A ROLE ANALYSIS STUDY OF COUNTY AGENTS AND EKRDP SPECMMSTS TN EASTERN KENTUCKY Thai: Tor the Doom 6f M. S. MICHTGAN STATE UNIVERSITY Robert M. Jones E963 LIBRAR Y L Michigan State University ,. ,, .. 0 'I‘“ "‘ d 51‘... u A v "3"”, vo‘ v 4 :x K . .. . . | V. .. . .. S a“ v .. ... u... 4' ‘4 7.. .5. “.2 VuA P‘ .. 3 3 ..:. .1. 3.. .2 U. z- t a. ;. 3.. C +L .1 HA 3. 3 “a 4,. ‘1‘ . _ n .r a. u h; an 1; h‘ 2.. a ru. .1 Cu S +v «L ab 0 A: E ‘ 5 O F. , 2» ha a r A: ”V sfu t r fix. 1 Q. «o S a 3 . u N. 1n u Tu n1 D. a A AU .: O n .. fiU m - VT“ 0 $14 ‘5‘ ~i~ ‘14 AV 0 « TV I ‘ * u. ABSTRACT A ROLE ANALYSIS STUDY OF COUNTY ASSETS AND EKRDP SPECIALISTS OF EASTERN KENTUCKY by Robert M. Jones The Extension program in thirty counties of Eastern Kentucky was drastically changed beginning in 1960. Two different programs were started. The.Modified Extension Program is an effort to broaden the Extension program to balance the human, institutional, and natural resource development efforts of Extension. The East Kentucky Resource DevelOpment Program (EKRDP) consists of a team of Specialists with technical and organizational skills. These specialists are located and work only in Eastern Kentucky. The specialists are responsible for seeking out opportunities for develOpment and for working directly on these development programs by assisting the leadership involved. These programs complement one another and together make up the Extension program in Eastern Kentucky. This study consists of two major parts. One is the determination of role consensus between agents and Specialists of Eastern Kentucky on the level of agents' responsibility for an agricultural and a non-agricultural program. The second part consists of determining the relationship between role definition and certain variables. . A questionnaire was used to obtain data to measure the agents' and Specialists' perception of roles. Data were received from all twenty-nine agents and nine EKRDP Extension Robert M. Jones Specialists working in the area. S A hypothetical county situation was presented to the respondents. Two development OpportunitieS--Strawberry production and tourism--were presented in the case county. The agents responded to the questions as county agents in the hypothetical county. The specialists rSSponded as they perceived the specialists' reSponsibility to the county. Twelve different program activity statements were given. For each, the reSpondents answered three questions: 1. Who should initiate this? 2. Who should provide the "know how" to do this? 3. Who has the best contacts to do this? These questions were answered by selecting one of six possible answers. There was a high degree of role consensus between the agents and Specialists. The mean scores of all the agents were compared with those of all the Specialists. As groups, both the agents and specialists indicated that similar levels of responsibility should be assigned to the agents. Agents and Specialists tend to assign the agents higher level of reSponsibility for agricultural programs than for non-agricultural programs. Agents also were assigned major responsibility for initiating and providing the contacts, while specialists were assigned major responsibility for providing the "know how". Both groups Robert M. Jones also assigned agents more individual reSponSibility for programs on the practice-commodity and individual-county program levels than on the marketing and area program levels. Agents in the counties rated to have made the most program change during the past three years tend to assign a higher level of individual reSponSibility to the agents. The agents who have not returned to school recently indicated agents should have a higher level of individual responsibility than did the agents who had returned to school. The agents in counties rated to have made the greatest change, and agents who have not recently taken additional schooling, indicated a similar nature of reSponSibility for the agents. The agents with the most eXperience assigned the agents higher individual reSponSibility for county agri- cultural programs, and a higher joint reSponSibility on non-agricultural programs. Agents of counties with high agricultural potential, and agents of counties with low agricultural potential, tended to assign a similar nature of reSponSibility to the agents. This study provides evidence that the agents and specialists have a high level of consensus on the aSpects exandned. There is further evidence that the agents located in high change counties, those who have not returned to school, axui the agents with fewer years of experience, tend to assign 1x) the agents a similar nature of individual reSponSibility. A ROLE ANALYSIS STUDY OF COUNTY AGENTS AND EKRDP SPECIALISTS IN EASTERN KENTUCKY By Robert M. Jones A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Institute for Extension Personnel DevelOpment 1963 figs“; w (9pm.? ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author is indebted to the following peOple, without whose assistance and guidance this study would not have been possible: To the University of Kentucky for granting sabbatical leave for graduate study; To the County Agents, EKRDP Specialists, and District Supervisors of Eastern Kentucky for their reSponse to the questionnaire; To Keith Kelley, Raymond Lickert, Ralph Ramsey, and Dr. G. P. Summers for their Special guidance and assistance; To Dr. Jack C. Ferver and Dr. Carl Couch, my major advisors, for their most helpful guidance in develOping the study and in the analysis of the findings; Also to Dr. William Kimball, Dr. Milton Steinmueller and Dr. Mason Miller whose counselling was much appreciated; And a Special word of appreciation to my family for the personal sacrifices they made to make this study possible, and eSpecially to my wife, Betty, who Spent many hours typing this report. 11 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE ACKNOWI‘Embl—EEJTS 00......00.0.0.0...0.00.00.00.00... 11 TABLE OF CONTENTSOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.0.0... 111 LIST OF TABLESOOOOOOOOO00.000000000000000.000...... v CHAPTER 1' INTRODUCTIONOOOOIOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 1 Extension in Eastern Kentucky........... 1 PIlrpose Of Study00OOOOOOOOOCOOOOOOCOOOOO 6 Hypotheses.............................. 8 II. REVIEW OF LITERATUREOOOOOOOOOOOO.0.....0... 11 Extension's Changing Role............... 11 R016 TheoryOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 19 Determination of Role Studied........... 21 III. WTHODOLOGYOOOOOOODOOO.OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 24 Questionnaire........................... 24 Testing the Instrument.................. 27 ReSpondents............................. 28 Obtaining the mtaOOOOOOOOIOOOOOOOOO0.0. 28 Method of Measurement................... 29 Iv. FINDINGS: PART IOOOOCOOOO.0.00.00.00.00... 30 Comparisons of Mean Responsibility Scores of Agents and Specialists on each of the Four Program Categories..... 31 A. Strawberry Program................ 31 Program Levels--Individual, County and Area................. 31 Program Levels--Practice, Commodity, and Marketing........ 34 BO TOUI'iSt ProgramOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. 38 Program Levels--Individual, County, and Area................ 38 Program Levels--Practice, Commodity, and Marketing........ 41 C. SummarYOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO000...... 46 iii Comparisons of Agents' and Specialists' Mean ReSponsibility Scores on the Over- all Responsibility Assigned for Initia- tion, Know How, and Contacts, in Each Program Categoryoooooco0.000000000000000 Comparison of Over-all Responsibility Scores on Agents and Specialists on Individual, County, and Area Clientele Groups and on Practice, Commodity, and Marketing Program Levels............ SummaryOOOOOOOOCOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO FINDINGS: PART 11.00....OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Supervisors' Rating of County Programs on the Amount of Change That Has Been Made During the Last Three Years........ The Relationship Between Recent Advanced Schooling and Mean Responsibility Scores of the Agents.................... The Effect of Years of Extension Experience on the Agents' Mean Responsibility Scores................... The Relationship Between the Agri- cultural Potential of the Counties and the Mean ReSponsibility Scores or the AgentBOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOIOOOOOOOO SmarYCCCOOOOOOCOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.0.000... CONCLUSIONSOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Summary of Findings..................... Conclusions and Implications............ Limitations of the Study................ Recommendations for Further Studies..... BIBLIOGRAPHYOOOCOOOOOOOCOOOIOCOOOOOCOOOOOOCOOOOOOOO APPENDIXOOOOOOOOOOO.0.0.00.0...OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO iv 47 50 54 58 61 66 71 74 77 80 80 86 89 9O 92 94 TABLE I. II. III. kIV. VI. VII. LIST OF TABLES Mean scores of reSponSibility assigned by agents and Specialists to the agents on the three questions concerning the activity statements on.strawberry programs on the individual, county, and area level-0.00000000000000000000.00.000.00.000. Mean scores or responsibility assigned by agents and Specialists to the agents on the three questions con- cerning the activity statements on strawberry programe.on.the practice, commodity, and marketing leveIBOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Mean scores of reSponSibility assigned by agents and specialists to the agents on the three questions con- cerning the activity statements on tourist programs on the individual, OOmt’, and area lovelaeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Mean scores of responsibility assigned by agents and Specialists to the agente.on the three questions con- cerning the.aetivity statements on tourist programs on practice, commodity, and area levels-0000000000000... Mean scores of responsibility assigned by agents and specialists to.agents for initiation, know how, and contacts on each of the four major program categorIQS................................ Mean.scores.of responsibility assigned by agents on tourist and strawberry programs on the individual, county, and area program levels, and the practice, commodity, and marketing program levelseeeeeoeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeoe Mean scores, indicating nature-of reSponSibility of agents located in counties rated high-change and low-change by District Supervisors for the tour program categories........... V PAGE 32 35 39 42 49 52 53 mm vm. xx, . IABLE VIII. IX. X. XI. LIST or TABLES Mean scores, indicating nature or responsibility of agents who have and have not taken additional schooling in the last five years on the activity statements for each of the four program categories................................ Mean scores, indicating nature of responsibility of.agents who have taken agricultural courses and those who have taken non- agricultural courses on the program statements in each or four program.categories................... Mean scores, indicating nature of reSponsibility.ot agents, with nine or less and agents with ten .or more years of eXperience on‘ the activity statements in each of the tour program categories............ Mean scores, indicating nature of responsibility of agents working in counties with.high and low agricultural potential, on the program activity statements in each of the four program categories................................ vi PAGE 68 7O 73 76 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The Extension Service throughout the nation has, in the last decade, made a substantial change in program content and in its approach to assist people in solving their problems. In Eastern Kentucky, the change has probably been even greater than in most other areas. Egtegsion in Eagtern Kentucky Eastern Kentucky lies in the fringe of the Southern Appalachian Mountains. The terrain varies from very rugged to rolling hills. For the most part, the agriculture is subsistence in nature. Seventy-five percent of the area is covered with medium to low grade hardwoods. Coal is the number one resource of the area. In roughly half of the counties of Eastern Kentucky, coal mining is the primary economic base. Agriculture ranks second in the area in number employed. The area of the state is characterized by severe 1 unemployment, underemployment, and low incomes. In recent years there has been some evidence that the area is begin- ning to show some improvement, such as improved highway 1University of Kentucky, Appalachian Resource Develogment Prgjegt, A Report Prepared by the College of Agriculture and Home Economics (Lexington: University of Kentucky, 1960), p. 4. -1- -9- I.— systems, improved educational systems, and even more impor- tantly, a renewed interest on the part of the citizens in development programs. The Kentucky Extension Administration recognized that the agriculturally oriented program Extension had deve10ped in the area through the last forty years was not meeting the needs of the area. To adjust the Extension program to better deal with the situation, two programs were launched: the Modified Extension Program and the East Kentucky Resource Development Program, hereafter referred to as EKRDP. Although these two programs were deve10ped somewhat independently, the same over-all objectives apply to each. The two complement one another, and combined, make up the Extension program of Eastern Kentucky. Thirty counties are involved in these programs. (See map, Appendix A.) The Modified Extension Program was planned as a comprehensive and drastic modification of the traditional LExtension program. The planning for the program was based on the area's particular needs, problems, and social and cultural situation.2 The program does not de-emphasize agriculture, but agriculture is placed in its position relative to the 'total resources and opportunities of the area. The East Kentucky Resource DevelOpment Program (EKRDP) omnisists of a team of Specialists with certain technical and 2James S. Brown, "The Eastern Kentucky Resource IMaveIOpment Project" paper presented to Agricultural ificonomics and Rural Sociology.section of the Association of‘iSouthern Agricultural Workers, Jacksonville, Florida 1962, p. 15. -3- organization skills. This team is stationed in the area. The major objective of the program is resource develOpment and motivation for improvement in the thirty counties of Eastern Kentucky.3 The Kellogg Foundation is providing part of the funds to the University of Kentucky to aid in financing the program for the first seven years. -fter that time, the program will be financed in total by the University. The preliminary plans for the Modified Extension Program was made by committees composed of administrators, specialists, and county workers. Following this, all county workers of the area attended a week-long training meeting at the University in September, 1960. At this meeting, plans were further deve10ped. The objectives of this program were reflected to a limited extent in the 1961 county plans of work. Since these plans of work were deve10ped in November, there was little time to make major adjustments in the county programs during the first year. The broad objectives of the Modified Extension Program have been broken down into the following seven working objectives:4 1. A I a N], ‘ ~ ' - Liv pi. Eastern Kentucky, a chronic depressed area, has a large prOportion of the pOpulation with low standards 3Ip1g. , p. 12. 4"The Modified Extension Program for Eastern Kentucky' (College of Agriculture and Home Economics, University of Kentucky, "n. d?) (Mimcographed.) 3. -4- of livin:, many with inadeouate die ts, shelter, and clothing, also many with 1:cor health. This program recognizes Extension's responsibility to assist these economically and socially depressed peOple to improve their living standards. Educational Pgograms on Techpi cal Services of Other Agencies. To some extent, Extension has always functioned in this capacity. This objective suggests planned action, with sufficient allocation of time to permit a more comprehensive job of informing people about them, wherever possible, in qualifying for, and taking advantage of these services. Legdezship in Action and Decision Making. The deveIOpment of Eastern Kentucky depends upon the quality of leadership available. Extension can make an important contribution toward deve10pment by recruiting and training leaders who serve on deve10p- ment programs. Extension workers would also be expected to play a leadership role in assisting groups in these deveIOpment programs. Assistance in Adult Cagee; Guidance. Three groups of peOple--(a) the displaced coal miner, (b) the subsistence farmer, and (c) the youth entering the labor force-- must be provided employment if they are to improve their standard of living. Most of this employment will necessarily be outside of the area. Extension can assist these groups by making them aware of the opportunities available, and by assisting those agencies and organizations that have training and job placement services available to the peOple of Eastern Kentucky. De e ment 0 S ec a zed As i t al Sources of Inggme. Agriculture in Eastern Kentucky is chiefly subsistence farming. The small amount of commercial agriculture generally is on a small scale. Extension's objectives are to assist the peOple of the area in develOping those specialized enterprises where the resources and interest are sufficient to add to the economic deve10pment of the area. Agriculture, alone, is not the answer to the economic problems of the area, but in combination with the develOpment of other resources can contribute toward total economic deve10pment. -5- . Close Cooneration with Community gnd Industrial Deve m nt Projects“L O\ Extension will attempt to cooridnate with the various movements that generally deal with social, industrial, educational, and agricultural improvement. It would not function as a contact agency to prOSpective industries and factories. The primary function would be to assist communities in providing the facilities and services that would attract industry. 