1| + IIIHIIHD 0..) N-l I IUD->4 '—1 A STUE’Y NEECA‘E’ENG THE FUTURE: DRECTWN OF THE CC'CfiERAYWE EXTENSEQN SERWCE 3N ORDER TO A4553? THE PRQELEMS AND NEEDS {RF Y'HEE §5EC§5RLI§ Thesis 5:): The Dogma 0% M. S. MSCHEQAN SKATE UNE‘VERSWY fiamas R Haziif? W63 WW\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\l\j\“MN\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\I _3 _1293 1 469 8174 LIBRARY Michigan State University ABSTRACT A STUDY INDICATING TEE FUTURE DIRECTION OF THE COOPERATIVE EXTEHSIGN SERVICE IN ORDER TO MEET TEE PRQELEMS AND NEEDS OF TEE PEOPLE by James R. Hazlitt Extension work grew out of a situation. It has come to be a system of service and education designed to meet the needs of people. Recognizing that the speed of change has become an established pattern in our present society, it is increasingly important that the COOperative Extension Serwke continually evaluate its pregram offerings to meet the chang- ing needs of the people. The purpose of this study was to seek information which would be helpful in guiding Extension programs and policies for the future. In this pursuit, a review of lit- erature concerning opinions and attitudes of others was made. Also, a study of the concerns and issues as seen by 294 Yuma County, Arizona citizens as well as their attitudes on whether or not the Extension Service should be working on these problems was conducted. The sample was obtained from a complete up—to—date list of names and addresses of families in Yuma County. Using random sampling methods, every nth address was selecuxi which provided for a uniform distribution of men and women hi approximately equal numbers. Over 90 percent of the concerns mentioned by Yuma 1 County citizens were in the general area of community needs James R. Hazlitt or public affairs. Sixty-three percent of these concerns were in the categories of schools, employment and industry, community physical upkeep, recreation and water. The study showed that such concerns applied to both urban and rural people. When asked if they would approve or disapprove of County Agents working on such concerns, nine in ten of those having definite opinions approved. Of the total group inter— viewed, 68 percent approved of Extension Agents working on their problems and concerns, less than nine percent dis- approved and about 22 percent did not express themselves one way or another. Over four-fifths of the interviewees residing in rural areas in relation to less than 65 percent of those residing in urban areas approved of agents working on public affairs educational programs. Also, three-fourths of those who had had Extension contacts felt that agents should work on public affairs problems as contrasted to 40 percent of those who had had no contacts with Extension. Extension accomplishments in 1959 indicated that 67 percent of agricultural agent's time was devoted to agricul- tural or related projects in comparison to less than six per- cent of their time being devoted to community improvement and public affairs. The implications of this study are that the people are desirous of Cooperative Extension's help in meeting their problems and needs which normally have been beyond Extension's A ‘3. I'I'I James R. Haz 11 1:1: scope of offering; and that if Extension is to meet these needs, it must broaden the scepe of its program offerings. A STUDY INDICATIRG TEE FUTUhE DIRECTION OF THE COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SERVICE IN ORDER TO EEET THE PROBLEMS AND NEEDS OF TIE PEOPLE By James R. Hazlitt A ‘EESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Institute for Extension Personnel Development 1961 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author wishes to express his appreciation to the following without whose help this thesis could never have been written: To the University of Arizona for the periods of educational leave in which to pursue such interests; To the staff of Michigan State University from whose council the author has been privileged to benefit, and especially to Dr. George Axinn and Dr. Frank Suggitt; To the Fund for Adult Education for providing the opportunity for pilot projects in Public Affairs and Leader- ship Development programs in the author's county; To Dr. J. L. Matthews of the Federal Extension Service and Dr. E. J. Boone, formerly with the Arizona Cooperative Extension Service, for providing guidance and leadership in conducting the survey from which portions of this study have been compiled; and for jointly authoring, along with this author, a more complete study of Yuma County citizens' attitudes and responses towards public affairs education; To the staff members of the University of Ariaona Cooperative Extension Service who served as interviewers in the collection of this data; To'the subjects interviewed, citizens of Yuma County. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 LIST OF TAXBLES o o o o o o o o o o c o o o o o o o 0 1V CHAPTER I 0 INTRODUCTION 0 O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O 1 A. The Changing Scene . . . . . . . . . . 2 B. The Formation of Cooperative Extension and Its Role to Date . . . . . . . . 7 C. Purpose of This Study and Hypotheses . . 10 II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 A. Opinions of Others . . . . . . . . . . 14 B. Other Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . _ 22 III. PROCEDURE 0 C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 26 A. Design of Study . . . . . . . . . . . 27 B. Definitions 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o 31 IV. FINDINGS O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 32 A. Characteristics of Yuma County POIJUlation o o o o o o o o o o o o o 32 B. Concerns of Yuma County Respondents . 36 C. Issues Concerning Yuma County Citizens 48 D. Yuma County Citizens' Participation in Solution of Problem Areas . . . . . 56 'vfi n. Knowlnge of and Participation of Yuma County People in Extension Activities. 58 F. Attitudes About Agents Working in Problem Areas . . . . . . . . . . . 64 V. COFICLUS IONS O O I O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O 67 A. Summary of Findings . . . . . . . . . 67 B. Implications and Recommendations . . . 75 C. Recommendations for Further Study . . 77 BIBLIOGRI‘PIIY O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 78 APPEE‘YDIX O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O 83 II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. VIII. IX. X. XI. XII. LIST OF TABLES Estimated Changes from the Present Time to 1980 andZOOO................... The Three Levels of Extension's Future Potential Interviews Completed and Attritions of Yuma County Sample — February, 1930 . . . . . . . . Place of Residence of Yuma County People - 1960 Occupation of Yuma County Respondents - 1960 . . Concerns of Yuma County Respondents - 1960 . . . Concerns of Corry Community, Pennsylvania, ReSIDOIldentS o o I o o o o o o o o o o o o o o Rank-Order Correlation Between Yuma County, Arizona, Respondents and Corry Community, Pennsylvania, Respondents - 1960 . . . . . . . Issues Concerning Yuma County Citizens - 1980 . Participation of Yuma County People in Solution of Problem Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Contacts with Extension Activities by Yuma County P001319 During 13.39 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o Attitudes of Respondents about Agents Working in Community Problem Areas and Public Affairs Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv PAGE 6 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The history of education in America can be traced in the story of its changing social circumstances. The forms which education takes, the kinds of education and their contents which are offered, and the parts of the population to which educational Opportunities are of- fered are determined by the needs which changes generaum There appears to be little, if any, disagreement by all types of educators to this statement. Whether they be educators in the fields of youth or adult, formal or in- formal, most will agree that problems and needs of people are the basis for education. Acceptance of this philos0phy implies that those who are involved as educators must develop educational programs to fit the problems and needs of the peeple. It is reason- ing such as this which lends direction to the scope and purpose of this study. more specifically this study is concerned with the extent to which educational programs of the COOperative Extension Service are based upon the problems and needs of. the people-—compared to the extent that they merely follow what they have been in the past--or are based on tradition. 1Wilbur C. Hallenbeck, "The Function and Place of Adult Education in American Society," handbook oi Adult Educa- tion in the United States, ed., Malcolm §. KnowTEs, (Chicago: Adult Education Association, 1960) p. 29. «in . ‘1 s it , . nv , m 1‘ A c Q ‘ . . . . _ L l ‘ , r. . . . ,i t I _ . a ,— 1“ . _ . a ~ Q . .\ r v . . . a i ,, x _ .. , , .J a a l a— . , : . , ,fi . , V . A. THE CHANGING SCENE One of the few certainties in this world is change. It goes without saying that if educators are to keep abreast of these Changes, not to mentipn help direct them, educators must be aware of them. Since the inception of the Cooperative Extension Service in 1914, the world, the nation, and lesser commu- nities have been propelled through a period of vehement change. Man has made astounding strides in scientific reseanfln invention, and technology. Outer space craft, guided missihfln supersonic aircraft, hydrogen bombs, miracle drugs are but a few of the many objects new to people of the world in the last decade or two. During the last ten years the population of the United States has increased about 20 percent. The mobility of our people has been more pronounced than ever before. PeOple are moving from east to west, from north to south and vice versa. Perhaps more important, as far as Extension's potential is concerned, is the vast movement of farm peOple to the city and the movement of city people to suburban and rural areas. Between 1950 and 1955 the popula- tion of urban fringes increased by 9.6 million people, or 28 percent. 2Harold F. Kaufman, et a1, "Concerns of Adult Educa- tion in Mississippi," Adult Education, (Adult Education Association of the U. S. A., Chicago, Autumn, 1957), Vol. VIII No. 1, p. 20. .----_..- 3 Rural farm population outside metropolitan areas declined by 2.5 million, while non-farm rural population outside metropo- litan areas increased by(3 million, or 11 percent, and the population of central cities increased by 2 million, or 4 percent.3 In 1930, 24.5 percent of the United States population was rural farm as 00mpared to 11.3 percent in 1 58.4 In 1954 the Agricultural Census showed a total of 3,327,617 farms.5 However, over 1,900,000 farms had incomes under $2,500 or were part—time farms. The balance, which produces the majority of our food and fiber, make up about 4 percent of the nation's families. This vast movement of population, largely towards the metr0politan areas, has created many problems--social, poli- tical, transportation, education, health, housing, industry and commerce, to name a few, for practically all communities. A publication by the United States Department of Agriculture on selected references of urbanization and chang- ing land uses from 1900-58 lists 1,319 such studies and 3H. G. Prunsman and H. S. Shyrock, "Population Migra- tion-~Who's Moving Where?" Appraisal Journal, XXV (January 1957), pp. 74-80. 4Donald 1. Bogue, The Population of the United States, (The Free Press of Glencoe, Illinois, 1939) p. 23. 5United States Bureau of the Census, County and City Data Book: 1955, (Washington: United States Government Printing Office, 1937) p. 8. r. I .- , \ ! . l ,J - 'x . ~ I -» . .,- s 1 I I . ,. 4 papers.6 These include subjects on: regional studies, land use and land use surveys, industrial location, population, urban and metrOpolitan areas, rural areas, community studies, government, taxation and services, annexation, rural areas, community studies, government, taxation and services, annexa- tion, rural-urban fringes, sociological and cultural aspects, rural land encroachment, recreation, transportation, employ- ment and others. .6United States Department of Agriculture, Unhanizatnzi andwChanging.Land.Hsss: .A.Bihlingrapha.nf.Selecisd.£efsxp annea.lflhfl=l&hfi, Miscellaneous Publication No. 825 (Washing- ton: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1960). .‘_. 5 A look at the future as foreseen by Joseph L. Fisher, President, Resources for the Future, as follows: Inc., shows a few items TABLE I ESTIMATED CHANGES FROM THE PRESENT TIME TO 1980 AND 20007 Now 1980 2000 POpulation (millions) 180 245 330 Labor force (millions) 73 102 140 Household (millions) 52 73 100 GNP (billions) 510 1,060 2,200 GNP per worker 7,000 10,000 15,000 Government expenditures (3 billion) 100 230 500 Meat consumed (billion pounds) 29 46 65 Cotton produced (billion pounds) 7 10.5 16 Autos produced (millions) , 7 13 27 New dwelling units (millions) 1.5 2.6 4.2 Fertilizer produced (million tons) 8 20 42 Cropland (million acres) 460 460 460 Water withdrawals (billion gallons per day) 250 340 480 While Mr. Fisher acknowledges these are only tentative estimates and a portrayal of the distant future is risky, the figures give one the magnitude of change. By his estimates, the nation will be able to produce food and fiber for the increased population with the same number of acres of cropland in use at the present time. This is judged to be possible because of the continued technol- ogical advance in the field of agricultural production. 7 Future." Government, Phoenix, Arizona, November 14, 1960. Joseph L. Fisher, "Cities and Resources For the Paper read before the 66th National Conference on . n . _-fi _.. I . J ' l I .a a u J V k, s . '6 .‘ ,’ k r V . H ,1, I x H .1 _ .- a - F . r , . .'. V 5‘ ~ . I '- \l ‘ .. - - . a - - a ,' -F,— It appears inevitable that the problems produced in our changing society in the last 15 years or so will be magnified in the future. It also appears inevitable that such problems of the community and society will become more complex as the popu- lation continues to grow. While it is impossible to halt change and may be impossible to avoid problems created by change, it is possible for most individuals to learn more about, and to better understand some of the alternatives. which must be considered in making basic decisions in regard to problems created by change.8 This, too, might offer Extension a potential for educational assistance. v—_— 8A. A. Liveright, Strategies of Leadership in Conduct- ing Adult Education Prorrams, (New YorRT—Harper and—Brothers, Publishers, 1959) pp. 3-8. ¢—-- B. THE FORMATION OF CGOPERATIVE EXTENSION AND ITS ROLE TO DATE Extension work grew out of a situation. It has come to be a system of service and education designed to meet the needs of people. What was the situation which gave rise to this unique American development? It was a period of pioneering and change in agriculture and homemaking. Long before the passage of the Morrill Act and the Smith-Lever Act, societies and institutes, were organized for the purpose of acquainting people with what was being done to improve agriculture and to disseminate agricultural information. .The.majority of the U. 8. population in the nineteenth century was engaged in agriculture and agricul- tural information during this period definitely was a need. In 1862, when the Civil War emphasized the need for greater efficiency in agricultural production, the Land Grant College Act introduced by Morrill was signed into law. This act created an opportunity for each state to set up an educational institution where the leading object was the teaching of branches of learning related to agriculture and mechanic arts. Also in 1862, Congress created the United States Department of Agriculture, whose function was to gain useful information about agricultural subjects and relay thns knowledge throughout the land. n — 9L. D. Kelsey and C. C. Hearne, Cooperative Extension Work, (Ithaca, New York: Comstock Publishing Company, 19497 “‘“3 P. ['1 a .. 4 ., A x .. A (J . a . , . . ‘o . . v Q. , n . . y L s . . l . ., v 1 .. v u _ , . a 4 . 3 .... . . . 4 D a : 1.. . v . I... . 1 v f . . J : . . l .. , .L i . o . i u . I . . . . y . . . 2 .\ . 4 . . . _.. _ , I!» I t . . K . .0. 'c . I . v .. r . . . . a I ,n . . , . J , a m .J J . . .?.v . $ 0. \ ., . _ . V J v p g ,. a . r .. _ r . _ ‘ ,.‘-."-- 0—. In 1890 the Second Morrill Act was passed (which in- creased the funds to Land Grant Colleges) and in 1914 the Smith-Lever Act provided for financial help for Extension work. This act designated Extension's major function as "... to aid in diffusing among the people of the United States useful and practical information on subjects relat— ing to agriculture and home economics, and to encourage application of the same ..." A brief analysis of the COOperative Extension era from 1914 to 1945 has been described by Brunner and Yang as four phases: (1) World War I; (2) industrial prosperity and agrarian discontent and depression, the 1920's; (3) the "Great Depression" or dismal thirties; and (4) World War 11.10 , During the first period the most important problem was that of food production. All other lines of endeavor were secondary to this. dany war effort projects were also undertaken and Extension's prestige was greatly enhanced by the manner in which the employees performed their functions.' The second period was the agricultural depression of the twenties. During the war when high prices prevailed many farmers went deeply in debt for equipment and land. Many farmers faced bankruptcy and foreclosure. Government 10Edmond de S. Brunner and E. Hsin Poo Yang, Rural America and the Extension Service, (New York: Bureau 0 Publications, Teachers College, Columbia UniVersity, 1949) PD 0 73—90 0 .