THE ROLE Of 'B‘HE COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SERVICE , kN URBAN AND URBANIZWG AREAS: ‘ ‘AN ANALYSIS OF EXTENSION WORKERS’ OPSLNIONS _ Thesis {a the Degtee of M. S. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERS’TY Kaye Francis Bartlett 1964 ummmmmmmmmmmwwwwm 3 1293 10106 5757 LIBRARY Michigan State University ABSTRACT THE ROLE OF THE COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SERVICE IN URBAN AND URBANIZING AREAS: AN ANALYSIS OF EXTENSION WORKERS’ OPINIONS by Kaye Francis Bartlett This exploratory study is designed to gather information that reflects the views of Cooperative Extension Service personnel concerning the role and responsibilities in urban and urbanizing areas. Change is the one characteristic which must be included in any de- scription of American society. The COOperative Extension Service is an example of an organization which has helped many changes to occur in the United States and has changed itself. It has taken the resources of the Land—Grant University's College of Agriculture to the farthest corners of the state and helped the rural resident apply the most recent research findings to his problems. Other segments of the population are now vo- calizing their desires for similar services and other educational organiza— tions are examining the Cooperative Extension Service for guidance in providing these and similar services. It appears that the Cooperative Extension Service may be at a cross- roads. If it is to remain an educational organization with the mission to help peOple, it should read the signs of the times and plot its course ac- cordingly. In its favor is its past ability to change to serve the changing needs of the changing rural area. The current rapid changes in political, Kaye Francis Bartlett economic, social,and technical forces of rural, suburban and urban areas bring into focus new and different informational and educational wants and needs. The data for this study were gathered through a mailed opinionnaire, designed specifically for this study, and submitted to 150 county Coopera— tive Extension Service workers representing urban and urbanizing areas in the fifty states. The sample counties were selected on the basis of the greatest total population and the largest percentage of increase in total population in the past decade. An adaptation of the opinionnaire was also submitted to the State Cooperative Extension Service Director of each state. Eighty-four percent of the county workers and ninety percent of the State Directors in the sample returned completed opinionnaires. The respondents were asked specific questions concerning the present and future roles and responsibilities, and sources of support of the Coop- erative Extension Service in these urban areas. The responses to these questions were incorporated on Hollerith (IBM) cards and processed on the CDC 3600 Computer at Michigan State University to determine the chi- square tests of significance for the relationship between personal back- ground and locational factors, and the respondent's answers to the specific questions. The following conclusions were formulated on the basis of the evidence obtained through the data analyses. 1. Contrary to popular beliefs, evidence gained in the study indicates Kaye Francis Bartlett that, as a group, the county worker respondents who received their bach- elor's degrees in the period from 1920 to 1940 were more urban oriented in their responses than those who received their bachelor's degrees more recently. 2. While the role of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban and urbanizing areas is not sharply defined by the respondents there is a trend toward more educational programs and projects directed to urban people. 3. While both county worker and State Director respondents agree that workers should spend a substantial proportion of their time working with urban people, the county workers tend to say a larger proportion than State Directors. 4. Generally, the county worker and State Director respondents tend to agree in their views of the total Cooperative Extension Service and its responsibilities in urban and urbanizing areas. 5. The five major program areas of the Cooperative Extension Service ranked by all respondents in order of the number of urban oriented programs and projects are: extension home economics; 4—H and other youth exten— sion work; community and public affairs; marketing and utilization of agri- cultural products; agricultural production, management and natural resource development. The conclusions demand an objective appraisal of the Cooperative Extension Service and its role in serving the society of today. First, it must be recognized that there is a clientele in urban and Kaye Francis Bartlett urbanizing areas vocalizing requests for the type of educational assistance which the Cooperative Extension Service has so capably provided in rural areas. Second, it must be recognized that there is an ever-increasing interrelationship and interdependency of all segments of the society, and there is a need for an educational institution such as the Cooperative Ex— tension Service to inform, interpret, and assist in helping peOple in their decision-making as individuals and groups. These general implications are followed by more specific implications. 1. The current enabling legislation for the Cooperative Extension Service is subjeCL to a wide range of interpretations. It would appear that this legislation at the three levels of government should be reviewed and revised if necessary to assure that the legislative intent is articulated in accord with the needs of society and the Land-Grant University philosophy of education for all. 2. Programs of the COOperative Extension Service in urban areas need to be morethan rural programs adapted to the urban environment. There is need for evaluation of what has been done in the past and what can be done in the future. Underlying this is the need for personnel and resources to operate effective urban programs. 3. The personnel of the Cooperative Extension Service selected to serve in urban areas should be employed on the basis of their knowledge of and willingness to work with urban people and problems. The results of this study show that this has not been achieved in the highest degree. THE ROLE OF THE COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SERVICE IN URBAN AND URBANIZING AREAS: AN ANALYSIS OF EXTENSION WORKERS‘ OPINIONS By Kaye Francis Bartlett A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Department of Resource Development 1964 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Many people have provided encouragement and assistance in the de- velopment, progress, and completion of this study. To all who helped, named and unnamed, I extend my deepest gratitude. Special acknowledgment is extended to Dr. William I. Kimball, thesis adviser and committee chairman, for his guidance in pursuing this study. Appreciation for their assistance and suggestions is extended to Drs. Raleigh Barlowe, Mason E. Miller, and Milton H. Steinmueller, members of the study committee. The cooperation received from the Cooperative Extension Service per- sonnel who shared their already busy schedules in completing the opinion- naires is also appreciated. The patience, understanding, and inspiration provided by my wife , Nancy, helped immeasurably. Kaye Francis Bartlett ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ........................ LIST OF TABLES ........................... LIST OF APPENDICES ........................ Chapter I. II. III. IV. BASES FOR STUDY ..................... Introduction ...................... Statement of the Problem ................ Purpose of the Study .................. The Basic Design for this Study ............ The Hypotheses .................... BACKGROUND CONSIDERATIONS ............. The Land- Grant College ................ The Land- Grant University and the Cooperative Extension Service ............ The Cooperative Extension Service ........... The Cooperative Extension Service, Today ....... The Cooperative Extension Service in Urban Areas. . METHODOLOGY EMPLOYED IN COLLECTING DATA . . . Scope of the Study ................... Information Gathered .................. The Opinionnaire .................... Procedure for Gathering Information .......... Selection of the Sample ................ ANALYSES OF THE RESPONSES ............... Opinionnaires Sent and Returned ............ County Cooperative Extension Service Workers' Opinionnaire Responses .......... iii Page ii wt—‘QOCDl—J I—‘f—J I9 22 26 32 4O 43 43 44 45 45 46 49 50 S9 Chapter Pa ge State Cooperative Extension Service Directors' Opinionnaire Responses .......... 80 Summary of Information Gathered ............ 95 V. ANALYSES OF DATA .................... 101 Data Analyses ..................... 102 Summary of Findings .................. 128 Testing of Hypotheses ................. 131 VI. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, LIMITATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......... 136 Summary ........................ 136 Conclusions ...................... 138 Implications ...................... 139 Limitations ....................... 141 Recommendations .................... l4 3 BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................ 146 APPENDICES ............................. 15 3 iv Table 10. LIST OF TABLES Range and Average Percentage of Funds Available to the State Cooperative Extension Service from each Source for the Fiscal Year ending June 30, 1963 . Locational Characteristics of the Counties Represented and the Number of County Cooperative Extension Service Worker Respondents Representing These Counties.... ........ ....... Locational Characteristics of the States Represented and the Number of State Cooperative Extension Service Directors Respondents Representing The se State 8 ...................... County Cooperative Extension Service Worker Positions and Percentages of the County Positions Represented in the Sample. . . . . . . ...... . ........ Major Subject Matter Interests of Respondents as they Relate to Professional Improvement ........ County Cooperative Extension Service Workers' Cooperative Extension Service Total Tenure and Tenure in County Now Serving . . . .......... The Number and Percentages of County Cooperative Extension Service Worker Respondents who Received Bachelor's and/or Master's Degrees from1920t01963 ......... Major Fields of Study as They Relate to the Formal Educational Experiences of the Respondents ...... Summary of Responses to Question 1: In Your Opinion What is the Current Role of the Cooperative Extension Service in Urban and Urbanizing Areas ? Summary of Responses to Question 2: In Your Opinion Should Extension Educational Assistance to Urban People be? . . . . . ............. V Page 24 52 53 54 55 55 56 57 6O 64 Table 11. 12. l3. I4. 15. 16. 17. 18. £19. 20. Summary of Responses to Question 3: What Proportion of Time Do You Think Extension Workers Should Spend Working with Urban Residents of Your County? ............... Summary of Responses to Question 4A: From What Sources Do You Think Extension Will Receive its Financial Support in the Future ? ............ Summary of Responses to Question 4B: From What Source Do You Think Extension Will Receive its Support Other than Financial? ............. Summary of Responses to Question 5: What Kinds of Assistance Do You Feel the Total Extension Program Should Provide for Urban People in Each of the Following Areas ? ................ Summary of Responses to Question 6: What Personal Experiences Have You Had in Urban Extension Work? . Summary of Responses to Question 7: To What Extent Has Urban Extension Work Been Undertaken in the Following Areas in Your County? ........ Summary of Responses to Question 8: In Your Opinion How Effective Have Urban Extension Programs Been in Your County? ............ Summary of Responses to Question 1: In Your Opinion What is the Current Role of the Cooperative Extension Service in Urban and Urbanizing Area 8 ? ................... Summary of Responses to Question 2: In Your Opinion Should Extension Educational Assistance to Urban People be: .................. Summary of Responses to Question 3: What Proportion of Time Do You Think Extension ‘Workers Should Spend Working with Urban Residents of Your State ? ................ vi Page 64 66 67 68 75 78 79 8O 83 83 Table 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. Summary of Responses to Question 4A: From What Sources Do You Think Extension Will Receive its Financial Support in the Future? ........... Summary of Responses to Question 4B: From What Sources Do You Think Extension Will Receive its Support Other Than Financial? ............ Summary of Responses to Question 5: What Kinds of Assistance Do You Feel the Total Extension Program Should Provide for Urban People in Each of the Following Areas ? ............... Summary of Responses to Question 6: Are Urban Areas in Your State now Participating in Extension Sponsored Activities ? ........... Summary of Responses to Question 7: To What Extent has Urban Extension Work Been Under- taken in the Following Areas in Your State ? ..... Summary of Responses to Question 8: In Your Opinion How Effective Have Urban Extension Programs Been in Your State? ............ Opinions of County Cooperative Extension Service ‘Workers Concerning the Current Role of the Cooperative Extension Service by the Period of Time in Which the Respondents Attained their Bachelor' 5 Degree .................. Opinions of County Cooperative Extension Service Workers Concerning the Proportion of Time that Should Be Spent Working with Urban Residents by Total Population. . .......... . ..... Opinions of County Cooperative Extension Service ~Workers Concerning the Proportion of Time that Should be Spent Working with Urban Residents by Population per Square Mile .............. Opinions of County Cooperative Extension Service ‘Workers Concerning the Proportion of Time that Should be Spent Working with Urban Residents by the Percentage of Urban Population ......... vii Page 85 86 87 93 94 96 104 106 108 109 Table Pa ge 31. Opinions of County Cooperative Extension Service Workers and State Cooperative Extension Service Directors by the Proportion of Time that Should be Spent Working with Urban Residents .......... 111 32. Opinions of County Cooperative Extension Service Workers and State Cooperative Extension Service Directors by the Kind of Assistance the Total Extension Program Should Provide for Urban People in the Area of Community and Public Affairs . . 112 33. Opinions of County Cooperative Extension Service Workers Concerning the Kinds of Assistance the Total Extension Program Should Provide for Urban People in the Area of Extension Home Economics by the Period of Time in Which the Respondents Attained their Bachelor's Degree ............ 114 34. Opinions of County Cooperative Extension Service Workers Concerning the Kinds of Assistance the Total Extension Program Should Provide for Urban People in the Area of Marketing and Utilization of Agricultural Products by the Population per SQuare Mile ...................... 116 35. Opinions of County Cooperative Extension Service Workers Concerning the Kinds of Assistance the Total Extension Program Should Provide for Urban People in the Area of Marketing and Utilization of Agricultural Products by the Percentage of Population Increase from 1950 to 1960 ......... 118 36. Opinion of County Cooperative Extension Service Workers Concerning the Effectiveness of Urban Extension Programs in Agricultural Production, Management, and Natural Resource Development by Total Population of Counties . . . . . ....... 120 37. Opinions of County Cooperative Extension Service Workers Concerning the Effectiveness of Urban Extension Programs in Agricultural Production, Management, and Natural Resource Development by Percent Rural-Farm Population of Counties ..... 121 viii Table 38. 39. 40. 41. Opinions of County Cooperative Extension Service Workers Concerning the Effectiveness of Urban Extension Programs in Agricultural Production, Management and Natural Resource Development by Percentage of Population Increase from 1950 tol960. . . . . ................... Opinions of State Cooperative Extension Service Directors Concerning the Effectiveness of Urban Extension Programs in Agricultural Production, Management and Natural Resource Development by Total Population of the State ........... Opinions of County COOperative Extension Service Workers Concerning the Effectiveness of Urban Extension Programs in Community and Public Affairs by the Population per Square Mile of the Counties . . ...... . Opinions of State Cooperative Extension Service Directors Concerning the Effectiveness of Urban Extension Programs in Community and Public Affairs by the Total Population of the States ..... ix Page 122 123 126 127 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix Page A. Census Data for Sample Counties ............. 154 B. Total Number of County Extension Workers in Sample, Counties . .................. 156 C. Correspondence and Opinionnaire: County Workers . . . 159 D. Correspondence and Opinionnaire: State Directors . . . . 168 E. Opinionnaire Response Coding System .......... 176 CHAPTER I BASES FOR STUDY Introduction The Cooperative Extension Service is one of many informational and educational services based on the needs of the people and is provided for through federal government leadership. The federal government made its first contribution toward the support of education shortly after the Consti-w tution of the United States was ratified by the original thirteen states. The Congress passed the Ordinance of 1787 which included provisions for the establishment of the public school system. One section of land in each surveyed township was dedicated to the state government for the support of a public school system. The funds from the sale of these lands were placed in trust with the interest from these funds providing a perpetw ual source of support for the public schools of each state. 1 By mid-nineteenth century, the federal government expanded its supe Port of education toward including higher education for all people who desired it through the granting of public lands to the states for the estab-u- lishment of "agriculture and mechanic arts" colleges by passing the Morrill Act in 1862. 2 1United States Department of Agriculture, Land, the 1958 Yearbook of 139110u1ture (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1958). PD. 9‘40. 2 United States Congress, Act of 1862 Donating lands for Colleges of 5%2112111'6 and Mechanic Arts (12 Stat. 503). Commonly referred to as the Morrill Act. 1 These new colleges formed an innovation in education which was the dream of many people. C. R. Elder describes this dream in the following statement. The people who surged westward a century ago dreamed of a new kind of education. They wanted colleges that would meet the practical needs of all citizens more directly than did the institutions that stressed classical studies and training for a few learned professions. They wanted "people's colleges" that their sons and daughters could attend at min- imum cost and that would put emphasis on research and in- struction that might increase agricultural production, improve the conditions of rural life, and support the young Nation's growing industry. 3 These "agriculture and mechanic arts" or "people's" colleges have become known as Land-Grant Universities. From their meager beginnings a century ago these Land- Grant Universities have been growing and changing continuously. However, the unique feature of the land-Grant University which distinguishes it from other institutions of higher learning remains today. That unique feature being practical education for the in- dustrial and agricultural classes. In addition to this , two educational innovations have been created as units of the Land—Grant University. The first of these units to be created was the Agricultural Experiment Station. 4 Its purpose is to expand the base of scientific knowledge through applied research. The second unit, the Cooperative Extension ‘ 3United States Department of Agriculture, After a Hundred Years: the 1962 Yearbook of Agriculture (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1962), p. 13. 4United States Congress, An act to establish Agricultural Experiment wons in connection with colleges established in the several States .and‘er the provision of an act approvedjuly second, eighteen hundred and Si\J'Cty¥two, and of the acts supplementary thereto (24 Stat. 440). Com- molily referred to as the Hatch Act of 1887. Service was created in 1914.5 Its purpose is to disseminate information and extend knowledge to the people of the state who are not students regularly enrolled in academic course work. Both of these units of the Land-Grant University Operate in close cooperation with the United States Department of Agriculture. The responsibilities of the United States Department of Agriculture include education, research and service of a general nature throughout the nation. It further acts as a coordinating body for the vari us state Agricultural Experiment Stations and Cooperative Extension Services by assisting in the exchange of information on education, research and services between the various states. Basic to these responsibilities is the Department of Agriculture's mandate by Congress to administer the federally appropriated funds for the Agricultural Experiment Stations and the Cooperative Extension Services. While this discussion of the Land-Grant University, Agricultural Experiment Station, Cooperative Extension Service and United States Department of Agriculture has been brief it was intended only to point out the existing relationships between these institutions. This discus- sion will continue in greater depth in subsequent sections of this chapter and Chapter II as this study focuses on the Cooperative Extension Service. It is important to note here that each of these institutions: the Land- Gl‘ant University, Agricultural Experiment Station, Cooperative Extension 5 United States Congress, Act of 1914 providing for cooperative exten- 1113141193 (38 Stat. 372). Commonly referred to as the Smith-Lever Act of . l4. 4 Service, and the United States Department of Agriculture, were created out of the need for information and education in agricultural production. These four institutions may be viewed as broadening into new areas with the finding of new knowledge and as more people need a broader range of knowledge in living their lives. The Cooperative Extension Service and its role in providing educa- tional experiences for a rapidly changing society is the central concern of this study. As society changes its institutions must change also to meet new demands from society. Reflecting back to the time period when the Cooperative Extension Service was created it may be seen that farming was a major sector of the total economy. In 1920, the year of the first decennial census after the establishment of the Cooperative Extension Service, the farm population was 31,974,000 or 30. 1 percent of the total population. There were 955 ,884,000 acres in 6,448, 343 farms that same year. However, in 1959 the most recent census of agriculture showed a farm population of 16,592,000 or 9.4 percent of the total and 1,123,. 378,000 acres in 3,707,973 farms. 6 The sectors in the economy other than agriculture have grown. As a nation we have become highly industrialized and urbanized. In 1920 ap- proximately one-fourth of the employed persons worked in agriculture 6Bureau of the Census, U. S- Department of Commerce, Statistical Abstract of the United States. 