7. An Educational Proggam for the Develgpment 9f Youth. In addition to adjusting the 4-H program to meet the needs of the area, Extension would work with community organizations and youth groups to improve the facilities and programs for youth. The emphasis on programs other than agriculture indicate the vast change in programming that has taken place in Extension Service of Eastern Kentucky. At the same time, recognition should be given to many past efforts on the part of the county Extension workers and Specialists in programs other than agriculture. The important consideration is that the Modified Extension Program is a total effort of Extension to adjust to the unique needs of the area. The broadening of the Extension program into new subject matter fields creates a need for new resource peOple. It was to supply these resources that the EKRDP program was started, along with the Modified Extension Program. A center was set up with offices and housing at the JRobinson Sub-EXperiment Station at Quicksand, Kentucky. This center’is staffed with eleven Specialists and a director. These Specialists were hired at various times during 1961. The fellowing Specialist positions were created: -fi- J EKRDP Specialist in Livestock EKRDP Specialist in Agronomy EKRDP Specialist in Poultry EKRDP Specialist in Horticulture EKRDP Specialist in Community Services EKREP Specialist in Industrial Location and DevelOp- men EKRDP Specialist in Marketing, Management and TranSportation EKRDP Specialist in Basics of Living EKRDP Specialist in Community Contacts EKRDP Specialist in Youth EKRDP Specialist in Wood Utilization EKRDP Specialist in Adult Guidance Add M‘Omm N mmbwma O 0 There is a high degree of correSpondence between the specialties in this list and the objectives of the Modified Extension Program. The two programs have the same objective and differ only in approach and organizational structure. The new Extension program in Eastern Kentucky is not only an effort to improve the area, but also serves as a demonstration for a new approach toward area resource deve10pment. ngpose of Study The role of the EKRDP Specialists differs from the role of the traditional Extension Specialists. The EKRDP Specialists not only assiSt the county extension personnel *with.the county programs, but may take the leadership in developing programs where Special needs and sufficient interest are determined to exist. This latter action may be 'Miken.in a county without the request of the agents, although there generally is close COOperation between the two. The EHQIDP s ecialist with close contacts in the area is in a 9 9 -7- much better position than is the specialist with offices at the University and statewide reSponSibility when it comes to analyzing the local situation and developing programs based on the problems of the area. The EKRDP Specialists are working without a clear- cut job description. This has the advantage of not limiting the action of the Specialist. At the same time, it is a possible source of conflict between the specialist and other Extension workers. The county agent's role basically has been that of an agricultural generalist. The Modified Extension Program has broadened the agent's role so that he becomes a generalist in both agricultural and non-agricultural fields. The program emphasizes the importance of the changing role of the agents, and provides some guidelines for making these changes. Nevertheless, the county agents are in a period of difficult adjustment--not only in program content, but in their values and beliefs, clientele, and methods and procedures. Changes such as these do not take place rapidly. Their new role must be deve10ped through eXperience and training. Both the county agents and the EKRDP specialists are in a period of deveIOping working relationships and methods of coordinating efforts to obtain maximum res'lts. The agents are adjusting to the new technical services available through the Specialist and to the Specialist's role of seeking Opportunities and developing new approaches. Changes in role of agents and Specialists, and in program content, were the major considerations in deve10ping this study. The two major objectives are: first, a comparison of role consensus of county agents and EKRDP specialists, and second, a determination of county agents' role definition on traditional agricultural Extension programs and on emergent Extension programs of total resource deve10pment. Not all agents adjust to a changing situation at the same rate or degree. This study will further attempt to determine if certain variables are associated with the county agent's role definition. The variables to be considered are: (1) rate of change in the county program; (2) advanced schooling; (3) importance of agriculture in the county; and (4) years of Extension eXperience. At this stage of the Modified Extension Program and the EKRD Program, such a study not only could provide infor- mation that would indicate possible needed adjustments, but 'would provide a bench mark for future studies of the program. Hypotheses Seven hypotheses were deve10ped for this study. The first three are concerned with the role consensus between county agents and EKRDP Specialists. The other four are concerned with role definition of agents in relation to the four variables listed above. Hypothesis I: There is a high degree of role consensus between.the county agents and the EKRDP Specialists that: (1) the county agents should have major reSponSibility for initiation of both agricultural and non-agricultural programs; -9- (2) that the Specialists should have major reSponSibility for providing the "know how" in conducting both agricultural and non-agricultural programs; and (3) that the county agents have the best contacts to work on both agricultural and non- agricultural programs. Hypothesis II: There is a high degree of role consensus between the county agents and the EKRDP specialists that the county agents have a higher level of reSponSibility for agricultural programs than for non-agricultural programs. Hypothesis III: There is a high degree of role consensus between county agents and EKRDP Specialists that the county agents should have a higher level of reSponSibility for both agricultural and non-agricultural programs, on the individual, county, practice, and commodity program levels, than on the area and marketing levels. Hyppthesis IV: Those agents whose programs were rated to have made the greatest amount of change from traditional Extension to resource deve10pment will define their role as indicating a higher level of individual reSponSibility than will those agents whose programs are rated to have made the least change. The greatest difference will be on non-agricultural and area programs. t s s V: There is a direct relationship between recent schooling and the degree of individual responsibility in- dicated by the agents. Those agents who have recently had additional schooling will indicate a higher degree of -10- individual reSponSibility than those agents who have not had additional schooling. Hypothesis VI: There is a direct relationship between years of Extension eXperience and agents' role definition of the nature of reSponSibility. Agents with the most experience will indicate a willingness to assume less individual responsibility for non-agricultural and for agricultural area programs than will those agents with the least years of eXperience. Hypothesis VII: There is a direct relationship between the agriculture potential of the county and the agents' role definition of nature of responsibility. Agents located in counties with the least agriculture potential will indicate a higher level of individual reSponSibility for non-agricultural programs than will those agents located in counties with greater agricultural potential. Providing these hypotheses can either be satisfactorily supported or rejected, the study can be useful in determining the degree of role consensus between agent and EKRDP specialist on the different types of programs and program levels included in the Extension program in Eastern Kentucky. It will further provide information on the relationship between social characteristics of agents and the role definition of the agent on various program segments. Most sion Service place in the is alarming, Extension is CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE Extension's Changing Role literature written about the LU caperative xten- today refers to the changes that are taking Extension program. To some peOple this change To others, it is considered essential if to remain an active, useful organization. Actually, the Extension program, since it's beginning in 1914, has been in a continuous process of change and adjust- ment to meet the changing needs of the peOple it serves. Paul Miller points out the change that has taken place in Extension programs. COOperative Agricultural Extension work is emerging from an agrarian past and is facing into an industrial future. The institution of the county agent has moved through successive chapters of evolution and is presently well into another. Each chapter followed significant epochs of change in the United States.1 Kelsey and Hearne also discuss three phases in which Extension programs have evolved. The history of Extension work indicates that there was an early period when men of science brought to the farmers what seemed most needed from the scientific 1Paul A. Miller, "Extension Education in the Land- Grant Colleges", Farm Policy Forum, Vol. XI, No. 4, (1958- 59), P0 80 -11- -12- viewpoint. Then in the first years of extension program planning came an attempt to list all the needs of each community and consolidate them into a program. ... The third phase, which seems to be more mature, is a combi- nation ofiheseideas of the Specialists about what is needed with the wants and desires of the members of the family.2 Morris discussed three phases of program planning,3 starting with Extension workers determining the program, then a period where the peOple of the county primarily determine what the program should be, and finally, Extension working with the lay leadership in selecting goals and objectives to meet the needs of the county. In 1957, the Extension Committee on Organization and Policy, recognizing the need for Extension to consider its objectives, developed the so-called "SCOpe Report." This report listed the trends that were taking place in the country and the significance of these trends for Extension. All such significant trends re-emphasize the fact that the Extension Service must have a dynamic program-- one constantly being modernized to keep pace with the ever changing conditions facing the peOple it serves. Programs and procedures appropriate and adequate yester- day are likely to be inapprOpriate today--and obsolete tomorrow. 2Lincoln D. Kelsey and Cannon C. Hearne, COOperative Eytension Work, (Ithaca, New York. Comstock Publishing Associates, 1955), p. 115. ici 1o ,37. 3F. 3. Morris, Pl n ins vount Agricultur l PrOEEgms, U. S. D. A. Extension Service Circular Io. 2J0: 4Paul A. Miller, et. al., The Coooergtive Ezteneion Service Today: A Statement of Boone and Resnonsibility, East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, 1958 ), p. 7. -13- There is general agreement that change is necessary in Extension. What direction the change should be in is not clearly stated in the literature. In early Extension work, the program was almbst entirely focused on agricultural and rural honemahing problems. There has been a gradual expansion of the program,as the situation changed, to include many activities that are more urban than rural in nature. One of the problems in determining what the changes in Extension should be is that the counties which are served by Extension vary from urban to rural, from prOSperous to depressed, from mountainous to plains, and from a growing agricultural situation to a declining.agricultural situation. A program that would be successful in one county may be with out value in another. The writers of the Sc0pe Report recognized this in the following statements. If we accept the principle that Extension's responsi- bilities are to farm families first, but not to them alone, then the major Operational problem of Extension is how to allocate its time and resources so that the highest priority needs of those other than farm pe0ple are given appropriate.attention. Because of the diversity of economic and pOpulation patterns throughout the nation, this allocation of Extension resources necessarily must be determined within5each state, and to a large degree, within each county. The Scope Report is a broad charter within which Extension can Operate. It is the reSponSibility of each state, and each county within the state, to deve10p a program, 52221... p. 13. -14- to be in accordance with the situation, within the framework of the SOOpe Report. There seems to be two different directions in which Extension is moving. One is a stepped up program to meet the complex needs of modern agriculture. The other is in the e not (D "5 direction a? community or rescure deve10pment. These a going in the Opposite direction, but rather parallel each other in an attempt tO meet the needs of today's society. 6 7 Studies were conducted in Arizona and Pennsylvania to determine what were the problems peOple were concerned with and if the peOple thought that Extension should work on these problems. The studies found that both rural and urban peOple were concerned with schools, employment, industry, community physical upkeep, recreation and water. The peOple also indicated they would approve of the COOperative Extension assisting on programs to help with these concerns Assuming that the findings in these two studies (andthere are other evidences to support these) represent the other areasof the nation, then it should follow that Extension be concerned in these types of community problems, because Extension programs are based on the needs of the peOple. 6James R. Hazlitt, "A Study Indicating the Future Direction of the Cooperative Extension Service in Order to Meet the Problems and Needs of the PeOple" (un ublished Master Thesis, Michigan State University,-1951 . 7Erie County Agricultural Extension Association and Department Of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, Corr Communit as Seen by Its PeOple,Extension Studies NO. E, (University Park, Pennsylvania, 1960) -15- These statements provide us with a broad background on the changes taking place in Extension. This would necessarily result in changes in the role of county agents and other Extension workers. Robert Clark, in discussing the role of the county agent, states: Change can be the basis of progress--the challenge which faces all Extension workers, and particularly the County Extension Agent of tomorrow, is to analyze, with wisdom and courage, the changes which are occurring, and adjust their role so as to provide maximum service at the highest professional level that it is possible to attain.8 In addition to the change taking place in the content of Extension programs, there is a change taking place in the level of programs. The early county agents assisted farmers in improving farm practices. Control of the boll weevil on the cotton farms of the South is an example. Later, there was a shift toward planning for the total farm Operation, and to county programs concerned with specific kinds of farm enterprises. Farm organizations, county committees, and the agents, together, deve10ped the county program.9 Black and Westcott make a similar observation: Early extension work gave major emphasis to improved farm practices. The emphasis is now shifting more to the farm and family as a unit and to the community as a whole.1 8Robert C. Clark, "The Role of the County Agent", Fagm Policy Foyum, Vol. XI, No. 4, (1958-59), p. 28. 9Ke1sey, 91. cit. pp. 125-26. 10John D. Black, George Westcott, and others, Rural Planning Of One County, (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1959), p. 374. l.‘il4llul4‘l|| I.