__...._..—- I'- i_vv 9 agencies used Extension agents to carry out recommendations. Emphasis was placed on efficient production rather than on production alone. The demonstration method was revived, more attention was placed on community programs and the development of local leaders. I During the thirties, Extension in addition to working on efficiency of agricultural production, worked as organs izers and with organizations. It conducted educational phases of the AAA and helped organize soil conservation associations and districts. It also worked closely with Rural Rehabilitation program and had discussion groups in public affairs. Extension during World War II reverted to its similar role of World War I, except with greater emphasis, and continued its role with organizations. Over the same period of time Paul Miller states that in his contention "Extension work emerged through two dominant chapters; the first was the chapter of itinerant agricultural philOSOphy and demon- stration. The second found its focus in the thirties as the chapter or organizational custodianship. The current debate is shaping wnat the third chapter will become."11 11Paul A. Miller, "Adjustments Needed in Extension Thinking, " Journal of Farm Economics, ProceecWin s No. Vol. XLI,_N0. 5, (December, 1959) pp. 1435-1445. ~ — J .w t - .k i f - a C...“ C. PURPOSE OF THIS STUDY ANU HYPOTHESES The purpose of this study is to indicate the future direction of the Cooperative Extension Service if it is to be of educational service in helping the people help them- selves in adjusting to change, in meeting their needs and in solving their problems. Two major areas of study will be pursued. These being: A review of literature regarding the opinions of leaders in the fields of Extension and Adult Education concerning the potential of educational programs in a community; the findings of a survey concerning the problems and issues of citizens of Yuma County, Arizona, and their opinions concerning Extension agents working with prople on these problems and issues. Hypothesis I. It will be necessary for the Coopera- tive Extension Service to broaden the sc0pe of its pregram offerings from the traditional offerings of the past if the Extension Service is going to help people help themselves in adjusting to change, in meeting their needs and in solv- ing their problems. To more fully explain this concept of traditional offerings and to build the rationale for this hypothesis, the following data from Extension activities and accomplish- ments for the year of 19o9 were given.12 l2U.S.D.A. Extension Service, Extension Activities and Accomplishments 19d9, Circular No. 531, (Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, July 1960) p. 14. l] The statistics in this report showed that 67 percent of the agricultural agents' time was devoted to agricul- tural or related projects which include: crOps, livestock, marketing, soil and water conservation, forestry, wildlife, farm management and farm buildings, and mechanical equip— ment. Less than six percent of their time was devoted to projects concerned with community improvement and public affairs. The percentage distribution of time of all Exten- Sion agents, which included those doing primarily agricul- tural, home demonstration and 4-H club work, was as follows: Slightly over 27 percent of their time was devoted to Exten- sion organization and planning and in-service training. Slightly over 36 percent of their time was devoted to agricultural projects. Almost 21 percent of their time was devoted to home economics subjects. Less than nine percent of their time was devoted to the combined areas of public affairs, community deveIOpment, health and safety. It may be questioned by some whether or not the data presented in this publication actually reflects what the county agents are doing, particularly in the fields of com- munity improvement and public affairs. This is because this data is obtained from Federal Extension report forms which some think may be too rigid. A review of the Extension activities and accomplishments circular listed the follow— ing areas which agents reported educational activities in the fields of community development and public affairs: 12 citizenship activities; developing and improving county or community organizations; general community s udies and sur— veys; improving health facilities, services and program; improving schools and churches; bettering rural-urban rela- tions; projects on libraries, roads, telephones, and communiqr centers; regional or area development programs or projects; national programs and proposals affecting agriculture and rural life; world affairs; and emergency activities. It would appear that there is ample opportunity for reporting such activities accomplished in these areas. Further indications that many Extension programs are not fully geared towards community problems and public affairs issues ensue from a review of states having spe- cialists in these fields. Minnesota has a specialist in Public Affairs. Alabama, Georgia, and Tennessee all have specialists for Community Activities; Illinois has one in Community Betterment; Washington one in Community Organiza~ tion: Michigan one in Resource Development and Wisconsin one in Land Use Planning.13 Specialists in these fields number sixteen out of a total specialist force in the United States of 2,49614or about seven-tenths of one percent of the total States' Extension specialists force. However, in addition to the above states, Kansas, Missouri and Utah have Depart- 13County Agents Directory, (Chicago: C. L. Mast, Jr. and Associates, 1950). 14H. S. D. A. Federal Extension Service, MO 246, (September, 1959). 1‘ 1'5 13 ments of Continuing or Adult Education in conjunction with their Extension Services. It is also known that Iowa, Colorado, Oregon and Montana have public affairs type pro- grams and undoubtedly specialists in areas of sociology or economics guide their activities. Also, there are probably other states which have similar specialist responsibility. Hypothesis II, The problems and needs of the people are varied and extend to a much greater extent beyond the areas in which Cooperative Extension has traditionally been working. Hypothesis III. The people of a community are desirous of the help Cooperative Extension could give in help- ing them to meet their problems and needs. The three hypotheses, in essence, are: The people are desirous of Cooperative Extension's help in meeting their problems and needs which normally have been beyond Extension's scope of offering; and that if Extension is to meet these needs, it must broaden the sc0pe of its program offerings. r... CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE In chapter one a certain amount of literature was cited in support of the general area of the study as well as to build the rationale for the hypotheses. In this chapter, the literature will fall into two categories. First are the articles and opinions of various people concerning the role of the Extension Service and adult education. These have been responsible for the direction of this study and for the areas of thought conveyed to tJiS writer in the general subject of the future Extension Service.. The other area of literature reviewed concerns other studies dealing with peoples' attitudes on community problems and their concep- tion of Extension's role in the community. A. OPINIONS OF OTHERS The Opinion of others in regard to the future of the Cooperative Extension Service might be described in three categories, recognizing some overlapping of each. These are: (1) Continuing as at present with more emphasis on specialty action and technical proficiency; (2) Continuing much as at present but broadening the scope of responsibilities; (3) Complete change of present policies in regard to being mainly agricultural service workers to one of liberal adult educa- 15 tion. These categories correlate somewhat with those pre- sented by Warren Rovetch in the following table. (See pagelfi) It would appear, from a limited number of personal contacts the author has had with other agents and special- ists, that a considerable number would agree that Extension personnel should continue much as they have in the past, but with increased emphasis on technical efficiency. John Carew states: . The Extension Service is in danger of becoming client-oriented instead of subject matter-oriented ... There is a tendency to confuse the professional respon— sibilities of Extension workers with their civic responsibilities. A new hospital or an improved Boy Scout Camp may be monuments to the civic mindedness of the County Agricultural Agent. But they may also sym- bolize his neglect of technical agricultural problems within his community. a ‘ Somewhat along the same vein of thinking is the following statement by the Dean of Agriculture at the University of California: In the past Extension has served primarily as an agency of technolOgical service. Historically there ans several reasons for this. Primarily, however, it has been because (1) farmers in general have not had exten- sive formal technical training, and (2) technological service was consistent with the efforts of the teaching and research divisions of the Land Grant College system. Now, however, times are changing rapidly. Each year sees a higher and higher percentage of farm operators who are graduates of land grant institutions and who are becoming Extension's foremost clients. The type of information they seek differs considerably from the meme general information their fathers sought. Today's 2John Carew, "The Role of the Extension Specialist in Agriculture," Farm Policy Forum, Vol. XI, No. 4, (1958-39), pp. 31-32. .‘ Q 3%! «to» .55 actual lad: e3 823...." «88 if Eflfififinm .. 503828 3:3 sausages. 3 gas egg on» e5 8383 unmeasopfionooo. 3328 E II l: l I I {.1 '1‘ III“ iJ‘ . “ 1 {I 685333 use sewage 33pm Emma heave a .83 53.3033 unseen no 5333.5 336 ~33 $83.53!: «5.5 e9: 05 .8 wastage ea. 30:23 dd 3335.. 'L I‘ll! H264” sewage a an 3333 on seaweeds» .0.“ng 0595586 no cud—"amended 26508 manque» dud Bop.“ 338.33 Hon. Sign $333351 .333st so meanness 332.808” pg. find.“ 3:353 05 5 Queen .735 do museum. 833nm .Ho ego sou,“ 90593.0 defivdoddm pg: . m wag lem3m6¢ ofifioflOoe ngeom g .N as ping scavenge .350 new: soapEemooo on apogee 3" engage Ho puma 89C sconce.“ 7.35m 0.33 5” Roseanne. commune 98 $893 Hagan—”om one 3 ”ashamed g un- wound—ouch 352000 passed 3 sponges US. 836033 831030 ,, snoaalpmsoae? can» nosed.“ puma soap?» romance, no 3395 managed.“ as? .8,“ e330 page?“ ape. €an e3.“ gages: you gangs? 85: geag 853$ mansion 7338589 log Kong $384 Eb SHE: Mango on. Bag 09 magma mgg Hggm.BthO§§E _ pg “- 1" 0| o l7 farmers are seeking problem solving assistance. They already have general information or can get it from farm magazines and technical publications. Extension must, therefore, prepare itself to meet the increasing specialization in order to deal with the complex problems which lie ahead. In respect to the above opinions, it may be well to pose the question of the needed technical proficiency of a County Agent, realizing situations vary with communities. In some areas the emergence of large "corporation" type farm units is becoming increasingly prevalent. .Under this type of farming each enterprise is a specialty and a specialist in each enterprise is in charge. Ordinarily these foremen have at least a bachelors degree and many have advanced degrees, including Ph.D.'s. Can a County Agent be any value to these types of people unless he too becomes a specialist in a narrow field? Another alternative is that of continuing the Exten- sion program much as it is at present, but broadening the scope of responsibility. J. L. Matthews in describing the Scope Report stated: The principle of first responsibility to farm fami- lies is recognized in the report, but attention is called to the broader audience being served that includes these general groups: Farm families; non-farm rural residents; urban residents; farm, commodity and related organizations; individuals, firms, and organiza- tions which provide farm people with essential services p 3Daniel D. Aldrich, Jr., "Implications of Agricultural Adjustment for Land Grant Colleges." Paper read at the Southwest Agricultural Adjustment Conference, Tucson, Arizona, October 12, 1960. a . n -‘V 4 18 and supplies such as credit, fertilizer, feed and many others. Mr. Matthews also stated: ... the Cooperative Extension Services, as a national educational system, must reappraise its programs and move into some of the program areas that generally have had less gttention than the traditional subject matter programs a 1 Former president of the American Farm Bureau, Allan Kline said: Extension people will need as much or more compe- tence in the technical fields and in additiog will need to increase competence in liberal education. He also stated: "If you are competent only in a tech— nical field, you make a good living, but a poor citizen."7 For the past several years all types of agricultural and educational leaders have expressed the need for change in the Extension Service or at least to have Extension take a good look at itself. Perhaps a statement that typifies this point is the following from Michigan State university President, John Hannah. I Traditionally the agricultural colleges and the COOperative Extension Service have been well thought of 4J. L. Matthews, "The C00perative Extension Service," Handbook of Adult Education in the United States, ed. Malcolm S. Knowles? Op. Cit., pp;_223:2237 5J. L. Matthews, Address to the Arizona Extension personnel at the Program Development Conference, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, October 3, 1959. Permission to quote secured. 6 Allan B. Kline, Address to the FAE-CES Program Con- sultants, Michigan State University, East Lansing,July 13, 1959. Permission to quote secured. 7Ibid. _.—;.4 -. .-..‘- 19 by farm people. Agricultural colleges have been told over and over again of the great contribution that they have made to the increased efficiency of agriculture and that this has played a significant role in making possible the development of our nation. The increasing efficiency of agriculture in the past 100 years that has shifted from a situation where approximately 85 percent of all productive workers were engaged in agriculture to the present situation where approximately 12 percent are engaged in agriculture has released the energies of approximately three quarters of all of our people to make possible the building of the communication systems, the industries, the televi- sion sets, the dish washers, and all of the other components of our higher standard of living. It has been good to be given credit for the valu- able role contributed by our agricultural colleges. But in another sense it has been a bad influence because it has encouraged a situation where the peOple in our colleges of agriculture have been inclined to accept the plaudits and have been less vigorous than they might have been in seeking new ways to serve agri- culture and to serve this increasing number of peOple formerly engaged in agriculture pursuits who are now working elsewhere. It is my feeling that those of us who are a part of the Cooperative Extension Service and staff members of Colleges of Agriculture had better take a hard look at the appropriate role for Colleges of Agriculture and for COOperative Extension Services, and this is parti- cularly true in areas of the country where the people in agriculture are in the minority. We have a continuing obligation to render eifective service to agriculture, but we also have an obligation to serve‘all of the people who need service and who want it. While change has been indicated in the previous state- ments, there has been little ultraism noted except perhaps by those who advocate no change at all. _._-_._ 8Correspondence from John A. Hannah, President, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, August 29, 1960 , i \ v N ’ 4 f I .. - 1 I .- 4 I. u .1 t . ‘ ~ 4 7 ‘ . ,u ' 1 I 7‘ Us. ‘ ‘ : \ u . . ”av--0 _ - - q )‘- A \ > V . ‘ . 20 To move into the third alternative where considerable change to present policies is deemed advisable is to move into the field of liberal adult education. Robert Blakely has stated, "Whatever interests free citizens in a free society is subject matter for adult educa- tion."9 Another thought by Wilbur Hallenbeck is: The job of adult education is to help people to understand the basis of order and security in a world of rapid change and to build their goals realistically in fitting terms; and to help peeple understand their problems and to reach their goals under current circum- stances.10 This statement relates very closely to the problem solving process type of education which Extension workers have advocated over the years in their particular program. Another way of expressing the definition of adult education is in the form of community develOpment as a means of educating the people in a community. Howard McClusky remarks: ... community development is essentially a direct method of teaching. Instead of standing on the side- lines and assuming that instruction done out of context will somehow automatically lead to a productive attack on local problems; community development helps the learner make the connection between his learning and its application directly and without the interference of intervening factors. It may deal with concrete data or concepts and at times be highly intellectual, but in any 9Robert J. Blakely, "What Is Adult Education," Hand- book of Adult Education in the United States, ed., Malcolm S. Knowles, (Chicago: Adult Education Association, 1930) P04 loi-mllenbeck, 2p. Cit., p. 31. -. 