1963 (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1963), pp. 613, 621. while three-fourths worked in other occupations. 7 By 1960 approximately 92 percent of the employed persons in the United States worked at occupaw tions other than agricultural production and only 8 percent were employed on farms. The place of residence of the nation's population has changed also. In 1920 about one-half of the population lived in urban areas and one-half lived in rural areas. Forty years later in 1960 , about 70 percent of the population lived in urban areas, and 30 percent in rural areas. In summary, there are fewer but larger farms, fewer farmers , and relatively fewer rural residents. The traditional rural and farm clientele of the Cooperative Extension Service is becoming smaller. However, there is a new clientele in urban areas vocalizing requests for educational. assistance. What are the implications of these trends for the COOperativ-e Extension Service? In order to answer this question one must ask another question. How has the Cooperative Extension Service changed over the years? The direction the COOperative Extension Service has taken in the past may offer some guidelines as to the direction it will take in the future. Therefore, the following section of this chapter is a brief view of the Cooperative Extension Service which will be expanded in Chapter II. 7National Resources Board, General Conditions and Tendencies In- fluencinLthe Nation's land Requirements (Part I of the Report on Land Planning, Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1936), p. 23. 8Bureau of the Census, op. cit. , p. 219. 9Ibid. , p. 21. 6 Statement of the Problem The Cooperative Extension Service created in 1914 with the passage of the Smith-Lever Act by the Congress of the United States launched a unique venture in education. This innovation completed the tripartite of resident instruction, research, and informal, off-campus instruction which is characteristic of the Land-Grant University. The basic, distinctive features of the Cooperative Extension Service have been retained through- out the institution's fifty-year history. The primary purpose of the Cooperative Extension Service is . . .to aid in diffusing among the peOple of the United States useful and practical information on subjects related to agriculture and home economics, and to encourage the application of the same. . .' Generally, the organiza- tional framework and the financial arrangements designed to accomplish this purpose involves the three major levels of government; namely, fed- eral, state, and county. 10 Today, the Cooperative Extension Service is an example of an organ- ization which has helped many changes to occur in the United States by changing itself. It has taken the resources of the Land-Grant University's 10United States Congress, Smith—Lever Act of May 9, 1914 as amended (7 U.S.C. 341 et seq.). However, the proportion of financial support sup— plied by each level of government varies from state to state and county to county. During fiscal year 1962 the average proportion from federal sources was 37.6 percent, from state sources 39.0 percent, from county sources to 21.6 percent, and from other non-tax sources 1.8 percent. Federal Extension Service, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Form MO-406 (ll-62). 7 College of Agriculture to the farthest corners of the state and helped the rural resident apply the most recent research findings to his problems. Other segments of the population are now vocalizing their desires for simu- ilar services and other educational organizations are examining the Co~ operative Extension Service for guidance in providing these and similar services. This period of change may well be labeled an era of exploring new horizons. E. T. York, Ir. , Administrator, Federal Extension Service, said, Extension has never had a greater opportunity to exercise a more significant and meaningful leadership role-—to make a more significant and meaningful contribution to the wel- fare of our people than we have now. We have built up a great reservoir of good will and developed experience and competencies of working with people that are badly needed in meeting today's problems. Now we in Extension are confronted with an urgent need to move aggressively and positively towards adjusting and redirecting our efforts so that we can be certain that they are serving the needs of our time. 11 Thus, it appears that the Cooperative Extension Service may be at a crossroads. If it is to remain an educational organization with the mission to help people, it should read the signs of the times and plot its course accordingly. In its favor is its past ability to change to serve the changing needs of the changing rural area. The current rapid changes in political, economic, social, and technical forces of rural, suburban and urban 11152. T. York, Ir. , "The Federal Partner Looks at Extension's Challenge, " E. I. Booth and C. M. Ferguson (eds.), ChanLing Dimensions in Agriculture and Home Economics (Madison, Wisconsin: National Agricultural Exten- sion Center for Advanced Study, 1962) , p. 19. 8 areas bring into focus new and different informational and educational wants and needs. There appear to be at least three broad alternatives open to the Co- operative Extension Service. Each alternative has its merits and each has its consequences. A decision should be made as to which of the fol« lowing alternatives will be the focus: (1) the COOperative Extension Serv- ice could direct its resources primarily to the rural segment of the popula~ tion in a limited, but well defined area of subject matter; (2) the Coop‘- erative Extension Service could direct its present resources, and add other resources, to include assistance in subject matter areas related to overall problems of rural people; (3) the COOperative Extension Service could broaden its resource in such a manner as to be in a position to meet the needs of an ever increasing urban pOpulation, as well as the rural population. To date the Cooperative Extension Service has operated somewhere between these three alternatives to varying degrees at various times and places. This study examines the current Opinions of key Cooperative Exten- sion Service workers at county and state levels, concerning the role of their organization in one hundred and fifty urban and urbanizing areas throughout the nation. The role of the Cooperative Extension Service in these urban areas is becoming a concern of Cooperative Extension Service administrators, SDecialists and county workers. Evidence of this concern is available 9 when in—service training programs, annual state Cooperative Extension Service conferences, summer school catalogs , and other professional meetings and literature are reviewed. These concerns along with the author's personal experiences with the Cooperative Extension Service as a recipient of informal educational services and as a former employee generated interest in studying this problem. Purpose of the Study The primary purpose of this study is to attempt to determine the cure rent and future roles of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban and urbanizing areas as viewed by county Cooperative Extension Service workers and State Cooperative Extension Service Directors. It is hoped that such information will be useful to those working toward the improve- ment of the Cooperative Extension Service. This study is based on the premise that an increased understanding of the Cooperative Extension Service and the diverse conditions in which it serves is needed as a basis for improving it. Terms Cooperative Extension Service refers to the off—campus, non-classroom educational institution which is a part of the Land— Grant University. It is usually a subordinate unit of the College of Agriculture and Home Eco—- nomics. In twenty—seven states it is called the Cooperative Extension Service, Agricultural Extension Service in thirteen states, Extension Serv- ice in eight states, Extension Division in one state, and Cooperative Extension in one state. 12 Herbert A. Ber , Assistant Director, Michigan COOperative Extens- a] ifi+C-?“\.T‘:.;!AJ BTr‘arorplfizr 00 10C? u; i by LUV : . 'A IUL'L 0b, LUV“. to 10 The Cooperative Extension Service has a Congressional mandate to provide educational assistance to the people of the United States in agri— culture, home economics and subjects related thereto. Educational as- sistance is provided by personal contacts, group activities , and mass media. State Cooperative Extension Service Directors are the persons respon- sible for the administration and supervision of the Cooperative Extension I Service at the state level. These persons are selected by the governing bodies of the Land-Grant Universities at the state level, pending the ap- proval of the United States Department of Agriculture. Depending on the state, these persons may be the dean of the college of agriculture, asso- ciate dean, assistant dean, or specifically listed as the director of exten- sion. Regardless of title, they are usually responsible to the dean of the colleges of agriculture and home economics. Cooperative Extension Service Specialists are individuals who have become highly trained in specific areas of subject matter and have been employed by the Cooperative Extension Service to teach this subject mat~ ter using extension teaching methods. The specialist is often affiliated With a subject matter department of the Land-Grant University, thus forming an essential link in the research-teaching-extension chain. County COOperative Extension Service Worker refers to the person \k 3Lincoln D. Kelsey and Cannon C. Hearne, Cooperative Extension .Work (Ithaca, New York: Comstock Publishing Associates, 1949), pp. 41— 42. 11 employed by the Cooperative Extension Service to conduct educational efforts at the county level. This person is responsible for localized Cooperative Extension Service programs in such areas as agriculture, community and public affairs, home economics, 4-H and other youth work, marketing and utilization of agricultural products. Persons in this position may have titles such as: Agricultural Agent, Consumer Informa- tion Agent, County Extension Agent or Director, Farm Agent, 4wH Club Agent, Home Demonstration Agent, Home Economics Agent, Marketing Agent, Youth Agent, etc. Urban and Urbanizing Counties or Areas describe the counties in- cluded in this study. Selection of these counties was based on current population information. The specific criteria for selection of these counties are presented in Chapter III. The Basic Design for this Study The primary concerns of this study are the relationship between the views of: (1) County Cooperative Extension Service Workers concerning the current and future roles of the COOperative Extension Service in urban and urbanizing areas and their personal background characteristics and locational factors; (2) State COOperative Extension Service Directors con- Cerning the current and future roles of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban and urbanizing areas and their locational characteristics. The county and state background data were obtained by abstracting census data, such as total population, population per square mile, percent 12 change in pOpulation from 1950 to 1960, percent urban and rural-farm population, from The CountLand City Data Book. 14 This data is presented in Appendix A. A mailed opinionnaire, a COpy of which may be found in Appendix C, was used to obtain the data analyzed in this study. The opinionnaire was designed specifically for this study and submitted to 150 county Cooperative Extension Service workers , three in each state, throughout the United States. An adaptation of this Opinion- naire applicable to the state Cooperative Extension Service Director posi- tion was submitted to the fifty directors (see Appendix D). The selection of the sample, the design of the opinionnaire and census data used in this study are discussed in detail in subsequent chapters. The responses to the opinionnaire were recorded on the Opinionnaire by the respondents. The responses were then coded and incorporated on Hollerith cards. 15 The coding systems used are presented in Appendix E. The data were then programmed on the CDC 3600 Computer for statistical analysis. 16 Chi square tests of significance were thus obtained. 4Bureau of the Census, U. S. Department of Commerce, The County and City Data Book. 1962 (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Of- fice, 1962), passim. 15Dr. Herman Hollerith conceived the punched card system in the latter part of the 1800's while employed by the U. S. Bureau of the Cen- sus. The Hollerith card is commonly referred to as punched cards or IBM cards. 16The Michigan State University Computer Center, where the study data was processed, uses the CDC 3600 Computer which is manufactured by Control Data Corporation, Minneapolis, Minnesota. 13 A detailed description of the personal background and locational data of the respondents are presented in Chapter IV. The data gathered in this study, through the Opinionnaire and census information, are discussed in depth in Chapter V. The study was designed specifically to gather the following categories of information: 1. The background and interests of Cooperative Extension Service workers currently serving in urban and urbanizing areas of the United States. 2. The current role of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban and urbanizing counties as viewed by county COOperative Extension Serv- ice workers and State Cooperative Extension Directors. 3. The future role of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban and urbanizing counties as viewed by county Cooperative Extension Serv- ice workers and State Cooperative Extension Service Directors. > An analysis of the above data and the relationships of these data are the basis for considering the future of the Cooperative Extension Service when viewed from a Cooperative Extension Service worker's point of view. This analysis of data are presented in detail in Chapter V. The implications of the results of this study for future COOperative Extension Service work is included in the final chapter of this study. The Hypothe se 3 The hypotheses of this study were generally based on the assumption 14 that an individual's prior experiences and his present environment affect his perception of the world about him and the way he behaves. In precise terminology related to this study: an Extension worker's professional training and current residence location are positively related to the way he views the future role of the Extension Service. Several personal background and locational factors serve as the inde» pendent variables in this study, with the dependent variables being the responses to the attitude questions asked in the opinionnaire. The independent variables are: 1. Personal background factors:17 a. Tenure in the COOperative Extension Service b. Tenure in the Cooperative Extension Service in the present county 0. Position d. level of higher education e. Major course of study for degree work f. Major course of study beyond the highest degree attained 9. Current subject matter interests h. Sex. 2. Locational factors: a. Region of the United States b. Total population of county or state 1 7Only item "c" was obtained from the State Cooperative Extension Service Directors because the researcher felt requests for this type of information might alienate potential respondents. 15 . POpulation per square mile of county or state Percent urban residents in county or state Percent rural farm residents in county or state Percent increase or decrease in population from 1950 to 1960 in county or state . The dependent variables are the respondents' viewpoints concerning: a. The current role of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban and urbanizing areas . The trend in Extension educational assistance to urban peOple . The proportion of time Extension workers should spend working with urban residents The kinds of educational assistance the total Extension program should provide for urban people in: 1) Agricultural Production, Management, and Natural Resource . Development 2) Community and Public Affairs 3) Extension Home Economics 4) 4-H and other Youth Extension Work 5) Marketing and Utilization of Agricultural Products The respondent's personal experience in urban Extension work The extent to which urban. Extension work has been undertaken in the five major program areas listed under item d The effectiveness of urban Extension work which has been underw 16 taken in the re spondent's state or county in the five major program areas listed under item d h. Sources of present financial support for the Cooperative Extension Service 1. Sources of future financial support for the Cooperative Extension Service j. Sources of future support other than financial for the Cooperative Extension Service. The generalized hypotheses of the study are presented here along with examples of the specific hypotheses. The hypotheses are presented in this manner because there are 1, 127 different specific hypotheses pos- sible using the above variables. The generalized hypotheses are: 1. Certain personal background factors of county Cooperative Exten~ sion Service workers are positively related to their Opinions concerning the present scope of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban and urbanizing areas. 2. Certain personal background factors of county Cooperative Exten- sion workers are positively related to their perceptions of the future role of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban and urbanizing areas. Example: The county worker's length of tenure in the Cooperative Extension Service is positively related to his perception of the propor- tion of time Extension workers should spend working with urban residents. 3. . Certain locational factors of county Cooperative Extension Serv- ice workers are positively related to their opinions concerning the present l7 scope of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban and urbanizing areas. 4. Certain locational factors of county Cooperative Extension Serv- ice workers are positively related to their perceptions of the future role of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban and urbanizing areas. Example: The total population of the respondent‘s county is posi- tively related to his perception of the kind of educational assistance the total Extension program should provide for urban people in community and public affairs. 5. Certain locational factors of State Cooperative Extension Service Directors are positively related to their opinions concerning the present scope of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban and urbanizing areas. 6. Certain locational factors of State Cooperative Extension Service Directors are positively related to their perceptions of the future role of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban and urbanizing areas. Example: The population per square mile of the state is positively related to the perceptions held by State Cooperative Extension Service Directors regarding the amount of educational assistance that should be provided to urban peOple. CHAPTER II BACKGROUND CONSIDERATIONS In order to consider the future of the Cooperative Extension Service one must examine this institution from its origin through the present. In this examination it is important to consider the Cooperative Extension Service in its setting in our dynamic society. Change is the one characteristic which must be included in any de- scription of American society. Evidence of change may be seen every— where. Changes in our political structures, economic systems, social structures and level of technology affect the lives of all, either directly or indirectly. "Change takes innumerable forms; it is rapid; it is vac- illating; it is extensive; it is subtle; it is welcome; it is disturbing; but it is indiscriminate and it is universal. "1 Many far reaching changes in the total American way of life have come about as the result of three legislative decisions made in 1862. The United States Department of Agriculture was established May 15, 1862, for furtherance of agricultural development. 2 The Homestead Act passed 1William I. Kimball, "The Relation between Personal Values and the Adoption of Recommended Farm and Home Practices" (unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, University of Chicago, 1960), p. 1. 2M. L. Wilson, "Abraham Lincoln and the Historical Background of the Department of Agriculture, " The Spirit and Philosophy of Extension Work, R. K. Bliss, et al. (ed.), (Washington: U. S. Department of Agri- culture Graduate School and National Honorary Extension Fraternity Epsilon Sigma Phi, 1952), p. 17. 18 19 on May 20, 1862, made public lands available directly to the settler who would develop and Operate his own farm. 3 The land-Grant College Act of Iuly 2, 1862, created colleges which would serve the "practical needs of all citizens more directly than did the institutions that stressed classical studies and training for a few learned professions. ” The Land-Grant College The law creating the Land- Grant College which has evolved into the Land-Grant University is known as the Morrill Act, or the Act of 1862 Donating lands for Colleges of Agriculture and Mechanic Arts. This law granted public lands in each state for: . . .the endowment, support, and maintenance of at least one college where the leading object shall be, without excluding other scientific and classical studies, and in- cluding military tactics , to teach such branches of learning as are related to agriculture and the mechanic arts, in such manner as the legislatures of the states may respec- tively prescribe, in order to promote the liberal and prac- tical education of the industrial classes in the several pursuits and professions in life. . . 5 The Morrill Act, sponsored by Senator Justin Smith Morrill of Vermont, represents the culmination of efforts of diverse origin. Agricultural societies , labor groups , and working class oriented educators each 3Ibid. , p. 22. 4 United States Department of Agriculture, loc. Cit. 5United States Congress, Morrill Act of 1862 (12 Stat. 503). 20 offered their own proposals for the "peoples colleges. "6 There is some credence in the fact that the crises of the day brought these various forces together, helped to forge out the Land- Grand College Act, and assure its passage. Some examples are such phrases as: ". . .including military tactics, . . .the mechanic arts, . . . liberal and practical education, . . . industrial classes. . . , and . . . several pursuits and professions in life. . . "7 The Morrill Act served as an incentive to the states to take the ini- tiative in making higher education available to all people. The Morrill Act, in itself, provided a broad framework of subject matter Which - could be taught in the new colleges. The actual organization of the in- stitution to perform the teaching was left to the state legislatures, who in turn created administrative bodies to oversee the specific operation of the Land-Grant College. Only a few years passed before the faculties of these colleges rec- ognized that practical knowledge applicable to agricultural practices needed to be expanded through applied scientific research. 