| 4" |1|l|ll| I]. v -15- History will probably show that during 1950-60, Extension made another major adjustment in the scope of its program. This adjustment was considerably more complex than those made during World War I and II and the depression. There are two current changes that are taking place that are pertinent to this study. One is the emphasis on marketing. The other is the increasing importance of programs for an area larger than one county. Following the passage of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946, Extension has increased the number of marketing specialists and enlarged the program to include not only farm marketing, but processing and consumer marketing as well. Extension is under firm obligation to carry on an education program in marketing, utilization, and dis- tribution. This obligation stems from the basic legislation establishing extension work; the traditional role of Extension in the U. S. Department of Agriculture and the land-grant colleges; and the accepted respons- ibility by Extension to farmers, business firms, and the general public.11 As the Extension marketing programs became more complex, requirements for personnel to work on these programs changed. The following statement, taken from "A Guide to Extension Programs for the Future", points this out: While trained personnel are essential to all phases of Extension, those persons assigned to work with marketing and processing firms must be exceptionally well trained. Advanced formal training and actual work 11C. B. Ratchford, "The Scepe of Marketing", Extension Service Review, (November 1959), p. 238. -17- experience in marketing is particularly important for those working directly with processing and distribution f1rms.12 This would indicate that the county agent would probably be doing less of the marketing work, and that marketing specialists and area marketing agents would be reSponSible for the different phases of the marketing programs. Motsenbocker,13 in his study, found that in 1961, eighteen states had area Extension workers covering two or more counties. Those inter-county agents primarily Specialized in a subject matter field, although there were a few who worked on general programs. Motsenbocker summarized this movement to inter- county agents as follows: Information assembled from the eighteen states showed that inter-county extension work is rapidly coming in. A new group of extension workers is rapidly deve10ping. They operate under a vast array of titles and different arrangements. However, they have at least one thing in common, they fit somewhere between the level of the count' extension agent and the subject matter specialist. 4 12Federal Extension Service, A Guide to Extension Pzgggam f9; the Futuge, (North Carolina State College Agricultural Extension Service, 1959), p. 13. 13Earl Edwin Motsenbocker, "The Inter-County Agent, A New Kind of CoOperative Extension Service Worker", (Unpublished M. S. Thesis, Michigan State. University, 1961), p. 71. 141bid. -13- The East Kentucky Resource DevelOpment Program is an example of an Extension program approached on an area basis. The personnel involved in the program are called specialists, however, their role places them in a position somewhere between the county agent and the usual subject matter Specialist. The following statement indicates the EKRDP Specialists' roles as prOposed by the Kentucky Extension Service. The resource Specialists, working as teams according to needed combinations, and composed of persons selected for exceptional proficiency, training, and dedication to the area, will vigorously seek every feasible Opportunity to further the economic and institutional program of the area. They will seek to ferret out the most favorable or promising Opportunities and will present to the project leader a unified plan of action, or project, for each such Opportunity, to accomplish the desired end. Projects prOposed for action by members of the Specialist team will indicate eXpected accomplishments, contributing areas of Specialization, supporting Specialists' time needed, and the sequencing Of such efforts.15 These resource Specialists function much like a county agent as they develOp programs to solve a problem. These programs usually involve more than one county. Since the county agents and specialists coordinate their efforts tO a large extent, the agents then, tO some extent, become involved in programs dealing with more than one county. 15University of Kentucky, 22, Qit., p. 10. Rglg Theory There are a number of ways that changes in an organization can be studied: (1) flow f ideas, (2) adOption of practices or ideas, (3) organizational deve10pment, (4) time Spent, (5) clientele reached, and many others. Another way is to examine the roles of the peOple that make up the organization. This was the basis selected for this study. This study is basically one of role definition, with the county agent's position the focal point. Included is a measure of role consensus of agents and Specialists, and comparisons of the role definitions of agents and certain variables believed to influence the agent's role perception. A role has been defined by many peOple. Gross defines a role as "a set of evaluative standards applied to an incumbent Of a particular position." 16 Miller gives a Similar definition, but emphasizes that the expectations of the individual holding the positions would be part of the role.17 Sower notes that an organization is made up of individuals who hold certain positions, and that there are certain eXpectationS of those in the organization because Of the position occupied. For each position, there h “ 16Neal Gross, Ward S. Mason, and Alexander H. Monachern, Ex 1 net ons in Role An l'sis: Studies of the $33001 Su erintendents Role, New York: The Dryden Press, 15, p. 50. Y ‘ 17Paul A. Miller, "COOperative Agricultural Extension fork in the Industrializing Society" (Michigan State Jniversity, East Lansing, 1959), p.-34. -19- are relevant others who have social rights to have certain eXpectations for the incumbent in that position. The key {5 for understanding an organization is the role consensus Oi a the position incumbents and the relevant others.1” Wilkening, in his study of Wisconsin county agents' perception of role definition, defines two terms that are used in this study: Role definition refers primarily to the agent's indication of what he feels he "ought to do" or what he feels his relationship with other persons should be. This definition Of what "ought to be" derives from the SXpectations Of persons in other positions. Role consensus refers to amount of agreement in role definition of the county extension agents. One aSpect of role consensus is the agreement among agents Of one type...while another is the amount of agreement among agents of different types...and finally, another refers to the agreement in role definition between agents of one type and persons in another position.1 The term "role definition", as used in this study, refers to what the agents and the specialists feel they should do, or be in the position to do, in performing twelve different activities. It is assumed that the reSponse to What he should do would be a combination of the reSpondent's personal belief and what he believes others would eXpect. * 18ChristOpher Sower, "The Land Grant College, a Deve10pment Organization in Transition: A Case of the Cooperative Extension Service", paper presented to the Seventh National Cooperative Extension Administration Seminar, University of Wisconsin, May, 1962, p. A - 11. 19Eugene A. Wilkening, The Cougty Extension Agent l2_WisconSin: Perceptions of Role Definition as Viewed by AEEREE» Research Bulletin 203 Wisconsin Agricultural Experiment Station, September, 1957), pp. 2 - 3. -21- "Role consensus" will refer to the amouxtof agreement on the definition of the agent's role between the agents and specialists, and between different groups of agents. Except in the broadest terms, such as "education", the role of county agents is difficult to define. The county agent's role may be defined in terms of subject matter fields, type Of activities, methods used, clientele involved, functions performed, and many others. Stone's study broke the occupational roles of county agents into seven major classifications: (1) consultant; (2) public program administrator; (3) salesman Of information and ideas; (4) organizer and supervisor of events; (5) organ- izer of groups; (6) student; and (7) facilitator-expediter.2O Wilkening studied the role of the county agent from the standpoint of: (1) major functions of the Extension Service; (2) subject matter areas; (3) type of activities of county extension agents; (4) ways of influencing farm peOple; and (5) relationship with other persons and groups.21 D te n t O R e Stud ed There were a number of possible ways that roles of agents and Specialists of Eastern Kentucky could be studied. For this study, it was decided to use three functions Extension workers perform to implement a program or project: 20John T. Stone, "How County Agricultural Agents Teach", (Michigan State College, East Lansing, 1952), pp. 1-2. 21Wilkening, J. c3 t. -22- (1) initiation, (2) providing the "know how", and (3) making the contacts. No previous studies were found using this particular classification. However, based on eXperience and the Opinion of others, it was concluded that these were "real" functions that agents or others perform in develOping programs. Someone5 must initiate the program by creating interest and organizing for action. Contacts must be made to implement the action. And someone must provide the "know how" to plan and carry out the plans. The literature that has been cited, and the author's SXperience as an agent in Eastern Kentucky, provided the bases of the program categories used in this study. These program categories are presented in the form of activity statements on a strawberry and a tourist program. The strawberry program would represent the traditional iExtensiOn program, and the tourist program would represent 13MB resource deve10pment phase of the Modified Extension JRrogram in Eastern Kentucky. For each program, activity statements are stated to represent a practice, a commodity, and a marketing activity. The review of literature showed that this sequence has been followed in the deve10pment of Extension. Early Extension ‘WOIQC'was primarily founded on the farm practice level. Later, the (zommodity approach was used. For example, county beef programs or county tobacco programs were deve10ped. Today, thexwa is much emphasis on marketing. -23- There are also activity statements for each program on individual, county, and area program levels. Again, this sequence coincides with the deve10pment of Extension. The early county agents were mostly concerned with working with individuals. From this, county groups and organizations became the agent's clientele. Today, the area approach is being recognized as a logical method of working on certain problems that cannot be solved on a county basis. CHAPTER I I I METHODOLOGY Questionnaire Eadicounty agent Operates in a unique situation. finnefore,ii‘each agent was asked to reSpond to the questions basedcnitme county situation in which he worked, his responses would be partly determined by the situation in the county. To avoid this, each agent was asked to reSpond in terms of a hypothetical county situation--that of Needmore County. (See Appendix B.) The situation in Needmore County represented the average economic and social condition that exists in Eastern Kentucky. A case was presented for two programs that could bring about economic improvement. Strawberry production was selected to represent agricultural programs. Tourist deve10p- ment was selected to represent non-agricultural resource deve10pment programs. Strawberries was selected over other agricultural enterprises because every county included in the study produces some strawberries. During the last ten years, Extension has emphasized strawberry production as a means of increasing farm income in the area. An Extension specialist committee on "Specialized Sources of Income in Eastern Kentucky Area" made a study of agricultural resources of rach of the counties. Their report suggested that straw“ -94.. -25- Murieslnm.possibilities in each of the counties for increasing farm incomes. Tmndsm was selected to represent the non-agricultural resourceckwelopment programs because of the recent increased interestih.tourism as a potential income source. State parksznmebeing improved, local tourist groups have been have been held. 8 organized, and several area tourist meeting Tourism, because of its economic implications, also has the advantage of being more comparable to strawberry production. It would be more difficult, for instance, to compare human deve10pment or community service programs with an agricultural program. Not every county in the area has equal possibilities in developing a tourist program, but every county is involved to some extent in the over-all deve10pment of the tourist business of the area. In responding to the questionnaire, the county agents were asked to play the role of the county agent in the hypothetical county. The EKRDP specialists were asked to play their natural role and to reSpond as the EKRDP specialists xnmfihi to assist in develOping the program in the case county. The questionnaire consisted of twelve activity statehmnits describing activities in which Extension could be involved in the strawberry and tourist deve10pment programs. Six of these statements are relevant to the strawberry program and six are relevant to the tourist program. Threw; statements on each program are concerned with groups that could be involved in the program--individuals, FL) / O- counm/grmnm, and area groups. There are also three state- nwntsibremch program on program levels - practice, commodity, and marketing. (See Appendix C & D.) Thanethree questions were asked concerning each of the twelve statements: ‘Mnashould initiate this? 1. "know how" to do this? 2. iflu>should provide the 3. Wuahas the best contacts to do this? These three questions were asked because each is a function that Extension workers must perform in develOping any type of program. The question, "who should initiate this," is of Special importance to this study because the EKRDP specialists have been given the unique reSponSibility The agents of develOping programs where the need exists. have been largely responsible for initiating programs and activities in the past. The question will help determine if this role of the agents still exists and to what degree. 1 The question, "who should provide the know how,’ is considered important in determining if the role of the EKRDP Specialist is like that of the traditional Extension specialist--that is, providing information. Sizune the EKRDT Specialists are located in the area and are in a position to develop close contacts with the the question, "who has the best contacts to do leadership, It has largely been the responsibility of this," was asked. the county agents to provide the contact to carry out county programs in the past. Responses to this question will -27- indicate if this is true in today's Extension program in Eastern Kentucky. Toemswer each of these questions, the reSpondents selecmaifrom one of the following possible choices: A. County staff ” County staff, with some assistance from EKRDP Specialists CL County staff and EKRDP Specialists sharing more or less equally IL EKRDP Specialists, with some assistance from county staff E. EKRDP Specialists F. Others, not Extension These possible reSponses are much like a continuum. At one pole, the agents would have total responsibility. At the other, the agents would have no responsibility. Testing the Instrnnent The questionnaire was tested on three graduate students at Michigan State University who had Extension eXperience. Because of the uniqueness of the role of the EKRDP specialists, those testing the questionnaire did not fully understand the implications involved. Other than this one factor, the test respondents had no difficulty in ans- wering the questions. Resnondenns The reSpondents consisted of the twenty-nine county 3‘ agents and nine EKRDP Specialists employed by Extension during January, 1963, when the data were collected. One county in the thirty-county area does not have a county agent. One of the specialist positions was vacant at the time the data were collected. Two specialists not paid from Extension funds were not included in the study. 0 i th t Arrangements were made to attend a series of in~ service training meetings to be held in Eastern Kentucky on January 22, 23, and 24. All agents and EKRDP Specialists were to attend the meetings. Sufficient time was provided on the program to administer the questionnaire to the respondents as a group. The first meeting was held with 100% attendance. A severe snowstorm on the second day prevented some reSpondents from attending this meeting. The third meeting was cancelled because of hazardous road conditions. Questionnaires, along with instruction sheets, were then mailed to the fourteen agents and three Specialists who were unable to attend the meetings. Completed and usable questionnaires were obtained from all twenty-nine agents and nine Specialists. The two District Extension Supervisors, who have reSponSibilities in the thirty-county area, were personally interviewed to eXplain the purpose of the study, and to solicit their assistance. The Supervisors then rated the ~28- -29- counthxsin their district on the amount of change that had :__1 takenlflace in their county Extension programs during the last three years. (See Appendix E.) Method of Measurement The reSponses to each of the questions were in terms of A, B, C, D, E, or F, correSponding to the possible choices stated on page 27. To provide a method of measuring differences in reSponseS, values were assigned to the possible reSponseS an0110W8:A=1,B:2,C:3,D:4,E:5,F=6. Using these values, mean scores were determined for (1) each reSpondent; (2) the county agent group and Specialist group; (3) each reSpondent group on initiation, "know how", and contacts; (4) each reSpondent group on the twelve program statements and different combination of these statements. Low mean scores would indicate a high level of agents' individual responsibility. High mean scores would indicate a high level of EKRDP Specialists' and agents' joint reSponSibility. Scores below 3.00 would indicate the agents Should have major responsibility, and scores zibove 3.00 would indicate the Specialists should have major responsibility. CHAPTER IV FINDINGS: PART I In this part of the chapter, comparisons of the agents' and EKRDP Specialists' mean scores will be made to determine the degree of role consensus. From the responses of agents and Specialists to the three questions on each of the twelve activity statements, agents' reSponSibility scores will be determined. Comparisons of agents' and Specialists scores will be made for the following: 1. Agents' level of reSponSibility on strawberry and tourist programs. 