21 case, riievance is the chief characteristic of its ap- proval. From reviewing the statements of these people on liberal adult education, it appears they fairly well follow an area outlined in the ScOpe Report as to one of Extension's problem areas--community improvement. Director Hutchison of Texas wrote: Extension's principal objective in community improvement work is development of the ability of the people through their own initiative to identify and solve problems affecting their welfare. Community improvement programs Offer the means for tying together, at the point of execution, the contributive portions of the other eight areas of Effiension program emphasis out- lined in the Scope Report. These are a few of the Opinions of various leaders throughout the country concerning the role of Extension and Adult Education. Others reviewed, but which somewhat para- lleled those mentioned, are included in publications of the "Center for the Study of Liberal Education for Adults," "Farm Policy Forum," "Center for Agricultural and Economic Adjustment," "Farm Foundation," "1960 White House Conference on Children and Youth" and "National Agricultural Center for Advanced Study."13 11Howard Y. McClusky, "Conlmunity Development," Hand-a book of Acult Ecucation in the United States, ed., Malcolm S. Knowles, (Chicago: Adult Education Association, 1960) pp. ‘19“420 0 12John E. Hutchison, "A Responsibility and a Challengef’ Extension Service Review, Vol. XXX, No. 10, (October, 1959) p. 203. 13See Bibliography. a. _...—-. B. OTHER STUDIES A review of literature on surveys or studies conducted by the Cooperative Extension Services during the past fifteen years reveals very little concerning the people's opinion on their problems and needs and whether or not they think counQr agents should help in working on problems and needs which range beyond Extension's present scope. The Director of the Division of Research and Training in the Federal Extension Service, J. L. Matthews, informed the author that the Yuma 14 Study, was the first of its kind conducted in C00peration with the Federal Extension Service in regard to an actual survey of the people's opinion on concerns, Public Affairs Education,Leadership Development and their approval or dis- approval of agents working in these areas. At the time of this writing, a similar study was 15 being conducted in Pennsylvania. Portions of this study have been completed and will be reported along with portions of the Yuma study later in the text. 14James R. Hazlitt, Edgar J. Boone, J. L. Matthews, "A Study of Public Affairs Education and Leadership Development, Yuma County, Arizona, 1950," (The University of Arizona Cooperative Extension Service, 1960). 1"'JErie County Agricultural Extension Association and Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, Cogry Community As Seen by Its People, Extension Studies No. 6, (University Park, Pennsylvania, September 1930). 23 Several of the other studies had to do with clientele with whom Extension should be working. In Wisconsin, Biever found that over two—thirds of the agricultural committee members indicated that home agents and 4-H club agents could include urban people in regular group programs, while agri— cultural agents could provide individual assistance upon request in working with urban people.16 In Michigan, Cornett conducted a study in regard to public concepts related to the role of the C00perative Exten- sion Service. .In answer to a question posed as follows he received the following responses: I Urban people seem to use an increasing amount of Extension Agent work time. Normally this will mean less time for farm areas. Due to the urban load, do you favor less rural service or adding another Extension Agent? He received replies from 269 out of 305 people and which included C3 full time farmers, 40 part time farmers, 96 Rotarians, 65 Kiwanians and 41 business and professional women. Twenty-five percent of those responding were in favor of adding another agent; twenty-two percent were in favor of doing less urban work; five percent were in favor of doing less rural work; and thirty-five percent did not know.17 16L. J. Eiever, "Roles of County Extension Agents as Perceived by County Agricultural Committee Members in Wisconsin." (Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Madison: University of Wisconsin, 1957). 17E. M. Cornett, "A Study of Public Concepts Related to the Role of Cooperative Extension Service" (Unpublished M.S. thesis, Michigan State University, 1958) pp. 49-50. -... ~—--- 24 In regard to program areas in the Extension Service, Wilkening reports that a majority of 112 agricultural com— mittee members in Wisconsin saw Extension workers as serving the people in the county. Very few of them voluntarily indi— cated that a major objective of Extension work was accomplish- ing sectional, state or national objectives. The committee members tended to reinforce the local orientation of Extensiaa work. Very few of them rated problems of public policy, consumer education and marketing as areas needing high emphasis. Wilkening also reported that the survey suggested the local people still regard involvement in community af- fairs as an important function although the agents do not.18 In Cornett's study farmers and urban peOple were asked: Should Extension agents increase their educational efforts on public programs such as zoning, taxation, community development, health, etc.? Of those responding 47 percent answered yes, 15 per- cent said some, 16 percent said no and 22 percent did not know. Fifteen percent of the farmers said no compared to 17 percent of the urban people. There was no difference between the urban and rural groups in approving.19 In addition to the review of literature concerning surveys or studies conducted by the Cooperative Extension 18E. A. Wilkening, "Consensus in Role Definition of County Extension Agents Between the Agents and Local Sponsor- ing Committee MemberS." Rural Sociology, Vol. XXVIII, No. 2 (June 1933), pp. 183-189. lgCornett 9,3. Cit., p. .51 \J 25 Services, a review of educational research over the last ten years published by the "American Educational Research Associa- tion" -- a department of the National Education Association of the U. S. -- was made. Nothing germane to this thesis was found in this review. CHAPTER III PROCEDURE Yuma County, Arizona, was one of twelve counties in the United States selected to participate in the pilot project in public affairs and leadership development spon- sored by the Fund for Adult EJucation and the Cooperative Extension Service. The purpose of the project is to encourage and assist the participating state C00perative Extension Services to establish successful pilot county programs designed: 1. To broaden and strengthen the program offerings, stimulate the interest of the public and obtain citizen participation in public affairs; and 2. To advance education for public responsibilities ' though involving large numbers of citizens in program development and other appropriate experi- ences to develop their leadership. One of the steps undertaken in Yuma County in conjunc- tion with this project was to design and conduct a study to obtain information regarding the present status of the people's knowledge, understanding and attitudes toward cer- tain citizenship activities and public affairs issues; and to obtain information to establish guidelines for County Extension program develOpment regarding the concerns of people and the type of educational programs desired. For the purpose of this thesis, only those areas germane to the hypotheses will be used. L. A. DESIGN OF STUDY Population1 'According to the latest estimates obtained from the Census Bureau, Yuma County has a population of about 45,000 people. Of these about 27,500 live in the City of Yuma and its adjacent suburbs; 4,500 in towns with less than 2,500 people; and the balance throughout the county. There are about 530 commercial farms in the county. The population is predominately Anglo-white with about 15 percent Spanish-American. Many of these employed in farming and the farmers themselves live in the City of Yuma and the small towns scattered throughout the county. Alec, many people employed in Yuma reside in the country on tracts of land too small to be considered farms. The major sources of income in the county are military and agriculture with approximately 3,000 military and civil- ians personnel employed by the military. The Samplez A complete up-to-date list of names and addresses of families in Yuma County was compiled. The list was obtained from telephone directories, lists of water users in the 1Hazlitt, Boone, Matthews, 93. Cit., p. 10. 21bid., p. 10. "l- ”h.- . . fl‘ J u I c ‘ \o ..-..- 28 irrigation districts and from the Yuma City~County Directory. Possibly the number selected to be interviewed in the City of Yuma was disproportionately high since employed persons were listed in the Yuma Citnyounty Directory and in several instances more than one employed person resided at the same address. Using random list sampling methods, every nth address was selected. Sample addresses were written on 3 by 5 inch cards. Each card was marked to indicate whether a man or a woman was to be interviewed. The cards were marked alter- nately so that there would be a uniform distribution of men and women in the sample and approximately equal numbers would be interviewed. _ ' The plan was to have a minimum of 250 completed intern views, half men and half women respondents. "Three samples were drawn independently from the total population-~300, 100 and 100 addresses--so as to allow for adjusting the sampling plan to the actual degree of sample attrition experienced in the field. The third sample of 100 addresses was subsampled by random method to obtain the 25 addresses shown in Table III. TABLE III NTERVIEWS COLiPLETED AND ATTRITIO? {S OF YUMA COUNTY SAMPLE February, 19603 Sample #1 Sample #2 Sample #3 A A A. __L Interviews completed 209. 7 58.4 17 Refusals A 17 6 0 Vacant houses* 34 12 3 California addresses l3 - 6 1 No man 1 No woman 1 Away from home a 4 1 Three calls without contact 14 3 Mexico address 2 1 Deceased 2 Unable to locate 2 l 111 2 3 1 Total attrition' = 91 36 8 Total in sample 300 104 25 Percent return. 69.7 64.4 68 ‘A large number of military families had moved from the county several months before the survey was conducted. The Questionnaire4 The questionnaire used in the Yuma study contained eight major divisions, namely: Characteristics of the popu- lation, concerns of the people, knowledge of and participa- tion in the Extension Service, Farm-City relationships, attitudes toward labor unions, political attitudes, attitudes toward schools, and adult education interests. As mentioned previously, only portions of these results are used in this thesis. ‘- 3Ibid., p. 30. 41bid., p. 10. —_,_ 4 .- .. “'— ‘-_— ’- ...-fi 30 The questionnaire was pre-tested with approximately 25 Yuma County citizens. Based on the responses obtained, several of the questions were revised. The Field Survey 'Eleven of the State Extension Office personnel and four agents from county offices, other than the Yuma office, interviewed full time. In addition, part time interviewing was done by agents from another county office. One of the Yuma County office secretaries, who could converse in Spanish, interviewed several who could not Speak English. Editing was handled by the author and Dr. J. L. Matthews of the Federal Extension Service. The interviewers were given extensive training in interviewing techniques and questionnaire acquaintance. Approximately four and one half days were needed to complete the interviews. Tabulation and Summary of Findings , Because of the numerous open end questions and responses, considerable effort was expended categorizing these responses. Categorization was accomplished by having each answer to an open end question typed on a 3 by 5 inch card and then categorized according to their similarity. After the categories were obtained, codes were devised and the information from the questionnaires was transferred to tabulation sheets. The IBM tabulation was conducted by the Numerical Laboratory, University of Arizona, and the Federal Extension Service. B. DEFINITIONS For clarity of understanding, and for the purposes of this study, the following definitions are offered: Occupation Classification: All occupations were clas- sified according to the "Classified Index of Occupa- tion and Industries," U. S. Bureau of the Census. White Collar: Those employed in the professional, managers and officials, clerical, and sales persons 'employment categories. - . Blue Collar: Those employed in the craftsmen and fore- men, operatives, service workers and laborer employment categories.‘ Farmers and Farm Managers: Those employed as managing, owning or renting farm units. Non-Employed: Housewives and others not holding posi- tions of employment. Urban: Those residing within the incorporated city limits of Yuma and its adjacent suburbs. Rural: Those living in open country and towns or vil- lages under 2,500 population. Commercial Farms: Farms with a value of sales of farm products amounting to $1,200 or more. . f . a v \ A, .5 t I u A“ .- cl. . o r... " ~‘7- CHAPTER IV FINDINGS The findings of the survey used in this thesis have been broken into six major areas. They are: Characteris- tics of the population, concerns of respondents, issues. concerning Yuma County citizens, Yuma County citizens' participation in solution of problem areas, cquaintance with Extension, and attitudes about agents working in problem areas. A. CHARACTERISTICS OF YUMA COUNTY POPULATION The characteristics of Yuma County population as derived from the Survey included place of residence, age of respondents, total net annual income after farm on business expenses, education of the respondents, occupation of the respondents and tenure in Yuma County. Since up—to-date census figures are not yet available for comparative pur— poses on most of these items, only place of residence and occupation of the respondents will be considerable. 33 TABLE IV PLACE or RESIDENCE or vuaA COUNTY PEOPLE - 19:301 . Percent Residence All Respondents Males Females On a farm (or ranch) 6.5 6.5 6.4 In the country, but not on a farm 3.4 4.6 2.1 In a town or village less than 2,500 9.9 11.7 7.8 In a suburban area of Yuma 8.2 8.5 7.8 In Yuma _ 72.0 68.7 75.9 Total Number _ _ 294 . 153“ _ 141 Eight out of ten respondents lived in the City of Yuma or its suburban areas. Two out of ten respondents lived in rural areas. Approximately 53 percent of the farmers and farm managers interviewed lived off the farm. The latest census estimates show that approximately 55 percent of the population live in the City of Yuma, 5.5 percent live inma suburban area of Yuma,,10 percent live in 2 According to a town or village less than 2,500 papulation. preliminary agriculture census data, 40 percent of those Operating farms lived off the farm.3 Those residing on farms would then account for 3.2 percent of the population. The most disparate areas, concerning those interviewed and estimated census figures, are those living in Yuma and those _._ ah— ; _L_—.a—-L 11bid., p. 11. 2's . O o 9 Data obtained from Walt tissner, Yuma County Census Leader. ') “United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census, 1959 Census of Agriculture - Preliminary, (Washington: Bureau of the Census, 1961). -.74 - e. H . , l..- n ' A ‘ v ' u 0 o ' o ‘ . ._ . . --Aq. -. ' -~ . . . r 1‘ l ; . c ' I ‘ o v A .fi . I . . .' r . ‘ ‘ _ , .-v... ... v» ._ a 1 ., o J . , _ , - l ‘ J o ‘ t ._, w— .... H... . ---... . __-... . \ I Y a; b Is . J . 1 ' ’ . . . . 1 ‘ —-- -‘ 4 ~-- .—_».4 . l . u: , , , . . i .- ... . . , " . v 4 . . PI! 3‘ '.l . . 4 - ' >- _ . . , c ‘I , .: ,_- , A‘ , I , . I i . ’0...- u s . - . uj' .- V 34 living in the country, but not on a farm. There are several "squatter" settlements scattered throughout the county whose inhabitants, along with many farm laborers, were not in- cluded in any of the sources from which the sample was drawn. It is assumed this is a major reason for this disparity. TABLE V OCCUPATION or vunA COUNTY RESPONDENTS — 19304 Percent Item - All Respondents Males Females Professional 8.2 9.2 7.1 Farmers and farm managers 5.1 9.8 ~-- Managers and officials 8.8 13.7 3.5_ Clerical 7.5 3.9 11.3 Sales persons 4.1 5.2 28.0 Craftsmen and foremen 7.8 15.0 --- Operatives 10.5 17.7 2.8 Service workers ' 8.2 9.2 7.1 Laborers 4.8 3.9 5.7 Not employed 31.3 5.9 59.0 Retired 3.7 6.5 .7 Sixty-five percent of all the people interviewed were employed. Thirty-one percent were not employed and nearly four percent were retired. 0f the total that were not employed, 90 percent were women. Slightly over 52 percent of all the employed men were craftsmen, operatives, service workers and laborers. Less than 37 percent of the employed men were white collar workers, including professional people, managers, clerks and salesmen. About ten percent were engaged in farming. Six percent of the men were not employed and slightly more than six percent 4Hazlitt, Boone, Matthews, 22. Cit., p. 12. ---. ———¢.