8 In other words, it was recognized that the Land—Grant College had the responsi— bilities of not only teaching the truth, but also seeking the truth. Out of this recognition came the concept of experimental farms Where science could be applied to specific agricultural problems. 6Paul A. Miller, "Cooperative Agricultural Extension Work in the In- dustrializing Society" (East Lansing: Michigan State University, 1959; mimeographed), p. 6. 7United States Congress Morrill Act of 1862 (12 Stat. 503). 8James Bonnen, "The First One Hundred Years of the USDA-Land Grant System: Some Observations on the Organizational Nature of a Great Tech- n010gical Pay-Off" (East Lansing: Michigan State University, 1962; mimeOeraphed), p, 5. 21 The Hatch Act of 1887 gave federal assistance to the Land-Grant College for the establishment of the institution known as the Agricultural Experiment Station. Provisions were made in this act to provide funds annually to the United States Department of Agriculture , which then dis- tributed funds for research in agriculture to the states through the Land- Grant Colleges. Research conducted at these Agricultural Experiment Stations has contributed to the base of scientific knowledge of agriculture and many related areas. Now that the Land-Grant College was in a position to do research and teach its students on campus, there remained a great number of potential "students" in the remainder of the population, the workers and farmers, or users of knowledge and information. The problem of how to disseminate this growing body of knowledge and information to the users as soon as possible was attacked from sev- eral different approaches in the late nineteenth and early twentieth cen- turies. Short courses, farmers' institutes, agricultural trains, demonstra- tions, boys and girls clubs, and bulletins were but a few of the methods used to get information out to the last man in the country. All of these methods were successful to varying degrees , but they all had the same weaknesses, they were only available at one point in time and to a limited number of recipients. A means of taking the resources of the college out to the people of the state was needed. 22 The land—Grant University and the Cooperative Extension Service On May 8, 1914, the Smith-Lever Act was passed by the Congress of the United States creating the Cooperative Extension Service. The purpose of this new institution was: . . .to aid in diffusing among the people of the United States useful and practical information on subjects relating to agri- culture and home economics , and to encourage the applica- tion of the same, there may be continued or inaugurated in connection with the college or colleges in each State, Ter- ritory, or possession, now receiving, or which may here- after receive, the benefits of the Act of Congress approved July second, eighteen hundred and sixty-two, entitled "an act donating public lands to the several States and Territories which may provide colleges for the benefit of agriculture and the mechanic arts. . . The Smith-Lever Act provides a description of what the Cooperative Extension Service shall do: Cooperative agricultural extension work shall consist of the giving of instruction and practical demonstrations in agriculture and home economics and subjects related thereto to persons not attending or resident in said colleges in the several communities, and imparting information on said subjects through demonstrations, publications, and otherwise and for the necessary printing and distribution of information in connection with the foregoing; and this work shall be carried on in such manner as may be mutually agreed upon by the Secretary of Agriculture and the State Agricultural College . . . receiving the benefits of this Act. This new institution, the tripartition of the Land— Grant College system, brought together within a national framework the resources of the agri— cultural colleges and the home economics colleges for the purpose of 9United States Congress, Smith-Lever Act as amended (7 U. S. C. 341 et seq.). 1011cm. 23 providing the users of information and knowledge with the information and knowledge necessary for the improvement of their farms, homes, and lives. Ideally, the state became the campus of the Land-Grant University through the county Cooperative Extension Service worker's programs and efforts in agriculture, home economics and 4—H Club work. However, typically, this did not happen with spontaniety, but rather it evolved over a period of years as people saw the Cooperative Extension Service in neighboring counties and wanted similar services in their home county. With this background on the legislation which created the Coopera- tive Extension Service it is important to consider the financial arrange- ments for this institution. This discussion is generalized because of the several special federal acts which provide funds for specific programs. Funds are apprOpriated at the federal level by the Congress for the Federal Extension Service which is an agency of the United States De- partment of Agriculture. The Federal Extension Service in turn distributes the major portion of these funds to the Land- Grant University located in each individual state. In addition to the federal funds distributed to the states, the state legislatures allocate funds to the Land—Grant University for the support of the state Cooperative Extension Service which administers the educational programs of the organization throughout the State. The county governing body in each county where the Cooperative Extension “See Robert M. Iones, "The Cooperative Extension Service Legal Mandates and Directives" (East Lansing: Department of Resource Develop- ment, Michigan State University, 1963). (Mimeographed graduate stu- dent term paper.) 24 Service maintains an office also appropriates funds for the operation of this educational organization. The three levels of government providing funds for the Cooperative Extension Service in the various states contribute varying proportions to the total budgets. The data in Table 1 present the range and average per- centages of funds from all sources for one fiscal year to illustrate the differing contributions of the various sources from state to state. Table 1. Range and Average Percentage of Funds Available to the State Cooperative Extension Services from each Source for the Fiscal Year ending Iune 30, 19631 Percentage of Total Funds Source Range Average Federal 19.1-54 9 37. 6 State 19.8—69.2 39.0 County l.2«-48.0 21.6 Other (Non-tax) 0. 1-21. 0 l. 8 1Federal Extension Service, U. S. Department of Agri- culture, "Ranking of States and Puerto Rico Based on Percent- age of Funds Available from Each Source for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1963, " FES form MO406(11-62). (Washington: Federal Extension Service, 1963.) The range in the percentage of funds available from the various sources may be attributed to such variables as: (l) the percentages of rural and farm residents of a state as they relate to the national percent- ages, 12 (2) the availability of funds for conducting educational work in 12See United States Congress, Smith-Lever Act as amended (7 U.S.C. 341 et seq.). 25 specific subject matter areas, 13 (3) the variation in the appropriations made by the state legislatures, (4) the differences in the requirements of counties to provide funds, and (5) the charging of fees for educational assistance and/or membership in the local organization which may under- write the expenses of the Cooperative Extension Service in lieu of the county government. 14 However, this list was not intended to be exhaus— tive. Its purpose is to illustrate some of the reasons for the differences in the contributions to the Cooperative Extension Service by the various sources. The funds appropriated by each level of government are used by the Cooperative Extension Service for conducting educational work within that particular level of government. Funds are not transferred from state to state nor county to county. This financial arrangement allows each level of government an important role in determining the direction of the Cooperative Extension Service. Policy decisions regarding COOperative Extension Service programs are made at each level of government. Internal communications of the organization allow for an interchange of ideas from any level to the other two levels. A framework for the operation of the organization is provided for by a "Memorandum of Understanding" which is a statement of coopera- tion between the Land—Grant University and the United States Department 13See Robert M. Iones, loc. cit. 14Kelsey and Hearne, op. cit. , p. 59. 26 of Agriculture. Similar memoranda describe the cooperative arrangements between the Land- Grant University and the county governing bodies of the state. There may be formal statements or informal understandings. The COOperative Extension Service The creation of the Cooperative Extension Service is attributed to two forces by Kelsey and Hearne. They point out that agriculture "char- acterized by cheap land, scarce labor, new products, and the use of credit" and education characterized by the "ideal of education for any man or woman in any field" were the two forces working tOgether which helped to create the Cooperative Extension Service. These forces in the United States may be contrasted against their counterparts in other areas of the world. In many other countries land is the limiting factor of production while here the limiting factor is labor. Therefore, in the United States emphasis has been placed on what the man can produce rather than what the unit of land can produce. 16 In education the classical approach for the few was the tradition, while in the United States the practical education for the masses was emphasized. Within this frame of reference it became evident that the Cooperative Extension Service should concentrate its early efforts on increased agri- cultural production efficiency. Further pressure to emphasize agricultural 15Ibid. , p. 11. lerido I pp. 3-40 27 production efficiency was brought to bear only a few months after the passage of the Smith—lever Act when World War I broke out in EurOpe and a decreasing number of farmers were called upon to feed an increasing industrial labor force, military establishment, and our allies. 17 After World War I the Cooperative Extension Service expanded its ef- forts in agricultural production and home economics by increasing the emphasis of youth work through 4-H Clubs. This provided another avenue of access to the farms and homes of the nation, not at the expense of on— going programs in agricultural production and home economics. The rural youth were taught newly found practices and techniques through their 4-H Clubs. The parents of the 4-H Club members could see the benefits of new knowledge applied directly to their farms and in their homes. Seeing the results of their youngster's work, parents then realized that similar educational assistance was available to them. Thus, the parents found the COOperative Extension Service and the Cooperative Ex— tension Service programs were broadened to meet the needs of the whole family in rural areas. An historical review of the functions of the Cooperative Extension Service at the county level brings into focus three distinct, yet over- lapping, periods of change. 18 Each of these periods of change in the 17C. W. Warburton, "Twenty-Five Years of Extension Work Under the Act of May 8, 1914, " The Spirit and Philosophy of Extension Work, R. K. Bliss, et al. (ed.), (Washington: U. S. Department of Agriculture Graduate School and National Honorary Extension Fraternity Epsilon Sigma Phi, 1952), pp. 262—263. 18Paul A. Miller, "The Evolution of Extension," Agricultural Leaders Digest, March 1959, pp. 12—13. 28 order in which they are presented were the chief concern of the county Cooperative Extension Service worker at that time. Early efforts of the county Cooperative Extension Service worker were directed to individual farms and homes. This informal educational innovation was taken directly to the potential information user. Early county agents worked mostly with individual farmers or small groups in meetings or demonstrations. They con- ducted auto tours to demonstrate new practices, spoke at farmers' institutes, Granges, and Farm Bureau meetings, mailed bulletins. The college sent out specialists who helped in projects like poultry culling, spraying, and pruning demonstrations, drainage and the like. By the late 1920's and early 1930's the county Cooperative Extension Service worker realized that his efforts could best be directed toward training leaders, getting people together to work on problems of common interest, and organizing committees to plan projects and accept respon- . . . 20 . . . . . . Sibilities. Marketing assoc1ations , cooperatives , spec1al interest agricultural commodity groups , and advisory committees of the several United States Department of Agriculture agencies came into being under the guidance of the county Cooperative Extension Service worker. During this period of change the COOperative Extension Service organized many specialized interests into groups which represented the rural and agri- cultural interests of each county, the state and the nation. 19Leo L. Rummel, One Hundred Years of Better Living, Ohio Agricul- tural Experiment Station Public Information Series 63, and Ohio State Uni- versity of Agriculture and Home Economics Extension Bulletin 422 (Wooster and Columbus: The Ohio State University, 1962), p. 56. 20Ibid. 29 The third and current period of change is undoubtedly the most crit- ical. Rapid changes have occurred in all facets of life in the past genera— tion. These changes have radically reduced the rural-urban boundaries. They have solved problems and created new problems. They have come in political, economic, social and technological areas of interest. These changes have come to the COOperative Extension Service both from inter- nal and external forces. While this trend was taking place in the Cooperative Extension Serv- ice other trends of equal significance were occurring elsewhere. The number of farms and the farm population were decreasing and the urban population was increasing. At the same time the number of industrial firms was decreasing. Efficiency in farming resulted in larger farms and greater productivity, but with surplus agricultural production the economic status of farming did not gain proportionately. However in industry the decrease in the number of firms increased the individual firm's position in the economy. In the 1930's the government started programs to medi— ate these differences by shifting some of the financial responsibilities for agriculture from the farm to society and the Cooperative Extension Service was given the educational duties of interpreting governmental programs directed to the farmer. These events brought about specialization in the production phase of agriculture, and corporations assumed the responsibility for processing and distributing the agricultural products. This increase in specialization has brought about an interdependency in society which increases daily. 30 Man and his relationship to the land, human services , and other men is . 21 . . . . in a constant state of change. This requires continued readjustment by the individual, society, and the institutions created by them. As the COOperative Extension Service helped to bring into application better agricultural production practices a whole new series of problems arose on the farm. How can I combine my resources for the greatest per- sonal benefit and satisfaction? How can we as farmers achieve a com— petitive advantage in the market place? Is there a place for my son in farming? How can we improve the schools in our community? What can we do to improve our local government and governmental services? These are but a few of the questions rural people have asked over the past fifty years. Throughout the fifty years of the Cooperative Extension Service's life there have been many rapid changes in the political, economic, social, and technical segments of the United States and the world. Miller offers the following concise description of this period of time. A half century of Extension history spans two world wars and other lesser ones; shifts in international balances between nations and some twenty new ones; the age of machinery into the age of atoms; from wireless to tele- vision; from horses to rockets; from public expenditures for peaceful purposes to big government and big taxes for not so peaceful purposes; and from scarcity and un— developed resources to opulance, proxie battles and Madison Avenue. 22 21Paul A. Miller, "Cooperative Agricultural Extension Work in the Industrializing Society" (East Lansing: Michigan State University, 1959; mimeographed), pp. 18-23. 221bid.. p. 18. 31 While the farmers and the rural people of the United States were bring assisted by the Cooperative Extension Service, urban people did not have such assistance. But once urban people found the Cooperative Extension Service through newspaper articles , radio broadcasts, fairs and other such media, they started to ask questions. What is 4-H Club work? How can I improve my lawn or garden? Where can I get help in designing my kitchen for greater efficiency? Can you help me to prepare more nutritious meals for my family? What can we do to protect the value of our home and prevent blight in our neighborhood? These questions from urban and rural-non—farm people, and questions directly related to agriculture from rural—farm people have created an in— ternal ambivalence in the Cooperative Extension Service. York cites two prominent former Cooperative Extension Service workers in this issue: The Scope Report gives us a broad framework for action-- but are we taking action fast enough? Paul Miller, Provost of Michigan State University (now President of West Virginia University), who played a prominent part in developing the Scope Report, com- mented that Extension has been notably active in con- sidering its changing role in State conferences and the like, but notably "resilient" when it came to putting such changes into effect. William Stucky of the Iowa Center for Agricultural and Economic Adjustment, recognized that Extension had been very aware of the need for internal adjustment. He commented that "the missing element seems to lie in converting from awareness to action. 23 23E. T. York, Ir. ,. "The Federal Partner Looks at Extension's Chal- lenge, " E. I. Boone and C. M. Ferguson (eds.), Changing Dimension in Agriculture and Home Economics (Madison, Wisconsin: National Agri- cultural Extension Center for Advanced Study, 1962) , p. 24. 32 The Cooperative Extension Service, Today The Cooperative Extension Service is at a crossroads, as has been mentioned previously in this study. The direction the Cooperative Exten- sion Service takes, as with any institution, is influenced by forces which impinge upon the institution. These forces may create indecision and confusion, maintenance of the status quo, or advancement--either in traditional or innovative directions. In this section of the study some of the more important forces affecting the Cooperative Extension Service will be examined. It is necessary in reviewing these forces to be aware of not only the forces, but the images of the Cooperative Extension Service held by these forces and the force's self-image. Boulding says, "The image is built up as a result of all past experience of the possessor of the image. " Further he says that behavior is dependent upon the image. 24 Therefore, as one views the following images of the Cooperative Extension Service, one must be cognizant that these images are the result of the holder's past experiences and that as the holder has additional experiences his images change. The first series of images of the COOperative Extension Service that shall be viewed are those of agricultural interests. The researcher has elected to start here because of the traditional Cooperative Extension Service programs in this area. 24Kenneth E. Boulding, The Image (Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 1956). p. 6. 33 A national farm organization leader says: . . .We recognize that the Extension Service must serve the public, but we insist that this serving the public be done through serving commercial farmers and their families. And I would differentiate between com— mercial farming and the rural residents and suburban dwellers. Included in commercial agriculture would be part-time as well as full-time farmers. But I want to differentiate because it's important to recognize that we face two vastly different kinds of problems in rural areas. One has to do with the farm income problem, in- cluding prices , marketing, cost of production, and many other factors. . . The other important problem area in rural America has to do with the folks who choose to live in rural areas but who are not making their living from or in agriculture. Now we in the Farm Bureau and you in Extension, of course are as concerned as any other citizen. But in my opinion this is not a prime area of concern for the Exten- sion Service. The Extension Service in agriculture and home economics was established to help farmers. It serves the public need through helping farmers. . . 25 An agricultural journalist expresses the following image of the Co— operative Extension Service. v There is practically unanimous agreement, in most cases quite strongly expressed, that the agricultural Extension Service has no business extending its service to urban residents. There is no implication here as to whether or not town people should have these services--it is simply a firm belief that this is not a function of the agricultural Extension Service and that the cost of serving town people should not be included in the budget of the U. 3. Depart- ment of Agriculture. 000 I think many agricultural editors would seriously question whether the same agency can serve a commercial agriculture 25Charles B. Shuman, "Organized Agriculture Looks at Extension," An Image of Cooperative Extension, E. I. Boone and C. M. Ferguson (eds.) (Madison, Wisconsin: National Agricultural Extension Center for Advanced Study, 1962), Pp. 55-56. 34 which has the goal Of producing and marketing food at a profit and also serve urban housewives whose goal is to buy fOOd and fiber most economically. 2‘6 A representative Of the Off-farm sector Of agriculture views the Co- operative Extension Service in this manner: I realize that this manner Of working more with the total population rather than just with agriculture is one that has been given much consideration by Extension for some time. I well recall when this was brought to the attention Of the National Agricultural Advisory Commis- sion several years ago. Should home economics Exten— sion work more with city women? Should the county agent begin to think in terms Of advice and service tO urbanites and suburbanites as well as to rural people? The feeling was almost unanimous that non-farm seg- ments of our population, who are taxpayers and who also have interests in nature and growing things , should have a right to the advice and counsel Of Extension people. TO them a lawn, a single shade tree or a rosebush is im- portant. I personally share that view. In line with this there is the question Of extending the program of 4-H beyond rural fence lines. Again the feeling Of our National Commission was that . . . even though the approach and methods might be different, yet nevertheless the constructive influences of Club work should be extended to non-farm peOple. Among farm leaders and non-farm businessmen there is a growing feeling that Extension may well give more attention to both the problems and the potentials Of ver- tical integration. Regardless Of the pros and cons, a definite feeling is developing that vertical integration is seriously disturbing the accustomed pattern Of Opera- tion among individual farmers , and that vertical integra— tion is leaving the farmer with less decision making as to expansion of Operations and individual planning of feeding rations. 