2. Agents' level of reSponSibility on the individual, county, and area activities. 3. Agents' level of reSponSibility on the practice, commodity, and marketing levels. 4. Agents' level of reSponSibility on initiation, know how, and contact functions. By combining mean scores to the three questions for each of the twelve activity statements, and different.com- binations of these statements, it was possible to obtain a measure of agents' responsibility as indicated by both the agents and specialists in each of the above four areas. There was a wide variation of mean scores between individual reSpondents in both groups. These variations were not treated separately. All agents' scores, and all Specialists' scores, were considered in measuring the mean -30- -31- : I scores of the groups. R S WW 9: Aggnts and Specialists 92 eggh g: ' the F92; Egggggm Categgzigs A. Strawberry Program 0 r e els--Ind viduals Count 3. d e . ee able . The three activity statements included in this program category are: Work with individual farmers to increase acreage of strawberrie s . 2. .Work with the Needmore County Strawberry Growers Association to increase acreage of strawberries. 1. Work with the Area Strawberry Growers Association 3. to increase acreage of strawberries. The one variable in these three statements is the clientele group with which the Extension agent and Specialist would be working. The strawberry program in Eastern Kentucky includes each of the clientele groups, and the agents have had experience working with each group. The mean scores of both agents and Specialists indicate that the major reSponSibility for initiating work with individual strawberry growers and county groups should be assigned to the agent, and that initiating work with the area group Should be assigned to the Specialists. There is a difference in assigning major reSponSi- b111ty for providing the know how with the individual growers. The mean scores indicate the agents assign the reSponSibility to themselves, and the Specialists would assign the reSpons- apaaanpmnonmmn momma omswammw on canonm mpdmwm map .H> nmsoaap H mmapma now asap eaon Haas mane .mppaanpmqommon ponds ooswpmmm on canonm mpmaamaomnm map opwopona mouoow some amps one opmopodd monoom some 309* oo.¢ mm.n mm.— mm.. mm._ mm._ mpompnoo ...: m_.¢ mm.n b_.m om.n mb.m 30m zoom Se.m om.m 00.. om.. mm._ wo.m ooapmapHoH a 7) _ m n 2 mm u z m u 2 mm H z m u 2 mm H z mpmpawpommm mpoomd mpmpaopomam apnomd mpmaawaomnm mpqmwa mopnnmnSmnpm no mmpnnonzwnpm omwmnow omwmnonp mo mmamnoo omwohoqp op noppmpoomma op noapwpoommd mopnnonswnpm mo mnosonw apnea nozonw magma ammonow ommonoop uswnpm wand Iswppm hpSSoo macs op mamaawm Hose mpnmampopm map Spa: ano:.m -eomz map Spa: anoz.m up>aeoa opp: an02._ apa>apo< Hm>mH some use .hposoo .stoa>puop map do mamnwoaa manonswnpm no mpaoSmpwpm hpp>ppow esp mapsnoonoo mnopmeSd omnnp map no apnomm esp op mpmpampommm one mpSmwm hp uodmpmmm hppflpnpmdogmon mo monoom moo II.H mqmda a. -33... ibility to themselves. The difference is Slight but does indicate the Specialists feel a high degree of reSponSibility for providing the technical information at all levels. The mean scores of both agents and Specialists indicate that the Specialists should have the major responsibility for providing the know how‘for working with the county and.area groups. The agents have the best contact for working with the individual grower and county groups, as indicated by the mean scores of both agents and Specialists. Both groups also agreed, as indicated by their scores, that the Specialists have the best contacts to work with area groups. Comparing the mean Scores of agents and Specialists indicates a high degree of role consensus. In only one of the nine comparisons, providing the know how for working with individual growers, did the agent and Specialist mean scores indicate disagreement on who should have the major reSponSibility. And the difference here was small. The mean scores of agents and specialists tend to assign the agent a high degree of reSponSibility for working with individuals and county groups, and low degree of reSponSibility for working with area groups. There was very little difference between mean scores of agents and Specialists on the statement concerning the individual or county groups. Both agent and Specialist mean scores were much higher on the statement concerning the area group. -34- 1‘” o r Level--Pract CS 00 d t d e a. See Table II. The three activity statements in this program category'are: 1. Work on a Needmore County program to improve straw- berry weed control practices. 2. Work on a Needmore County program to increase straw- berry acreage and yields per acre. 3. Work on a Needmore County program to improve straw- berry marketing and processing outlets. In these three statements, the county program is held constant. The variable is the level of the activity. Each of these program levels are a part of the over-all strawberry program in Eastern Kentucky. The three levels also coincide with the general deve10pment of Extension programs. Early Extension work dealt primarily with improving farm practices. Later, programs were deve10ped around the total enterprise. Recently, Extension has emphasized marketing, not only from the standpoint of assisting the farmers with marketing problems but also at the processing and marketing firm level. Much the same pattern of responsibility assignment is indicated by agents and Specialists for these three state- ments as for the previous statements on clientele groups. The mean scores of agents and Specialists indicate that both groups would assign the responsibility for initiating programs on the practice and commodity level to the agents. The scores show a disagreement on the assigning of responsi-. bility for initiating on marketing. The agents' scores indicate the Specialists Should have major responsibility -35- mm.m mm.m mm._ om._ nn._ Fn._ mpompSoo 00.: w¢.¢ mm.m mw.m mm.n Sm.m 30m Scum Nb.m mw.m wo._ mo._ 00.. FN.— SoppwppanH m u 2 mm H z m u 2 mm H z m u 2 mm n z mpmdamaoogw mpnmm< mpmafimdommm mpnowd mpmpflmpoomm mpdowd mpoHpSo mapmmmo chow non mooapomnm Iona onm wanoMnma moamph can ommmnom Hoppdoo new: annonkmnpm obonaap manonsmnpm omdohodp munopswupm obonnSp op anamonm hpSSOO op sapwonm hpSSoo op sapwonm hpnsoo mpqoaopopm ouoaoooz o no Mnoz.m ohofiuooz a no xuo3.m whoaoooz a no.3nox.¢ hppbapod r mHo>oH mappoxnms cow .hppooaaoo humonsmapm no mpSoSopmp map op mpmpaopooam can mpno m h > poo map wupanooqoo mdoppmos mm MM wonwpmmw hppapppmnonmoh Mo mohoom sooznn.HH mqmda .ooppownm onp so msoawonm u mohflp onp no mpnmmo -35- :far initiating marketing programs, and the Specialists' scores indicate the agents should have the major responsibility. A possible eXplanation for this difference is that the agents recognize marketing as a complex activity requiring a person trained in the subject to adequately deal with mar- keting problems. The Specialists may be of the Opinion that the agents should be reSponSible for initiating all county program activities, and the wording of this statement presents it as a county program. The mean scores of both agents and Specialists generally indicate Specialists should have the major responsibility for providing the know how on each of the three program levels. One exception was that the agents would assign to themselves the major reSponSibility for providing know how on the commodity level, and the Specialists would assign the major reSponSibility to themselves. This difference could possibly be explained by the fact that agents have used the commodity approach extensively for developing county programs. This experience then provides a basis for the agents assigning themselves the major reSpons- ibility. The Specialists, on the other hand, may have based their responses on the traditional role of the specialist-- that is, providing information. The mean scores of both agents and specialists indicate that the agents have the best contacts to work on county strawberry programs on the practice and commodity levels, and that the Specialists have the best contacts to work on a county strawberry program to improve markets. -37- The general pattern of role assignments is that the agents Should have major reSponSibility for initiation and providing contacts for county strawberry programs on the practice and commodity level. The Specialists should be assigned major reSponSibility for providing the know how on all three program levels and for initiating and providing contacts on the marketing level. There is general agreement of agents and specialists on who should be assigned the major reSponSibility on these three program levels. On only two of the nine comparisons-- initiation on marketing and know how on commodity programs-- do the scores indicate differences in opinion. On only one of these is the difference very large. There was little difference between the mean scores on either the agents or Specialists on the three questions for the statements on the practice and commodity program levels. The scores were much higher on each of the three questions for both groups on the marketing statement than for the practice and commodity level. This indicates that neither the agents or specialists make much differentiation in assigning reSponSibility on practice or commodity program levels, but both groups recognize a sizable distinction between the marketing program level and the practice and commodity program levels . ' ”has. -.‘-~ 0. -38.. B. Tourist Programs See Table III The three activity statements included in this program category are: 1. work with individual tourist facilities Operators Qf Needmore County to improve the services provided the tourist. 2. Work with the Needmore County Tourist Development Association to improve the services provided the tourist. 3. Work with the Area Tourist Council to improve the services provided the tourist. In these statements, as for the first three state- ments on strawberry programs, the one variable is the clientele group the Extension worker would assist. While the tourist program in Eastern Kentucky isn't deve10ped to the point the strawberry program is, these types of clientele groups do exist in the area. To some extent, Extension personnel has worked with each of these group types. The mean scores of both the agents and Specialists indicate that the agents should be assigned the major reSponSibility for initiation on the individual and county group level, and that the Specialists should have major responsibility for initiating area tourist programs. The major responsibility for providing the know how for working with all three groups should be assigned to the Specialists as shown by the mean scores of both the agents and Specialists. The extremely high mean scores of both groups indicates that the agents Should have but little - 9 a) . mm.¢ m>.n ¢¢.m oo.m ¢¢.m o_.n mpoproo mm.¢ _¢.¢ mm.¢ >—.¢ mm.¢ om.¢ Sam Scum ¢¢.¢ om.m ...m mw.m ...m m©.— SoapmppdnH m u 2 mm M o m u z mm H z m n 2 mm H z mpmaampoonm mpSmmq mpmpaoaommm mpnowa mpmpamdoonm mpnow< pmahdop map pmpHSop ooopbona moop> pmphfiop map vocabonm map coopbonn unom map obonaap moopbnmm map obong macabnom map obonm op noppopoomw¢ nap op mpasoo whoa tap op Haquoo puosaoaobmn noooz mo muoponono pmahdoa mend hpSSoo onoaomoz mopppaaomm pmanop mpnoaopwpm map Spa: auo=.m on» Spas aao:.m Hosea>aeoa Spa: anon.» apHSSpo< mao>oa none can .manoo .Hmsoa>pona onp no madawona pmHHSop no mpnoSopwpm hpp>ppow map wnpnnooSoo maoppmoso mmnnp map no mpaomo onp op mpmpaopooam use mpSoww hp umdemmm hppHanmnommon no monoom SwoZnu.HHH mnmnom one mommonppws upwup op ssnmonm mpSSoo ohofiuooz o no #90:... mopppapoop pmpHSop Ho omwomunwa our SSSH esp obonaaa op amnwonm hpndoo ohoacooz o no Mnoz.op mpdofimpmpm app>ppo< mHo>mH some one maonwonm pmphSop no mpSoSopwpm mpp>ppo opp op mpwpaopoomm one mpooww an eon .appooaaoo .ooapomum opp no a mnp mapsnoonoo unoppmmsu moan mamas hppapppmdommon mo moaoom swozuu.>H mamas p onp no mpnmww -43- problems. Through experience and training, agents have deve10ped a workable knowledge for dealing with this practice. The second statement represents the commodity program level. The training of waitresses and service station attendants would include the consideration of several different practices such as courtesy and manners, knowing the tourist business Of the county, understanding tourist needs, and develOping a favorable attitude. Training programs of this type have been carried out in some Of the counties in Eastern Kentucky. Extension has played a supporting role in these programs. The third statement deals with promoting and adver- tising, which is a phase of marketing. Except for the work by some individual tourist facility Operators and the Kentucky State government, little effort has been exerted to promote and advertise the tourist attractions of Eastern Kentucky. With the increasing recognition of the tourist business as a potential source of income for the area, county and area groups are becoming interested in this aSpect of tourist development. In each of these three statements, the county program is constant, and the variable is the program level. The mean scores of both agents and Specialists indicate that the agents Should be assigned the major reSponSibility for initiating county tourist programs on all three program levels. This again, indicates that both agents and Specialists agree that the former Should be reSponSible for the initiation of county programs on both agricultural -44- and non-agricultural programs. In general, the mean scores of agents and Specialists indicate Specialists should be assigned the major reSpons- ibility for providing the know how on all three levels. One exception is that the agents' scores indicate the agent Should have the major reSponSibility for providing the know how for programs on lawn and landscape improvements. The agents' agricultural training and SXperience is the probable SXpla- nation for this. Agents and Specialists agree that the agents have the best contacts to work on a county program on the practice level, and that the Specialists have the best contacts for county programs on the marketing program level. There is disagreement on who has the best contact to work on a waitress and service station attendants training program. The agents indicate they have the best contacts and the specialists indicate they have the best contacts. The difference between the agents' and Specialists' mean scores on this question is greater than for any other question. One possible SXplanation for this difference of cpinion may be that each group considered a different group that would be contacted to conduct the training program. The agents may have considered the peOple that would be trained, and the Specialists may have considered the resource are not Extension employees but who could be ‘pe cple. that The Specialists would obtained to assist with the training. probably have closer contact with these peOple that would the agents. -45- The assigning Of reSponSibility for the tourist program levels follows the same general pattern as for the comparable strawberry program levels, although the pattern is not so concise. On both strawberry and tourist programs, the scores indicate the agents would be assigned major responsibility for initiation. The scores also indicate Specialists should be assigned major responsibility for pro- viding the know how on strawberry and tourist programs at all three levels. There is general agreement of both agents and Specialists that the agents have the best contacts to work on tourist and strawberry county programs at the practice and commodity level, and that the Specialists have the best contacts to work at the marketing level. However, the Specialists' scores indicate the Specialists have the best contacts on the tourist program at the commodity level. Further comparisons of agents' and Specialists' scores on the tourist and strawberry program statements at the practice, commodity, and marketing levels Show that there is not so much distinction made between the marketing level and the practice and commodity levels on the tourist program as on the strawberry program. Also there is more distinction made between the commodity and practice program levels on tourist program than with the strawberry program. This could be accounted for in two possible ways. First, the statements may not have been constructed to represent the three levels on tourist programs so effectively as the strawberry programs. Second, the scores may be an indication of lack of eXperience of both agents and Specialists -45- on tourist programs. In this case, tourism roles would not have been defined to the extent that strawberry programs were where both groups have had more eXperience. The scores of agents and specialists indicate a fairly high degree Of role consensus on these program levels, even though the difference is very large on who has the best Contacts for implementing waitress training schools. 0. Summary A summary of the mean scores of agents and Specialists on all twelve of the activity statements reveals both groups generally agree that: 1. The agents should have major reSponSibility for initiating both tourist and strawberry programs dealing with individual and county groups, and on the practice and commodity levels. 