-.r 1' 35 were retired. Nearly six out of ten women were not employed. Slightly over 61 percent of the employed women were white collar workers. The remaining 39 percent were employed as Operatives, service workers and laborers. Less than one percent of all the women interviewed were retired. While 1990 census data is lacking in regard to occupa- tions, the 1959 preliminary agriculture census indicates 747 farm operators.5 Assuming one Operator to a household, then farm Operators account for approximately 5.5 percent of the total households. Hence, farm operators would account for approximately the same percentage in regard to occupa- tional categories. 5United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census, 92. Cit. _.--4--, L. CONCERNS 0F YUMA COUNTY RESPONDENTSs The first question the interviewees were asked was: "What would you say are two or three things that people in your vicinity should be concerned about?" This was an Open- end question aimed at getting respondents to fully express themselves about this subject without the benefit of sug- gested topics. 0f the 294 interviewees, 268 or 91 percent listed one or more concerns. A_tota1 of 584 concerns were mentioned by the 268 respondents who had concerns. .Of these, 370 oumxmns, or better than 63 percent, were in the categories of schookn employment and industry, community physical upkeep, recrea- tion, and water. A Gfiazlitt, Boone, Matthews, Op. Cit., pp. 14-16. o. 37 ITABLE VI CONCERNS OF XUHA COUNTY RESPONDENTS - 1960 4 W Item ‘ % Mcntioning Each 'Tiafiked in order percentage of responses) (258 out of 294) SChUUl’B ‘ 4007 Employment and industry 31.7 Cenmunity and physical upkeep 24.6 Recreation 20.9 Water and utilities 20.1 Human relationships 17.2 Community protection . 11.2 City government and general politics 9.3 Religion 7.5 Hospital, health and sanitation 6.0 General agriculture 5.6 Public apathy 4.1 Taxes 3.4 City planning and zoning - . _ -- 3.0 Other items receiving less than three percent res- ponses included: ‘Housing, international and national affairs, transportation, high cost of living, Indians and Indian lands, and other miscellaneous items. It is interesting to note the similarity between com- munity concerns of the peOple in Yuma County and those of a community in Pennsylvania. In a study of Corry Community, Pennsylvania,7 the respondents were asked, "What two or three things in this community are you concerned about?" Their replies were as follows: 7Erie County Agricultural Extension Association and Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, Op. Cit., p. 2. - - 4 ’ as ‘ a . , ‘ 1 . .. , . . - § / " o . _‘ . ‘ ._. r I | ' A - h .L- . 7 - -- . ..., _ - ‘ - --- 1‘ .. , _-_> . .- ) WM. . ~ . _ a .. A » .- . 7‘. .r L. -3 38 TABLE VII CONCERNS OF COREY COMMUNITY, PENNSYLVANIA, RESPONDENTS - 1960 - .—_— —---. —.-__ .—. _. . . ...- . — , --.”— .-. -. .__ -.. ._ -. . Item % Mentioning Each Employment, industry, business 35 Schools 16 Roads 13 Churches 13 Taxes 10 Community upkeep 10 No concern at all l2 Recreation 9 Local government 5 Medical health 4 Control of cats and dogs 4 Housing 3 Youth 3 Other items receiving less than three percent included: Human relations, organizations, cost of living, sewage, public transportation, gambling, public utilities, work for handicapped and vandalism. Items such as schools, employment and industry, com- munity upkeep, recreation, local government, etc. ranked high in both communities. 0f the nineteen categories listed in the Yuma survey, only the categories of water, general agriculture, public apathy, city—county planning and zoning,, Indians and Indian lands, and international and national affairs were not listed in the Corry survey. or the twenty— one categories listed in the Corry survey only two, work for handicapped and organizations, were not mentioneS in the Yuma study. While categories in the Corry study such as roads and vandalism were not listed in the Yuma study per so, they were mentioned by those interviewed, but categor- —-c-— ,. C“ I . J . “ - i. _ . .‘f k . .' 4 , . -'. .d . ... o .4: fl . . .a A a. ,- . - . _. .-.. .-. - _ . T ,. .1 - ”i . . I - L . : _ '1 . v. I ‘, 'z. ’ " . . . . I. J A. t- k. . , . . ., L I. t. .‘ .l ‘ J. . — ,, 'Jl 39 ized under different headings. Also, at the time of this writing, two other communities in Erie County had been surveyed and the responses to this question were quite simi- lar to the one reported.8 There were nine areas in both surveys which had nearly identical headings. Following is a rank order cor- relation between the two surveys and the nine areas. TABLE VIII RANK-ORDE R CORRELATION BLTWELN YLAA COUNTY, ARIZONA RESPfllifiF NTS AND COBB:Y C)dsUNITY PLNNEéYLVANIA Rn‘ SPONDLNTS — 1960 Liii. Yuma Corry Yuma Corry in Subject Survey Survey Bank Bank Rank D Schools 41 16 l 2 1 1 Employment & Industry 32 35 2 1 1 1 Community upkeep 25 10 J 5 2 4 Recreation 21 9 4 6 2 4 Human relationship (youth) 17 3 5 9 4 16 City Government & .general politics 9 5 6 7 l 1 Religion 8 13 7 3 4 16 Hospitals, health and sanitation 3 4 8 8 O 0 Taxes 3 10 9 4 5 25 58 The rank order correlation coefficient for these groups is .617. This tends to show some similarity between the concerns of the two communities especially when consid- ering the concerns came from open-end questions aimed at 8Correspondence from John W. Bergstrom, Program Consultant, Elie County Agricultural Association, Erie, Pennsylvania, November 3,1960. , .u'vr ._. ; : .‘i-o-q—w- .--“ v- 7“... 4O getting respondents to express themselves without benefit or suggested topics. A few of the major responses from those concerned about schools were: Need for higher educational facilities, curriculum needs, teacher qualifications and financing of education. Men were slightly more concerned about this subject than were the women. According to age groups, schools ranked highest with the 40-49 year old group and loweSt with those over the age of 60 with one-half of the former mentioning this item compared to slightly over one- fourth of the latter. Slightly over 40 percent of those in :the age groups of 30- 39 and 50—59 mentioned schools as a concern. Of those surveyed, 150 had children in school and 117 of those were in the 30- 49 year old age group. As the level of education increased, the more concern there was about schools. Forty-eight percent of those with some college education, compared to 31 percent of those having eight years or less of education, mentioned thisi subject. The same correlation held true in regard to income levels. Over 52 percent of those with incomes over $10,000 mentioned this item compared to 27.5 percent of those with incomes under $2,500. H I Rural groups had considerably more responses to schools than did the urban people, as 55 percent in these .éroups mentioned this item compared 37 percent of the urban people. Schools were ranked either first or second in per- I) 0. n . . I. . i J . J n - A v‘ v r . 4 ... r 1 r rt” I . .. ‘ . a .m a J . r ‘..+ r I. I. a, I . l‘ C l_\ A 7!). 41 centage of responses by the nine occupational groups. Farmers had the most numerous reSponses, percentagewise, with 69 pchent. The balance oi the occupational groups were fairly consistent, running from slightly over 33 percent to 45 percent. Employment and Industry The need for employment opportunities and industry also ranked high with the respondents. A few of the con- cerns in this category included: Lack of industry in the Yuma area, unemployment and poor wages, the need to bring more tourist trade to this area, the general economy of the area needed to be improved, etc. Hen respondents were more concerned about employment and industry than were the women with 33 percent of the men mentioning this item compared to 25 percent of the women. Thirty-four percent of the urban respondents compared to 21 percent of the rural respondents mentioned this item. At the time of the survey approximately 500 people were collecting unemployment compensation and a majority of these people resided in the urban area. Approximately a third of the respondents in the dif- ferent age groups between 25 and 59 mentioned this item_ compared to about two out of ten for those over 60 and those 24 years of age and younger. In this aspect, less than 38 percent of those over 60 were employed and might be expected to mention this item less than the other groups. 42 The two income groups mentioning this item the most were those with incomes under $1,000 and those with incomes over $10,000 with one—half of the iormer listing this as a concern. It was of interest to note the white collar workers mentioned concerns in this area more often than did the blue collar workers with almost 40 percent of the former compared to 28 percent of the latter listing this item. Community Physical Upkeep The third item of concern, as mentioned by the total group of respondents, was community physical upkeep. This had to do with the poor conditions of streets and roads, the need for sidewalks and sewers and the general appearance of the community. Thirty percent of the women interviewed indicated a concern about this area compared to 20 percent of the men. The survey indicated those residing in towns or vil- lages under 2,500 population and those living in the.sub- urban area but not in the City of Yuma were most concerned about this subject. About three out of ten in these groups compared to less than 17 percent of those residing on farms mentioned it. Almost one out of four of those living within the City of Yuma felt this was a concern. Thirty-one percent of those with less than eight grades of school listed this as being of concern compared to less than 12 percent of those with one or more years of 43 college. There was not a single response to this item from the group whose incomes were over $10,000 while over 35 per— cent of those with incomes under $1,000 listed this as a concern. Service workers,_managers and_officials were most concerned about this item while farmers were.the least con- cerned. Recreation ‘Another major concern of Yuma County people was recreation. The responses were about equally divided into three categories: Needed recreational facilities for.child- ren, for teenagers, and needed recreation facilities in general.. There was a sprinkling of responses concerning inadequate television programs and the need for more cultural opportunities. Again women were more concerned about this item than were the men with over 26 percent of the former responding compared to less than 16 percent of the latter. Beepondents under 30 years of age mentioned recreation more often than those over 30 years of age. This was of major concern to those living in the country, but not on a farm, with over 44 percent mentioning it.- It was of least concern to those living on a farm and in the suburbs of Yuma. Comparing recreation to income groups, it was noted that those with incomes of $10,000 and over listed this item about 35 percent of the time while the balance of the groups ..." 0" ‘A p ..O l .. w ' u " .’. ,1 t - . - .a . , .’ v ' k -ao -.;- . .‘ 1 - .. 5‘ IV I . ., - I . u I 1., ‘ o 44 responded from 19 to 21 percent. There was little difference between educational groups, and their mentioning this concern with the exception that those with less than eight grades of schooling were less concerned than were the other educational groups. There also was little difference between occupational groups mention- ing it about 40 percent more than the other occupational groups. Water and Utilities Responses concerning this issue had to do mostly with high water rates and the desire for municipal ownership of the water company with a few responses concerning the water situation in general and water rights to the Colorado River water. There was no difference between the different sexes in mentioning this item. There were no replies from the far: group on this issue and very few from the rural group as a whole, as they responded slightly over five percent compared to 25 percent for the people of Yuma. Those over 60 mentioned this concern considerably more so than did the other age groups. This was also true of those with incomes under $1,000 and those with less than- eight years of schooling. It was mentioned the least by those with incomes over $10,000 and by those with four or more years of college. The occupational groups were fairly consistent in percentage of respondents mentioning this I‘— (a 1.4 1.. 45 issue, with the exception of farmers. They mentioned it less than eight percent of the time compared to 20 percent for the tOtal 0 Human Relations Human relationships concerns mentioned consisted of Juvenile delinquency problems, family and neighbor relation- ships, and welfare. Twenty—one percent of the women, com- pared to slightly over 13 percent of the men, thought this was a concern. By age, over 31 percent of those 60 years and older mentioned this item compared to less than five percent for those 24 years and under. Approximately 35 percent of those with four or more years of college listed this as a concern compared to those in the other educational levels who listed it from 11 to 18 percent. Those with incomes of $10,000 and over also listed it more so than did those in the other income levels. Community Protection Community protection was listed as a concern by slightly over 11 percent of the respondents. Included under this item were concerns about law enforcement and safety with a few respondents concerned about stray animals and legalized dog racing. Those living on the farm were more concerned about this item than other residential groups. Respondents 60 years old and older, professional peeple and service workers were also more concerned than were the other age and 4G occupational groups. City Government and General Politics This concern mainly had to do with the need ior im- provement in these areas and general dissatisfaction of the respondents. The suburban and farm people listed concerns in these areas more so than the other residential area groups.. Those in_the age group of 30 to 39 responded more so than did the other age groups.» The percentage of responses increased as did income. No one listed this as a concern who had an income under $1,000 compared to almost 22 percent of those with incomes of $10,000 or more. Hospital, Health and Sanitation ‘The majority of replies in this category dealt with the inadequacy of hospital service. A few mentioned sanita— tion conditions and health programs. This wasmentioned the most numerous, percentagewise, by those residing in towns or Villages under 2,500 population. It might be assumed this was because of the distance to hospitals in Yuma or other cities and because of the lack of adequate hospital and doctor facilities in these towns. General Agriculture Concerns under this category had to do with the farm surplus and farm programs, agricultural research, public relations, drainage problems, and problems with neighbors and others concerning farming operations. This item was ....-- t . . a r — . at _, - » t 5. v -v-F ..er 47 listed more often by farmers than others and by men than women 0 Yuma County Citizens' Awareness of Concerns and Methods of Obtaining and Sharing Information After the respondent mentioned a concern, he was asked whethe1 or not he had any reason to believe other people in his vicinity were concerned about that particular issue. If he answered "Yes, " he was asked to indicate whether he had (I) heard peeple talking about it; (2) talked to people about it; (3) read about it in newspapers or maga— zines; or (4) or seen it on radio or television programs. Seventy-two percent of all the replies fell into two categories. Forty-six percent had heard people talking about it and had talked to people about it, while 25 percent had communicated in all four areas.‘ The balance fell into one or a combination of the other categories. Items which had considerable local publicity by radio, television and neWSpapers and which the respondents ranked high with all four types of communication were water, city government and politics, religion, taxes, and national and international affairs. C. ISSUES CONCERNING YUMA COUNTY CITIZEN89 In conjunction with the previous question, another question was designed to give respondents an Opportunity to study and evaluate 18 public affairs issues of a local, State, national, and international nature., Specifically, the respondents were asked to indicate whether any of the 18 issues were of concern to the people in Yuma County and to indicate their opinion regarding the importance of the issues. About 95.6 percent of all those interviewed responded to this question and averaged 5.6 items of concern. Of all those responding, 53.4 percent listed employment Opportuni- ties, 52.7 percent listed water rights and 48.3 percent listed public schools as concerns of people in their vici- nity. It was also evident that the more local the issue, the greater was the percent identifying the issue as a con- cern to Yuma citizens. There was a decided similarity in responses to these two questions in the Yuma survey. Themain difference was that issues mentioned in the first question were more Of a local nature such as community physical upkeep, recreation facilities, human relationships, community protection, local government and politics, and public apathy. 0f the 18 9Hazlitt, Boone, Matthews, 9g. Cit., pp. 17-20. ---—-~.- _._. ..