26}. H. Florea, "The Farm Press Looks at Extension," E. I. Boone and C. M. Ferguson (eds.), An Image Of Cooperative Extension (Madison, Wisconsin: National Agricultural Extension Center for Advanced Study, 1962), pp. 31—32. 35 I know the question Of Extension people moving into the arena Of public policy has been hotly debated both ways. Many Of those I contacted took the position that it is important for Extension workers to get more into the realm Of public policy. There were many comments to the effect that Exten- sion workers must recognize, and work with, the growing reurbanization movements taking place in our country to- day. Better roads and more automobiles with more power have made Americans the moving—est people on earth. Rural and urban people are emerging on an entirely new and different basis. I defy anyone today to tell who are the real wearers of the blue jeans or the grey flannel suits. This new kind of hybrid society requires new and different Extension programs. 27 The preceding statements were made by recipients Of the services Of the Cooperative Extension Service. Each represents a strong force which has a part in guiding the destiny of the Cooperative Extension Service. However, there is a wide difference Of Opinion as to what the Coopera- tive Extension Service should be. Before analyzing any Of these remarks the researcher presents another group of images for comparison. This series of statements has been made by administrators Of Land- Grant Universities, the parent institution Of the Cooperative Extension Service. These images are included in this study because they are held by persons responsible for the total educational program Of the university and its colleges of agriculture. D. W. Colvard, president Of Mississippi State University, had the 27Milo K. Swanton, "The Off-Farm Segments Look at Extension," E. I. Boone and C. M. Ferguson (eds.), An Image Of COOperative Exten- sion (Madison, Wisconsin: National Agricultural Extension Center for Advanced Study, 1962), pp. 67-69. 36 following to say about the COOperative Extension Service in giving a Land-Grant University president's view of this institution. The patterns Of life Of farm people, the needs Of Society, and the structure Of the economy are vastly different from what they were 50 years ago. Currently we are not so much concerned about availability Of food for the population as we are about the efficient use of available resources. Budgets and staffs have grown to be very large. Many Of the people who use Extension information, including many former Extension workers , are well educated and demand the very latest scientific knowledge. Institutions have grown and have become involved in so many diversified activities that presidents depend more upon organiza— tion and less upon their own intimate knowledge Of de- tails Of specific programs to Operate their institutions. More and more of the presidents have backgrounds in fields other than agriculture and must rely upon leaders in their various programs for their guidance. It is entirely possible that some presidents because of classical background or urban environment have not had the time or the incentive to Observe the Extension movement from the grass roots up. They may, indeed, wish just to take it for granted--land-granted, if I may risk a pun. But Extension has always had its problems and always will have them, and these problems make noises that are inevitably heard in the acoustically in- sulated precincts where top administrators live. These noises come both from within and without. Presidents are looking tO Extension leaders for clear interpretations Of the future plans for their service. All Of these facts suggest the great importance of effective communication between presidents and Exten- sion directors. If there is to be understanding, if the goals and procedures of Cooperative Extension are to be in harmony with those Of the university, if the presi- dent and the Officials in charge Of agriculture are tO lend complementary strength one to the other, it seems essen- tial that lines Of communication remain Open and that no stones be left unturned to see that there exist both under- standing and agreement as to the purposes and procedures. 28D. W. Colvard, "A University President Looks at Extension, " E. I. Boone and C. M. Ferguson (eds.) An Image Of Cooperative Extension (Madison, Wisconsin: National Agricultural Extension Center for Advanced Study, 1962), pp. 5-6. 37 H. Macy, Dean of the Institute of Agriculture at the University Of Minnesota points out some important changes which have occurred and which are Of great significance to the Cooperative Extension Service. As agriculture developed in the early years of our nation, the physical resources were particularly impor- tant and appropriately applied. As time moved onward, the need for the development Of the mind and its applica- tion to the solution Of our problems became increasingly more important. Agriculture no longer consists Of just simple basic chores Of farming. Now there is science, technology, the application Of power other than the physical power Of man or animal, and the related enterprises that con- stitute agricultural businesses and services. Here the ratio between mind and body has changed. All segments of our society participate to some degree in agriculture, and the utilization of our resources. This is one Of the challenges we face in the Land-Grant college. Agricultural Extension must accept responsibility for helping suburban and urban people with problems involving families, nutrition, food selection, lawns and shrubs, etc. Our people in the city and in the country must be fully informed about community affairs and the inter-relationships which exist among all Of our people, including especially work with young people. This challenge encompasses the establishment of closer liaison with business and industry, professionals and trades, as well as all parts Of private and public agencies, foundations , associations and organizations. It even involves , and importantly the field of international rela— tions. 29 The preceding two groups of statements lead to the question of what are the images of the COOperative Extension Service held by its admin- istrators. For a view Of their images the researcher has selected two 29H. Macy, "Summing Up, " Proceedings Of the Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges, 76th Annual Convention, Novemm ber ll-14, 1962. pp. 120-121. 38 statements the first Of which is by E. T. York, former Administrator, Federal Extension Service. America today faces many broad social and economic problems requiring concentrated educational efforts. Land- Grant institutions are in the unique position to serve this need. They have demonstrated their effectiveness in dealing with problems Of rural America through programs of research and extension in agriculture and home economics. By ex- tending their philosophy Of "education for all" and "educa- tion for use" to the problems of other segments Of our total society, these universities can become the developmental arm Of their states. In accepting this role, competencies from the total university would be involved in the same type Of people--and problem=~oriented programs characterizing the work in agriculture and home economics. The problems of agriculture and rural peOple must con— tinue to be a major focus of the Cooperative Extension Serv- ice. But these problems have changed greatly in recent years, and extension programs must change accordingly. These problems require educational resources beyond the traditional subject—matter fields. TO meet them effective- ly, Extension must involve more Of the competencies Of the total university. With such a broadened scope, Exten- sion can contribute to solution of problems confronting more areas Of our total society. Extension is ready and anxious to explore any measures by which it can serve better its parent institutions and render greater service to the peOple Of the nation. To serve commercial agriculture, extension will need more highly specialized personnel, with many Operating in multicounty areas. Extension must further concern it- self with the economic growth and social well-being Of communities and trade areas throughout rural America by providing leadership for total resource development efforts. Extension must also help the total citizenry develop an understanding Of the problems Of agriculture and rural America, as well as an appreciation Of rural America's contributions to the welfare and happiness Of all. 30 30E. T. York, "The Second Hundred Years--Tooling Up for Tomorrow, " Proceediggs Of the Association Of State Universities and Land-Grant Collgges, 76th Annual Convention, November 11-14, 1962, pp. 129-130. 39 Paul A. Miller, former Michigan Cooperative Extension Service Di-- rector and Michigan State University Provost (now president Of the Uni-- versity Of West Virginia) Offers the following view Of the Cooperative Extension Service's future. The agricultural colleges have inherited one challenge among several which calls for vision, daring, courage, and intelligence. It deals with lifting up to the all- university level, the unique system Of the Extension Service. It means that the array Of local Offices be brought to represent the entire university, continuing with integrity such local workers and programs as ear- marked agricultural apprOpriations may provide for, flexibly rounding out specializations Of local Offices as their areas may vary and as additional resources may be provided by federal, state and local bodies, artic- ulating their programs with those of Other institutions and administering such a single field-arm Of the land- grant institution with an appropriate Official within the Office Of the university president. Under this plan the corps of agricultural extension specialists would remain the responsibility Of the agricultural colleges , and, in COOperation with those specialists which other university divisions will come to have, would form into a competent task force to address directly from the campus the agri- cultural problems Of the state, and indirectly through the medium of the field Office other public agencies and the private sector. Such task forces would normally be co- ordinated by a central staff agency of the university (per— haps the general extension division) in order to mobilize and focus the educational resources of the entire univer- sity and of other agencies tangent to it. Land-Grand leaders will agree continuing education throughout life on issues which count is not unrelated to survival Of democratic institutions. Even the turnover Of knowledge requires a lifetime Of learning. We cannot without peril overlook such a uniquely American innovation as the ex- tension service tO facilitate it. 31Paul A. Miller, "The Agricultural Colleges Of the United States: Paradoxical Servants of Change, " Proceedings of the American Association of Land-Grant Colleges and State Universitiesy 75th Annual Convention, Vol. II, November 1961, pp. 39—40. 40 Seven statements of images of the Cooperative Extension Service have been presented. Seven different views Of what is or what ought to be have been presented. These images have defined the roles of the Cooperative Extension Service from only agricultural production education to continuing education in all discipline areas and several points between. The Cooperative Extension Service in Urban Areas While the Cooperative Extension Service has been examined, studied, and analyzed from many different aspects there is an apparent lack Of information on this institution's role in urban areas. The literature re- view conducted by the researcher resulted in finding only two studies directly related to educational activities of the total Cooperative Exten- sion Service in urban areas. The first of these studies was conducted by Kaufman in 1956. 32 The second study was completed by Smith in 1958. 33 The respondents in both Of these studies were the county Co- operative Extension Service workers who were responsible for the agri- cultural programs tO the exclusion of all other county worker positions. Kaufman compiled statements from sixty-four respondents representing thirty-five states on the Obligation of the Cooperative Extension Service to serve urban and rural-non-farm peOple. The study is summarized by 32Charles R. Kaufman, "An Analysis of the Responsibilities of the Extension Service with Non-Farm Families" (unpublished master's degree research paper, Michigan State University, 1956). 3 Norman I. Smith, "Agricultural Extension Work in Densely Popu- lated Counties of the United States" (unpublished master's degree research paper, Michigan State University, 1958; mimeographed). 41 Kaufman with the following statement: The Extension Service is now, and has been for some time, in a transition period in its development. NO one can quarrel with the fact that its educational services have been very commendable. The time is long past when the Extension Service can rest on the laurels won through the hard work of those capable individuals who built the organ- ization tO its present heights and acceptance in the county today. Past programs and procedures will have tO be weighed carefully against the demands and opportunities of the future so that the Extension resources are utilized to render the greatest contribution possible. The excerpts quoted above would indicate that indi- vidual agents who are out on the firing line every day are confused as to which way Extension should go from here. They all are pretty much in agreement that there is a big challenge facing the Extension worker Of today. In all fairness to those agents who have indicated that they do not work with non-farm families with the same concentrated effort that they do with farm families it should be pointed out that they see a danger in spreading them— selves tOO thin, this can be an even greater danger than not taking the added responsibility of a program in the highly populated areas. In some areas it is quite evident that the program has been sold far beyond the abilities Of the Service to produce the end result that the people have grown to expect. The caliber of the program has been high. The people will not be satisfied with anything less. A careful balance must be maintained between the ability to serve a program and the desire created for programs. 34 Smith's research was primarily concerned with the types Of educa- tional programs conducted by the county Cooperative Extension Service worker responsible for the agricultural and horticultural areas Of the CO» Operative Extension Service programs in eighty-nine counties Of thirty- two states. However, he did describe the changes in number of county Cooperative Extension Service workers, between 1950 and 1958, the 4 .. Kaufman, loc. Cit. 42 clientele, subject matter areas, financing, office equipment, and new techniques used by county Cooperative Extension Service workers. He drew no conclusions from these data. He merely reported the number of responses and comments made by the respondents. Both Kaufman and Smith may be criticized for not attempting to obtain a cross-section of county Cooperative Extension Service workers in their samples, and for not attempting to analyze their data in greater depth. While Kaufman obtained data on the totalCooperative Extension Service effort in the counties , Smith restricted his to the Cooperative Extension Service programs in agriculture. All of the counties in Smith's study had pOpulations of at least 140,000 people. This sample would automatically limit the number of states and prevent a total cross-section of opinion from all states. Kaufman selected counties of over 25,000 population, but he did not at- tempt to include all states in his sample. It was after a review of these two studies that the researcher set about to design this study. CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY EMPLOYED IN COLLECTING DATA Sc0pe of the Study This study is of an exploratory nature designed to gather information that would reflect the views of county Cooperative Extension Service workers and State Cooperative Extension Service Directors concerning the role and responsibility of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban and urbanizing areas of the United States. The results of this study are not expected to provide sufficient data for the development of organizational policy recommendations. However, this study has been undertaken with the hope that it would provide some in- formation on trends and directions which might be useful to Cooperative Extension Service workers and interest others to pursue more comprehen» sive research. The study involved only those in the positions of county workers and State Directors who make the routine and long-range policy decisions which affect the direction of the Cooperative Extension Service at county and state levels. By confining the sample to Cooperative Extension Serv- ice personnel; (1) it was assumed that there would be greater homogeneity in the respondent’s familiarity with and interpretation of the terms used in the opinionnaire, and (2) the many differences in organizational struc- ture and responsibilities of the various state and county Cooperative 43 44 Extension Service advisory bodies, and state and local governmental units would be by passed. The decision to ask three county Cooperative Extension Service workers, regardless of official title, from each state to participate was made so that a cross-section of viewpoints would be available for exam— ination and analysis. Each state was involved equally, rather than on a population basis, so that this study would be national in scope and each state Cooperative Extension Service would be included in the analysis. State Cooperative Extension Service Directors were asked to participate in this study because they determine the direction the institution moves at the state level and relate these decisions to the county Cooperative Extension Service workers. Information Gathered The county Cooperative Extension Service worker in the urban and urbanizing area is at the point in time and space where changes are being felt with great pressure. Therefore, it is necessary to obtain opinions from county Cooperative Extension workers in urban and urbanizing areas as to the present and future roles of the Cooperative Extension Service. It is also considered necessary to obtain the opinions of State Coopera- tive Extension Service Directors on these same questions, because of their role in allocating resources and talents in urban and urbanizing areas. As background on the Opinions expressed by the respondents about the present and future roles of the Cooperative Extension Service , 45 they are asked to evaluate the extent and effectiveness of urban type programs which have been conducted in their counties and states. The Opinionnaire An opinionnaire was designed to reflect the opinions of the respond- ents on the questions which were asked. This opinionnaire was sent to county Cooperative Extension Service workers. An adaptation of this opinionnaire was sent to State Cooperative Extension Service Directors. The terminology used through the Opinionnaire was selected because of its general usage by the Federal Extension Service in various communica- tions, bulletins and forms. The adaptation of the opinionnaire for the State Cooperative Exten- sion Service Directors was essentially the same as the original; however, certain questions were reworded to be applicable to the state level, and information concerning personal background was not requested. The Opinionnaire was pretested with ten county COOperative Exten- sion Service workers who were attending the Michigan State University Institute for Extension Personnel Development, and one Michigan county Cooperative Extension Service staff. Because of the similarity to the original opinionnaire, the adapted opinionnaire sent to State Cooperative Extension Service Directors was not pretested. Procedure for Gathering Information The opinionnaires were assigned code numbers to assure confiden- tiality and mailed to the potential respondents on May 9 ,. 1963. A letter 46 explaining the purpose of the study, a stamped, self-addressed envelope for returning the completed opinionnaire , and a cover letter endorsing the request from the researcher's adviser were sent to each potential respond- ent. The State Cooperative Extension Service Director in each state was informed of the county Cooperative Extension Service workers in his state who were asked to participate in the study. A follow-up postcard was sent to thirty-two potential participants on June 13, 1963. All responses were received by Iuly l, 1963. The covering letters, opinionnaires, and follow-up postcard are pre- sented in Appendices C and D. Selection of the Sample States Each of the fifty states of the United States were included in the sample in order to obtain a broad cross-section of Cooperative Extension Service activities in urban and urbanizing areas. The sample included four potential respondents from each state: the State Cooperative Exten- sion Service Director and three county Cooperative Extension Service workers . Counties The three county Cooperative Extension Service workers of each state who were asked to participate in this study represented three different counties. The counties selected were: (I) the county with the largest 47 total population; (2) the county with the second largest total population; (3) the county with the highest percentage of population increase from 1950 to 1960. In cases where the county with the highest percentage of increase in population was included in criteria (1) or (2) , the next highest percent- age of increase in population were selected. If the criteria for increase in population could not be met, e. g. , decrease, or increase lower than the national average, the county with the third largest population was selected. Only counties which had Cooperative Extension Service offices were considered for the sample. Therefore, all of the above criteria is con— tingent upon this limitation. Sample Selection of the individual potential respondents was done randomly to give equal weight to each county Extension worker position in each county, i.e. , Agricultural Agent, Home Demonstration Agent, 4_H Club Agent, Consumer Information Agent, etc. The procedure used to select the potential respondents consisted of locating the names of the county I Extension workers of the sample counties in the County Agents Directory, 1515;. 1 Each name was assigned a number based on the order in which the name was listed in the above publication for the sample county. A deck of numbered cards was prepared containing the number of cards equal 1C. L. Mast, Ir. , and Associates, County Agents Directory, 1963. (Chicago: C. L. Mast's Associates, 1963). 