2. The Specialists should have major reSponSibility for initiating area strawberry and tourist programs, and for strawberry marketing programs. The agents should have major responsibility for initiating programs to promote and advertise county tourist attractions. 3. The specialists should be assigned major reSponSibility for providing the know how for both strawberry and tourist programs on all program levels, and the agents' reSponSibility should be less on area and marketing program levels than on the practice-commodity and individual-county program levels. -47- 4. The agents have the best contacts to work on strawberry and tourist programs on the individual and county levels, and on practice and commodity levels. The Specialists have the best contacts to work on area and marketing program levels. The comparison of mean responsibility scores of agents and Specialists on the three questions on each of the twelve activity statements reveals a high degree of role consensus on the level of reSponSibility that should be assigned to the agents. Twenty-nine (29) of the thirty-Six (36) agent- Specialist score comparisons differ by less than .50. On only one comparison is the difference as great as 1.00. This would indicate that, as a group, the agents and Specialists perceive their role and the role of the other position very much alike, which shows a high role consensus. But there is wide variation of reSponSibility scores of individual agents and Specialists within the groups. C f A e ' d S ec ' M R s ib t Sc es 0 th 0v - Regpgnsibility Assigned for Initiatign, n Know How, and Contagtg i each Ezggram Category In the previous section, mean scores were presented for each of the three activity statements, in each of the four program categories. For this section, the scores were combined to present an over-all responsibility mean score for each of the program categories on initiation, know how, and contact. These scores were obtained by determining the mean of the means for the (1) three questions on initiation, (2) three question on know how, and (3) three questions on -48- n _H' L: contacmsin.each of the four program categories for both 1i: agents and Specialists. (See Table V}) i The purpose of combining scores this way was to obtain a measure of role consensus and role definition of agents and Specialists on tourist and strawberry programs. On the two strawberry program categories, clientele groups and program levels, both the agents' and Specialists' mean scores indicate that: (1) agents Should be assigned the major over-all reSponSibility for initiation, (2) agents have the best contacts,and (3) the Specialists should be assigned the major over-all reSponSibility for providing the know how. These reSponSibility assignments are what would be eXpected of the role relationship between county agents and the traditional Extension Specialists located at the University. This tends to indicate that both agents and Specialists perceive the role of the EKRDP Specialists as Sbmilar to that of the traditional Specialist's role on an agricultural program. Mean scores of agents and Specialists Show agreement that the agents should have major over-all reSponSibility for initiation of tourist programs at all levels, and that the Specialists Should be assigned the major over-all respons- ibility for providing the know how on tourist programs at all levels. In general, the scores indicate that the Specialists would have the best contacts for tourist programs. There is one exception to this however. The agents' mean scores indicates that they have the best contact on tourist programs -49- .m. use.—F.o_ magmaopapm spa>apoee .m ama.m.s mpgoampmpm apHSapoapoaena pmansoa m mam>ma wsapmxnws mo.m ¢<.n mo.m mpmdamaommm one .hpauoasoo .moapownn on» so m..m ¢¢.m an.w mpnmwd swnmonm annooswnpm m n z mn.m _m.n .m.m mpmaaadommm —adnwona mm H 2 mono and .hpqsoo on.m on.n m¢.m modems .stea>acua hummnsmhpm uncapooo 3cm scam noapwapHdH unsounommmm muowmpwo awnwonm anowopwo summons some Ho mpnmsopwpm sapwong means on» so soapmmsu seasons“ map How mswms map no news map mpsmmmnmon ouoom some zoom .wmdnowmpmo swnwonn scams Adam esp Mo some so mpowpnoo use .30: Song .noapwapasa you mpsmwm op mamaawaomam use mpsmmw an umswammw hpaaapdmsommmn mo monoom swmzun.> mqmqa ._50_ on the practice, commodity, and marketing levels. Using this combination on mean scores, there is a high degree of role consensus between agents and Specialists. 0n only one comparison is there a disagreement on who should be assigned responsibility. The mean scores of both groups tend to assign less responsibility to the agents on tourist programs than on strawberry programs. However, the agents strongly indicate that, as a group, they would accept reSponSibility in develOping tourist programs. Considering the agricultural background of the agents and their very limited experience with tourist programs, this provides evidence that the agents, as a group, are accepting the broader role set forth in the Modified Extension Program of Eastern Kentucky. Connezison o: Oven-ell Reepensibilitz Scenes 9: Agents ene Specieliete on Indivignel, CeuntyI eng Aren Clientele Gneune and en gnectice, ConnodityI eng W These mean scores indicates the over-all reSponSi- bility' including initiation, know how, and contacts, for each of the activity statements. Here, again, the statements are divided into the four program categories used previously. The scores were obtained for both agents and Specialists by determining the means of the three mean scores on the initiation, know how, and contact questions for each of the twelve activity statements. These mean scores will provide information on how agents and Specialists would tend to assign reSponSibility on different program levels. Comparison -51.. can be made between agents' and Specialists' mean scores, and between mean scores on strawberry and tourist programs. (See Table VI.) The mean scores on the individual, county and area levels, Show that agents' and Specialists' agree that the over—all major reSponSibility in strawberry work be assigned to the agents on the individual and county group levels, and that the Specialists Should have the over-all major reSpons- ibility on the area level. On tourist programs at the individual, county, and area levels, agents and specialists agree that agents should have major reSponSibility at the individual level, and that the Specialists should have major reSponSibility at the area group levels. Both indicate they Should share almost equally on the county program levels. A comparison of scores of both agents and Specialists Show that the agents should be assigned less reSponSibility at each program level on tourist programs than on straw- berry programs. This would be expected because of the traditional agricultural role of county agents, and their lack of eXperience on tourist programs. The mean scores of both groups Show little difference between individual and county levels for either strawberry or tourist programs. The mean scores on the area level are much larger than those on the individual or county levels. This indicates the agents should have high and practically equal responsibility at the individual and county levels on either strawberry or tourist programs, but should have a -52- .pnmsmpmpm apabapom some you monoom pomvaoo and .30: song .noapmapasa mo soapwuapaoos . . . m m edemam mHo>oH mnApoMnda can mm m mm m e— m u “H *.hpdcosaoo .moapomum #n.n mm.m >—.m mpdomd no amnwonm pmahdoa . . . m m a com mHm>mH msawmsnwa can gs m mm . no m 9 aa a m .Npauossoo .moapownm so no. n .— mo.m mpnmwd awhwonm apnonzmnpm m mHo>mH . . . mpmaawaommm awnwonm who cum 0: d 00 m mm m .hpqsoo .HwSca>chH mo.¢ mm.m mm.m mpnmmd so adnwonn pmansoa . . . mamaflwdommm .Hoboa amnmonn mono one mm m mm m mm — *.mpndoo .stca>aes« no mm.n om.m m_.m madame mswnwonm annmnswnpm mend menace Hmzua>aunH mpnmuuommmm moanommpmo awnwonm mvnoampwpm hpabapom aback» on» mo a one monoom some muons .mHo>mH adnmonm ma mdo>ma adnwong some and .hpnsoo mpaowm op mumaawaomnm can mpnmwm apmxnws and .h .stoabauaa map so mswnwonn an omsmammm hpaaapquoqmmn u some do mnoapmmsw couponsm mouse on» no memos pauossoo .moapowng on» use hunmnzmnvm use pmanzop do o mmhoom nw02u1.H> mqmda -53- low level of reSponSibility at the area level. (m.tourist programs, the mean scores of both agents and Specialists Show that the agents Should be assigned the major reSponSibility for marketing types of programs. On the commodity level, there is slight difference of opinion between agents and specialists on who Should have the major respons- ibility. Agents feel that they should have the over-all major responsibility, and the Specialists indicate they should. This difference can be attributed to the wide difference of mean scores of the two groups on the contact question, as shown in the previous section. The mean scores of both agents and Specialists indicate little difference between reSponSibility on practice or commodity level on strawberry programs. There is a wide difference of mean scores between reSponSibility on area and the commodity levels. On tourist programs, there is more difference between scores on the individual and county levels. The relative low scores on the marketing level of tourist programs can probably be attributed to two factors. First, it is stated as a county program. Second, it was probably recognized as an organizational problem rather than a technical one. Each of these factorswould tend to increase the degree of agents' reSponSibility. The Scores in these comparisons tend to Show a high degree of role consensus of agents and Specialists. 0n only one comparison is there a difference of who should have the over-all ma j or responsibility. 3mm As a summary to the first part of this chapter, the first three hypotheses listed in Chapter I will be considered in.relation to the data that have been presented. To do this, it will be necessary to make the assumption that the straw- berry program would be a fair representation of other agri- cultural programs, and that the tourist program was a fair representation of other non-agricultural programs on which Extension may work. Hznetneeie I: There is a high degree of role consensus between the county agents and the EKRDP specialists on these three points: (1) that the county agents Should have major responsibility for initiation of both agricultural and non- agricultural programs; (2) that the Specialists should have major reSponSibility for providing the know how in conducting both agricultural and non-agricultural programs; and (3) work on - that the county agents have the best contacts to both agricultural and non-agricultural programs. The data is Table V strongly support the first part of the hypothesis. The scores of both agents and Specialists indicate agents should have major reSponSibility for initiating both strawberry and tourist programs. However, the data presented in Tables I, II, III, and IV show that on the strawberry program at the area and marketing levels and the tourist program. at the area level, the specialists should have major reSponSibility for initiation. The scores of agents and specialists support the second part of this hypothesis4as to the over-all major -5 - -55- responsibility for providing the know how. However, on three of the program levels, the agents indicated that they should have major responsibility for providing the know how. The over-all scores do not support the third part of the hypothesis. Both the agents and Specialists indicate that the agents have the best contacts to work on strawberry programs, but that the specialists have the best contacts to work on tourist programs. The scores on the program statements tend to indicate that agents have the best contacts to work on strawberry programs at the individual and county group levels and on the practice and commodity levels, and that the Specialists have the best contacts to work on the area and" marketing program levels. Both the agents and Specialists tend to agree, as indicated by their mean scores that the Specialists have the best contacts on all levels of the tourist program-~except the practice level. There is less role consensus on who has the best contacts than on the other two function questions. The data generally support Hypothesis I on the over- all responsibility of agents and Specialists for initiation and providing the know how, but do not support that part relevant to contacts. Hynetneeie II: There is a high degree of role consensus between county agents and EKRDP Specialists that county agents should have a higher level of reSponSibility for both agri- cultural and non-agricultural programs on the individual, county;'practice, and commodity program levels than on area -55- and marketing program levels. The data presented in Table VI strongly support this hypothesis. On both strawberry and tourist programs, the mean scores of the agents and Specialists are considerably lower on the individual and county program levels than on the area program level. This indicates a higher level of agents' reSponSibility on the individual and county program levels. On the strawberry program, both the agents' and Specialists' scores were considerably higher on the mar- keting program level than on the practice or commodity level. On the tourist program, the same pattern is shown, except that the Specialists' mean scores are higher on the commodity program level than on the marketing program level. With this one exception, the data support the hypothesis. Hypothesis II, from the over-all mean scores of agents and Specialists, can be accepted, with the one exception. -HIDQ§h§§1§ III: There is a high degree of role consensus between the county agents and EKRDP Specialists that the county agents Should have a higher level of responsibility for agricultural programs than for non-agricultural programs. The over-all mean scores of agents and Specialists support the hypothesis. The agents' total mean score on all (ruestions on the strawberry programs is 2.67. For the specialists, the total mean score is 2.59. For all questions -57.. on the tourist program, the agents' mean score is 3.22. The Specialists' mean score is 3.21. These indicate that the agents should have a higher level of reSponSibility for agricultural programs than for non-agricultural programs. The mean scores of both agents and Specialists on the marketing program level, however, indicate that the agent Should have more reSponSibility on the tourist program marketing level than on the strawberry program marketing level. Recognizing that there is an exception on one program level, Hypothesis III can be accepted. The data that have been presented in these sections indicate a high degree of role consensus between the agents and specialists as groups. This would indicate that there should not be any conflict between the two groups. On the other hand, there is wide variation between individual responses , which would indicate possible conflict between ' individual agents and Specialists. ll'llilal 1111'! It.) FINDINGS: PART II In Part I, comparisons were made between the mean scores of agents and Specialists. Part II will deal with the relationship between the nature of reSponSibility assigned by the agents and different social factors of the agents, and factors relating to the situation of the counties in which the agents work. The nature of responsibility refers to the agent's indication of whether the agents should be individually responsible, or have joint responsibility with Specialists. Low mean scores indicate individual responsibility. High mean scores indicate joint reSponSibility. Five variables were chosen for this part of the study. Each has a Special bearing on the Extension program in Eastern Kentucky. 1. The amount of change made in the county programs is the key variable, because change from traditional to total resource deve10pment programs is the ob- jective of the Modified Extension Program. This will provide information on role definition of agents in Situations of varying amount of change. 2. AS agents become involved in activities other than those in which they have been trained, there would probably be a felt need for additional training. This training can be obtained in several ways. For this study, it was decided to use recent advanced degree work. Role definitions of those agents that have taken additional course work in the last five -58- -59- years will be compared with those who have not. This is a comparison of agents who have expressed a need for additional training by obtaining advance schooling, with those that have not eXpressed the need in this manner, rather than the comparisons of formal ed- ucational attainment. 3. Of those agents who have returned to school, some have taken agricultural courses, and others, the social sciences. The scores of these two groups of agents are compared on the basis of their role definition reSponses. 4. Agents' years of Extension experience was included to determine what effect, if any, the years of experience had on the agents' role definition. 5. The counties of Eastern Kentucky vary in agricultural resources. The agricultural potential of the counties will be compared with the role definition of the agents. The purpose of the remainder of this chapter will be to determine what effect, if any, these variables have on :role definition of the agents. The last four hypotheses :Stated in Chapter I will be considered, since they relate to these variables. In each of the following sections, the agents' mean scores on the individual and county activity statements were combined to obtain the over-all reSponSibility mean score. 