— issues listed on the second question, only regulation of communication channels was not mentioned by respondents in question one. TABLE IX ISSUES COHCERNING_YUHA COUNTY CITIZENS - 1960 W Item % Mentioning Each Employment opportunities Water rights Public schools I PrOperty taxation Financing education Health service and facilities Federal taxation Transportation Public assistance and welfare Housing conditions Farm programs Labor vs industry U.S. Foreign Policy Zoning Communism vs capitalism Art and music Regulation of communication channels United Nations Employment opportunities 53.4 52.7 48.3 39.8 33.8 37.4 34.4 31.6 30.3 29.3 27.9 22.8 22.1 18.4 17.3 14.6 8.5 7.8 (281 out of 294) The most important item was employment opportunities. Over 53 percent indicated this was an issue in Yuma County. Men were more concerned about this item than were the women. Small town and urban people were more concerned about employ- ment Opportunities than those living in the country. Res- pondents between the ages of 26 and 50 were more concerned about employment Opportunities than those under 25 and over 50 years of age. Over 62 percent of the blue collar respon- .. m O U? dents mentioned_this item compared to 55 percent of the white collar respondents. Water Rights Water rights was listed as a concern by about 53 percent of the respondents. Men were sowewhat more con- cerned about water rights than were the women. Respondents living in the open country mentioned this item more than those living in small towns and urban areas. Slightly over 18 percent of the respondents in the age group of 24 years and younger mentioned this item com- pared to over 53 percent of the other age groups. This concern increased proportionately with years of school com- pleted. Professional workers and farmers were more concerned about water rights than other occupational groups. Public Schools ‘here was a substantial difference in responses of the various residential groups mentioning public schools. About 68.5 percent of the rural respondents mentioned public schools as compared to 46.4 percent of the urban people. Respondents in the 25-29 year old age group listed schools more often than did those in the other groups. Those under 24 and over 50 showed the least concern. The higher the level of schooling and income, the greater was the percentage of respondents that identified schools as a concern to people. Schools were mentioned more by profes~ sional people than by other occupational groups. 51 Property Taxation Approximately 40 percent of all those interviewed llisted property taxation as being of concern to people in this area. Men were more concerned about this issue than' were the women. 'This item was of the least concern to those 60 years and older and those with incomes under $2,500.. Property taxation was of more concern to the farmers and white collar workers than it was to the blue collar workers, retired and unemployed. ’Financing Education Men were more concerned about financing education than were the women, and the rural groups were more con- cerned than were the urban peOple. Respondents under 24 years and over 60 years of age were least concerned about the problem of financing education. In general, this was of more concern to people as their educational and income levels increased. The professional people were considerably more concerned about this item than were the other occupa- tional groups. Health Service and Facilities Health service and facilities was ranked high as a concern to Yuma citizens by the interviewees between the ages of 25-29. The white collar workers, retired persons and farmers had a larger percentage of responses to this item than did the blue collar workers and the unemployed. 52 Federal Taxation -Federal taxation concerned those living in the country but not on a farm, much more than the other residential groups with 70 percent of the former replying compared to 34 percent of the groups as_a whole. Those with some college education responded to this subject more often percentagewise than did those with high school education or less. There was a relationship between responses to this item and the level_ of income. The higher the level of income the greater was the number mentioning federal taxation as a concern of people. It was of more importance to the white collar workers and farmers than it was to the blue collar workers. Transportation Transportation was of the most concern to the women, the urban groups,those_over 60 and white collar workers. This concern also increased proportionately with education and ranked highest with the high income group. The city of_ Yuma does not have a public transportation system. Public Aesistance and Welfare Public assistance and welfare increased in percentage of responses as age of the respondents increased. It also was mentioned more often by those with less than eight grades of schooling and by those with incomes under $1,000. The farmers replied to this item more than did the other occupa- tional groups. ..—. m. 53 Farm Programs Over 55 percent of the rural people identified farm programs as being an item of concern compared to about 22 percent of the urban people. The implication may be that the urban people lack understanding about farm programs in general even though they are substantially dependent upon the agricultural enterprise in the county. in general, the per? centage of responses to this item increased as education and income levels increased. A difference regarding responses was evident in the occupational groups. Six out of ten of the farmers felt that farm programs were of concern in rela- tion to 42 percent of the white collar workers and slightly less than 22 percent of the blue collar workers. Labor vs Industry Almost 23 percent of those interviewed felt that labor vs industry was a concern to Yuma citizens. Male respondents were more concerned about this item than female respondents. This issue concerned those in the 30-39 year old age group, those with four years or more of college and those with in- comes over $10,000 more than those in correSponding groups. About 32.9 percent of the blue collar workers mentioned this item compared to 22.6 percent of the white collar workers. U. S. Foreign Policy Men were more concerned about U. S. Foreign Policy than women. Most of the respondents who indicated that this was a major concern were under 24 years of age, had completed 5. s.‘ ,. ~‘ ... “ _ ‘ . j v - < ‘ ‘ -7 . « .- - ,t. t .e . .. .— ,7 . .- — r— - . ~—— .. ' n A .' ‘- .. I l ‘ , ‘ -~ . f _ - J ‘ , , , . ‘ . ; i . , . . _, xi . . . 7 . . - a, u ‘ . a . r ~ - v ‘ . i ., v _‘ . . 0| . f . . . l . ‘ . 0 J -' , , ‘ U a- . .»- ...- . __._ - ,- 7 o—io ~~o . . , 4' 54 high school or college work, and had incomes exceeding $7,000. Farmers and white collar workers mentioned U.S. Foreign Policy as a concern more than other occupational groups. Zoning Zoning was of major concern to the urban people and those in the highest education and income levels. It was also of more concern to the white collar workers than blue collar workers and farmers. Communism vs Capitalism Over twice as many men as women responded to Communism vs Capitalism. It was of interest to none that those under 24 years old and those over 60 years mentioned this more than did the other age groups. D. YUMA COUNTY CITIZENS' PARTICIPATION IN SOLUTION or PROBLEM AEEASlO After the interviewees had the Opportunity to fully express themselves about things concerning peoPle and to indicate whether or not 18 selected public affairs and com- munity improvement issues were of concern to people, they wena shown the card of the 18 issues and asked this question: "Did you as an individual, or with others, try to do some- thing about any of the things you mentioned or the items listed on this card?" TABLE X PARTICIPATION OF YUEA COUNTY PEOPLE IN SOLUTION OF PROBLEM AREAS Response % (283 out of 294) Yes, as an individual ‘ 9.2 Yes, with others 19.4 No - 70.7 Don't remember 17 Slightly less than three out of 10 people had tried to do something about the things that they felt were of concern to people in their vicinity. 0f the total respondents about one out of 10 had tried to do something as an individual, while two out of 10 indicated that they had worked with others on some of the concerns. 101bid., pp. 19-20. J - ’ . ‘ l. . 4 n . ‘ , .. 1 - a K . I 7 _ _ ‘ p“ ‘ .3 oi J r - r I l J I — -‘ - ‘ . ' 0 ' , . . .— . ., . . ‘ ' ' h o h- ‘ I . I v , . . l n _ A H . c - . - A- - . _ _ - a - o -.-A.. -..,._._.,c._ _ wva‘ .—a...-.-r‘-wr.-—~_—no- __. . . a / ‘ t . . _ , _. - _ .- _ ... v. ,- . . . ca . -——.--— - .. . ~-— --—..—.-—-~.-. ...... q- F—Wh— .... ---, - ....... . . , _ > r- r ‘ J ' ‘ . L - A- 0‘ . — ‘ I 0 - “l ’ C: . . ~> - ‘ '- h -‘ ~ 1. ‘ ' I ’ Q .. I . , a - . b u I ' 'I 7 A . fi-D-v- 0 .- .H \- "~ 7 —- r Q—v --—- r o i . — I — - v -- -A» ..r - I 0' " — ‘ fl-M ‘ ‘ ---- U. v-‘-.-’ “3“ * v ' ' w ’ . . » . . . v . , -. q a .1 ‘ ' - ‘ _. - . _ . _ _- a— . ..., v Q t , , ' .‘ ‘ I . a . . , “ ‘ a -- ‘ ‘o A \- r I 6‘ I ‘ ‘ fl ‘ H t“ J ' n. I ‘ a ‘ 5‘ ~' ..‘- ' q n , f‘ 7 ‘ l ’ n ‘ I ' I i . . - . — , , r- 7 ' » ‘.’ - 5* . ' ' 7' 2‘ " r‘ n . . ' v ‘ d ' ‘ ‘ ‘ c g a U . A ‘ h‘ K v . - ‘ -’ ' ‘ I ‘ .5 , e . . . . fl . - . — J : a k - v W , ,— »- 7H7 . - - - l . , .h - , «. .. . ...---._, ..n . -—._ -..-- .- 4-—-—-- —- 57 Thirty-five percent of those interviewed who belonged to some type of an organization had tried to do something about the identified problems as compared to 13 percent who did not belong to an organization. The least active group attempting to work on certain concerns were the respondents who had lived in Yuma County less than one year. Rural people were more active in working on concerns than urban residents. About 44 percent of the rural peeple compared to 25 percent of the urban people had tried to do something about some of the issues. Those persons with high school education or more were more active in working on con- cerns than those having less than a high school education. As income increased so did activity, with less than 13 percent of those with income under $1,000 working on problems compared to 39 percent of those with incomes over $10,000. It is worthy to note that while the majority of those interviewed expressed themselves as having concern over a number of problems and issues facing the community, less than three out of ten had reportedly done anything in attempting to alleviate these problems. E. KNOWLEDGE OF AND PARTICIPATION or YUMA COUNTY paopnr IN EXTENSION ACTIVITIESll The Yuma County Cooperative ExtenSion Office is lo- cated in the City of Yuma and is presently staffed with nine agents. The average tenure of the total Yuma Extension staff, at the time of the survey, was 2.5 years. Three of the staff members had been in the county for four years, ‘while the tenure of the others ranged from six months to two and one—half years. 'In the past, the duties of the agents were broken into three areas: 4-H Club Work, Home Economics and Agriculture. iThe agricultural agents primarily spent their time in the field of agricultural efficiency.w Prior to determining the people's reactions to Exten- sion working in these problem areas it was desirous to obtain their knowledge cf and participation in Extension. It is well to point out that at the time of the survey, the peOple inter- viewed had no knowledge to the fact that the Extension Service was conducting the survey. Acguaintance with Extension The first question asked in regard to the people's acquaintance with Extension was: "Do you know the County or Home Agents in this county? If yes, do you remember any of their names?" Of the 294 interviewed, three out of ten named one or more of the agents. A larger percentage of peOple residing on farms knew an agent compared to the general population. Seven out of ten of the farmers knew one or more of the agents. The per- centage knowing an agent increased with age, with eleven percent of the respondents between 15 and 24 years knowing an agent compared to 21 percent in the 25-29 age group. Thirty-three percent of those over 30 years of age could name an agent. A larger percentage of the respondents in the higher income brackets knew an agent than tid those in lower income brackets. One out of two with incomes of $7,000 and over could name an agent in relation to only 16 percent of those with incomes under $7,000. A similar relationship held true with educational status.w Seven out of ten with four or more years of college knew at least one agent as compared to six percent with less than five years of educa- tion. Seventy-three percent of the farmers and farm managers, 66 percent of the professional group and 7 percent of the laborers knew an agent. Tenure in Yuma County had some bearing on whether or not people knew an agent. Only three percent of those living in Yuma County under one year knew one; 31 percent of those living in the county from one to ten years knew an agent; while 35 percent of those living in the county over ten years knew one of the agents. When asked to describe the responsibilities of the . u ‘ ' m n l i . . - ‘ v - .- .. . A ’l‘ , ‘ l . . I H O 7 \Q ' u A ‘ - ... .L ’ t _ _ , __ L. ‘. x A - 4 A AJ County Agent, 55 percent indicated that he worked with farmers, homemakers and 4-H Club members. About two percent had him confused with other agencies, while the balance had no knowledge of agents' responsibilities. Slightly over 46 percent of those interviewed said they knew how the County Agent's work was financed; however, less than six percent knew thatzfll three levels of government --county, state and national-~were involved. The balance knew that Extension work was tax supported by one form or another. Another question was designed to obtain different types of contacts the people may have had with the Extension Service. The interviewees were handed a card with several different contact pessibilities. The question read: ”I have here a card with a list of activities that the Extension workers carry on. I mean the different ways the agents work with families. I will go through the list and you can Just answer yes or no to each." 61 TABLE XI CONTAC S WITH EXTENSION ACTIVITITS BY YUEA COUNTY PEGPLE DURING IQJQ Response % Answering Seen 4-H or Home Economics Exhibit 67.0 Seen 4-H Members Project 60.5 Read Extension Article in Paper 53.7 Heard on Radio or TV 44.9 Received Extension Bulletin 22.8 Attended Extension Meeting 15.0 Received Letter 14.3 Agent Visited Home 12.6 Visited Office 12.2 Phone Conversation 12.2 Belong to Home Economics Group 3.4 4—H Leader 2.4 Other Contacts 2.7 No Contacts at All 18.7 Over eight out of ten interviewed had some sort of an Extension contact during the past year. Sixty-seven per- cent of those interviewed had seen a 4—H or Home Economics exhibit while 60.5 percent had seen a 4—H member's project. It was assumed the majority of these contacts were made at the County Fair. This posed the question of how many peo- ple had Extension contacts excluding exhibits and 4—H members' projects. A further analysis showed that 7 out of 10 interviewed had some type of an Extension contact in areas other than 4—H or Home Economics exhibits or projects. There are three newspapers in Yuma County-~a small town weekly in Northern Yuma County; a farm weekly and a daily published in Yuma. Other information behicles include four radio stations and one television station. The agents have regular programs on two of the radio stations and at as --o— 62 one time had programs on the television station. The study showed almost 54 percent of the people interviewed had read an Extension article in a newspaper and 45 percent had heard or seen an gent's program on radio or television. In general, a larger percentage of women respondents had contacts than did the men. Of all types 01 Extension contacts the men had a higher percentage of responses in visiting the agent's office, reading an Extension article in the paper and attending an Extension meeting. The women had a higher percentage of responses in all other types of Extension contacts. Persons residing on farms or ranches ranked consid- erably higher than any of the other residence groups in regard to all the different types of Extension contacts. All of those interviewed living on a farm had some Extension contact last year as compared to 90 percent of those living in the country, but not on a farm; 83 percent of those in towns under 2,500 population; 80 percent of those living in Yuma; and 75 percent of the suburban people. It was of interest to note that of the total Yuma City people inter- viewed over 45 percent had heard or seen an agent on radio or television and over 50 percent had read an Extension article. Fifty-eight percent had seen a 4-H member project and over 60 percent had seen a 4-H or Home Economics exhibit. About 10 percent of the city people had visited the Exten- sion office, had a phone conversation with an agent, had an agent visit their home, received a letter from an Extension 63 worker or attended an Extension meeting. In practically every instance there was a positive relationship between the amount of education or income of the respondents and percentage of Extension contacts. Of those with less than eight grades of schooling, 43 percent had no Extension contact while only three percent of those with four years or more of college had no contact. or those interviewed with less than $2,500 income over 40 percent had no Extension contact while everyone with over $10,000 income had some contact. Seven percent of those in the $5,000 to $9,999 income range had no contact while 26 percent of those with incomes in the $2,500 to $4,999 income bracket had no Extension contact. Those living in Yuma County less than one year had the fewest Extension contacts. Three in four of those resid- ing in Yuma from one to five years had contacts with Exten- sion while nine in ten of those with five to twenty-five years tenure had Extension contacts. 