48 to the number of county COOperative Extension Service workers in the sam— ple county having the largest Cooperative Extension Service staff. The deck was shuffled, a carddrawn and the number recorded. This process was repeated with the deck containing the number of cards showing con- secutive digits which corresponded to the number of county Extension workers on the staff. In sample counties where there was only one county COOperative Extension Service worker this person was included in the sample automatically. Number ,of._Countx.F-.xteasien Worker.$._,.1n Sample Counties The sample of one hundred and fifty county Extension workers was taken from a universe of eight hundred and eighty-two county Extension worker positions. The number of county Extension worker positions by counties and states is presented in tabular form in Appendix B. CHAPTER IV ANALYSES OF THE RESPONSES The material presented in this chapter is the descriptive data con— cerning the number of respondents and their answers to the questions contained in the opinionnaire. This material is presented in the following sequence: (1) the number of opinionnaires sent and returned; (2) the locational characteristics of the county Cooperative Extension Service workers; (3) the locational characteristics of the State Cooperative Exten- sion Service Directors; (4) the personal background characteristics of the county Cooperative Extension Service workers;1 (5) the county Co- operative Extension Service workers' opinionnaire responses; (6) the State Cooperative Extension Service Directors opinionnaire responses. The summary of responses follows the format of the opinionnaire except that the personal background characteristics of the county Cooperative Extension Service workers are presented first. The material is presented in this sequence so that the reader may become acquainted with the respondents' backgrounds prior to examining the summary of responses. The various sections of this chapter present data gathered at the county level first followed by similar data gathered at the state level. Terms are defined, a brief discussion of the important data in the tables 1Personal background information was not requested of State Coop— erative Extension Service Directors. See Discussion in Chapter I. 49 50 is conducted, and quotations are cited to aid in defining the categories. The tables are constructed reading from low to high down the table and low to high read across the table to the right. This applies to all tables except those indicating positions and tenure. The data presented in the tables of this chapter are presented as they were combined after an initial analysis was made on the CDC 3600 Computer. The mean and standard deviation were determined for each of the responses on the computer. This information was used in combining the data categories in order to obtain a more valid statistical analysis. Qpinionnaires Sent and Returned Responses were received from 130 or 86. 6 percent of the 150 poten- tial county Cooperative Extension Service worker respondents. Of the 130 responses, 127 or 84. 6 percent of the opinionnaires sent were usable. Approximately an equal number of the usable responses came from each of the four Federal Extension Service regions. The adaptation of the Opinionnaire sent to the fifty State Cooperative Extension Service Directors brought forty-seven responses or a 94. 0 per— cent return. Of the forty-seven responses, forty-five or 90. 0 percent of the opinionnaires sent were usable. All questions on the opinionnaire were not answered by all respondents. This will account for variations in the total responses from question to question. Therefore, all tables in this study are subject to this condition. 51 County Locational Characteristics The locational characteristics of the counties represented by the county Cooperative Extension Service worker respondents are presented in Table 2. These various characteristics were divided into categories of low, medium, and high. The lower and upper limits and the number of respondents representing each category are presented in Table 2. The data in Table 2 indicate a nearly equal distribution of respondents in all low, medium, and high categories except in the percent of rural- farm population. In this particular locational characteristic over one—half of the respondents were from counties which had one percent or less rural- farm population. The medium and high categories of rural-farm popula- tion each contained about one-fourth of the respondents. State Locational Characteristics The locational characteristics of the states represented by the State Cooperative Extension Service Director respondents are presented in Table 3. These data, while similar to the county data, are presented in a separate table because of the differences in the units of measurement and comparison. The data in Table 3 shows a fairly uniform distribution of respondents in all categories of all locational characteristics. Personal Background Characteristics This section describes those characteristics which are held by the county Cooperative Extension Service worker respondents. These char-- acteristics are: position, professional improvement interests, tenure in the Cooperative Extension Service, and educational background. 52 l ANA Nv ow mv mucoocoomon Mo 50252 co>o cap 3 omnmm vane 82 op ommfi ommocog cofimgqoo “coupon RH mm om mo mbcoocoamoo mo 59:32 .850 can m vim To coflmgdoa Anagrams“ “Gounod KNH ov ow 3 mHQoUCOQmB mo 598:2 ooTom mmumm memo coflflsaoa cont: “coupon— mmfl 3V mv 3» upcoocoamm: Mo 38:32 Eo>o can Hmn 02:2: 03:0 3:: 895m coo coflmfisaom NH: mv vv 3... mucoocoamoc Ho #5852 ~95 can ooodov mmm.mmmnooo.HNH mmm.o§uo coflmfisaoo 230.5 2309 £33 83634 33 mofimtopomcmco Ammoflmooq moflcsoo mmmfi. ocficommnoom mucmccoamom Expo; oofiCom coflmcoflnm ofififimoooo 3560 Mo $9832 9: cam popcommamm moflcsoO 9: mo moflmflouomnmnO fimcofimooq .N 633. 53 we 3 m2 mucopcoomo: to 59:52 :o>o cam 2N omnofi mno omma 0: 0mm: $6805 cofiflzooo Emeom me 02 3 mucmccoomo: Mo 89:32 :o>o cum 2 Sum muo cofiflsooo 923.465: Emeom 3 m2 3 mucmpcoomo: Co 58:52 :m>o cam on moron mmno :ofiflsooo :68: Enema 3 m2 3 mucoocoomo: Co 58:32 :96 cum. am can? ovno 3:: 298m :mo :oflflsoom mv m: E monopcoamm: Co 58:32 :96 cam 200.com...” 0006362005092 ooo.oom.To cofiflsaoo 28.8.. 28.0.2. :32 83:32 BOA moflmtmuomhfio Hmcoflmooq mmgmum omone ocficmmoamm mpcoccoomom 38.0950 outflow coflmcoufim oZHEmdooO 33m :0 59:52 9: cam popcommaom mopmum o5 mo m03mfl306$£0 fimcofimooq .m 293. 54 The data in Table 4 show that 89. 8 percent of the respondents were agricultural, 4-=H Club, or home economics agents. The category "other agents" includes consumer information, marketing, horticulture, live—- stock, and forestry. Table 4. County Cooperative Extension Service Worker Positions and Percentages of the County Posiw tions Represented in the Sample Respondents Position Number Percentage Agricultural agents 57 44. 9 4-H Club agents 18 14. 2 Home economics agents 39 30. 7 Other agents 11 8. 6 No response 2 1. 6 Total 12.7 100. 0 The proportion of county Cooperative Extension Service worker posin- tions in the United States is: 57. 6 percent agricultural agents, 6. 2 per- cent 4-H Club agents, and 36. 2 percent home economics agents. 2 A comparison of the sample to the actual proportion of county positions shows that the proportion of agricultural agents in the sample is quite low, the propotion of 4-H is over twice the actual proportion, and the proportion of home economics agents is similar to the actual proportion. In Table 5 technical subject matter includes such areas as: animal husbandry, agronomy, horticulture, dairy science, textiles, foods, and 2Federal Extension Service, U. S. Department of Agriculture, 1962 Statistics on Activities of Cooperative Extension Service, ESC-SSS , Washington, 1964, p. l. 55 nutrition. Educational methods include education, vocational agriculture and home economics, etc. Sociology, psychology, human behavior, family living, etc. make up the category of human development. Table 5. Major Subject Matter Interests of Respondents as they Relate to Professional Improvement Respondents Subject Matter Number Percentage Technical 84 76. 4 Educational methods 6 5. 4 Human development 20 18. 2 Total 110 100. 0 A far greater number of respondents ranked technical subject matter as their major subject matter interest than the other two categories. Eighty-four or 76. 4 percent said technical subject matter was their major concern. Twenty or 18. 2 percent listed human development as their ma- jor interest. Only six or 5. 4 percent were primarily interested in educa- tional methods. Tenure was viewed from two aspects. First, total tenure and second, tenure in the county now serving are presented in Table 6. Table 6. County Cooperative Extension Service Workers' Cooperative ‘ Extension Service Total Tenure and Tenure in County Now Serving Cooperative Extension Service Tenure in County Number Total Tenure Now Serving of Years Number Percentage Number Percentage 0-5 39 30. 7 51 40. 2 6-15 44 34.6 51 40.2 16-over 42 33.1 21 16.5 No response __2 l. 6 _____4 3.1 Total 127 100. 0 127 100. 0 56 The data in Table 6 show approximately one-third of the county workers were in each of the three tenure categories for total tenure in the Cooperative Extension Service. However, approximately 40. 0 percent of the county workers have served from 0 to 5 years, and 6 to 15 years in the county now serving, while about 16 percent have been in the county now serving over 16 years. The period of time in which the county Cooperative Extension Serv- ice workers received bachelor's and/or master's degrees is presented in Table 7. About one-third of those respondents providing information on this question received their bachelor's degree in each of the three time periods. However, 21 or 84. O'percent of the respondents received their master's degrees in the 1955 to 1963 period. Table 7. The Number and Percentages of County Cooperative Extension Service Worker Respondents who Received Bachelor's and/or Master's Degrees from 1920 to 1963 Period of Bachelor’s Degree Master's Degree Time Number Percentage - Number Percentage 1920-1940 35 34. 3 2 8. 0 1941-1954 34 33. 3 2 8. 0 1955-1963 __33_ 32.4 _2._1_ 84.0 Total Responses* 102 100.0 25 100.0 * Total responses , total number of respondents having bach— elor's degrees and total number of respondents having master's degrees, duplication not removed. The criteria used to establish the subject matter categories in Table 8 is the same as that used in Table 5. The data in Tables 5 and 8 are presented separately to differentiate between subject matter interests of the respondents related to professional improvement and those interests related to formal education. 0.00.2 0:: 0.2V 0.3» CD 0m mm 0.002 0.0 0.50 0.00 N 2 02 0.002 0.0 0.20 0.00 NNH 00 mm 28.0.2. 5580029,.ch 89:32 25:52 Hmcofimosvm 20083052. 50 055050 58:: 2 50085892 58:: 2 50 8:00:92 58:: 2 83m $5083 55.8502 95502 505502 m 1528500 mpcmvconummm 00 29512 28530035 29:52 53.22 0.05.520 3500:8500 or: .5 mmocmtmoxm fimcoflmospm 28:52 58. 9. 555m >92. mm >030 mo .6de 8.82 .m 2an 58 Table 8 shows that at the bachelor's degree level eighty-three or 68. 0 percent of the respondents pursued technical subject matter areas , thirty-eight or 31. 2 percent of the respondents studied educational methods, and only one or 0. 8 percent pursued the area of human develop- ment. At the master's degree level sixteen or 55. 2 percent of the re— spondents studied in technical subject matter areas, eleven or 37. 9 per- cent pursued educational methods, and two or 6. 9 percent studied human develOpment. The respondents who had continued to take courses beyond the highest degree which they had attained placed equal emphasis on technical subject matter and educational methods with twenty-six or 42. 6 percent of the respondents in each category, and nine or 14. 8 per- cent of the respondents were studying human development. One of the respondents had completed his doctor's degree in a tech- nical subject matter area. Also, one of the respondents had completed most of the requirements for a doctor's degree in educational methods. Seventy-four or 58. 3 percent of the respondents were males , fifty- one or 40. 2 percent were females , and two or 1. 5 percent did not respond to this question. Of the male respondents , fifty-six were agricultural agents , ten were 4-H Club agents , and eight were in other county agent positions. One female was an agricultural agent, eight were 4-H Club agents, thirty-nine were home economics agents, and three were in other county agent positions. 59 County COOperative Extension Service Workers' Opinionnaire Responses The material presented in this section includes the number and per- centage of county Cooperative Extension Service workers' responses to each question asked in the opinionnaire. Because the responses to the open—ended questions are combined into three categories , the researcher presents direct quotations taken from the responses to aid in defining the categories. The terms rural oriented, transitional, and urban oriented are used to identify the three categories of responses to the Open-ended questions. The category in which the term rural oriented is used includes responses which emphasized: a farm or rural orientation; agricultural production over all other program areas; demonstration or "how to do it " type of pro— grams; relating agricultural problems to urban people; and/or a reluctance to develop a broader clientele base. The term transitional is used to describe those responses which indicated movement toward a broader clientele base; however, this movement was limited by concerns over the loss of support from the traditional clientele and the uncertainty of the support a new clientele will provide; lack of total perspective in rela— tion to the interdependency and interrelationships of the various segments of society; and attempting to work in new areas or new problems with a new clientele by using traditional methods and approaches. The response which indicated working with a new clientele in broad programs which explore the interdependency and interrelationships of society and investigate 60 the why of things were categorized as urban oriented. Question 1: In your opinion what is the current role of the Cooperaw tive Extension Service in urban and urbanizing areas ? Less than 10 percent gave rural oriented responses. These data are presented in Table 9. Eighty-six percent of the county Cooperative Ex- tension Service workers' responses were categorized transitional and urban oriented . Table 9. Summary of Responses to Question 1: In Your Opinion What is the Current Role of the COOp- erative Extension Service in Urban and Urbanizing Areas ? Respondents Responses Number Percentage Rural oriented 11 8. 66 Transitional 57 44. 88 Urban oriented 5 3 41 . 7 3 No response 6 4. 72 Total 127 100. 0 The following quotations are examples of responses which were cate- gorized as being rural oriented. One county Cooperative Extension Serv— ice worker said the current role of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban and urbanizing areas was: Providing agricultural information as it may be related to urban problems. Extension's function is related to agri— culture, and not urban areas. The full name of this organi- zation is "COOperative Extension Work in Agriculture and Home Economics. " I note that you do not include agri— culture in your headings. The fact that taxes support this work does not require that we get into areas outside agri— culture and home economics. 61 Another county worker said, In work such as home groups and youth there is some need. But don't forget there are private agencies al» ready doing work in this area. Some examples of transitional responses are presented here. As one county worker points out: Our current role seems to be trying to be "all things to all people, " an impossible situation. Our dilemma is that we can't decide whether to neglect farmers so as to develop urban programs and get support from the people with the most votes, or to ignore the city (except to fill specific requests) and develOp new and better farm pro- grams (where we are best qualified). We can't do both with the staff and finances now available. Another county worker said, To serve the increasing masses of publics in the field of education in home and family living, money manage- ment, and probably strongest in consumer buying or education. There is great opportunity and need for active youth programs in organized 4-H work as well as other phases leading youngsters in guided lines of career 0p- portunities. Agriculture still remains the most important part of today's economy. Urban people need agricultural training and background in daily living as well as agri~ culture dependent careers. Another responded , To assist public agencies and community groups solve problems of area-wide importance where our knowledge of plant life, soils, animal life, water, etc. makes us the logical agency through which to seek the assistance. Examples of acceptable problems: parks, recreation areas, erosion and brush control in hillside residential areas, water supply, etc. Another commented , The current role is probably a rural program grafted on and slightly adOpted to fit an urban setting. Subject 62 matter, the organizational framework, the methods of COOperative Extension can be used to serve effectively the needs of the vast population groups in an urban setting. Another listed his response, Expanding Needed but not publicized Difficult for old timers to accept sometimes Fills definite need but may require new methods . Inevitable for survival mpwai—a Another responded , Urban citizens are being shortchanged for their extension tax dollar. Too often extension agents work with coop- erators who request help. But the urban person does not request help because he does not know it is available to him, nor just what kind of help he can have. The current role of extension is of minor educational importance. The urban oriented responses include such comments as was made by this county worker. I would quote from the Smith-Lever Act "to the people. " Our role is to disseminate information "to the people. " Where they are living does not enter into the picture. Their needs should be evaluated and responses included in our plan of work. If this results in increased effort, OK, decreased same. Trends should follow in proportion to usage. Another remarked , According to the "Statement of Scope and Responsibility of the Cooperative Extension Service" published April, 1958, the Extension Service has the same responsibility to urban peOple as rural, although priority is to be given those families producing good food and fiber, as I inter- pret this statement. In reality, however, Ihave found that Extension in this State has been slow to adjust to meet their urban responsibilities. We in urban areas, who must meet the needs of our rapidly growing urban populations have had to pioneer methods and programs to 63 meet these needs without much assistance from outside the county. Another explained , The role of the Cooperative Extension Service is to work with all the people. Being a part of the Land Grant Col- lege we should represent the college in the county. The exact work will depend on the local situation. If an area is being serviced by an established organization or group it should not be duplicated by the Cooperative Extension Service, but the Cooperative Extension Service should cooperate with similar groups. Another commented, I feel that the Extension Service must work with peOple in urban areas to carry out the philosophy of extension working with all people. This group cannot be ignored-- they play an important part in local government, and this is very important in securing local government support for extension work. Another stated , Working with all people toward economic and social de- velopment. Another said, I feel Cooperative Extension Service is designed for all people and thus believe in urban and urbanizing areas , the programs must be adapted to this audience. Question 2: In your opinion should Extension educational assistance to urban peOple be ? The data in Table 10 show that approximately 15 percent of the county worker respondents said Extension educational assistance to urban people should be held the same to increased slightly, while over 80 percent of the responses were in the category increase moderately to substantially. 64 Table 10. Summary of Responses to Question 2: In Your Opinion Should Extension Educational Assistance to Urban PeOple Be? Respondents Responses Number Percentage Held the same to increase slightly l9 14. 96 Increase moderately to substantially 104 81. 89 No response 4 3.15 Total 127 100.00 Question 3: What proportion of time do you think Extension workers should spend working with urban residents of your county? The responses to this question are summarized in Table 11. Approxi- mately one-tenth of the county worker respondents replied that less than 20 percent of the time should be spent with urban work. One—half of the respondents indicated Extension workers should spend 21 to 60 percent of their time working with urban residents. Approximately one-third of the respondents said 61 to 100 percent of the worker's time should go in- to urban work . Table 11. Summary of Responses to Question 3: What Proportion of Time Do You Think Extension Workers Should Spend Working with Urban Residents of Your County? Respondents Responses Number Percentages 0 to 20 percent 14 ll. 02 21 to 60 percent 64 50.40 61 to 100 percent 44 34. 65 No response 5 3. 93 Total 127 100.00 65 Question 4A: From what sources do you think Extension will receive its financial support in the future? Question four was divided into two parts. The first part sought opinions concerning the sources of funds for the future Operation of the Cooperative Extension Service. The second part of the question attempted to obtain opinions related to sources of support other than financial or goodwill and favorable attitudes toward the Cooperative Extension Service. The respondents were also asked to supply information concerning the present sources of financialsupport for comparison with the future sources. The responses are presented in Table 12. Table 12 shows the number and percentage of responses in each source category in terms of the present and the future. When comparing the number of responses for future financial support to the present it can be seen that county, state and federal sources received fewer responses in the future column, while more respondents indicated the other sources. The greatest increase in numbers of responses for future support from a source occurred in the categories city government, business, foundations, and industries. Question 48: From what sources do you think Extension will receive its support other than financial? ' The greatest number of responses to this question were in the cate- gories of county, state, and federal government. Business, industries, organizations, and foundations formed the next group of sources. This information is presented in Table 13. $035 05 :2 0003 00000000: 502.53 00350 0020:0000 03550000 3:300 00 58:3: 200.0» 08. :0 002 02 002500000 0:330 000 8500.00 08. 8.00 :2 00:300 5000 :00 00000000: 0: 000 00000000: 00 58:3: 05 0028500000: 02050 02000 02.2.2.2 66 00.00 002 20.0 . 0 00.00 002 00.0 0 550 02.00 022 00.0 02 . 00.00 002 02.0 0 00020010200000 00.00 022 00.22 22 00.00 002 00 .0 0 002503002 00.00 222 00.02 02 00.00 002 02.0 0 00020000300 00.00 022 00.22 22 00.00 002 00.2 0 00002030 02.00 00 00.00 00 00.02 00 20.00 002 205000 00.00 00 00.00 00 00.00 00 00.20 20 00000 00.00 02» 02.00 00 00.00 00 00.00 00 50300 20.00 022 00.02 02 00.00 002 00.0 0 0020 00.00 002 00.0 0 00.00 002 00.2 0 02:02:50.2. 