1311s score is then compared with the over-all responsibility -50- mean score on the area activity statement. The mean scores for the practice and commodity statements are also combined to obtain an over-all responsibility mean score, which is compared with the mean scores on the marketing activity statements. These scores are the means of the mean scores on the initiation, know how, and contact question for each activity statement or statements, as indicated. This combining of agents' responsibility mean scores on both the individual and county activity statements and on the practice and commodity activity statements can be justified because of the finding presented in Part I of this chapter. The agents indicated that-they should be assigned nearly equal reSponSibility on the individual and county activity level, and on the practice and commodity activity level. An additional reason for these combinations is that traditionally the county agents have had a high level of reSponSibility for programs and on the individual and county group programs and on the practice and commodity level programs, and a low level of responsibility for area and .marketing programs. These comparisons, therefore, will provide some information on how the agents would tend to zassign reSponSibility for activities traditionally the .responsibility of agents and on activities in which agents do not usually have major responsibility. o C e S as e D t ee Ye Snnenyisene' Rating of County Prognens en tne WWW. The major objective of the Modified Extension Program in Eastern Kentucky is to change the program from one in which agriculture is the basic consideration to one that would con- sider the total resources, both human and physical. This new program emphasis had been in operation two years at the time the data were obtained for this study. Based on the assumption that not all agents will make the same rate of change, the following hypothesis was advanced: gynetneeis I : Those agents whose programs are rated to have made the greatest amount of change from traditional Extension to resource deve10pment programs, will define their role as indicating a higher level of individual reSponSibility than those agents whose programs are rated to have made the least change. The greatest difference will be on the non-agricultural and area programs. To obtain a measure of the amount of change in each of the county programs, the two District Supervisors with :responsibility in the area were asked to rate the county ;programs in each of their districts. The District Super- 'visorS were selected to provide this information because of 'their close contact and familiarity with each of the counties. in: other Extension personnel has this degree of contact with all the counties. Another advantage of having the Supervisors make this rating is that they are continually evaluating (county’programs and would be familiar with this task. -51- -52- The Supervisors were given the following instructions: "Rate the county programs in your district on the amount of change that has been made in the last three years, from a traditional Extension program toward total resource develOp- ment, using the following five-point continuum from no change to Significant change." (See Appendix E.) The purpose of having the county programs rated on the amount of change was to determine if those agents whose county programs had made the most change would indicate, by their responses, either more or less individual reSponSibility for non-agricultural and area programs, than those agents in counties where the program was rated to have made the least change. The District Supervisors, using the five-point scale, rated one program 1, five programs 2, Sixteen programs 3, four programs 4, and three programs 5. The higher the rating, the larger the amount of change. For comparison purposes, the mean scores of agents from counties rated 1 and 2 (low change) are combined and compared with the combined :mean.scores of agents from counties rated 4 and 5 (high change.) The mean scores of agents from counties rated 3 are not included in this comparison, because the main objective here is to compare scores of agents in situations of high and low-change county programs. The high-change agents generally indicate a higher level of agents' individual reSponSibility than do the low- change agents. (See Table VII.) -63- .aanmsoapwaon was» osmoauca mohoom some .Hx I HH> modems sH .mpmaaoaooam com manomm Homepop mpaaapamaommon poaon mo Hm>oH swan mpwoaona monoom swam .mpnmww op umsmammm apaaanamsoamon Hezea>ausfi mo Ho>mH swan opwoaeSH monoom sons mm.m mmwm modemanaa.m_ meapmasas sowwqaaqqua sea .apaeoaaoo nn.m m¢.m use .moapownm "mamboq ooapoonm.op smnmonm pmahdoa o_.s mm.n amn«.m mend wenmamdw one .hpdfioo ma.m .s.m use .HmsedsaeqH ”museum HaguabaosH.b smumohm pmaHSoe mmun mm.m weapmanmz. medpmaoaa 11 and as 0 use .spaeoaaoo em.m sm.m sum .ooapomnm "mamsmq ooavoonm.¢ Emhwonm unpopzmupm a¢.¢ .w.m wond.m 4 msmnwoym 11 1Nmmqqmdu mend one .mpnsoo sm.m mo.m .eea .HaseasaenH “masons HoneabausH.— swhmonm hhhopswnpm m H z N H z mpnmfiopmpm owns: 309 owswno swam ava>apo¢ moanowopwo awnmonm .2. moanomopwo summons anon on» you .mnoma>noasm poanpman an ammono 30H use masons swan copay moHanoo ca sapwooa oedema mo.hpaaapamqoamon no mazes: madamoaena .wohoom nmoznu.HH> mqmde :64- The mean scores of both high-change and low-change agents indicate the agents should have the same level of individual responsibility on the strawberry program activities, except on the area level. At this area level, the high- change agents' scores indicated the agents should have a higher level of individual reSponSibility than that indicated by the low-change agents. On the individual-county, and area tourist program statements, the high-change agents tend to assign a higher level of individual reSponSibility to the agent than did the low-change agents. 0n the practice-commodity tourist program statements, there is little difference in scores. 0n the tourist marketing statement, the high-change agents again indicated a higher level of agents' individual reSponSibility than did the low-change agents. The high-change agents tend to aSsign agents a higher level of individual reSponSibility on the tourist program activities and on area strawberry programs than do the low-change agents. Both tend to assign the same level of responsibility to agents on the other strawberry program activity statements. This suggests that those agents who received high change ratings are those who assign themselves greater individual responsibility on the non-agricultural activities than agents receiving low-change ratings. These findings were eXpected. If an agent changes 21 program from a traditional Extension program to a total :resource deve10pment program, it would be necessary for that {agent to assume a higher level of individual reSponSibility -55- on the non-agricultural program activities and area programs than if the agent's program made but little change. These findings support the hypothesis that the high- change agents would indicate a higher level of agent's individual reSponSibility than would the low-change agents, especially on the non-agricultural and area programs. However, there are two limitations to using this rating of amount of change in county programs as a basis of classifying agents. First, it is possible for an agent to attempt to change the county program toward total resource deve10pment but for the leadership of the county to resist this change for one reason or another. In this kind of situation, the agent would probably reSpond as an agent in a high-change situation, but would be placed in the low-change group. Secondly, the reverse could also be true. The agents could resist changing the program, while the leadership highly favors considering the total resources in program deve10pment. In this Situation, the program may be rated high-change, but the agent would respond as a low-change agent. Even with these two possible limitations of the rating procedure, the reSponses strongly support the hypothesis. Tne Relatienshin between Recent Advenced Sonoeling end Meen Responsibility Scones of the Agents Professional improvement of county agents is of concern to the Extension Administration and to the county agents themselves. While there are several methods avail- able to agents for professional improvement, attending formal classes, either Special courses or a program for an advanced degree, is usually recommended for every agent. Advanced schooling is a means whereby an agent can maintain competency in technical fields, improve skills for working with individuals and organizations, and broaden horizons. The Modified Extension Program requires that the agents be highly competent not only in technical agriculture but as leaders in community and resource development programs. Fourteen of the twenty-nine agents in Eastern Kentucky have taken advanced schooling during the last five years. The extent of the course work ranged from one extension course to completed master's programs. Five of the agents had taken agricultural courses, and nine had taken non-agricultural courses--primarily Extension education and Social science courses. The following hypothesis was established relative to the agents' recent activity in advance schooling. HEDQIQ£51§ 2: There is a direct relationship between recent Schooling and the degree of individual reSponSibility indicated by the agents. Those agents who have recently had additional schooling will indicate a higher degree of individual reSpons- ibility than will those agents who have not had additional schooling. -55- -57- The mean responsibility scores of those agents who had not attended any formal classes in the last five years indicate that the agents should have a higher level of individual responsibility than do the mean scores of agents who have attended formal classes. (See Table VIII.) On the strawberry program statements, both groups of agents indicate they would assign the same level of reSponSi- bility to the agents, except that on the area level those agents without recent schooling would assign more individual responsibility to the agents than would those agents who have had recent courses.\ . On the tourist program, those agents who have not recently had advanced schooling indicate a higher level of agents' reSponSibility at all program levels, except on marketing where scores are nearly equal, than do those agents who have had additional schooling. The reSponses of the agents indicate that those agents who have not attended formal classes recently would be willing to assume more individual responsibility than those agents that have had recent course work. This is directly opposite of what was eXpected. Therefore, the hypothesis is not supported. The data obtained in this study do not make it possible to determine why those agents that have not recently had advanced schooling would assign more individual responsibility to the agents than would those who have taken additional course work. One possible explanation for this difference is that those agents who accept a high degree of mm.m mn.m weapoanaz.m. weapoanaz (wedumaaqmqaa can .apaeoaaoo on.m as.m use .eoapomnm “mHmSeq ooapomnm.op smnwonm pmahdoa os.n ms.e mon<.m .ll Npflfldem moH<.udm .meSoo so.n .m.m sea .HazeasdeoH «mosooo HazedbausH.n swnmohm pmaHSoa om.m mo.e meapmauaz. weapmauaa . hpquaamm1m use .hpacoSSoo mw mo.m m_.m one .moapoanm "masses . ooapomnm.s amnwonm hpnopsonpm mm.n ..wa omn4.m thmdmdw send one hpszoo mo.m mm.m new .HaSedsaeuH "ozone amoua>aosH.P swnwonm hyponzmnpm m— n z s. u z manoSopmpm moaaoomom oz mcaaoonom mpa>dpoa moaaomopwo smnmonm moanomopoo shamans Meow on» Ho some now mpdoSmpwpm hpa>apoo omp So .mumoh obam pmma esp SH weaaoonow stoapacem swamp pod o>ms use o>mn on: modems mo .hpaflanamsommmn mo endpoo msapooaeSa .moHoom dwoznu.HHH> mqmse -59- individual reSponSibility for both agricultural and non- agricultural activities become highly involved and do not believe they should take time away from their jobs to return to School. This reason was given by one of the agents. Another possible explanation is that the agents who have had additional course work view the resource development program as a broad, complex program requiring Extension workers highly trianed in the subject matter field. This would tend to indicate the agents should have joint responsibility with the Specialists. Another consideration that may further explain the difference in agents' scores is that those agents who indicate they would assume a high level of individual reSponsi- bility have been more successful in making the desired change in the county-programs, and have not felt the need to return to school. On the other hand, the agents who indicate they would not assume so high a level of individual responsi- bility may not be so successful in changing the program and return to school to improve their effectiveness. It is impossible to determine from the data obtained what effect, if any, these theories had on the agents responses. They do suggest the need of further studies on the effect of advanced schooling on agents role description. The mean scores of the nine agents who completed non-agricultural courses were compared with the mean scores of the five agents enrolled in agricultural courses. The data are shown in Table IX. The agents who had taken non-agricultural courses indicate that the agent Should have a slightly higher mm.n mm.n weapmaoaa.m_ assesses: +1 {Spammawqmqfla use .apaeoaSoo ms.m ma.m use .ooapomnm "mao>oq ooaPownm.o_ smnmonm omdndos mm.w, omwmr won<.m deqmmqm sons was .hpqSoo am.n ms.m sea .HaSeapaenH «moneys HmsufibaosH.b amhwohm pmahfioa . b>.n mm.w msapoxnmz. wnavoxnms m.,1 =n. apddmammmqm can knacoSSoo . .o.m ms.m ens .moapomnm “masses weapomnm.¢ sapwonm anhonswnpm —..w .m_»w wond.n .Hmmmmmdm send one .hpdfioo s_.m mm.m use .HaSUasaesH "manage Hosea>dosH._ smnwonm annooswnpm m n z m u z pdoSopopm oHSPHSoansnaoz mHSpHSoHHm4 hpa>apo¢ moanowopoo sapwonm moanowmpmo smnwona Macy one No mono ma mpoosopmpm sapwonm on» no .momhsoo HmHSpHSoanmmnnos Swamp o>mn on: much» use momnzoo HmHsPHSoanwm Sosa» o>o£ on: mpsowo no .hpaadnamaoamon mo endpmn wsapmoacSH .moHonII.MH mamas -71- level of individual reSponSibility for strawberry program activities than did the agents who had taken agricultural courses. On the tourist program, the agents taking the non- agricultural courses indicate less agent individual reSponSi- bility on the individual-county and area level, and a higher level on the practice-commodity and marketing level, than the agents who had taken agricultural courses. While there is a slight tendency for the agents who have taken non-agricultural courses to indicate the agent Should have a higher level of individual responsibility than the agents that have taken agricultural courses, there is not sufficient evidence to determine any possible effect of the type of courses on the role definition of agents. Tne Egieet of Yegne 9: Extension Exnenience en t e.ts Mean Resnensieility Scenes The traditional county Extension program of Eastern Kentucky was an agricultural program, approached primarily on the county basis. The Modified Extension Program emphasizes a total resource program approached on a county and area basis. Those agents with the most years of exPerience with the traditional Extension program would have a relative greater change to make in their methods of operation than the agents with fewer years of Extension eXperience, to change from a traditional Extension program to a total resource development program. In this section, the mean scores of agents with the most years of experience will be compared with mean scores of the agents with the least years of eXperience. -72- _ 2.. __._._._—--—~——..*—. ._. v The hypothesis established for this variable is 11 stated below. HXDOtEGSIS VI: There is a direct relationship between years of Extension eXperience and agent's role definition on nature of reSponSibility. Agents with the most experience will indicate less willingness to assume individual responsibility for non-agricultural programs and for agricultural area programs than will those agents with the least years of experience. Information obtained on the years of Extension experience of the agents showed that three had fewer than five years, thirteen had between five and ten years, six had between ten and fifteen years, and seven had fifteen or more years of eXperience. The reSponses of those with fewer than ten years of eXperience are compared with those having ten or more years of eXperience. (See Table X.) The mean scores Show that the agents with the most experience indicate the agent should be assigned a higher level of individual responsibility for strawberry programs at the individual-county level, and at the practice-commodity level, than that indicated by those agents with less SXperience. The agents with less eXperience indicate agents Should have a higher level of individual responsibility for strawberry programs on the area and marketing levels, and for tourist programs at all levels. Thus agents with more experience would tend to assume less individual responsibility for non-agricultural programs -7}... _S.n mo.m moapmaoas.m_ andpmaaas ismwmmmaqmqqa use .apaeosaoo mm.w .n.m use .moapoonm “mambmq weapowpm.op sapwohm pmanzoa mews 0b.n mond.m Mpqmmmdm some use .meSoo om.m mm.m use .HmSua>HesH «madopo Hosea>acsH.> smnmonm pmandoa sons mm.n moapmauaa.m assesses: tapaeo on use .apaeoaSoo mb.— .m.m coo .ooapomnm "mambon ooaPomhm.