'The Extension Service is well known throughout the county as indicated by the findings.. The findings indicated that a large percentage of respondents had contacts with the Extension Service during the past year. F. ATTITUDES ABOUT AGENTS WORKING IN PROBLEM AREASlz One of the most important questions asked of the people concerning the possible future role of Extension programs was: "From what you know about the peeple in this county, how do you think they would feel about agents work- ing with peeple on problems and issues such as those listed on the cards I showed you a few minutes ago?" TABLE XII ATTITUDES OF RESPONDENTS ABOUT AGENTS WORKING IN COMMUNITY PROBLEM AREAS AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS EDUCATION __ Response_ . _ Percent Would Approve 68.0 Would Disapprove 8.8 No Opinion 21.8 No Response 1.4 Sixty-eight percent of the total group interviewed approved of agents working in these areas while about 22 percent did not express themselves one way or another. or those actually having an opinion one way or another, almost nine out of ten approved. In the Corry Community, Pennsyl- vania, Study concerning a similar question with 103 inter- .viewees, 57 would approve, 3 would disapprove, 25 didn't 121bid., pp. 25—26. , - l , .1 _ , ,_,1 I o o I --....r- -...H. - —. - ...-p, -....— o a ’, . . . l - x. . -- - imp-__ t - K . '-‘ ,-_. -“L, .._u s - . a ’ Q ~ .. L , . . \ ‘ . ~ I ' ' h I -.....V---._..._..- -- _. know, and 18 had no answer.13 Of those in Yuma County who disapproved the typical comments were: they have enough to do at the present time without doing this sort of work; they should not become in- volved in politics; and this type of work is out of the agents' line. Those approving thought there was a definite need for assistance in these areas and thought the County Agent was well qualified to assume responsibility. It was noted that membership in organizations was associated with respondents' attitudes regarding agents work- ing on public affairs issues and community improvement prob-' lems as compared to 57 percent of those who were not members of an organization. Too, a slightly larger percent of those holding leadership positions in organizations favored the idea of agents working on public affairs-community improvement type educational programs than those who were only members of an organization. While less than one-third of those interviewed knew an agent by name, seventy percent of those knowing him endorsed the idea of county agents working in this type of an educa- tional program. Three-fourths of those who had had Extension contacts felt that agents should work on public affairs-com- munity improvement problems as contrasted to 40 percent of those who had had no contacts with Extension. 13Correspondence from John W. Bergstrom, Program Con- sultant, Erie County Agricultural Extension Association, Erie, Pennsylvania. . u a ' _ t . i J, .. J 'h, t l‘ .11 v 1 f ; J , . . . . < .. _ . ‘ .‘w —-—-—o._. ... 66 Place of residence was associated with respondents' attitudes regarding agents' participation in such programs. Over four-fifths of the interviewees residing in rural areas in relation to less than 65 percent of those residing in urban areas approved of agents working on public affairs-community improvement educational programs. A larger percent of respondents in the high income brackets approved of agents working on this type educational program than did those in lower income brackets. Seventy per— cent of the respondents with incomes over $7,000 approved compared to 62 percent of those with income less than $2,500. Eight out of ten of the respondents who had completed one or more years of college indicated that agents should work with peeple in these problem areas, while less than six in 10 with no high school education approved. In general, it can be concluded that Yuma County citizens approved of the idea of broadening the Extension program to include public affairs-community improvement types of programs. CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS The purpose of this study was to seek information which would be helpful in guiding Extension programs and policies for the future. In this pursuit, a review of literature concerning Opinions and attitudes of others was made. Also a study of the concerns and issues as seen by 294 Yuma County citizens as well as their attitudes on whether or not the Extension Service should be working on these problems was conducted. The results of this study, the review of opinions and the results of other studies provide the basis for the fol- lowing summary of findings, implications and recommendations. A. SUM} JARY OF FINDINGS At the time of the conception of the Land Grant Colleges and later the Cooperative Extension Service, the population of the United States was predominantly rural. The major problem these peOple faced was in the area of agricul- tural production. Agricultural research, technological changes and -..... ‘-.-.-., ...—- 5., . ...-.___ w. .....r ”a?” Mr H... “A _ - _._... L.-.--- P _ education have been responsible, to a considerable degree, in the increased productivity oi a iarm unit. Today the 68 average farm worker in the United States produces enough food and fiber for himself and 23 others. At the turn of the century he produced enough for himself and six others. During this period migration of rural people to the metro- politan areas had been prevalent. It is now estimated that less than ten percent of the total population reside on farms. The society of today is an industrial one and not agrarian. The vast technological changes, population in- (zreases and movements, and the overall shrinkage of the world due to transportation and communication developments have created many social, political, economical and psycho- 10gical problems. ' Hypothesis II of this thesis was: The problems and needs of the peOple are varied and extend to a much greater extent beyond the areas in which Cooperative Extension has traditionally been working. i In pursuing this hypothesis a study was made of 294 Yuma County, Arizona, citizens in regard to their concerns. Sixty—three percent of their concerns fell into the cate- gories of schools, employment and industry, community physical upkeep, recreation, and water. Outside of about 5.5 percent who mentioned concerns in general agriculture and less than two percent who mentioned high cost of living, all the concerns mentioned were in the general area of com- munity needs or public affairs. The study showed that concerns as listed above ap- plied to both urban and rural people. The urban peOple were *u. 69 more concerned than the rural people in matters dealing with employment and industry and water and utilities. The rural people were more concerned than the urban people on concerns dealing with schools, recreation, government and politics, community protection, health and agriculture. The study undertaken in Corry Community, Pennsylvania, showed comparable concerns. Practicallyall of their con- cerns were also in the general area of community needs or public affairs., In addition to asking the Yuma people whattheir specific concerns were, they were also given the opportunity to study 18 public affairs issues of local, state, national and international nature, and asked to indicate if any of these were of concern to Yuma County people. Over 95 percent of all those interviewed responded to this question and the group_responding listed an average of 5.6 items as being of concern to Yuma County people. The U. S. D. A. bibliography of selected references concerning urbanization and changing_1and uses showed 1,319 studies and papers mainly dealing with areas of community improvement and public affairs. It appears that there is ample evidence that the problems and needs of the peOple are varied. Extension accomplishments in 1959 indicated that 67 percent of agricultural agents' time was devoted to agricul- tural or related projects in comparison to less than six percent of their time being devoted to community improvement _o-4 ,\ 70 and public affairs. At the state level, outside of Kansas, Missouri, Utah and Michigan, less than one percent of the total states Extension specialist force were listed as work- ing in the fields of-community improvement, or development, and public affairs. While it is realized that other states have individuals working in these fields, the implication remains that the fields of community improvement and public affairs constitute a minor portion of Extension's effort. Even though the Extension Service has increased the scope of its clientele to include services to urban families, "... these services have followed Extension's tradition, shifting mainly in the sense of doing the old things for new people. Even in agricultural work 40 percent (1958) of the assisted families were urban; they were given advice on how to grow better lawns and rose bushes."1 Therefore it appears that there is ample evidence to support Hypothesis II. That is: The problems and needs of the people a1; varied and extend to a much greater extent beyond the area in which Cooperative Extension has traditionally been working. Hypothesis III was: The people of a community are desirous of the help Cooperative Extension could give in help- ing them to meet their problems and needs. The Yuma study showed that the people had many varied concerns, yet the majority failed to attempt to do something about them. Of the total respondents about one in ten had 1Warren Rovetch, Op. Cit., P96 216‘217° o _ . o. . T— u . _ v . m )\ , ‘ v _ O I l, 0. .J 71 tried to do something as an individual and two in ten indi- cated that they had worked with others on some of the concerns. The study also showed that over 80 percent of those interviewed had some sort of an Extension contact during the past year, hence, they had some knowledge of the Extension Service even though it may have been limited. When asked if they would approve or disapprove of County Agents working on their problems and issues, nine in ten of those having definite opinions approved. 0f the total group interviewed, 68 percent approved of Extension Agents working on their problems and issues, less than nine percent disapproved and about 22 percent did not express themselves one way or another. In the Corry Community study 95 percent of those hav- ing definite opinions on the question of agents working on their problems indicated approval. In Michigan Cornett found that eight in ten of those having definite opinions favored Extension Agents increas- ing their educational efforts on public programs as zoning, taxation, community development, health, etc. Biever in Wisconsin and Cornett also indicated the people's approval of broadening the scope of clientele to include more urban people and work in Extension program offerings. In the Yuma study over four-fifths of the interviewees b . _ 2 . s. u . C ‘ I i. _ .9 u i l .4 Ar , u . . I h , _.‘ .. . A ‘ 1 a . 9 \s .q o . . ... r * . i .. . . ._ q l . 72 residing in rural areas in relation to less than 65 percent of those residing in urban areas approved of agents working on public affairs educational programs.“ Also, three-fourths of those who had had Extension contacts felt that agents should work on public affairs problems as contrasted to 40 percent of those who had had no contacts with Extension. In view of the preceding, Hypothesis III has been deve10ped. That is:n The people of a community are desirous of the help Cooperative Extension could give in helping them to meet their problems and needs. Therefore, if the peOple of a community are desirous of the help Cooperative Extension could give in helping them to meet their problems and needs; and the problems and needs of the peOple are varied and extend to a much greater extent beyond the areas in which Cooperative Extension has tradi- tionally been working, then Hypothesis I is developed. That is: It will be necessary for the Cooperative Extension Service to broaden the scope of its program offerings from the traditional offerings of the past if the Extension Service is going to help people help themselves in adjusting to change, in meeting their needs, and in solving their problems. B. IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Because of the momentous changes that rural America has undergone, Rovetch, in his analysis of the Cooperative Extension Service, visualizes three alternatives as to the future of the Extension Service. The first to close down Cooperative Extension with a suitable commendation for a job well done and now virtually completed. . A second ”solution" is to ignore, to the extent that it is still feasible, the changes that have taken place and to continue along the old road. The third alternative is to adapt more basically to the changed circumstances, followingzthe population both to greater literacy and to cities. ' The development of the hypotheses implies that there are many needs of a community in which the people desire help; and in order for these needs to be met by the Exten- sion Service it will be necessary for Extension to broaden the scOpe of its program offerings." This compares favorably with Rovetch's third alternative. Since its inception, the Cooperative Extension Ser- vice has been credited with being flexible. As such it has met various challenges throughout the years and has emerged as a strong and respected institution. However, constant adjustment is essential for survival and efficient function. Failure to adjust means almost certain deterioration and 31b1d., pp. 215-217. ...— W—v ...—v 0‘ ,_—-.—~e “’- _.-~.-- 74 possible extinction. At the present time the General Extension Service, in several states, is developing programs which are attempting to meet community needs in much the same manner as are the rural development programs of the Cooperative Extension Ser- vice. There is also a growing demand for the Department of Health, Education and Welfare to enter into this field in both rural and urban communities as a "... major rallying point for stimulating and assisting citizen action to improve "3 Added to the quality of our family and community life. these are the efforts of the labor unions to obtain federal help for education. The Cooperative Extension Service is unique in that it has personnel in practically every county of the United States doing educational work in conjunction with the Land Grant Colleges. Duplication of efforts by other organiza- tions appears wasteful-~providing the Cooperative Extension Service can adjust to meet the needs these agencies strive to meet. To more fully utilize the potential of the Coopera- tive Extension Service framework, their personnel and the universities, it would appear logical for the Cooperative Extension and General Extension Services to coordinate or combine efforts. In this manner the County Agents' office 3J0hn H. Moore, "Community Action" Conference Proceed- ings: 1960 White House Conference 22 Children and YOuth. (Washington, D. C.) p. 119. ¢-.4 75 could truly become the front door of the university at the county level. At the present time such combinations have been accomplished in the states of Kansas, Utah and Missouri. In addition, Michigan has a combination program in the Upper Peninsula Counties in relation to their resource development program and Montana and other states are study- ing the possibility. While the farm population is diminishing, it is far from becoming extinct. Agricultural production will be of paramount importance as more and more peeple will need food and fiber in future years. Technical agricultural informa- tion to the farm people will still be essential. huch of this information can be supplied by private industrial resources such as bankers, fertilizer, insecticide, feed and machinery dealers. Agents, specialized in much the same manner as are our present state specialists, could still be available to the farm people. However, in this day of rapid transportation and communication, this agent could be respon- sible for an area larger than our present counties. In order to keep abreast of the latest technical developments, this agent probably should be connected directly to his specialty department at the Land Grant Institution. Under such an organizational structure, the county or community agent would be more a generalist. One of his principal duties would be that of a coordinator. He would be a central point from whence calls and problems would be diffused and channeled to their proper places for action. 76 Not only would the agent have direct lines to the universi- ties, but also to private, public and human resources. He need not be an expert in everything as long as he knows or can discover those who are. For such an evolution to take place, it appears that county agents, state specialists, extension directors, college deans, university presidents, special interest groups, and others will have to take a long, hard, critical look at extension and themselves and perhaps they will need to develop new understanding in regard to extension's potential and future. It is logical to assume that if the Cooperative Extension Service does not adjust to meet the needs of the people, some other educational organization will evolve or adjust to do so. sented total. C. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY It is realized that the studies and opinions pre- in this paper represent only a small faction of the Further studies are recommended in the following: 1. Surveys of various communities throughout the nation on people's concerns and needs. More specific information on the relative import- ance of these concerns and needs and whether they are of enough importance to the people to promote action. Studies or the opinions of the people on the desirability of Extension working in these areas. Surveys of the total Extension Service's involve- ment in meeting community improvement and public affairs needs. Surveys of attitudes of university presidents, college of agriculture deans and extension directors in regard to overall, coordinated educational programs for the communities. BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Blakely, Robert J. "What is Adult Education," Handbook 2;, Adult Education ig,the United States. Edited by Mabxflm S. Knowles. Chicago: Adult Education Association, 1960. Bogue, Donald I. The Population 91 the United States. Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1959. Brunner, Edmund de S. and Yang, E. Hsin Poo. Rural America and the Extension Service. New York: Columbia . University Teachers College, Bureau of Publications, 1949. Clark, R. c. and Abraham, R. H. Ed. Administration _i_n_ Extension. Madison: National Agricultural Extension Center ior Advanced Study, University of Wisconsin, 1960. Hallenbeck, Wilbur C. "The Function and Place of Adult Education in American Society," Handbook 9; Adult Education in the United States. Edited by Malcolm S. Knowles. Chicago: Adult Education Association, 1960. Kelsey, L. D. and Hearne, C. C. Cooperative Extension Work. Ithaca, New York: Comstock Publishing Company, 1949. Knowles, Malcolm S. Informal Adult Education.‘ New York: Association Press, 1950. Liveright, A. A. Strategies 91 Leadership i3 Conducting Educational Programs. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1959. Manning, D. W. and Levine, S. Elementary Statistics for JOurnalists. New York: The hacMillan Company, 2nd Printing, 1959. Matthews, J. L. "The Cooperative Extension Service," Hand- book 9; Adult Education in the United States. Ldited by Malcolm S. Knowles. Chicago: Adult Education Association, 1960. 79 McClusky, Howard Y. "Community DevelOpment," Handbook of _A_________dult Education _1_1_1_ the United States. Edited by Malcoln S. Knowles. Chicago: Adult Education Association, 1960. . Moore, John H. "Community Action" Conference Proceedings: 1960 White House anference 22_Children and Xout . Washington: 1960. Rovetch, warren. "Cooperative Extension and the Land-Grant System in University Adult Education," University Adult Education A Guide pg Policy. Renee and William Peterson. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1960. Periodicals Brunsman, H. G. and Shyrock, H. S. "Population Migration-— ' -Who‘s Moving Where?" Appraisal Journal, XXV, January, 1957. » . Carew, JOhn. "The Role of the Extension Specialist in Agriculture," Farm Policy Forum, XI, No. 4, 1958—1959. County Agents Qirectory. 45th Edition. Chicago:' C. L. Mast, Jr., and Associates, 1960. : Hutchison, John E. "A Responsibility and a Challenge," Extension Service Review, XXX, No. 10, October, 1959. Kaufman, Harold F. and Others. "Concerns of Adult Education in Mississippi," Adult E L ’ . . D I. . . I i C A . . U l .‘u l ' — A 7 A P“ I t‘ i. I .. ‘ I : ‘ h . A r l . ‘7. “ A . . O l ' l , . C I u o . . ‘\ ‘h‘ . | . . . 7 A - v r - - i - _ . u - I . _ . ‘ A o ' ' ‘ Y. o ' . . O - v ‘ - 7 - _ -... I o - ' v ‘ I . . - ' ' . n ‘ - .- > ' I - 7 I . . .: . . -7. ‘ in u a . A I - C ’i ' V 7 ‘ ‘ ' .n ' ..‘ V—r“~-_ “ ( e ‘ . H ‘ . .. _ . . _ , . _ _ o " A , O “ . v . . -..-u ‘-_-_' 81 . Extension Activities and Accomplishments: 1959. U. S.'DZ A. Extension Circular No. 531, July 1955. . Public Relations Inventory of the Qoogerative Extension Service. ,U. S. D. A. ”Extension Service, October 1951. - The W W Service Today: A State- ment of Scope and fiesponsibility. U. S. D. A. Extension Service, 1958. U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. 1959 Census‘gg Agriculture - Preliminary. Washington: Bureau of the Census, 1961. Wilkening, Eugene A. The County Agent in Wisconsin: Perceptions of'FEIe Definitions as Viewed 21 Agents. ‘Univers1ty oi Wisconsin Agricultural Experiment Sta- tion Researcn Bulletin 203,1957. Unpublished Material Biever, J. L. "Roles of County Extension Agents as Perceived by County Agricultural Committee Members in Wisconsin," Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Wisconsin, 1957. Cornett, E. M. "A Study of Public Concepts Related to the Role of Cooperative Extension Service," Unpublished M.S. Thesis, Michigan State University, 1958. Miller, Paul A. "COOperative Extension Work in the Indus- trializing Society," Unpublished Manuscript, Michigan State University, 1959. Other Sources Aldrich, Daniel D., Jr. "Implications of Agricultural Adjustment for Land Grant Colleges." Paper read at Southwest Agricultural Adjustment Conference, Tucson, Arizona, October 12,1960. Bergstrom, Jehn W., Program Consultant, FAE-CES Project, Erie County, Pennsylvania, Personal correspondence. Fisher, Jeseph L. "Cities and Resources for the Future." Paper read before the 65th Conference on Government, Phoenix, Arizona, November 14, 1950. Hannah, John A., President, Michigan State University. Personal correspondence. ‘Ios-h- 82 Kline, Allan B. Address at FAE—CES Seminar, Michigan State University, July 13, 1959. Matthews, J. L. Address at Program Development Conference, University of Arizona, October 3, 1959. Miller, Paul A. Address at FAE—CES Seminar, Michigan State University, August 17, 1959. Suggitt, Frank W. "The Broad Problems of Rural Communities." Paper read at the North Central Extension Directors Meeting, Kansas State University, September 20, 1960. Federal Extension Service USDA INSTRUCTIONS FOR UTERVIEWERS Yuma County, Arizona, Pilot Program Benclmmk Survey The main purpose of this survey is to obtain information to establish a benchlz'ark regarding the present status of the people's knowledge, under- standing and attitudes toward certain citizenship activities and public fairs issues. The specific objectives of the benchmark survey are as follows: 1. To determine present status of public affairs education and partici- pation, including: a. Level of awareness of public affairs issues, current or continum. b. Interest in public affairs issues. c. Participation in organisation or action. d. Leadership status and experience. 2. To assess the attitudes toward certain government programs, such as: - Government farm programs - The Extension Service 3. To determine attitudes about rural-urban and farm nonfarm relation- ships. h. To assess awareness of opportunities for participation in and sources of information on public affairs issues. 5. 'To determine extent of participation in educational programs or acti- vities, such as: Extension organization - home demonstration, h-H Club, commodity groups. Knowing about Extension - perception and role. The Sample The information is to be pulley; ted by personal interview with a randomly selected cross-section sample in the urban and rural areas of Yuma County. The sample was drawn from telephone directories and lists of residents covering; substantially all of the permanent residents of the country. Outline of the interviewer's job: 1. Familiarize yourself with these instructions. 2. Become proficient in this use of questionnaire. Eager-29 (2-60) l _ . r _ ‘ ~ ' I . . m J v I ’ - r ' .. . . 7‘- __ _ . .. , . 7 A ,~ .1 I l t . ~ . . a a . . s _ , .-. I ' V. I, U.“ ‘ .. . _ . a . I . \ I . ' -- — J U ‘- - '- ‘ . 7' 74‘ . is l ‘ I» J r . . - . ‘ I ‘ I. ' ‘ I J ‘ , l u ‘ u 4 ,. L \ I ' ‘ l . I , - i - I ‘4 ‘. ‘ V d . 1 . s n 1 J . . 7' I ‘ A‘ ‘ ... I ‘ ‘ . -r ' ‘ . I _ 1 I -- I . ’ ‘ . ' ‘ - . . s ' ‘ ' . . _ | .. ' ' ‘l i J o - v . . e o L ‘ _ A - I ‘ . . M a. ‘ 4 J v \ I ' ' ‘ I y ' . _ . . 1 ¢ . . » .. .. . I v . . r ‘— \. . ‘ ' ' - . ‘ "’ - ._ . i ‘ . , ‘ , _ -' . . . v A O ‘ . . ' I ‘ I - 7 ..L I ‘ - ~ I s K" — 1 '~ 7' ‘ ._I I . . , 1 " ‘ u . s .' ‘ . ~ _ . -- .- ,. ‘ . - I .- .- --‘ ' ‘ ‘ I - h .. I . c .' . , . . ' I. 7 . 7 A I ' r .- ‘ _. c . . - .‘ V- L r“. , . >I' ' . I . "t . . u ’ I ‘ s7 ‘ ' C . . . I ~ , O . O s. - -'-' ’ . .v C 0 _ 3 , . . U " ¢ __ . a: 4- ‘. . a. . - u’ ‘ I‘I .‘ ) .- . .a -‘ b - ‘- .2 . . s‘ ‘ . ~ ‘ . _ r. I . ’A _. A. ' ~ \ . l‘ V - ' s ' ' ‘ _ is. ’ I . I. - ~ .- .*' V . ] \‘l.o *" J - '0 .1 ‘ ' I .. ..1 I ‘ > . . . l l , ' ~ I a- ‘ ‘f . -.- - . ‘ r- 'o- s . s . . " ‘ 4 -‘s . 0.. s -2- 3. Be sure you have all the needed maps, forms, etc., before you go to the field to contact resPondents. h. mare sure that you have located and identified the right person to interview. 5. When you have properly located the residence of “e erson to be interviewed fill out the ego Jropriate spaces at the top of the giestionnaire indicating date and time of call(s ). o. If the person.you seek is not at home on the first call, follow the procedure that was given to you for call'baehs until.you have obtained an interview or until you have made at least three attempts to get the interview. 7. W110n you have completm an interview check'bach over the question~ naire item by its =m to see that (1) you have made an entry in each response item and (2) that your entries are legible and consistent. int-a -;on s and others who can't be intervie JCd: Our goal is to Obtain an interview from every pox son in t1 as sample. This nay call for some ingenuity on your part. If you i'ind no one at home you should inquire from a neighbor as to the time when the person you seek can most likely be found. If tile f’irst call is made at one hour, time the second one for a different hour. If children are at home, learn the time when the parent is likely to be at home. If the man or women is too busy to be interviewed at the time yoii cs 11, make an appoint- mont for a time that will be conJenient. Record the date and hour of each'v sit to the sample address in the spaces provided on the question- ' re. After hating made th as careful attempts to locate a respondent without having found him or her, write "not at home," he date and hour in the last line of the call record and make no f'uioher eii’ort to get a schedule. - Questiirrfiire entries Careful and legible entries are essential. If it best to use a medium or so"t pencil. Every item on the questionnaire requires an entry. If he question calls for a check mark or other entry locate it so that there will'be no question as to which category it was intended for. rm :3 notes on the questionnaire regarding any unusual circumstances that of; set the entries. Also make other comments that may be useful in analyzing the results. You need not be concerned about giving too much information. Try to keep "don't know" and "no answer" entries to a minimum by probing for an estimate when the respondent hesitates to ans nor. Interviewing : Based on experiences in protesting the questionnaire, complete interviews will require an average of about one hour each. - Each interviewer should study the "Instructions for Interviewers." When- ever an interviewing problem arises, aanr. Boone for help. In general, whenever we contact a person to obtain ini‘on: Jation we must create an interest in the stud ey and a willingness to cooperate. This means persuading the respondents of t 1e importance of the study. They must have confidence both in the objectives of the study and in the interviewer as a person. An honest, simple, and friendly approach is the best way to do this. " 3.3;;ested introduction: The intmiuction on the questionnaire should satisfy most persons whom you will contact. Avoid idontiflflng yourself with the local extension office so as not to bias the responses to questions 5 and 6. If there is any hesitancy, it is well to stress the confidential nature of the in cerview. It is sometimes helpful to encourage the prospective respondent by adding: "I'm sure you'll find some of the questions interesting and I know your answers can be of great help to us." Every interviewing situation is different. Each situation is new and challenging. This means the interviewer should adapt his approach to i it the circumstances. Remember that your errand is a friendly and constructive one, and that it can be- and usually is .. as interesting to the respondent as it is to you. Do not try to "educate" the respondent, however. Leave this to the local Ebrtension Service. The vast mjority of peeple are friendly and enjoy talking; about their homes, their families, and themselves. If the inter- viewer is at ease and puts the respondent at ease, the stage is ordinarily set for a good interview. Getting accurate answers: Ash each question as it is worded on the schedule. Sometimes this may not be possible but champs in wording should be kept to a minimum. -- To chair-go the wording of sore questions may also change the meaning conveyed to the respondent and in turn affect the answer. To obtain adequate answers it is sometimes necessary to use probing ques- tions. Either the oriJ inal quest ion can be repeated, a neutral question may be asked, or a reassuring statement made. One of the most com: on .1}. errors in probing is to suggest an answer to the respondent. When he hesitates the interviewer should not suggest an answer to him. Give him or her time to think. One of the best "probes" is to repeat the question. The schedule is divided into several parts dealing with different subjects. It is desirable to make a transition statement between these parts so as to help the respondent to think in terms of the new subject. Such state- ments help to mete the interview'more natural and informal. Closing the intervie : When the interview is finished thank the respondent for his or her co- operation. If more time has been required than you had indicated at the beginning of the interview, analogize and express your bone that it may have proven interesting. - It is innortent to leave a good impression. If the schedule is in any way incomplete, inaccurate, or neonsistent, you may be asked to call a;ain.in.the next day or two in oroer to get sanitionsl information. (There is also the possibility - even likelihooi - that the respondent will "syread the word" bj telephone as soon as you leave.). 533 QUESTIORI‘EAIRB Gene rel In st met :1. on : The portions that appear on the qnestionnaire typed all in capital letters and underlined are instructions to be read to the person who is being interviewed. won as the interviewer and are not to Cosments, suggestions and explanations, where they egpear desirable, are given below opposite tne igpyoprinte question nonbers. la. Is to find out what ieoglo think are some of the things that concern the general public in.Yuoa County. lb. Is to find out the extent to which the respondent thinks the concern is shared by others and the basis for whatever response is given. items that are listed on the deck of 13 cords. Hand the deck, arranged in any order, to the respondent, ask him to look at each card and answer questions (1) and (2). Call the respond- 2. This table is to record the answers of the resoondents to the ent's attention to any that are skipyed in going through the deck, making sure you Obtain two responses for each item be selects. 3. This series of qnestions is intended to find out about any action taken or ottergted by this respondent individually on any of the items he or she mentioned or an; of the is in the dock ‘f cards. 7-11. 13"@ a 21"-29 0 -5. The purpose of the d. part of this question is to find out if the respondent is a member of any group or orgsnization that has as one of its purposes making iiprsvomonts or doing something about any of the things he me n-tionod or that are listed on the cards. It is to find out enouts say groups or organizations concerned with such issues , the respondent's participation in such and his perception of its results. Is to find out if the respondent knows the county extension agent, how he or she became acquainted and the perception of extension work. The subgnrts are to find out if there is identification.vith the University of.Arizonn and to check on role definitions in relation to public problems and issues. ‘Are to find out about i'a:n-city attitudes and attitudes toward government farm programs. - Are to find out the local attitudes and positions on certain items suggested by the county staff. Are to get information.sbout the respondents for analyzing the data. Fedeml Mansion Service Bud;=,et Bureau lo. 100-6903.]. 0. 3. Dept. of Agriculture Approval mph-u 3/15/60 m cm, ARIZONA, m m-m Interview", Miami's lo. sample new no. ___(i) ____(2) ___(3) cm No. sate Time In Card No. l pn . . u - .«~ a Name oi’ person interviewed: a p . ' on Sent: (1) h]; (2) Fem]; Address . .IIYJZ‘RODIIJTIM: I am helping with a. survey that is being and. by the unimr sity of Arizona. The purpose is to obtain information to use in pEmmin;5 an educational program in Yuma County. The answers you give v.17 onfidential and used only to add in with the answers given by other people who are being interviewed in this county; I want to ask you I few questions to find out vial: citizens like laur- self think are important. En. What would you any are two or b. Have you any reason to believe time thing: that people in thnt other peep]: in your vi- your vicinity should be con- cinity are now concerned shout cerned about? (item mentiomdh (1) __ (1) Yes ____(2) lo ___(3) Don't know IF YES, Have you: ____(1) Beard people talking about it? ___(2) Talked with people about 11:? ____(3) Read about it in newspapers or magazines? (1+) Heard or seen it on radio No answer or TN. programs? ____(: ) 01:11- 1:? 