85:85>OO 00085050 58:32 00085050 58:32 00085050 58:32 0000:0050 58:32 000300 00000000 02 00000000 00000000 02 00000000 050030 2020:0020 0.2330 0.50030 2020:0020 00000.00 20003030 05 :2 2.50030 202000020 002 030000 222.2,. 0020:0800 02020.2. 30% 00 000.300 0.0223 80:0 202. 000.0030 00. 000000000 00 0:08:30 .02 0200.2. 67 Table 13. Summary of Responses to Question 48: From What Source Do You Think Extension Will Receive its Support Other than Finan- cial? 1 Response No Response Source Number Percentage Number Percentage Government Township 27 21. 26 100 78. 74 City 46 36.22 81 63.78 County 73 57.48 54 42.52 State 74 58.27 53 41.73 Federal 77 60. 63 50 39. 37 Business 69 54. 33 58 45. 67 Foundations 57 44. 88 70 55. 12 Industry 69 54. 33 58 45. 67 Organizations 61 48. 03 66 51. 97 Other l9 14. 96 108 85. 04 1The total number of responses and no responses for each source is 127. Question 5: What kinds of assistance do you feel the total Extension program should provide for urban people in each of the following areas ? Responses to this question were categorized into the three categories of rural oriented, transitional, and urban oriented. A summary of the responses is presented in Table 14. Regarding the kind of assistance that should be provided to urban people in the area of agricultural production, management, and natural re- source development; 33 percent of the responses were rural oriented, 45 percent were transitional, and 21 percent were urban oriented. Responses which were classified rural oriented were those which indicated direct service to farmers, or information to home owners about landscaping and 68 002 00 .00 20 00 .00 00 00 .00 00 0530000 20032302000 00 25200022203 0:0 0:250:02 022 00.00 00 20.02 02 00.0 0 V253 :020:0uxm 00300 5000 0:0 2:0 022 00 .00 00 00 .00 2% 00 .02 02 00280:000 0800 2520:0000 m: 2o .3 0m 0m .3 N0 8 .mm mm 0:000 23:: 08.. 0858800 202 02 .20 00 00.00 00 00.00 00 808002950 0003000: 200300: 0:0 0:08000:08 3020030000 2052302000. 50832 0000:0050 50832 0000:0050 58:32 0000:0050 50832 00:0 2000.2. 008580 :085 5:035:90. 0080200 20:30 000:00000 0 0000.0 05302200 000 00 0000 :2 020000 2:00:22 :00 003000 023000 80:0000 :020:00xm 2000.2. 00.3. 2000 30% OD 00:0002000. 00 00:32 00005 "0 :0200030 00 000:00000 00 808830 .252 0200.2. 69 horticultural problems. Examples of transitional responses are: And , Knowledge resource in such areas as vegetable produc- tion, lawn care, horticultural problems, insect pests, marketing and consumer information. If farm still sur- rounded the urban area they may need help in how to be able to get out of farming. Tax problems, what to do after farm is sold for income etc. When help is not available from a private agency, exten- sion should help people understand the benefits of sound management. No service should be provided when it is available from a private individual or agency. Two examples of urban oriented responses are: And , Assistance in coordinating the activities of many indi- viduals and organizations working in this field. Offering technical guidance in timber production, crop production, and the use of forest lands for recreation. Promoting good resource planning and development. Assistance must be geared to the need. It will, of neces- sity, cover a wide range of subjects—-food production, home maintenance, self-improvement, soil conservation, opportunities for taking advantage of natural resources, etc. In the area of community and public affairs assistance for urban people 22 percent of the responses were rural oriented, 54 percent were transi- tional, and 23 percent urban oriented. Some examples of responses from each category are presented here. These responses were categorized as being rural oriented. One county worker said, Inform these people of the large percentage of the labor force involved in agriculture. Keep them up to date on the government farm programs. Be sure the urban public understands the farmers problems. Tours, local farm visits, and agricultural field days would help. 70 Another expressed his feelings this way, Very little. Public affairs (such as roads, schools, etc.) information may be very important but I don't feel it is our job as agents to be leaders in this field. Reasons: 1. Technology in trained fields of agriculture impossible to keep up with now. 2. Consists mostly of night work. 3. Too easily becomes politically involved. 4. Gives no personal satisfaction. Another county worker stated, I have no feeling upon extension's role in this area. After some study of the outline of public affairs in the SCOPE report, I wonder if the local chamber of commerce in our community is not already fulfilling this function. These responses were transitional. One county worker stated his views this way. Extension workers must get into politics when organiza- tions are created and public opinion is necessary for a program to succeed. This should not be from a govern- ment angle but for the protection of private enterprise. Another said , Some work should be done in this field, but it should be done through existing organizations. These are already set up and it would be unhealthy for Extension to try to get in the forefront. Another responded, Much needs to be done by the Extension in Community Development. The urban people tend to be less interested in their community than farm folks. We need to work with the community groups on programs that are of interest to them and try to show how this will help their community. The following responses were placed in the urban oriented category. One county worker said, 71 Extension should continue to expand in this area, working through an ever increasing number of groups. Member- ship in varied groups and serving on committees broadens the scope of Extension. Another replied , Programs to help people more fully understand their respon- sibilities as citizens and how public affairs affect their families and communities. And another stated, Community improvement is making great strides in some areas. With extension service leading the way many have been able to overcome "growing pains. " Fifteen percent of the responses in the area of extension home eco- nomics assistance for urban people were rural oriented, 38 percent were transitional, and 46 percent were urban oriented. Some of the responses are presented here. The examples of rural oriented responses are: And , Since the home economics section of the Agricultural Ex- tension system was originally designed for the rural fam- ilies, I feel that it should remain to be so. Urban homes should seek home economics assistance from other sources or a special branch that is connected to Universities. However, the public is entitled to the publications that are written in this field. For those homemakers who have not had home economics training it has good possibilities provided ways are found to conform with bridge and bowling schedules. (We should add working wives also.) The examples of transitional responses are: Certainly extension can do as much in education in this area in urban communities as it has in the rural community. But with the use of good home economics people by many commercial and public utilities, the extension role must be different, more SOphisticated than in the past. 72 And, We place no distinction on Extension home economics for urban and rural people other than we find it necessary to work with them in a slightly different manner. Some examples of urban oriented responses are presented here. As one county worker summarized, There is unlimited potential for home economics exten- sion work with urban women-weverything from nutrition to clothing, home management, child care, budgeting and money management--the works. Another stated , There is a decided need and future for home economics assistance in urban areas. In fact, as great a need as was formerly in rural areas. We notice that families in low cost housing, our transcient military families and the newly married couples are in great need of help with family financial planning and child development. Though they do not all recognize this need, agencies directly con- cerned for their welfare do. As in other urban areas , Ex- tension is now beginning to establish contact with these agencies. Another said, This is one area in which Extension finds no barriers. Urban homemakers can and do use the services of home agents and homemaking information as well or perhaps even better than do rural homemakers. Our county home demonstration program is a classic example of how leader- ship can be devoted among urban ladies and the kinds of information that can be utilized fully. Six percent of the responses in the area of 4-H and other youth exten- sion work assistance for urban people were rural oriented, 14 percent transitional, and 80 percent were urban oriented. An example of a rural oriented response is: 73 Where land is available for working with animals or for planting a crOp of vegetables , fruit or ornamentals, 4-H work has a particular place. When 4-H is reduced to a "riding club" of equistrians, 4—H has lost its purpose of building future citizens. An example of a transitional response is: Programs that would be of greater interest to urban youth should be worked in but they may be already available from other organizations. Duplication of this would be ridiculous. The following are examples of urban oriented responses. They are included here in greater number than in the other categories because they point up different considerations in this area and because of the large pro- portion of responses in this category. A county worker said, Extension should again stand ready to meet the needs of every boy and girl, whether in urban areas or not. Working with other youth agencies may be necessary but we must gear our image to meet the needs of all youth. Another responded , The 4-H Club program probably is the most far-reaching program in my county to urban people. Through 4—H, we are able to keep Extension's educational role before the people. We make good use of monthly newsletters, which the 4—H members take home to their parents, to detail in the information we teach in the clubs; and to keep them abreast of coming Extension events, as well as timely tips on home yard and garden care, and insect control. Another stated , This is the major area in which Extension can be of greatest Service. Organizing clubs , selecting and training leaders and meeting the clubs as often as possible is the job of Extension agents. Our job is to find educational assist- ance to provide in whatever field the youth are interested. Another replied , 74 4-H and Other Youth Extension Work have a place in urban areas. With our goal of building boys and girls by giving them opportunities to make their best even better, we are of the opinion that we haven't even dented the imaginative opportunities for building and assisting youth in the fields - of personal interest, including commodities, health, safety, cooperation, industry, sportsmanship, citizenship, com- munity service, etc. Another offered, Here We should depart from the old 4-H project rut and offer programs in recreation, health and hobbies. Provide the opportunity and atmosphere for older youngsters to discuss careers, occupation and marriage or other special interests. In the area of assistance for urban people in marketing and utilization of agricultural products, 50 percent of the responses were rural oriented, 21 percent were transitional, and 29 percent were urban oriented. An ex" ample of a rural oriented response is this statement: Urban people need to learn why a "beef animal in Kansas is not a steak in Chicago"—-need to understand costly services between the producer and consumer. This statement is an example of the transitional response. Surplus picture might be one indication of the effective-— ness of Extension's educational program in the fields of production. What impact might Extension have if equiv- alent resources were poured into the marketing of these agricultural products. The urban oriented responses indicated that the respondent considered marketing and utilization as production, assembly, processing, sales and consumption. Question 6? What personal experiences have you had in urban Extent- sion work ? 7S Twelve percent of the responses to this question were categorized as being rural oriented, 63 percent were transitional, and 21 percent were urban oriented. These data are presented in Table 15. Table 15. Summary of Responses to Question 6: What Personal Experiences Have You Had in Urban Extension Work? Respondents Responses Number Percentage Rural oriented 15 ll. 81 Transitional 80 62. 99 Urban oriented 27 21. 26 No response ____5_ 3. 94 Total 127 100.00 The following are examples of the responses. Thus county workers‘ responses were categorized as rural oriented. I participated in a Public Affairs survey in ---- County, which I felt was ridiculous. . . We did little except argue over what is a public affair. We are not trained in this area. Why "meddle" or duplicate what professionals are hired by local governments to do? This response was also rural oriented. Telephone calls. . . Our office phones are constantly ringing. Urban dwellers requesting information on lawns , gardens , and flowers. We give out the latest information and send bulletins if requested. We limit our home visits due to the number of calls. These responses were classified as transitional, Radio—-daily S-minute program. Answer questions sent in by listeners. Negro station--owned, operated and listened to by Negroes in -------- area. "Better Living Series"--meetings with homemakers. Meetings planned and sponsored. in cooperation with such groups as 76 Credit Unions, PTA's, Church groups, Women's Clubs, Industrial Girls' Clubs, Labor Unions, Home Economics Extension Clubs, City Housing Commission, Social Agencies, etc. YWCA and YMCA. And , I have been employed to work primarily on the non-agri- cultural interpretation of the progressive soil survey now in operation. To date I have worked with Plan Commis- sions , Health Department, county and state highway of- ficials and land developers. These agencies have been very receptive to the ideas and information available through the use of the soil survey. I have also carried on educational meetings with the general public and written articles for the "mass media" outlets available in this area. These are urban oriented responses. After coming to ------- County, I soon learned that the urban residents did not know anything about extension service. They did not know where to turn to get. unbiased information in horticulture and home economics. After sizing up the situation our extension staff felt that the setting up of a home economics committee and a land- scape committee , would contribute much to planning a program to meet the needs of this group. This approach has been successfull. Speaking to various organizations and groups in urban areas, has been most helpful. Demw- onstrations and clinics have contributed much. Radio and TV programs in the past, have assisted in carrying badly needed information to this group. A regular mailing list of subject matter in which this urban group is interested, is maintained. A clean-up campaign was quite success- ful this spring. Initial plans were made by a Landscape Committee. Planning meetings were held with county of- ficials, and all departments cooperated in carrying out this educational program. A special pick-up day was designated and county trucks collected the litter. Object of the campaign was to clean up roadways and vacant lots in the county of the debris which had collected. Many community organizations assisted. Radio, TV, and News-- papers helped. 77 And , In this county, because of previous agents, and the total distribution of population, we have been involved with urban affairs for some time. We are extremely heavy on mass media. We have several in-town 4-H Clubs, as well as in the "urban" areas. Our membership would be less than half rural. There are several home programs directed at the (city) homemaker, as well as young home- makers, with program designed for their specific needs. The two telephone lines that are into the office are kept busy with urban calls. The agents feel like a "kael and Hyde " proposition as you are wearing several caps in the same day. Question 7: To what extent has urban Extension work been undertaken in the following areas in your county? The summary of responses to this question is presented in Table 16. It is shown in this table that 44 percent of the respondents said that a moderate amount to much work had been done in urban agricultural produc— tion, management, and natural resource development; 50 percent said the same for community and public affairs; 90 percent for extension home eco~ nomics; 77 percent for 4-H and other youth extension work; and 53 percent said the same for marketing and utilization of agricultural products. Question 8.: In your opinion how effective have urban Extension pro-- grams been in your county? The responses to this question are presented in Table 17. In all Ext- tension program areas the majority of the county workers ranked the ef— fectiveness of the area moderate to very high. Sixty-=one percent of the reSpondents placed agricultural production, management and natural re- SOurce development efforts in this category; 61 percent did the same with 78 2N2 00 .Nm «0 22 .5. :0 0.6308: 283220080 00 :02H0N0233 0:0 0:300:02 0.02 00.: :0 00.00 00 02:03 :000 a:00.xm 0030.2 5000 0:0 2:0 002 00 .00 m 22 om .0 m2 002:0:000 080: :000:00xm :2 2:. .00 S m... .2. 8 28:00 33:: 0:0 3:388:00 002 02 .00 mm 00 .00 no 308002950 093000: 20:30: 0:0 .u:0::000:0E 50303003 205230254. 2000.2. 0000:0050 50532 00050050 . 50832 000:0. 0002.2 30> 00 00.05002 080m 00. 0232.2 000:0000m :00005052 :00m 02:03 :000:00.xm :00:D 00m 0:00.020 :00? 0.2. 03:300 :30? :2 000:.4 05302200 000 :0 K :030030 00 000:0000m Ho b08830 .02 0200.2 79 022 cm .00 0.\. on .00 mm 0303005 2033230300 00 :030N0233 0:0 0:300:02 002 20.00 002 00.02 om 02:03 :000:0u.xm 00.30% 5:30 0:0 2:0 002 oo .00 022 00 .0 O2 0280:000 080: :000:03xm 022 mm .00 0: 02 .00 02V 0.0030 002030 0:0 32:38800 v2 2 02V .20 R 00 .00 2V2» 0008002950 00:3000: 20:30: .3:08000:08 50303005 2033230300. 2030.2. 0003:0050 50832 0003:0050 :00832 000:4 :92 05> 03 03050022 .3012 03 30.2 >5> 000:0000m :000:03xm :00:D 0>0m 0>3003m 302 :025QO :300 :2 03:300 :3on :2 :00m 08050.5 “.0 :030030 03 000:0000m 00 058830. .2 030.2“ 80 community and public affairs; 92 percent with extension home economics; 83 percent with 4-H and other youth extension work; and 69 percent of the respondents placed marketing and utilization of agricultural products in this category. State Cooperative Extension Service Directors' Opinionnaire Responses The material presented in this section includes the number and per- centages of the State Cooperative Extension Service Directors' responses to each question asked in the opinionnaire. The terms used in this sec— tion are defined as they were in the preceeding section which contained the summary of county Cooperative Extension Service workers' responses. Question I: In your opinion what is the current role of the Coopera- tive Extension Service in urban and urbanizing areas ? Thirteen percent of the State Cooperative Extension Service Directors' responses were classified as rural oriented, 40 percent transitional, and 44 percent urban oriented. These data are presented in Table 18. Table 18. Summary of Responses to Question 1: In Your Opinion What is the Current Role of the Cooperative Extension Service in Urban and Urbanizing Areas? Respondents Responses Number Percentage Rural oriented 6 13. 33 Transitional 18 40. 00 Urban oriented 20 44. 44 No response __1 2. 22 Total 45 100. 00 81 The following quotations are examples of responses which were cate- gorized in the three categories, rural oriented, transitional, and urban oriented. One State COOperative Extension Service Director responding in the rural oriented category said: Our primary responsibility is to rural people but all people will be given help when this is requested. Another stated , Until we have urban workers the present staff should be- come involved in urban work to the extent it is requested --not solicited. Another said , The current role is not clear. We do not have a well planned organized urban program. Much inprovement needs to be made in Home Economics and 4-H Club Work in urban areas. Farm technolOgy must not be decreased. Urban people will not lend real support as will farm and rural people. Examples of transitional responses are: And , Also, Urban areas are legally entitled to the services of the Ex- tension Services including youth work, home economics, policy and community development and those agricultural areas applicable to them. Because we have been "farm oriented" we still would say in this state that our prime responsibility is to farm and rural families but not to them alone. Extension currently plays a restricted role in urban areas. Some leadership is given to industrial development efforts and some assistance is given primarily in the areas of health, nutrition, and horticulture. Extension's main business is people and the development 82 of people the main objective. City people are taxpayers as well as rural people are. They are entitled to the kind of help Extension can give. Many of today's city people were rural people yesterday and know the value of Exten- sion for themselves and their children. Extension can help city peOple with their agricultural problems--and they have many of them (lawn care and fertilization, in— sect control, and disease control, etc.) and with their home economics and youth needs, etc. Many city pe0ple are in agriculturally related activities. Examples of urban oriented responses are: As one state director remarked, The Extension Service has a responsibility to all people and therefore, should design programs to reach urban people in an effective manner. Another said, The same as to other people, Extension has a responsi- bility to the people of the United States. Our responsi- bility is limited only by our competency. Another stated, We have a responsibility here and I see no reason why we whould not accept the challenge. Ours is education, and I think we are expected to do the job regardless of where our clientele is! Another replied, The current role is to teach urban people to help themselves. We have a responsibility to all people-—rural and urban. New information should be disseminated to those who have a need. Question 2: In your Opinion should Extension educational assistance to urban people be ? In response to this question 24 percent of the state directors said Extension educational assistance should be held the same to increased 83 slightly and 75 percent said it should be increased moderately to substan— tially. These responses are presented in Table 19. Table 19. Summary of responses to Question 2: In Your Opinion Should Extension Educational Assist- ance to Urban People be: Respondents Responses Number Percentage Held the same to increased slightly ll 24. 44 Increased moderately to substantially 34 75 . 5 6 No response _0_ 00. 00 Total 45 100. 