¢ smhwohm manoQSmnpm mo.w, ss.n won<.n ifipmmmmqw mon4 cam .thzoo .o.m mm.m sea .HaseasaeeH "manage HazeabausH.. smhmonm annonsmhpm n_ u z m. u z monoauoaxo mnmom oodoapmaxm mpdofiophpm whoa ecm op mhmoh moo avabapod moanomopmo amnwonm moanomopmo Hammond adom one Mo some ma mpdofiopopm hpabapom on» no .oosoahoaxo SoamSopHm mo whom» onos no mop spa: modems one mood no mods Spas mpsomw Mo apaadpamnoomon mo endpwc mdapmoacsH .monoom smoznn.x mqmHesH.w sapwonm pmahdoa ss.m 1mm.e1 weapmanaa. manomenaa 111 seas 0 use .apaeoaaoo . oo.m mo.m use .ooapomnm “mHo>oH WW ooapomnm.d amhwohm mHHmQSmnpm . 1w>.n mmmmt mon<.n memmdmdw send one .thSoo mo.m m—.m use .Hmsea>acsH amazono Hosea>aesH.— swnwonm annopsonpm m. u z m n z Hmapmopom HwHPSopom HmHSpHdo HmHSpHSO upcosopmpm Iauwa Son Ianms swam apa>apo< moanowopmo smhwonm moanomopmo smnmonm Adam map Mo some a“ mucosopwpm hvdbdpoo anemone on» so .Hmapnopog HwHSpHSodnww zoa use swan and: moadeoo dd wsaxno: madame mo .apaaanamsonmon Mo museum mnapmoacsa .monoom smmzou.HN mnmde Seaman To summarize Part II of this chapter, the indicated nature of agents' reSponSibility will be considered in relation to each of the five variables. te 0 Those agents in the high-change counties indicated the agents Should have a higher level of individual responsi- bility than did the agents in the low-Chane counties. This was true to a greater extent on the tourist program statements than on the strawberry program statements. This suggests that if a county agent is to be most successful in changing from a traditional agricultural Extension program to a broader resource deve10pment program, he must be willing to accept a high level of individual reSponSibility. Enucetien The comparison of scores of those agents who returned to school with those who did not in the last five years Show that those who did not indicated the agent should have a higher level of individual reSponSibility than did agents who did go back to school. This was true to a greater extent on the tourist program statements than on the strawberry program statements. The agents who have not returned to school, and the agents located in the high-change counties, both indicate a Similar pattern of agent reSponSibility. It would probably be incorrect to conclude that those agents who return to school would accept less individual reSponSibility, thereby having less success in changing the program in the direction -77- -78- of total resource deve10pment. A more probable eXplanation would be that those agents who have been most successful in making the desired change in the county program would be less likely to return to school because of the heavy work load and/or because they do not feel the need to do so at this time. s N n-A cult 1 Ad nce W Of those agents who had returned to school, those who had taken non-agricultural courses indicated a slightly higher level of agent individual reSponSibility than did those that had taken agricultural courses. No conclusion can be drawn from this because of the slight difference, and there was no pattern shown in the reSponSibility scores. W The relationship between years of Extension experience and the indicated nature of agent responsibility shows a very definite pattern. Those agents with the most years in Extension indicated a higher level of agent individual responsibility for county agricultural programs than did the agent with less experience. For area agri- cultural and non-agricultural programs, the agents with the less eXperience indicated that a higher level of individual reSponSibility should be assigned to the agents than did the agents with the most Extension experience. -79- Agnicnltnnel Resonncee The data Show that the agricultural potential of the county has but little effect on the agent's perception of his responsibility. Those agents in countiet with low agricultural potential did indicate a slightly higher level of agent individual reSponSibility than did the agents in counties with high agricultural potential, but not enough difference was Shown to draw any conclusions. These data provide some information on how agents as a group would be SXpected to react in a given situation, but for any given agent, this would not necessarily hold true. The scores of individuals varied widely, indicating each agent showsa high degree of individuality in deciding the nature of reSponSibility he Should have for each Situation. CHAPTER V cowoLosiors This chepter will include a brief summary of the findings of the study, and the implications and conclusions that can be derived from the findings. This writer also would like to express some of the limitations that became apparent in studying the data, and to list some of the additional study areas suggested by this study. finnns:z.of_21ndinss. As groups, the agents and specialists showed a high degree of role consensus on the level of agents' responsi- bility. Individually, agents and specialists showed a wide variation. For the purposes of this study, mean scores of the two groups were compared to obtain a measure of role consensus. Those agents and specialists who showed a wide variation in.mean scores were not treated separately. Their scores were included in the mean score for the groups. There was s high degree of role consensus between the agents and specialists on the following: I. The agents should have a higher level of responsibility on the strawberry program than on the tourist program. This is as expected because agents traditionally hsve 'not been highly involved in tourist activities. However, both groups indicated that the agents should ~80- 2. 3. -31- have a fairly high level of responsibility on tourist programs at the county level and for initiation of tourist activities. This shows that the agents would accept responsibility on the non-agricultural programs in the counties. This further provides evidence that the agents are to a degree accepting the objectives of the Modified Extension Program for Eastern Kentucky. The agents should have a higher level of responsibility - for activities that deal with individuals and county groups than for area groups. There was little differ- ence in the level of responsibility that either group assigned to agents on the individual and county activity levels. Since agents are assigned to a particular county, and specialists are assigned to all the counties in the area, this lower level of agent responsibility for area activities is as would be expected. The agontsshould have a higher lovol of responsibility for county programs on the practice and commodity levels than on the‘marketing level. This would indi- care a recognition by both groups that the agents do not have the same background for developing marketing programs that they have for practice and commodity level programs. The agents should have a higher level of responsi- bility for initiating and providing the know how to -82- ; implement a program activity. The specialist's g; role has traditionally been that of providing the. information for Extension programs. This role is reflected in the responses of both the agents and specialists. The pattern of the indicated relationship between the Eastern Kentucky agents and specialists responsibilities are similar to what would be expected between agents and the specialists located at the University. This would indicate that the specialists in Eastern Kentucky, though they have a broad responsibility in program development, tend to perceive their role very similar to that of the traditional Extension specialist--Just as the agents do. The relationship between five independent variables and the agents' indicated nature of responsibility were considered in this study. Tho variables were: (1) amount of change in county programs; (2) agent's participation in recent OGVEHGO 8°h0°11383 (3) agent's years of Extension experience; and (4) the agricultural potential of the county. The nature of responsibility refers to the agent having individual responsibility versus Joint responsibility of agents and specialists. The agents working in counties rated to have made the most change from a traditional Extension program toward a total resource development program indicated that the agent should have a higher level of individual responsibility than did the agents in counties rated to have made the least -33- amount of change. Agents in low-change counties indicated a higher degree of Joint responsibility of the agent and specialist. This provides evidence that, to change a county program toward total resource development, the agent would have to assume a high level of individual responsibility. The possibility exists that the major factor con- sidered by the Supervisors in rating the amount of change in county programs was the agent’s initative in assuming individual responsibility for implementing a program.. If this were true, then it would follow that the agents.indicating a high degree of individual responsibility would have their programs rated as having made the most change. This possibility can be discounted because the Supervisors were asked to rate county programs on basis of change from traditional to total resource development. With these directions, it would be difficult for a Supervisor to make a rating on the basis of an individual agent taking tho imitative in carrying out the county program. Uhile this possibility does exist, the author is inclined to discount it because of the general pattern of agents' scores. In addition, personal observations give little or no support to this interpretation. The most surprising relationship in this study was between the scores of agents who had taken additional school ‘wcrk in the last five years and of those who had not. Those agents who had not taken additional schooling indicated the agents should have a higher level of individual responsibility than did the agents who had additional schooling. Comparing -34- this relationship with the variable on rate of change in county programs, those agents whose programs were rated to have made the greatest amount of change, and these agents who have not returned to school recently, indicated the agent should have a higher level of individual responsibility than did their counterparts. This is surprising, because advanced schooling of agents is usually associated with the preparation of an agent to improve the county program. This study does not disprove this idea, but it does indicate that additional studies are needed to determine the relationship between advanced schooling and agents' role descriptions. These findings can be.raticnalized by considering that advanced course work gives the agents a broad under- standing of the many factors to consider in developing a program, whether it be an agricultural or a non-agricultural program. If this is true, then this type of agent would tend to rednest assistance from others to assist with his program develOpment.e I This then suggests another question. What should be the objective of advanced schooling for an agent? Should it be to develop an agent whcahas a broad understanding of program deve10pment and who is a generalist in many fields, or one who has the technical training in the fields pertinent to the county situation so that he can take the individual responsibility to develop the‘county program? The answer to this question is beyond the scope of this study, and no attempt will be made to suggest an answer. However, the data obtained in this study suggest that the 41'7'; -85- .question should be studied, considering the role of the agent in future program development. A comparison of scores of agents who had taken agri- .cultural courses with those who had taken non-agricultural . courses provides evidence that the subject matter of the courses had little effect on the agent's role definition. The study showed thatothere was a considerable difference between scores of agents with varying amount of Extension experience. These agents with the most years of experience indicated higher individual responsibility for agricultural programs on the county level. They also felt a higher level of Jointlresponsibility with the specialists for area agricultural programs and non-agricultural programs than did the agents with fewer years of experience. This suggests that the agents with fewer years of experience would probably assume more individual responsibility for those. programs broader in scope than the traditional Extension program than would these agents with the most experience. - The agricultural potential of the county did not prove °to.be a factor in role definition of the agents. Agents in counties with low and high agricultural potential both tended to assign the agent the same level of individual responsibility of agricultural and non-agricultural programs. 2anslnsisss_snd_1snlissiisns. Thisstudy was designed to provide information on role consensus between agents and specialists of-Eastern Kentucky and on the relationship.of five independent variables tc.the-agents' role definition. The study was designed for the unique situation in Eastern Kentucky. To better meet the needs of the area,.twc new programs have been started: the Hbdified Extension Program and the Eastern Kentucky Resource Development Program. The Modified Extension.Program is an effort to.broaden.the scope of traditional.Extensicn work there to include the development of the human and physical resources of the area. The EKRDP consists of a staff of Extension specialists placed in the area to assist in the development work. These specialists were given the -responsibility of providing leadership and technical infor- mation for development in Eastern.Kentucky. The data.fcr this study were collected two years after these programs were started. During this time, agents and specialists alike were becoming familiar with their new roles and the roles of each other. The responses of agents and specialists showed a .high_degree of role consensus, as groups. This would ;indicate that both groups have developed a similar pattern of role definition for themselves and for the other position. ;The general pattern is that the agents should have major :responsibility for both county agricultural and none .agricultural programs and that the specialists would have major responsibility for programs that would be developed on -35- -87- r an area basis. The agents generally would have major 5 responsibility for initiation and providing the contacts, and the specialists would have major responsibility for providing the know how. The agents would have a higher level of individual responsibility for agricultural programs than for non-agricultural programs. I These general patterns of responsibility hold true only for the.agents and specialists when considered as groups. Scores of individual agents and specialists varied con- siderably from.the mean. This would indicate individual agents and specialists may define their role and the role of those in the other position quite different than.did the group._ This could lead to unsatisfactory working relation- ships between individuals.- The agents of counties rated by the District Super- visor to have made the greatest amount of change, and agents who had not taken additional schooling in the last five years, indicated that agents should have a.higher level of individual responsibility than did the agents in counties rated to have made the least change, and the agents who have taken additional course work. respectively. This tends to show that to make the greatest change in a county program.an agent should accept individual responsibility for the county program, and that agents who have chosen.to.receiye addition.schooling would tend-to seek more joint responsibility with the specialists rather than.assuming so much individual responsibility. This.suggests an important question- which of these types of responsibilities will result in the greatest return 112.; - -33- over a longer period of time? The findings of this study, which rated agent change activities over a three-year -period, indicated that the agents who assume a high level of individual responsibility would probably change the program the fastest. If other studies, measuring the rate of program change and effectiveness:of.this change.for longer periods .of time, would support the findings here, this would be -valuable as an aid in selecting agents for county positions. Agents with.fewer than ten years of experience, working on the traditional agricultural Extension program indicate they would assume more individual responsibility ~for nonsagricultural programs and.area agricultural programs than would agents with ten or more years of experience. This tends to show that the agent with most experience would rely more upon the specialist for those programs in which he has had.but little experience than would the agent with less experience. In these findings, conclusions were based on agents as.groups. The individual scores of agents lost their identity. Therefore, the findings do not imply that any individual would respond exactly like any particular group. .It would be incorrect to assume that, because an.individual had a certain.characteristic,_he.responded as did the group ‘with.this.oharacteristic..'The data show that different -groups of agents tend to respondin.a.oertain.manner. Each individual should be considered separately in determining the way he would or does perform his role. W In analyzing the responses of the agents and.apecialists, there was evidence of a few limitations in the instrument. Should the method used.in this study prove to be useful in other studies, these limitations will be discussed so that others would not make the same mistake. One of the possible answers to each of the questions was; ”Others, not Extension.