3:: 1:1 (. 2') ) _____(1) 1'11 __ (2) so __ (3) Don't know IF 1'33, 11111110111 ____(1) lizard. peogle talking about it? (2) 12.31111 with people about it? ____'. (3) Road about it in neveyspers or magazines? “(11) 121: 3.111 or seen it on radio or TN. progran's? __ (5) 01:11:.» mm m “era--- ___(1)'ch ____ (2) No __ (3) Don't know IF “:3, has you: . . (1) 111-11 111.1112 1111111111; 9.11111 (2) ma :1 With 3111111111 about 11 (3) E11311 about it in was; s. :1": or 2.1-“311....."1135? (14-) :23“ 1.11:":- r seen it on radio or £3.11. ping-1.21s? (5) CL;- 1.1 1'11"" 111 .— vv-mx -» —"'.t ... a. - ~ . Cu. ‘—_ . < . H A ~ --~-» ... v -5 A -_ V .. - q- as- 'ur- ,.. -¢¢ .1 - - — o- -. ...; “pa- -moo~ 'o-OI ”v- .. n A . ~ ' 4 --‘, we “H .. 9‘9 -3- 2. 21‘:be : on have an 1:103 51:31:13 112-Lethe:- one or 123m oi” t cm 1321’.) (‘3‘. :2I‘53 am of concern to 1330310 are: can here. Look over the items-'— on the car-Lia and tell me (1) £1121qu ones in your 0:31.433) are 0:: concern to 130012333 (1:011:11 here, and. (2) hair important do you im- " 7' the selected items are. IT':."‘;‘".::_4::—- ‘2: (EFT-WC "Y“Q." RFC? “F“ C“. ‘12! Its-.3 Is this IF $.28 11:33: 131333138311; IF V“! 12"‘0' if}??? OR Izmmarm 133. 31‘ cun- do you :tigizzfz it is? "‘ ."3'2. 5.3;, 132.52.: corn to 31:31:13 -.:.,......,~. .1115. artillm "3.4.13 T0 IIEICATF 3P1“): JR 12:31:? ) W“: ":8 '19“ '-’" it! 0:331:11: 1.12130?"J taut 1:13-23:- tant "5133-3 1 (1) 1;) (3) ;_ 2 .11) (2: +13) 3. (1) (2) (3) h (1) 21 13) s (1) (2) (32 ;; §. (11 (2) (3) 11) £31 - 13) ca r4 (1) (3 .3 (3) 9 .11) (2) (3) 1: (1) (a) ‘13) .. g;_ (1) C3) 3) 3; .13) (2)__ _£3) :3 (1) 1(2) (3 13: (l) (1’) (3) 15 .(1) (2 (3) 13 (1) (2) (3 1: (13 122 (3) (1) (2) (3) 4- 3. maywulnimmm, ”mama, trytodomthingobmt 8117-; of the things you mentioned or the items listed on this card! ____(1) Yes, a an individual ____(3) Bo PILL M A; B AND C ___(2) Yes, with others __(h) mn't lumber .W If ye : a. what m (are) the b. when: cation m e. um named Jonah)? taken? trujour efforts? m ‘ 7 " ’11.): ..m (2) (2) (2) (3) “(3) (3) No mm:- ...- o .- .A -4 d . -5- IF WE]? TO DO STTII‘VG FIE-1‘11 011E333: (1) What was (were) the nomads) of the group(s) or organizations: (a) ' .1 -3 _,. . - 2 p ounswlowsle) THROUGH (6) IN' (a) (b) (c) APPROPRIATE COLUMNS ON'RIGRT. (2) How any other persons were in- volved. (write in the number) (3) About how my members were in the total group? (write in number) : (1*) What year was this? (write 1n .. year) (5) About hov many times 0. year did (does) it usually meet? (write in number) (5) How long were you (lave you been) a member. (write in full years) How did you happen to become a member? “.5. InfifiTIFY RESPONSES FOR fiIFFERENT GROUPS: (3) (b) (c) - ... .v .- -_ . ...... .... .6- 1‘. that would you say is the (are the) most important accomplislmxenth) of the group“) to date? (1) (2) Don't how 13. Please name all of the organizations in which you now hold a. membership or office regardless of their purpose. Name mm comm 3333(8) OR Home CHECK 1:31.014 n“ OFFICER O b c - ._ d _ e _ LEE BACK OF PAGE II" MORE SPACE IS NEEDED 5. How, I went to find out if you are acquainted with certain local persona. Do you know the county agents or home agents in this county? ______(1) Yes _____(2) No _____(3) Uncertain IF YRS: a. Do you reamzber any of their names? (1) Romeo (2) Cannot give names ‘0. How did you happen to becazle acquainted with him (her)? (1) r-.. was.” -4.. ‘Hf.u.- .-,_ . ~- «-3 o . « .4 v i we 3 - .‘ ' -- ~o r- 'v 0. f. g. -7- Eow'would you describe what the county scent (home agent) does? (1) Can you tell me how'this'wor“ is financed? (1) Yes (2) No (3) Not sure IF YES 03 NOT stun, how is it financed? (II-ow do you think it is iinancedr) (l) As you understand it, what connection, if any, exists between the county agent's (hone agent's) office and the University of Arizona in Tucson?_ (1) (2) Don't know Fron.what you knOW'about the people in this county, how do you think they would feel about the county agents (homo agents) working with people on problems and issues such as those listed on the cards I showed you a few minutes ago? Do you think they: (1) Would approve, or (2) WOuld disapprove? why do you say that? (l) (2) No Opinion 'h .* , . I V v -..r ,. -‘ ..au .8- 6. I have here a card with a list of activities that the Extension workers carm' on. I mean the diflerent ways the agents work with families. I will go through the list and you can Just answer 1:3 or NO to each. During; the past year: (a) (1“) Have you (c) Extension worker? (<2) (1‘) (s) (h) (i) (J) (1:) Have you visited the Agricultural Exten- sion office in Yum-n? Have any of the agents visited your farm or home? during the past year: Received a letter from an E‘s-:tension worker? Had a telephOne conversation with an \ Received an Extension bulletin? Road Extension articles in newspapers? Seen an exhibit of 1|...H Club or home economics club work? Soon any h-n Club member's project? Attended any Extension meeting, (field days, tours, achieve-nont days, folk school, #41 Club meeting, meeting at result demon- stration, etc.)? Belonoed to a home economics group? Served as an Extension leader? (1) in 1M! Club work? (2) As group or project loader in home demonstration work, as home demon- stration club officer, or as com- mittee member? Had no contact of any kind with county :‘I'tension Service. (0mm om ATISltBR FOR EACH own-terms) ______(1) Yes ______(1) Yes _____(1) Yes _____(l) Yes ”(1) Yes “(1) Yes __;__(61) Yes _____(1) Yes ___(1) Yes _____(1) Yes ____(1) Yes ____(1) Yes ______( 1) Yes ____(2) No _____(2) No ____(2) Ho ____(2) No (2) No ”(2) No _____(2) No ____(2) No ____(2) No __’__(2) No _____(2) No _____(2) No ______(2) No 7. now do you think the city men feels about the farmer? (l) (2) ho Opinion 8. How'do you think the farmer'feels about the city man? (1) ___(2) Ho opinion 9. How do you think the city men feels about the government paying farmers not to plant certain crogs and supporting the prices of some crops? (1) 10. In general how do you feel about the amount of help farmers are receiving from the government? Would you say they are receiving too much, about the right amount, or too little? (1) too much (2) about the right amount (3) too little (h) no opinion IF "TOO MUCH" OR "T00 LETTLE"; why do you say that? (1) .. a -- o ,g‘ u.-.. . ‘\- .-- -- . - v - l\ x I 1 in . 0' sun, --- - .1 - . .10. 11. Do you have in mind any other comments or ideas about farm-city relation- ships that you would like to mention? (1) Yes (2) No IF YES: What do you have in mind? 12. New, I Visit to ask, you a few questions to get your ideas about labor unions . s. (‘9 o What do you think is the chief argument in FAVOR OF LABOR unions? 13.3 do you think is the chief argument AGAIl‘IST labor unions? In general, do you approve or disapprove of labor unions? (1) Approve (2) Disagxprove (3) No opinion o u do you feel about unions for these different {groups of l. O 8 p #9169 - would you favor or carprove unions for: (1) Public school teachers? (1) Favor (2) Oppose ( 3) Don't know (2) Policemen? (l) Favor (2) (mouse (3) Don't know (3)Firer.1en? (l) Favor (2) 013mm (3) Don't know (1+) Pro baseball plaster (1) Fewer (2) Oppose ( 3) Don't know What is the picture in your mind of a typienl lob-3r leader? What kind of person is he , how would you describe 112122? -- -. -— rn- ‘ .- u.~uva A- O. -U—at .-' -i --.—-7 ¢ a . I n o. -.. ---.4_ l l . l v 3 A . , _ , a Q o'.‘ s . | ' 4 up:’ ‘2) . o. - . .. _ . o 4. , -— . . ... ‘“-- .. a z . _ 1 - -.. --—¢ dh~ouh —d—-J—D~ .. A o ‘.:-__ -H ..-w‘. i. . k A J —.1-. . ~ - .u a .. . -1 3.."— .7. o o ‘ ‘ , ...-x . . .- ¢ c . u I . . \ . , ' ... . ‘ . I . h. , p-« 3 9 l . I v v i . i . .u -..-._._.H-.—_. ...._._. ‘ . _, .-'~‘-“moy.n..‘ s.» ‘ ..n-urw..- o cur. no u. ——10 .11.. 1'. Wont about the head of a big corporation - what kind of person is be, how would you describe him? M 13. If you had I. son interested in going into politics, how would you feel about it? Would you approve or disapprove? (1) Approve (2) Disapprove (3) Don't know Why do 1; u "y that? (l) 11;. Compared with the general population, how would you describe pe0ple in politics or political jobs? would you say; They usually are: (READ Pix-33mm RESPONSES, 0:12ch 1 IN EACH comm) ______(1) More honest, - 4(1) More 59013, ____(2) About as honest, or ____(2) About as able, or ____(3) L933 1101195“!- ' ___(3) been able. 15. If you had a considerable amount of extra money what do you think you would do with it? Why wmfld you do this? . , ‘ . I , .- - - , . V . u . .... ‘ > r . - - . , . - . . - . - v . - -o A . - - - - - , .. c‘ « ‘ - y- - , . . - , . x . _ - - .. .,- - xv _. ...... .‘_ , . -. -- . . y . ...... A - - - - . t . - , - i .. .. ...“..A . .-.. . _ . i -r - t - - . . .. . . . ,. ‘ . 0 1 § ' 3 . - I‘ x ‘ . I - I - r v ,_ .. . .m. , . l . . , , . ‘ ... - .- -‘ . ... .. V .. .A.-----. - ..-- r , - . , . .. c ‘ ,_ , V.- . -.- . .- . ~v “pa, ...». v ‘n.. -. - - i ‘ . ,. - - . . - . .7 . ...V , .. v~ - 0 ~ 0 .. - ‘- . .-o‘. , 4.. ...,— .. p.7-uv -. ‘ - ‘ - , , —«- A. r - A on - - - w v . I § . ‘ . ~ A ', I . . . - — - - . . 0-4 . -. -- . v _ _ - i . ‘ A I ‘ ‘ . \ h» b v .. I7 ‘ é . _, . - u . . - ... .. -. -. -. -» - . A s .- l.-. . ‘ . _ _. . .—,.p- A . ,_, -- - A 0 -- - ’ - ' r-«F'A ~ - A ’ . ‘ — . - - 4 » — ‘“"--+‘O‘h -~—» ..1-4 ‘_-‘. ‘ ... ... . . .- .. - .. . . u . ¢ . u. ‘ u . _ - ... g _ -:b-.--.- -n -- 4.x. - ...--. -. - . - , .— - .. ,A--- ~ ‘ ._ 4 o 'y - 0—" a. V- on v- . —-’.v- unv- , - .. ....-. .- . - --- ‘ .__- u.‘ ‘ . . _ - v . H - . . r. , -- . w—n- . d n v '- u-k- —r--' .-- ’ "fi' ~| ' - o »- ‘- - a. a . . . _ - — _ - .1 or - o.-.- A-.. o.»—‘-'s— - , -- -m- 16. We would like to get awe of your ideas about the public schools. 3. O. In your opinion what are some of the more important things children are taught in the local schools. F5- ' '.' '.'°.' 'CTI9'.‘_'2 .2- D0 HAT PHIL!) T'm PJL...»IBIE AV. qfffm‘S-D TO THE RESP TDm'r IlJ-‘E:T 1...: l; (IA..\L51\'uY :10 JJL‘L: A1...).L"\. §~E :JSfl AiD CiEC< Ell: rflil‘s.‘ 11.3.Tfi its-ST ACLU. ’1..:.LY RLJ: 1353']? TILE “pd-LS kDQTDAD. War. Iii 0511?. I4"): I-:J"S muff ...)...ufl $-31]. Alta 331:." n 2"":ij- 1"2. “LL31: T'TGSE 1.1.1--.. ____( l) Engli sh ______(6) cove Hmont _____(2) Reading ' _;___(7) Citizenship ______(3) Mathematics _;____(6) Shop “(11) Winges ”(9) Auto mechanics (5) Physical education (1) Other um III (1.1) No opinion How many children, if any, do you have in: elementary school? Hum-her junior high echOOI? Hunter high school? Ember No children in family (rm-sex How do oyou feel about t1.eo.zo.11fications of the teachers in the public schools? Do you feel that the y are READ RESPOIIE‘EJ .ECK 05E: ___"_(1) Well Qualified? (2) Fairly well qualified? ____(3) Poorly qualified? (1+) No opi1.:5. .11 Win, do you say that? (1) -....o. .—._ -. u- ’— _ . v . u ' . u D a . . . . .. .. ,. - . . 1 ‘.1..« l ' > ’ C . ’L ‘ ’ ’I . ‘a ’ - I o - 0 . .4 . , ,‘ . . o L . I . 4 . ‘ I _. - _ . . L. .~ - -. . - . _ . - - .. . ~ - \ "-v n , . . . 4 C . . . . . .. . .. ..p. . 4 ; . . v » _ ‘ .' l .- . . J . . r- v ‘ | c . - _ _ . - . s. . . .. . . - - .. d . . ‘1. . L. . . . > . k ‘1 vH.v -——.‘-¢>..-.. - . .-. . -- ._ -....-.—...-.A-.......~.-. . , - ---. . -..-.- _.,y . .- ...—... , -.....—-_. ... ' ...—... .. .m -13- d. Regarding the mnount talk-flat in the local schools total: is your opinion of the following? (1) English, reading, etc? ____(1) Too much ___(2) About right ___(3) Too little ____(h) No opinion wa do you say that? (l) (2) Government, citizenship, etc? ____(1) Too much ”(2) About right ____(3) Too little ____(h) No Opinion 1 t£113; do you say tnis? (l) (3) clence, mthemtlce, etc.? ____(1) Too much ____(2) About fight ___(3) Too little ____(h) No opinion Wily do you say that? (l) e. Are you in favor of- or against the PFEHQfiEESQQ-flfimnninu.01}__3__ 12- 310111311 basis? . _____(1) Infavor ol" ____(2) Against ____(3) Ho opinion 900 No onswer ' Wig; do you feel that my? (1) w—v—y 17. In your Opinion, what 13 the main obstacle to sza County's future growth and development? (1) i o .- ; ¢ 7., l r I -- 'Vflo‘ ‘~ elk- 13. It is the policy that public utilities in this State aim; charge for their services at a rate that will return a minim-um of 555 on the investment. Would you say that this is: ___(1) Fair to all concerned. ___(2) Unftir to the consumer ____( 3) unfair to the utility ___(h) Have no opinion Why do you say this? (1) Q -—y—- A few issues are listed below on winch mmr peeple in 11min County take one side or the other. Please tell me what your position is on each of the following: 19. I-EJJEQL‘II‘ vs. council type of city government. ____(1) Favor muse: type _____(2) No differ-once 4(3) Favor council type ___(h) No opinion mxy do you take this position? (1) 20. llnlicipal vs. private mmorohip of water system. (1) Favor municipal ownership (2) Favor private ownership (3) No difference (h) No opinion Why do you hold this VieV‘? (l) H.... - . ‘ —..— I... ... v - .. . A . - »-. --' o I n . ‘ -. v . . .-. .p . *un“ , .. . a ’u . I' ‘ I ' . I. _ _ . I I - / ‘ . L . ‘ { I 7 o ' ‘0- ‘ . -.v‘) . '- " l -... .. ..w- .--. . _ - - - --~.‘,. --‘ . cull... r as C(J - . .0 A - --v --- --.-0' ‘ — - ... u . A‘- ., .. — -.—. or... ‘.o’ r I .~ - l, v .4 I I' Q .a- . . , . o . . .... - J . . 7 o . " . \ ( K a , « n u -‘ '— , ‘ . u I) _ u . ‘ ' ' ‘ A 1 _~ >nw“-.. .‘-__ » __‘, . , A - - mu.- ,‘a~. - - w . ... _--.-. “tn—..iwfluosnv .— ‘ ..A - -l ...- -m r.- o -—a. - - . ...; >—..., nu- s L I ‘ > ' v ~ - Q . a o \ g - ‘ ... -- I. ' ‘ a “ ' _ . I - \ e o , . . A ‘. ‘ . ~ _ - u- 5.- C‘ — ...-... .0. 1 V' I -, , .- o ‘af 1». ...- . .r ...‘g r -. _. ., ¢.J._..¢ -.- . .. . , - , a. - , ~¢.:. .- o‘g — - , . . .— 21. 22. -15- How do you feel about the suggestion of placing all the Arizona State colleges and universities undo-r one acbninistrativo person? (1) Favor the idea (2) Am against the idea (3) I30 opinion Why do you feel this wag"? (l) W Hove you heard am'thing about the question of Yarn. County ' 3 rights to Colorado River water? ______(1) Yes ______(2) No _____(3) Don't remember IF YES, what are the issues? _;____( l) Arizona-California. suit ______(2) Yuma County-Central Arizonn dispute ......(3) Other mm m .. '0 H-v .M ..- o l 0 -' o-r— .. _. . r 7r t o , I . ' . u . l . . . v . . ; I t J! n — o.— . F.. .. a- v , ..-v~.- ' .n - 23. Look over the list of topics on this card and tell me if you think you would be interested in attending; a discussion series or in taking n course on any of the following topics, if available. HARD RESPOIiDEM CARD A311) CHECK OR “RITE IN THE TOPICS WHICH INTEREST Illa-J DER) . l. ____r.£3thods of Logical Thought (ethics) 2. “Americcn soclal History 3. ____Investment Principles It. ____Economic History 5. ____A.Ih2r1cm Foreign Policy 6. ____Prsctical Politics and Civic Affsirs 7. “American Political thought I . o. I “Politicsl Science 9. ”6001053; 10. “Philosophy of Human nature 11. “Psychological basis of Hum Behavior 12. ___Dove10pclent of Human Culture 1 l3. "Biolow 15%». “Drawing and sketcbm 13. ”Painting 16. ____Bculpture 1.7. ”History of the American West 18. Jviodern dram 19. ”Family financiIl record keeping 20.“ “Citizenship and Political Behavior 21. “Comtionnl Spanish 22. .flleadership 23. “Other WRITE IN 214-. ____I§ot interested in any series or course. 21+. 25. -17.. Which of the following statesmen s best describes where the respondent lives? (CI-Em 01$) _____ (1), m a farm (or ranch) __ (2) In the country but not on a femn(or ranch) __ (3) In a. town or village with less than 2, 500 people _____ (it) In a town or city with 2,500 to 10,000 people __ (5) In a suburban area. (not in city limits) of Yuma __ (s) In Yuma Met nm.1ber of persons in each of the following age groups are living in your home now, including; yourself, your spouse, relatives, children, hired (WRISTE DJ 0 IN 0320i?“ WEB-31$ THEE? APE 2301313 All!) CIRCLE THE help, etc.? .AGE GEOUP IN WHICH RESPONBERT BILONGS) timber Ember __ Under 5 years _____ 25-29 years __ 5-5 years __ 30-39 years lO-llt. years 110-1}? years 15-19 years __ 50-59 years 20-23; years 60 years and over Which of the following; is nearest your net annual income after farm or business expenses are deducted? (CE-ECK 03-13) ,___; (1) Less than $1.000 __ (6) $5.030 ~ 6,939 __ (2) $1.000 - 1.199 __ (7) 7,000 - 9,399 __ (3) 1,930 - 2,199 __ (a) 10,000 and over __ (1,) 2:500 " 3:199 __ (9) Refilsed __ (5) 3.500 - M99:- __ What was the highest gmfie you completed in school? __ (1) lat - 14th grade __ (6) h years 1114; school __ (2) 5th . 6th grade ____ (7) 1 - 3 years coMge __ (3) 7th grade __ (8) 1+ years or more of college (2*) 83111 grade __ (9) No answer _ (5) 1 - 3 years high school I1 1.." 28. -13.. Are you employed? (1) Yes (2) Ho (3) Retired (M) No answer I!” 2333-3, what is your occupation? Kind of "business: Kind of Work: Is your euployment: (1) Full-tine (2) Pelt-time (less than 35 hours per week) flew long; have you lived at this address? Years How 1011;; gave you lived in Yuma County? Years or Native 13:” NO? E'IATIVE: Wile-re (1.1.1 you live before coming to Yuma County? Tel-m State T ‘3'. 1“. .11" 9571 i i655 ‘M WN-fifiriQBS ‘ ‘ -w-7:""mPC ULH‘N‘ - U ta‘)“ 2'... ..... »r‘ ‘ ._:"“ A; ~‘-. HQ. +————fi6~- Wk "‘lllflllllllifllflfilT