00 Question 3: What proportion of time do you think Extension workers should spend working with urban residents of your state? The response to this question as summarized in Table 20 show that 49 percent of the state directors indicated Extension workers should spend 20 percent of their time or less working with urban residents , 47 percent said from 21 to 60 percent of the Extension workers time should be spent working with urban residents , and only 2 percent said over 60 percent of the time should be spent on urban work. Table 20. Summary of Responses to Question 3: What Proportion of Time Do You Think Extension Workers Should Spend Working with Urban Residents of Your State ? Respondents Responses Number Percentage O to 20 percent 21 48. 89 21 to 60 percent 22 46. 67 61 to 100 percent 1 2. 22 No response 1 2 22 Total 45 100. 00 84 Question 4A: From what sources do you think Extension will receive its financial support in the future? The respondents were asked to provide information on present sources of financial support as well as future sources of financial support. The responses are presented in Table 21. The data in Table 21 show the number and percentage of responses in each source category in terms of the present and the future. When comparing the number of responses for future financial support to the present it can be seen that an equal number responded in both the present and future regarding county financial support, there are fewer responses in state and federal government and other categories. All other sources contain a greater number of responses in the future column with the greatest gain in number being in the category of city government. Question 4B: From what sources do you think Extension will receive its support other than financial? This question differs from Question 4A in that it seeks opinions re- lated to sources of favorable attitudes and goodwill toward the Coopera- tive Extension Service. The group of categories receiving the greatest number of responses included county, state, and federal government. The middle group con- tained all other categories except township government and other sources. This information is presented in Table 22. 85 .0030 00.: :2 0003 000:0000: 0:050:20 0o2>5m :020:0fi£ 03550000 03030 00 :0083: 2052.2 003 :o 00 02 00300050 0:33... 0:0 3:000:0 003 0300 :2 00300 0000 :00 000:0000: 0: 0:0 000:0000: 00 5083: 003 0:32:000:00: 0200.03 0200”. 00.2. 2 22.20 22V 00.0 2: 00.00 00 00.02 0 5030 22 .20 22. 00 .0 2. 22 .20 2:. 00 .0 2. 080008080 00.00 00 22.22 0 00.00 NV 00.0 0 00330305 00 .00 N2: 00 .0 0 00 .002 00 E. E. 0:0300:300 00.00 00 00.0 N 00.00 22: 00.0 2 0005030 00.0 0 22.20 22: 00.0 2 00.00 E: 205000 00.0 m 00.00 02‘ E. 1: 00.002 02: 02.030. 00.0 0 22.20 20 00.0 0 22.20 22V 05300 00.00 00 00.00 02 22.20 22: 00.0 v 0320 00.00 02V 022.2: 0 00.002 02V In n: 02005500. 5085960 0003:0050 50832 0003:0050 50832 0003:0050 50832 0003:0050 :00832 00.2300 00:00000 02 00:00000 00:05.00 02 00:00000 3.200030 205:0:20 0.23330 300030 2020:0230 32500.20 200.2330 02.3 :2 3.50030 538050 032 0.05000 2223 :000:03xm 0:200. 300 002 000:300 300.3 80:0 ”.00 :030030 03 000:00000 00 0.208830 .20 0200.2. 86 Table 22. Summary of Responses to Question 4B: From What Sources Do You Think Extension Will Receive its Support Other Than Financial?l Response No Response Source Number Percentage Number Percentage Government Township 10 22.22 35 77.78 City 22 48.89 23 51.11 County 30 66.67 15 33.33 State 33 73. 33 12 26. 67 Federal 32 71.11 13 28. 89 Business 21 46.67 24 53.33 Foundations 20 44. 44 25 55. 56 Industries 21 46. 67 24 53. 33 Organizations 21 46. 67 24 53. 33 Other 5 11.11 40 88.89 1 . The total number of. responses and no responses for each source is 45. Question 5: What kinds of assistance do you feel the total Extension program should provide for urban pe0p1e in each of the following areas ? The summary of responses to this question is presented in Table 23. The three categories of rural oriented, transitional, and urban oriented are again used to describe the responses. The responses regarding the kind of assistance that should be pro- vided to urban pe0p1e in the area of agricultural production, management, and natural resource development were: 37 percent rural oriented, 46 per- Cent transitional, and 16 percent urban oriented. Examples of rural oriented responses are: Education of urban people as to role and importance of agriculture . 87 02. 22 .20 2.2 22 .20 2.2 0: .km :2 02050:: 28328250 00 :03002233 0:0 0:300:02 02. 2.2. 2.0 00 00 .0 2. n0 .0 0 0:03 :020:03xm 03300 505 0:0 2:2. 02. 00 .02. 20 00 .02. 02 00 .02 0 00280:oo0 0800 :020:02.xm 02. 2.2. .2.2. cm 0: .km :2 0: .2 0 0:20:00 0220:: 0:0 32:25:00 02. 00 .02 u 20 .02. 00 20 .00 02 U0080020000 00:3000: 20.2330: 0:0 3:08000:08 50303080 205230304 20220.2. 0003:0050 :00832 0003:0050 :00832 0003:0050 :00832 00:22. 0020030 :00: D 20:0320:0:.2. 09:02.20 20:30 000:00000 0000.24 05302200 003 00 0000 :2 020000 :00:D :00 00380 023000 80:0o:0 :020:02xm 2030.2. 003 2000 300 00 00:030200< 00 00:20 3003 20 :030030 03 000250000 00 058830 .00 02000 88 And, Information pertaining to landscapting, production of hor- ticultural crops, and disease and insect control. Transitional responses looked like these: Emphasize work with industry and such producers as florists, vegetable, etc. Avoid individual homeowner service. Utilize mass media and telephone service. And, as one state director listed, 1. Ornamental horticulture 2. Household management 3. Legal documents--wills, estate planning, partner- ships, etc. 4. Recreation 5. Use of water resources State directors who provided urban oriented responses said: An understanding of the interrelationship of agricultural production to urban living particularly with respect to the relationships between agricultural service industries and agricultural production. This same factor would be true of management. Natural resource development di— rectly involves both the land owner and the land user. Therefore, a successful natural resource development program must involve the entire state's population. The Extension Service should provide organizational guidance, programs and motivation to accomplish the natural resource development. And , l. Furnishing information on gardening, home grounds, hobby farming, etc. , to all by means of mass media. 2. Holding short courses--conferences in selected sub- jects to provide more information to those especially interested. 3. Applying agricultural business management and anal- ysis principles to other small businesses. 4. Organizing and working with groups in resource de- velopment. 89 The responses regarding the kind of assistance that should be provided urban pe0p1e in the area of community and public affairs were: 18 percent rural oriented, 38 percent transitional, and 44 percent urban oriented. Examples of rural oriented responses are: as one respondent said, Work with groups when requested. Another said, Understanding of government programs, farm organizations, and USDA agencies and their relationship to urban people. Understanding of pesticides and weedicides relating to public consumption. Transitional responses ran similar to these: 1. Direct teaching in public affairs issues affecting rural people in which urban people have a stake. 2. Organizational know-how. 3. Arrange for resources which can help deal with prob- lems of urban people especially from Land-Grant Institutions . And , An educational program designed to help governmental units become more effective. These responses were classified urban oriented. One respondent said, Assistance for this area should be increased by a large amount. This is possibly our area of greatest opportunity with urban pe0p1e. Another replied: There appears to be more organized and concentrated leadership in towns than in rural areas. This makes the urban areas ready audiences for educational programs in public and community affairs. Another re sponded , 90 Present unbiased facts on public affairs. Extension must not vacate its traditional role of educators to other agencies. Thirteen percent of the responses regarding the kind of assistance that should be provided to urban people in extension home economics were rural oriented, 40 percent were transitional, and 47 percent were urban oriented. The following quotations are representative of the three cate- gories. Examples of the rural oriented responses are: Same as for rural pe0p1e. And, Provide urban residents with the same applicable home economics assistance that is offered rural residents. Several examples of transitional responses are: "Subject matter is applicable but our methods of teaching may have to be changed. " The unit system does not have a wide appeal in urban areas. Interest meetings or a series of sessions on one topic may be one approach. And , Little basic difference between rural and urban needs , except perhaps in degree or priorities. In the urban oriented category the following quotations are examples. One state director said, Programs must be modernized to stay ahead of advancing technology in the home. Less emphasis should be placed on crafts and more on home economics subject matter. Another said, An educational program which will gain the support of tax- payers and government representatives beyond the image of home economics. 91 And another said, The Extension Service as the principal off-campus arm of the University should make available the home economics resources of the University to the entire population of the state. This is now being done primarily through the home- makers club organization. However, our basic organiza- tion provides a vehicle by which the total home economics educational pr0gram can be provided to both for carrying out our responsibilities. The state directors' responses to the kind of assistance that should be provided in 4-H and other youth extension work were 7 percent rural oriented, 9 percent transitional and 84 percent urban oriented. The rural oriented responses emphasized providing general information and work with groups when requested on agriculture, home economics, and related subjects. Examples of the transitional responses are: When project qualifications are met and other "success" factors are present, a young person can be a 4-H Club member regardless of location. Under these conditions, our urban youngsters can receive the same training and benefits as those from a rural area. And, In certain urban situations the Extension Service should develop 4-H Club work with urban youth. The urban oriented responses were similar to these quotations. Because of the greater Opportunities for youth activities in towns there is less need for 4—H Clubs as such. There is a great need for our techniques and know-how in organiza- tion. This may mean a shift to leader training as Extension principle function. And , Youth program for urban areas will continue to increase as more specialized projects are deve10ped, but again it is 92 hoped that youth workers will find ways of working through other professionally trained pe0p1e who are conducting youth programs. The tally of responses to the kind of assistance Extension should pro- vide to urban pe0p1e in marketing and utilization of agricultural products was 38 percent rural oriented, 31 percent transitional, and 31 percent urban oriented. The rural oriented responses were similar to these examples: Education——more information about problem as related to the city peOple. And Developing an understanding in the consumer. Some examples of transitional responses are: Much work opportunity rests with firms whose personnel and headquarters are urban. And, Marketing work should be expanded, but not at the expense of production projects with rural people. The urban oriented responses were similar to these quotations: The Extension program in this area will be concerned with consumer education and stress assistance to marketing organizations in market and price analysis, cooperative organization and operational efficiency. Benefits from this assistance are passed directly to the urban consumer in lower prices and higher quality. And , Programs with firms that produce goods and services for agriculture . Programs with firms that assemble, process and distribute food and fiber. Programs for consumers on better buying of foods, etc. , consumer buying of a number of items. 93 Question 6: Are urban areas in your state now participating in Exten- sion sponsored activities ? Four percent of the responses to this question were categorized as rural oriented or no response, 20 percent were transitional, and 76 percent were urban oriented. These data are summarized in Table 24. Table 24. Summary of Responses to Question 6: Are Urban Areas in Your State now Participating in Exten- sion Sponsored Activities ? Respondents Responses Number Percentage Rural oriented 1 2. 22 Transitional 9 20. 00 Urban oriented 34 75. 56 No response __1 2. 22 Total 45 100. 00 The criteria used for placing the responses in one of the three cate- gories of Table 24 was the number of the five program areas mentioned in the response. If only one program area was mentioned the response was classified as rural oriented. Two or three program areas mentioned placed the response in the transitional category and four or more program areas mentioned were labeled urban oriented. Question 7: To what extent has urban Extension work been undertaken in the following areas in your state? The responses to this question are summarized in Table 25. Sixty- nine percent of the respondents said the extent of agricultural production, management, and natural resource development work conducted in urban 94 02. :0 .02. 2... mm .3 2.0 02960:: 20:32:28... 00 :03002233 0:0 0:300:02 02. 00 .00 20 22 .20 v2 0:03 :020:03xm 03300 505 0:0 2.22. 02. 2.2. 2.0 00 00 .02 u 0028o:oo0 0800 :000:03xm 02. mm .mm 02 :0 .00 om 0:20:00 022022 0:0 02203580 02. 22 .20 2.2 00 .00 20 3:080020>00 00:3000: 20:32.0: 0:0 .3:08000:08 . :o3030o:0 20532303022. 2030.2. 0003:0050 :00832 0003:0050 :00832 000:0 0032 05> 03 0305002 OEOW OH may“: 000:00000 0.20.25 :02025finm :00:D 002.2 3:00:20 3003 0.2. 003030 :30.» :2 000:4 05302200 003 :2 25000.50:D :000 K :030030 03 000:00000 00 0.208830 .00 0200.2. 95 areas was little to some. Sixty-seven percent said the same for commu- nity and public affairs. Eighty-four percent of the state directors said the extent of extension home economics work conducted in urban areas was moderate to very much. Sixty-nine percent of the respondents said the same for 4—H and other youth extension work. Fifty-three percent of the state directors said the extent of work in marketing and utilization of agricultural products in urban areas was little to some. Question 8: In your opinion how effective have urban Extension pro- grams been in your state ? The responses to this question are summarized in Table 26. The ma- jority of the state directors responded by saying the effectiveness was moderate to very high in each of the five program areas. Ranking of these responses: extension home economics was first; 4-H and other youth extension work was second; marketing and utilization of agricultural products was third; agricultural production, management, and natural resource development was fourth; and community and public affairs wa s fifth . Summary of Information Gathered Two hundred opinionnaires were sent to potential respondents. One hundred and seventy-two or 86. 0 percent of the 200 Opinionnaires sent were returned and used in this study. The locational characteristics were combined into categories of low, medium, and high on the basis of means and standard deviations resulting 96 m2» 3 .00 mm mm . mm 02 0300005 20:0:200300 20 00300330 2000 0030032 00 mm .mm ov 22 .22 m 0:03 0200030022 00.00% :0030 2000 muv 00» mm .mm NV no .0 m 002050000 00:00 03000000 3 00 .3 E 3 .00 ON 0:000 008a 0:8 3250000 00 mm . mm mm 3» .00 ON 30080029300 00:0000: 20:0300 000 3008000000: 003000082 2033200300. 20309 000300800 $0802 000300800 :00E0Z 00:0. 003.2 >:0> 03 030:0002 3Q2 03 30.2 >:0> 000000000 0>02.2 0>3003m 302.2 02030 :00» 02 0.03030 :0o> 02 000m 0.00580 0020003xm 000:.D "0 0030000 03 000000000 00 3:080:00 .3 0200.2. 97 in almost all categories containing approximately equal numbers of re- sponses. While the proportion of county workers in the various positions in the sample differs some from the actual proportion, the ranking of these pro- portions is in the same order as the actual. The majority of the county workers indicated their major subject mat- ter interests related to professional improvement was technical subject matter. Human development was the second highest area when viewed from professional improvement. In terms of total tenure in the Cooperative Extension Service, approxi- mately one-third of the county workers were in each of the three categories of time. Eighty percent of the respondents have served from 0 to 15 years in the county they are now serving. Approximately one-third of the county workers received their bachelor's degrees in each of the three time categories. Eighty-four percent of the respondents received their master's degree in the 1955 to 1963 period. The majority of the county workers received their bachelor's and master's degrees in technical subject matter areas. Of those pursuing additional study about 42 percent were working in technical subject mat- ter areas and about 42 percent were working in educational methods. Approximately 60 percent of the county workers were males and 40 percent were females. The categories transitional and urban oriented respectively received the largest and second largest number of responses from county workers. 98 Over 80 percent of the county worker respondents said that Extension educational assistance to urban people should increase moderately to substantially. One—half of the county workers said Extension workers should spend from 21 to 60 percent of their time working with urban residents and over one-third said 61 to 100 percent of the time should be spent in urban work. In response to the questions concerning future financial support for Extension the respondents generally indicated the various governmental units; however, a large number did not respond to the question. County, state, federal government; business; and industry were said to be the sources of support other than financial in the future. The responses of the county workers indicate that transitional kinds of assistance should be provided for urban people by Extension in agri- cultural production, management and natural resource development; and community and public affairs; urban oriented assistance in extension home economics , and 4—H and other youth extension work; rural oriented assistance in marketing and utilization of agricultural products. Sixty-three percent of the county worker respondents indicated that they had had transitional experiences in urban Extension work. The county workers indicated extension home economics had been undertaken to the greatest extent in their counties with 4—H and other youth Extension work second. The same respondents said the above two areas respectively were the most effective. 99 Forty—four percent of the State Directors said the current role of the Cooperative Extension Service was urban oriented and 40 percent said it was transitional. The Extension educational assistance to urban people should be in- creased moderately to substantially was the response of 75 percent of the state directors . In response to the question concerning the prOportion of time Exten- sion workers should spend working with urban residents of their states 49 percent of the state directors said 0 to 20 percent, and 47 percent said 21 to 60 percent of the time. Fifteen state directors saw city government as contributing to the fi- nancial support of Extension in the future; this is eleven more than at present. The question on support other than financial received the most responses in county, state and federal governments. In response to the question concerning the kinds of assistance the total Extension programs should provide for urban people the largest num- ber of state directors said urban oriented in the areas of community and. public affairs, extension home economics, and 4-H and other youth ex- tension work; transitional in agricultural production, management, and natural resource development; and rural oriented in marketingand utiliza— tion of agricultural products. Seventy-five percent of the state directors gave urban oriented responses 100 when asked if urban areas of their state were now participating in Exten- sion sponsored activities. Extension home economics and 4-H Club and other youth extension work were ranked first and second in terms of the extent of work in urban areas by the state director respondents. The same two areas received the same ranking in terms of their effectiveness. CHAPTER V ANALYSIS OF DATA This study is primarily concerned with measuring the Opinions of the respondents as expressed in answer to specific questions asked in the opinionnaire. A summary of the statistical analysis of the gathered data is presented in this chapter. The chi square test was used in performing the statistical analyses of the data with significance determined at the 5 percent level. This sta- tistic indicates the probability that the responses actually obtained would have been obtained if there were no relationship between the variables under consideration. Because of the limitations of this statistic and the small sample size it was necessary to combine categories of data to as- sure greater confidence in the results. According to Dixon and Massey the sample size must be large enough so that none of the cells of the contingency table contain less than one response and not more than 20 percent of the cells contain less than five responses. 1 They also say that ". . . in the case of one degree of freedom, the approximation of the chi square distribution can be markedly improved 2 by reducing the absolute value of each difference by . 5 before it is squared. " lWilfred J. Dixon and Frank I. Massey, Ir. , Introduction to Statistical Analysis (New York: McGraw—Hill Book Co. , 1957), p. 222. 2Ibicl. , pp. 225-226. 101 102 As was mentioned in Chapter I, there were 1,127 possible contingency tables. The data were processed on the CDC 3600 Computer and the 1,127 contingency tables were then examined to determine the significant com- parisons and the variables in which the categories should be combined. After the categories had been combined and those variables to which there were few responses had been removed, the data were again processed on the CDC 3600 Computer. The second round of processing resulted in 291 contingency tables. Of the two hundred ninety-one tables , fifteen were significant and met the minimum limitations of the chi square statistic. Data Analyse s This section contains a review of opinionnaire questions which, when compared to the independent variables, produced significant chi square tables. This material is presented in the same order as the questions were asked on the opinionnaire. The independent variables used in the chi square tests ofsignificance on the responses of both county Cooperative Extension Service workers and the State Cooperative Extension Service Directors were: total population, popula- tion per square mile , percent urban population , percent rural-farm population , and the percent of population increase from 195 O to 19 60. In addition to the above independent variables the responses of the county Cooperative Extension Service workers concerning tenure in the Cooperative Extension Service , tenure in the Cooperative Extension Service in the county in which the respondent wa 5 serving, and the period of time in which the respondent attained his bachelor's 103 degree were used in testing the relationship to their responses to the de- pendent variables. Also, the responses of the county Cooperative Exten— sion Service workers and the State COOperative Extension Service Directors served as the independent variable in a series of chi square tests to deter- mine if there were relationships in the response of these two groups. The dependent variables of this study are the opinionnaire questions which are reviewed in this section. Question 1: In your opinion what is the current role of the Coopera- tive Extension Service in urban and urbanizing areas? One of the fourteen chi square tests of significance applied to this question produced significant results. Table 27 summarizes the responses to this question when viewed from the period of time in which the county Cooperative Extension Service workers attained their bachelor's degree. While this table does not meet all of the limitations of the statistic used, as were mentioned earlier in this chapter, it describes how the responses occurred and it is included here to point out the relationship between when the county workers received their bachelor's degrees and their views of the current role of the COOperative Extension Service in urban and urban- izing areas. The current role of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban and urbanizing areas was viewed as being transitional by the majority of the county workers respondents. The second highest number of responses was in the urban oriented category. 