“ This response generally indicated that a.certain activity was not the responsibility of.Extension.and.that-others should be responsible. Some of the agents, however, selected this answer to questions on strawberry.activity statements. In these cases, the interpretation of "Others, not Extension" was probably that local Extension leaders would be responsible for the activity. This has an entirely different meaning than the more general interpretations of the responses. While the number of responses insulted was small,.this could have been avoided by rodwcrding the statement. _ The greatest difference in.mean.scores between agents and specialists was on.the question of who has the best contacts to work on.a county tourist program.to train watiresses and service station attendants. This difference can probably be accounted for by the interpretation of who would be contacted. The agents probably considered the contacts.noeessary to interest participants. The specialists probably considered contacts that would be made in obtaining instructors for the training.msetings. Assuming the variation in scores was because of different interpretations, this -39- 1” lst‘_-__. -m- question then would be of little value. The three activity statements on tourist programs at tho.practice, commodity, and marketing levels, probably do not represent those levels so clearly as do the activity statements on the strawberry programs. This could possibly be avoided by selecting a different type of program level or tho.sslection of other statements to represent these program levels. The author feels that these limitations are not serious and that the data obtained in.this study were very satisfactory for the purposes of the study. With.modification, the instrument could be used to measure role consensus in other Extension programs, and possibly other organizations. W This study has measured agents' and specialists' responses on what they believe should be the role of both positions. These responses indicate high role consensus. An.interesting and valuable study would be to determine how agents and specialists actually perform their.roles. .It is .possible that pressure, either from within Extension or outside Extension, tends to force the Extension worker to perform a different role than.the one he parceiyes he should perform. Sower,1 shows in his model that the role expectation of an agent or district agent iswa combination of the expectations of the state administration, county office colleagues, county clientele, and self beliefs of the agent. L A L 'Ohristopher Sower, pp. 211., p. A - 14. -91- 1 study of this nature would be especially valuable in Eastern Kentucky because of the transition taking place in the Extension.program. Pressuresto.resist change would probably be greatest in.this type of situation. This study also suggests the need for further information on.the type of role performances of agents and specialists that would bring about the greatest amount of change and the greatest amount of improvement in the county situation. The findings.here indicate that an agent assuming a high level of individual responsibility would be expected to cause the greatest amount of change. Further study is needed to either support this or other role behavior. Additional study of the effect of advanced schooling on agents as to role perception and role behavior is needed. This study has given.evidence that agents who.have taken advanced schooling would tend to perform in a joint responsi- bility capacity with area agents to a greater extent than the agents who have not taken recent advanced schooling. Further study could determine if this is a unique situation for the area studied, or if this.is.a.general pattern. The new Extension approach in Eastern.Kentucky is in .the refinement and development.stage. Program.evaluation is most important to determine the value of this concerted effort to assist an.area in.developing to the limit of its resources. This study may provide.a.bench.mark.for further studies of the Extension Service of Eastern Kentucky. '.A;_ I.) _ ‘1."- t BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Black, John D.,Westcott, George, and Others. W. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard niversity Press, 1959.. Gross, Neal, Mason, Ward 8., HcEachern, Alexander H. B. ' S . New ork: The Dryden Press, 1951. Kelsey, Lincoln D., and Hearne, Cannon C. 0 m. Ithaca, New York: Comstock Publishing Association, 1955. Periodicals. Clark, Robert C. ”The Role of the County Agent", W We no NOoA’ o '958‘590 Miller, Paul A. “Extension Education in the Land-Grant . Colleges” . Wm XI. No.4. . 1958-59. Ratchford, C. B. "The Scope of Marketing, ”W , 3,331,113.15». 11, (November 1959 . Bulletins and Circulars .v Erie County Agricultural Extension Association and Depart- ment of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology. WW- Pennsylvania tats niversity, xtension Studies No. 6, 1960. Federal Extension Service. W W. North Carolina tats ollege Agricultural xtension- Service, 1959. Waller, Panlhufl ”I- ooo. : '1- :‘-o; es s. " Ens; Lansing, Michigan: chigan tate I . iversity, - 195 . Morris, Po Bo C — E U. S. D. A. xtension Service Circular No. 2 O, 1937. -92- R D V . University of Wisconsin Agricultural Experiment Station, Research Bulletin 203, 1957. Wilkenins Eugene A. W: W Other Sources Brown, James S. ”The Eastern Kentucky Resource Development Project.- Paper presented to the Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology section of the Association of Southern ricultural Workers, Jacksonville, Florida, 1 2. Hazlitt, James R. "A Study Indicating the Future Direction of the Cooperative Extension Service in Order to Meet the Problems and Needs of the People." 03 ublished H.S. Thesis, Huchigan State University, 1 1. Miller, Paul- A. ”Cooperative Extension Work in the Industrial- izing Society." Unpublished Manuscript, Michigan State University, 1959. .Hotsenbocker, Earl Edwin-”The Inter-County Agent, A New Kind of Cooperative Extension Service Worker" Unpublished .K.S. Thesis, Michigan.State University, 1961. Sower, Christopher. "The Land-Grant College, A Development . , Organization in Transition: A Case of the Cooperative Extension.Service.” Paper presented to the Seventh National Cooperative Extension Administration Seminar, University of Hisconsin, Hay, 1962. Stone, John T. "How County Agricultural Agents Teach.” .. Michigan State University, 1952. University of Kentucky. WW 2:21:21. A.report prepared by the ollege of . , Agriculture and Home Economics, 1960. University of Kentucky. "The Modified Extension Program for Eastern Kentucky.” College of Agriculture and Home Economics, n.d. (Htmeographed.) APPENDIX APPENDIX A m U '04 u C: 5 O O o m LOCATION OF COUNTIES IN APPALACHIAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT * Quicksand, Ky. APPENDIX B NEEDMORE COUNTY E Needmore County, located in Eastern Kentucky, is characterised by low incomes, few job Opportunities, unemployment, underemployment and outmigration. The county is within the area. served by the EKRDP Specialists. The population started to decline in the 1940's and continues today. Due to lack of job Opportunities, fewer jobs in the mines and subsistence type of agriculture, the employable people are moving out of the county. Twenty two percent of the working labor force is employed in mining. twelve percent in agriculture, six percent in construction, five percent in manufacturing and the remainder in services. Recently the Needmore County DeveIOpment Organization was formed. This organization has completed an OEDP which included the thinking of a high percent of the leaders and agency representatives. Two projects that were considered to be a potential source of income for the county were strawberry production and the tourist trade. The factors that favor strawberry production are the need of a cash crap, surplus labor, adequate fertile land, available market outlets within a three hour driving distance, and sufficient interest among the farm leaders on which to build a program. To develop the strawberry project will require 250 acres of producing berries. High production must be maintained. Weed control and proper fertilisation are considered to be important production practices for success. To provide sufficient volumn of strawberries for efficient marketing, several counties will need to work together. -95- g1" ‘ _ . O r ‘ . . ., . ,' V . ‘ l ,. . . A . ' _. . . . 1 . u b " . f . .lv . u' ' l N . . - r. .. ~ ‘. , 4 . t y l . . , . . _ . . . c . . . . . l . . ' s ' V . . V ' - 4 ‘ ‘ ' - .t . ' . ‘ . A ' . . ‘ _. . _. I ‘ ; . ’ ‘ . . .I - ‘ “' ~ . - .1 .' . n '. .1" ’ ' ' . ...-'2 . ' I I - . -‘ l h . . n . . x » ‘ l. - b: ‘ ... . . i ' . _ . n . . .. as ' . Two groups have been organized to provide leadership in develOping the strawberry project, the "Needmore County Strawberry Association" and the "Area Strawberry Association. " The factors that favor tourist development in Needmore County are the completion of a lake and a major state park. In addition, the county has scenic drives, unusual rock formations and historical sites. A new modern highway crosses the county. Some improvements must be made before the county could provide the type of services required by today's tourist. The motel and restaurants must be improved and made more attractive. The waitresses and service station attendants must provide adequate and proper services. The county must create a favorable image in the minds of the traveling public. Two groups have been organized to provide leadership in developing the tourist trade, the "Needmore County Tourist Development Association" and the ."A rea Tourist Development Associaton. " The Needmore County Extension staff consists of a County Extension Agent, Associate Extension Agent and Home Extension Agent. The agents have had some experience working with strawberry producers, and some understanding of the tourist business, but do not consider themselves specialists in either. «man» an op avocados puen_onv can on: .« «was» op op grog soda: on» oud>oua «was» oudaaada .N .— eazoem on: canons on: APPENDIX C "mpnoaoospm adnmoun chaos» on» we does no nexus muoaamosv seaponzu sonny .m .huoweveo nose now madoaopspm adnwonn send» one manonounom .Q .moanowouso adhwohn Mensa one masononnem .o .husvm nun» dd cououumnoo maeuwoua or» on» sensuounem .m. .huaum can» dd pounded“ aduwoun nodnnovum Hove» on» nauseounom .4. n n h n. n n . n _ n n “a n n n m sum sum. 3 u sum 3...... 3...... 3...... sum sum sum sum “wt tot tot twt tot tot tot tot tot tot tot tot 03a 03a oHa cHa canal OH... OH... cHa 63.... 03a 033 one a 1. a. if a 4. a c. .a .1 a 4. .a .1 a «l .m a. a «l a g. a 1. twt twt _. tvt twt tut twt tvt twt wt tut tvt tut ...: .... rash ”on m... m... “...... 31 no... mom. mom 3m "Wynn nwvmh ChI GMT Chm Ohh CHI OKh Ohm 0&1 A OhI , CKI A A 0” ll; 8 1. 1i m. v. m .5 v. w +. e .m +. s .1 .1 0 d .1. 0 d .t .a 1. v. 1. an .a at A v. «i o o .t as V e O as .t v an m c a m if ya m 40 a m 1. r o a a. o as r o. a .e .u .m “M nu .n .u no .m am no m“. .u no T. * 11 1F. J 1 {$1 ¢ 4 L, .n maebmq undone mambmq . quouw sapwonm AL, awnwonm anemonm awnmonm .0 awnwonm amansoa asnwonm mnhonsenpm 11. :4 .m xdmoomm ZOHmamBMM O M ohcsvn one dd cons mnansonm use douvsdanaoo one o» as ehasnuouveesd can do seaweeds can no nasnnoaasneh one wadsonn an¢:ouu.o HuedeAA< -93- APPENDIX D QUESTIONNAIRE Scale to be used in answering questions: A. County Staff B. County Staff, with some assistance from EKRDP Specialists C. County Staff and EKRDP Specialist, sharing more or less equally D. EKRDP Specialists, with some assistance from County Staff E. EKRDP Specialists F. Others, not Extension Listed below are twelve items that describe a function in developing the strawberry project and tourist business in Needmore County and other counties in the area. For each item there are three questions listed below the item. Please answer each question using the scale above, by selecting your choice and placing the letter on the line beside the question. 1. Work with individual farmers to increase acreage of strawberries. Who should initiate this? Who should provide the "know how" to do this? Who has the best contacts to do this? 2. Workwith the Needm0re County Strawberry Growers Association to increase acreage of strawberries. Who should initiate this? Who should provide the "know how" to do this ? Who has the best contacts to do this? 3. Work with the Area Strawberry Growers Association to increase acreage of strawberries. Who should initiate this? Who should provide the "know how" to do this? Who has the best contacts to do this ? -99- -100- Scale to be used in answering questions: A. B. C. D. E. F. 4. County Staff County Staff, with some assistance from EKRDP Specialists County Staff and EKRDP Specialist, sharing more or less equally EKRDP Specialists, with some assistance from County Staff EKRDP Specialists Others, not Extension Work on a Needmore County program to improve strawberry weed control practices. Who should initiate this? Who should provide the "know how" to do this ? Who has the best contacts to do this? Work on a Needmore County program to increase strawberry acreage and yields per acre. Who should initiate this ? Who should provide the "know how" to do this? Who has the best contacts to do this ? Work on a Needmore County program to improve strawberry marketing and processing outlets. Who should initiate this? Who should provide the "know how" to do this ? Who has the best contacts to do this ? Work with individual tourist facilities operators of Needmore County to improve the services provided the tourist. Who should initiate this? Who should provide the "know how" to do this? Who has the best contacts to do this? Work with Needmore County Tourist Development Association to improve the services provided the tourist. Who should initiate this ? Who should provide the "know how" to do this? Who has the best contacts to do this ? -.-. .‘c.’ ‘ -101- Scale to be used in answering questions: A. B. C. D. E. F. 9. 10. ll. 12. County Staff County Staff, with some assistance from EKRDP Specialists County Staff and EKRDP Specialist, sharing more or less equally EKRDP Specialists, with some assistance from County Staff EKRDP Specialists Others, not Extension Work with the Area Tourist Council to improve the services provided the tourist. Who should initiate this? Who should provide the "know how" to do this? Who has the best contacts to do this ? Work on a Needmore County program to improve the lawn and landscape of tourist facilities. Who should initiate this ? Who should provide the "know how" to do this? Who has the best contacts to do this ? Work on a Needmore County program to train waitresses and service station attendants. Who should initiate this ? Who should provide the "know how" to do this? Who has the be st contacts to do this 9 Work on a Needmore County program to promote and advertise the county's tourist attractions. Who should initiate this ? Who should provide the "know how" to do this? Who has the best contacts to do this ? ~102- What have been your major problems working on non-agriculture projects ? What are the major advantages of EKRDP ? What are the major disadvantages of EKRDP ? Do you feel that Extension can make a major contribution toward development of Eastern Kentucky? Yes No What are the reasons for your answer. (Circle one) -103- How many years of Extension experience have you had? (check one) 0 ---- 4 years 5 «an 9 years 10 ---- 14 years 15 and over How many years have you worked in your present county? (check one) 0 an 4 years 5 ---- 9 years 10 ~--- 14 years 15 and over Have you been back to school in the last five years? (check one) Yes No If yes, check appropriate items. 3 week summer term Full summer term Graduate program Other (specify) What subjects did you study Recognizing that change may be either .1329. or good, I am interested in your assessment of how much your program has changed from traditional Extension programs toward newer resource development programs. For your answers circle one number on the following five-point continuum ranging from no change to significant change. . No change q WaltflNo-I . Significant change Name Position ,..s .... V 2. :....'...r1 " ' ~.“~ ' " - . ;. ..1: I. a-‘ . . ,. ’_. .s- -' .v-u ~-' '- ~- . ... If 0. ' I. - - .v I - I . :1 » ' \ ~ \ ' 3' ‘ , . l c . -2- I'- . -- a . . . ’ I ‘ . I ‘ o l . l.- .0”. K.“-. ” .. Q I x. i" ' . . '- .Y. s APPENDIX E TO BE FILLED OUT BY DISTRICT SUPERVISORS Rate the county programs in your district on the amount of change that has been made in the last three years, from traditional Extension program toward total Resource Development using the following five point continuum from no change to significant change. I. no change 2. 3. 4. 5. significant change District VI District V Bell Carter Breathitt Elliott Clay Floyd Estill Johnson Harlan Lawrence Jackson Mogoffin Knott Martin Knox Menifee Laurel Morgan Lee Pike Leslie Rowan Letcher McCreary Ousley Perry Powell Rockcastle Whitley Wolfe ”-I-v‘.’ . . > a , . , ._ ',_ . .. I. . . ~ . I v‘. n I. -l l I O v . , I . u _ , ; I . . . ' - ~ -/ .- . -_ - . n _ ... . . "I ' i {I ....” 7 A . . . . . h ‘ "' " ',,‘3 w; v. ' h i“ e I . . ‘ I { 4.. _ h ‘ ‘i. I I .... . . - - . A ‘ . : a , ._‘.._ _4 _ _ - .' «I , - . \ V: ‘ “~....‘.a.'...- . . . U I. I , ‘ I ‘. - I I: i. , —. J ‘ ' A . . A ’ " .. .>I . . . - ‘ , “‘ > 0.... _ ’ . ...._. . ' r - .\ - , ‘ - "' nA ‘- M . V .. ., . ..,, ‘ 7 L ' "' “o. —‘ . . " ‘ .in'...’ D '- I", a. , _, h ‘ h v - n ’ - ...- _ '_ . . " - _. .. —. . , .L_.,. .' . . . .. . h ‘ ~ - ' ... _ ‘_ ._‘ ‘ . _ . . ...._. . e . h ‘ .. _ ., . > . ' . ‘dl ..--3m. .. V ----v.-_. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVER ITY LI 3 1293 03015 85 W. 2 1