104 .mo. V0 “v" 3.0 £20.02 N X N 00.002 mm 06.3: mm 2.0.20 2: mmd 0 2030.2. mm.mm mm mmd m mm.mm mm 00.2 2 mmm2 03 0002 Nv.mm 0m om.m2 N2 00.02 02 02.0 v 0002 03 2032 mme om 00.02 02 wm.m m m2.m m 0002 03 022 3000:00 :00E0Z 3000:00 :0030072 3000:00 :00E0Z 3000:00 :008072 0300.2. 00 00300 20300. 0030030 000:3 20003000032. 0030030 20:00 000000000 00 00.2.2. 00:000 0.:0200000 :0003 00030333» 03000000000 003 00:03. 03 000.2. 00 00300 003 00 02>:0m 003000306 0>30:00ooO 003 00 0200 300::00 003 000500000 0:00:03 000200 0000003000 0>30:00ooO 030000 00 003500 KN 02009 105 Those county worker respondents who received their bachelor's de- gree in the period 1920 to 1940 had the largest number of responses in the urban oriented category and the second highest number in the transitional category. Those who received their bachelor's degree in the period from 1941 to 1954 had the largest number of responses in the transitional cate- gory and the second largest number in the urban oriented category. Twenty- two of the thirty-two county worker respondents who received their bach- elor's degree in the period from 1955 to 1963 gave transitional responses and nine gave urban oriented responses. The data in Table 27 show that the group of county workers who re- ceived their bachelor's degree in the period farthest away from the present contains more urban oriented responses than the groups who attained their bachelor's degrees more recently. Also, the group of county workers who received their bachelor's degrees in the period from 1955 to 1963 gave the smallest number of rural oriented responses , but the most transitional re— sponses. Question 3: What prOportion of time do you think Extension workers should spend working with urban residents of your county or state ? Four of the fourteen tests of significance produced significant results. These four tables are presented here. The data in Table 28 present the relationship between the total popula- tion of the counties and the responses of the county Cooperative Extension Service workers concerning the prOportion of time that should be spent working with urban residents. 106 .20. V0 .0: u 3.0 N000.02 H X N 00.002 NN2 3.00 3: 00.Nm 2:0 00.22 02 20300. 20.00 20 00.02 mN 00.02 02 0240 0 003.2 2060 20 om.N2 02 00.02 NN 0N.m v 0:00002 mnNm 00. N00... 0 umdN 0N 02.0 m 30.2 E0800 :00E0Z 3000:00 :000302 3000:00 :00E0Z 3000:00 :0030072 003020000 20300. 2030.2. 00002120 n000:2N o\oONIo 000000000 00 000.2. 003020000 2030.2. >0 030000000 000:.D 0303 050.63 30000 00 020000 3003 000.2. 00 0o3:o0o:0 003 05050000 0:00:03 003:00 0000003000 030000 00 00000000 .0N 0200.2. 107 When the county workers' responses to this question were compared with the total population of the counties , the majority said Extension workers should spend from 21 to 60 percent of the time working with urban residents , and the second highest number of responses was in the 61 to 100 percent category. The majority of responses from those counties which had the highest total population were in the 61-100 percent cate- gory, while the majority of responses from the counties classified medium and low in total population were in the 21-60 percent category. An over- view of Table 28 shows that there are relatively more responses in the 61 to 100 percent category made by county workers from counties with larger total populations than those from counties of smaller total population. The data describing the county workers' responses concerning the prOportion of time that should be spent working with urban residents com- pared with the population per square mile are presented in Table 29. The results are similar to those of Table 28. The opinions of county COOperative Extension workers regarding the proportion of time that should be spent working with urban residents when compared with the percentage of urban population provided the results contained in Table 30. The data in Table 30 show the more urban the population of the county, the greater the relative number of responses in the 61 to 100 percent category. These results are similar to the results of Tables 28 and 29. 108 .20. V0 “2:" 3.0 NmmNJVN H X N 00.82 NN2 00.00 2; 02:.Nm 00 00.2 202 2030.2. 00.20 mm 20.2N 0N 0N.0 o2 00.N 2.. 00220 00.00 Nv No.0 22 2m.2N 0N 02.0 m E02002 20.00 20: «0.0 0 mmNN 0N N00» 0 30.2 E0800 :008072 300300 :000302 3000:00 :00E072 3000:00 :00E0Z 0222 0.0000 :00 003020000 2030.2 0082.20 0.00:: o\oON|o 000000000 00 000.2. 0222 0:0000 :00 003020000 >0 030002000 000:22 0323 003.83 30000 00 020000 3003 00:20 00 0o3:o0o:0 003 002500000 0:00:03 002300 0020003000 0>30:00ooO 030000 00 00020200 .mN 0200.2. 109 .No. V0 “v" 3.0 u000.22 H X N 00.002 NN2 No.00 . v2: 00.Nm 00 00.22 02 2030.2. 00.20 00 00.02 02 00.02 02 02:.N m 0023 00.00 00 00.02 02 00.02 02 N03: 0 E02002 00.20 00 N03: 0 m0.NN 0N . 02.0 0 3Q2 3000:00 :00E072 3000:00 :00E0Z 3000:00 :00802 3000:00 :00E0Z 003020000 000:3 000300800 2030.2. n02:32:20 o\ooo..2m .RONao 000000000 30 00.3.2. 003020000 000:3 30 000300200 003 00 030002000 000:3 0323 002083 30000 00 020000 3003 00:30. 30 003.6080 003 002500000 0:00:03 002.300 0020003000 0>30:00ooO 030000 30 00020200 .00 0200.2. 110 The comparison of the responses of county Cooperative Extension Service workers and State Cooperative Extension Service Directors con- cerning the proportion of time that should be spent working with urban residents show that the majority of responses were in the 21 to 60 percent category with the second highest number of responses in the 61 to 100 percent category. These data are presented in Table 31. There is a significant difference between the responses of the county workers and the state directors on the proportion of time that should be spent working with urban residents. A general observation of the data contained in Table 31 shows that the majority of responses of the county workers indicated a greater amount of time should be spent working with urban residents while the responses of the state directors indicated a lower proportion of time. Qgestion 5. Part 2: What kinds of assistance do you feel the total Extension program should provide for urban pe0p1e in community and public affairs ? One significant table resulted from the tests of significance used on this question. There was a significant difference in the response of the county workers and the state directors. These data are presented in Table 32. The majority of the county Cooperative Extension Service workers gave transitional responses as to the kinds of assistance Extension should pro- vide for urban people in community and public affairs. The remainder of 111 .20. v .0 “N H 0.0 635m H X N 00.252 002 22 Km mv 2m.2m mm mo..2N , mm 2000.2. 2m.©m 3V om. 2 mm.m2 NN mo.m2 2N 0:300:20 0000M @060. NN2 2m.mm :0 mm.mm v0 mvd 202 0:32:03 30:00 0000:00 :000572 20000. 0000:00 :000372 0000:00 :008072 o\0002..2m o\oool2m 000000000 00 000.2. 0000:00 :008072 0030000 excomlo 000000000 000:5 0023 003:0; 0000m 00 020005 0000 000.2. 00 0000:0090 00“ >0 0:800:20 00020.0. 0000000000 03000000 000% 000 0:00:03 02>:0m 000000032 030000000 30000 00 00000000 .20.. 0200.2. 112 .mo. V0 “N" .00 “omNKu x N oo.oo2 002 22.0w 00 0060 mm mmdm mm 20000. mvdm 3 00.2 om 00.02 02 00.0 m 0:300:00 00000. 3.20. M22 00.02 mm 3.3., mm 3.02 mm 0:00:03 000000 00800 :00E0Z 00:00:00 80802 00:00:00 :008072 0000:00 :00802 00030000 20000. 0000020 000:3 20003000002. 0000020 20:00 000000000 00 0000. 00034 0:000 000 300000000 00 00:0. 000 00 020000 000:3 :00 00390 309% E0580 02000me 2000.2. 0000 0000000000. 00 0000 000 00 0:300:03 000>:0m 0000000000 03000000 0000.0. 000 0:00:03 00030.0 000000000 030080000 50000 00 00000000 .Nm 0200.2. 113 the county worker responses were about equally distributed in the rural oriented and urban oriented categories. The greatest number of State Co- operative Extension Directors responded in the urban oriented category with the remainder of the responses in the transitional and rural oriented categories, respectively. The data presented in Table 32 also show that 50. 00 percent of the responses were transitional, 29. 11 percent were ur- ban oriented and 20.89 percent were rural oriented. When the total table is viewed a larger proportion of state directors provided urban oriented responses than did county workers. Question 5 , Part 3: What kinds of assistance do you feel the total Extension program should provide for urban people in extension home eco- nomics ? When the responses of the county Cooperative Extension Service workers on this question were compared with the periods of time in which they received their bachelor's degree, there was a significant difference. This was the only comparison involving this question that produced a sig— nificant difference. These data are presented in Table 33. Forty-seven percent of the county workers' responses were urban oriented, 39 percent were transi- tional, and 14 percent were rural oriented. The majority of the county workers who received their bachelor's degrees in the period 1920 to 1940 responded in the transitional category. The majority of those who received their bachelor's degrees from 1941 to 1954 responded in the urban oriented 114 .No. V0 “v n .00 “000.22 M X N 00.002 Nm 00.00 00 02.00 00 02.02 02 2000.0 N0.2m mN 00.02 02 20.0 0 00.0 v 0002:0002 00.00 00 00.02 02 00.02 02 N00 0 0002:2002 20.Nm om 00.0 0 00.0N m2 0N.m m ovm2uONm2 0000:00 :00E0z 0000:00 :00E0Z 0000:00 :00E0z 0000:00 :00E0Z 000.0 00 03:00 20000. 0000020 000:3 2000000000. 0000020 20:00 000000000 00 0000.. 00803 0.:0200000 0000 00500.4. 00000000000 00:. 00003 00 000.2. 00 03:00 00:. 00 000000000 00:00.2 000000000 00 00:0. 00:. 00 020000 000:3 :00 00390 020000 E0380 02000me 2000.2. 0000 00000000000 00 00000 05. 000500000 0:00:03 000300 02000me 03000000 30000 00 00000000 .00 0200.2. 115 category as did those who received their bachelor's degrees in the period from 1955 to 1963. Question 5, Part 5: What kind of assistance do you feel the total Extension program should provide for urban pe0p1e in marketing and utiliza- tion of agricultural products ? Two of the tests of significance of this question resulted in significant differences. These significant differences were found when the responses of the county Cooperative Extension Service workers were ranked according to the population per square mile and the percentage of population increase from 1950 to 1960 for the counties. The data on the responses of the county Cooperative Extension Serv— ice workers concerning the kinds of assistance the total Cooperative Ex- tension Service program should provide for urban pe0p1e in the area of marketing and utilization of agricultural products when compared with the population per square mile of the respondents' county is presented in Table 34. The data in Table 34 show that 50. 00 percent of the total responses were rural oriented, 29. 25 were urban oriented, and 20. 75 percent were transitional. The county workers from counties in the low population per square mile category responded in the greatest number in the urban oriented category, in the rural oriented category the second highest number, and the least number of responses was in the transitional category. The county workers in the medium population per square mile category responded 116 .00. V0 “0" 0.0 uN0N.o2 H X N 00.002 002 0N.mN 2m 00.0N NN 00.00 00 20000. 00.00 00 00.0 0 Nm.22 N2 00.02 02 0900 00.00 20 00.0 02 N06 0 mméN 0N 8000032 00.0N mN 0N.N2 02 N00 0 00.02 22 300 0000:00 :00E072 0000:00 :00E0z 00:00:00 :00802 0:00:00 :00E0Z 0222 0:00am :00 003020000 2000.2. 0000020 000: 3 20000000002. 0000020 20:00 000000000 00 000.0. 0222 0:00am :00 003020000 000 00 0000080 20302002902 00 003000233 000 00300022 00 00:0. 000 00 020000 000:3 :00 00390 020000 0:00.080 02000me 2000.2. 00:. 0000000000 00 00000 00: 000500000 0:00:03 000500 0000000000 03080000 30000 00 00000000 .00 02000. 1 17 in the largest number in the rural oriented category, second largest num— ber in the urban oriented category and least in the transitional category. The numbers of county workers representing the high population per square mile category responded in the rural oriented, transitional, and urban oriented categories in that order. The data in Table 35 describe the responses of County Cooperative Extension Service Workers concerning the kinds of assistance the total Cooperative Extension Service program should provide for urban people in the area of marketing and utilization of agricultural products when the re- sponses were ranked according to the percentage of population increase from 1950 to 1960 in the respondents' counties. The total number of re- sponses in the categories of rural oriented, transitional, and urban oriented is the same as they were in Table 34. The county workers from the counties which had the least percentage of population increase from. 1950 to 1960 gave the largest number of responses in the urban oriented category, the second largest number of responses was in the rural oriented category, and third largest number in the transitional category. Those county workers from counties which had medium increases in percentage of population from 1950 to 1960 responded in the greatest number in the rural oriented category followed by the transitional and urban oriented categories in number. The county worker from the counties which had high increases in percent of population increases from 1950 to 1960 responded similarly to the county workers in the counties which had low increases . 118 .20. V0 “0" 3.0 “000.02 H X 0 00.002 002 0N.0N 20 00.0N NN 00.00 00 2030.2. 00.N0 00 00.0 0 00.0 0 00.NN 0N 0030 02.20 00 00.0 0 N0.22 N2 0N.N2 02 E30022 00.00 00 00.02 02 00.0 0 00.02 02 300 300800 :00E072 300800 :00E072 300800 :00E0z 300800 :00E072 0002 0:. 0002 E80 0000:002 2000.2. 0000030 000:3 20003000002. 0030030 20:00 003020000 000000000 00 0000.2. 00 000300800 0002 03 0002 E80 0008000 003020000 00 000300800 003 .00 0300080 280200300. 00 003000233 000 0:300:02 00 00:0 00:. 00 020000 000:3 :00 00380 020000 E0580 000000000 2030.2. 05 0000300000. 00 00000 05 000800000 0:00:03 003000 0000003000 0>30:00ooO 30000 00 0080000 .00 02000. 119 Question 8, Part 1: In your opinion how effective have urban Exten- sion programs been in your county or state in agricultural production, man— agement, and natural resource development? Four of the tests of significance applied to this question resulted in significant findings. Those results are presented in Tables 36, 37, 38, and 39. Sixty-one percent of the county Cooperative Extension Service workers rated the effectiveness of urban Extension programs in agricultural produc- tion, management, and natural resource development as moderate to very high, while 38 percent said it ranked very low to low. The opinions of the county workers concerning this question ranked according to the total population of the counties are presented in Table 36. The majority of the county workers from counties with the least pop- ulation said the effectiveness in urban Extension programs in agricultural production, management, and natural resource development was very low to low. The majority of the county workers from the counties in the medium and high total population categories said the effectiveness in this area was moderate to very high. The opinions of the county workers concerning the effectiveness of urban Extension programs in agricultural production, management, and natural resource development are ranked according to the percentage of rural-farm population of the counties in Table 37. 120 .00. V0 “N" 0.20 “200.0 N X 0 00.002 022 00.20 00 00.00 2% 20000. 00.00 00 00.00 .00 00.0 02 002.0 00.00 20 00.00 00 00.02 202 830052 00.20 00 00.02 02 00.02 00 30.2 0.000000 0000572 0000000 0000372 0.000000 0000572 003020000 200.00. 2000.2. 0002.2 50> 00 000000022 33 00. .304 30> 000000000 00 000.2. 0030500 00 003020000 2000.2. 00 00000002000002 0030000 200302 000 50080000032 0030020000 20032000090 00 0000000 0020.00.05 000.5 00 000003000000 05. 0000000000 00002003 003000 0000000020 0300000000 30000 00 0000000 .00 0200.2. 121 .00. V0 “N" 0.0 0000.0" X 0 00.002 0022 00.20 00 00.00 vv 20000. 00.00 00 00.22 02 02.02 02 00000 00.00 00 00.02 02 000.22 02 00000022 00.20 00 00.00 00N 000.02 02 30.0 0000000 00000072 0000000 0000002 0000000 000052 0000020000 8000:2030 00 2000.0. 0000.0 >00> 00 000000052 33 00 3010 30> 0000000000 000000000 00 0000. 00000000 00 0000020000 0000000000 0000000 00 0000000200002 00000000 20000072 000 0000000000002 .0000 I000000 200002000000 00 000000000 0000000000 00003 00 000003000000 000 0000000000 00000003 000.500 0000000000 0300000000 000000 00 00000000 . 0.0 02000. 122 .20. V0 “N" 0.0 0000.0 N X 0 00.002 0022 000.20 00 00.00 vv 2000.2. 00.00 00 02.00 20 02.0 0 00020 00.00 00 20.02 02 00.02 02 00000032 00.00 ov 00.02 00 00.02 02 30.2 0000000 00000072 0000000 00000072 0000000 0000002 00 02 :0 0 0 2 00000 00000002 2000.2. 0002.2 >00> 00 000000002 30.2 00 30.2 >00> 0000020000 00 0000000000 000000000 00 0000.2. 0002 00 0002 00000 00000002 0000020000 00 0000000000 00 0000000020009 00000000 20000072 000 0000000002 .0000 n0s0o00 200002000004. 00 000000000 000000000 00000.0 00 0000000000000 000 0000000000 00000020. 0000000 0000000000 0300000000 000000 00 00000000 .00 0200.2. 123 .00. V0 0N"... 0.0 0000.0" X 0 00.002 00 00.00 00 23.0% 00 2000.2. 00.00 02 00.00 02 00.0 0 0002.2 22.20 002 00.02 0 00.02 0 00000022 00.00 02 00.02 0 00.00 0 30.2 0000000 0000002 0000000 0000002 0000000 000802 0000020000 2000.2. 2000.2. 0000 30> 00 000000022 3Q2 00 30.2 >00> 000000 00 00 0000. 00000 000 0o 0000 1020000 2000.2. 00 00000002000002 00000000 2000002 000 0000000000032 .0000 :000000 200002000000. 00 000000000 000000000 000022 00 000003000000 000 0000000000 000000020 003000 0000000000 0300000000 00000 00 00000000 .00 0200.2. 124 The majority of the respondents from counties in the low and medium percentage of rural—farm population categories rated the effectiveness of urban Extension programs in this area moderate to very high. Those re- spondents from counties in the high percentage of rural-farm population category rated the effectiveness very low to low. The opinion of county workers concerning the effectiveness of urban Extension programs in agricultural production, management, and natural resource development are ranked according to the percentage of population increase from 1950 to 1960 of the counties in Table 38. The majority of the county workers representing counties in the low and high percent population increase categories rated the effectiveness in this program area moderately to very high. The number of responses of county workers representing the medium category of population increase were about equally divided between very low to low and moderate to very high. The opinions of State Cooperative Extension Service Directors con- cerning the effectiveness of urban Extension programs in agricultural pro- duction, management, and natural resource development are ranked in Table 39 according to the total population of the states. The majority of respondents from states in the low and medium total population categories ranked the effectiveness of urban Extension programs in this area very low to low. The reverse was true of majority of respond- ents from the states in the high total population category. They said the effectiveness was moderate to very high. 125 @estion 8, Part 2: In your opinion how effective have urban Exten— sion programs been in your county or state in community and public affairs? Two of the tests of significance applied to this question resulted in significant findings. These usable significant data are presented in Tables 40 and 41. Sixty—one percent of the county Cooperative Extension Service worker respondents said the effectiveness of urban Extension programs in com- munity and public affairs was moderate to very high, while 39 percent said it was very low to low. The data presented in Table 40 show that the majority of county worker respondents from counties classified low and medium population per square mile said the effectiveness in urban Extension programs in community and public affairs was moderate to very high. The majority of respondents from high population per square mile counties said the effectiveness in this area was very low to low. Fifty-four percent of the State Cooperative Extension Service Directors said the urban programs in community and public affairs were moderate to very high in effectiveness, 45 percent said they were very low to low. The respondents from states in the category low total population were equally divided in their responses of very low to low and moderate to very high. The majority of the respondents from states in the medium category rated the effectiveness moderate to very high. The majority of state direc- tors from the high total population states said the effectiveness of urban Extension programs in community and public affairs was very low to low. 126 .00. V0 00" 0.0 “000.0" X 0 00.002 022 00.00 00 02.00 000 2000.2. 00.20 00 20.02 02 00.02 00 00020 00.00 00 00.00 00 00.02 02 00000032 02.00 00 00.00 000 00.22 02 30.2 0000000 00000072 0000000 0000002 0000000 0000002 02022 000000 000 20000. 00000 >00> 00 000000022 30.2 00 33 00> 0000020000 000000000 00 000.2. 00000000 000 00 02022 000000 000 0000020000 000 00 00000000 002000 000 00000000000 00 000000000 000000000 000.5 00 00000030000000 000 0000000000 00000005 000200 0000000000 0300000000 00000 00 00000000 .00 02000.2. 127 .No. VQ “NH .26 ..302.0" X N 8.82 3 00.2.0 2.0 3.02. 8. 289.2. 00.00 02 00.22 0 8.00 22 £0220 00.22.. 2.2 3.3 02 00.22 N 9520022 00.20 2.2 20.02 N 20.02 m .33 ”2:00.29” 003832 300.292 00228222 2:0000n2 0022822272 2522202522022 2020.2. 2020.2. 220222 30> 00 0200020022 302 02 25.2 30> 00000Q00m 00205 02: mo 25302222292 2020.2. 02: >02 0.220024. 0222232 new 32238800 :2 mfimumoi 22020220me 20022.5 00 000220300005 05 9:500:00 0.2300022 0o2>00m 00202202032 03000022000 00.05 20 020022.230 .20 02220.2. 128 Summary of Findings The material presented in this section is a summary of the findings. This information is presented to further develop the analysis of the data presented earlier. Generally, the responses indicate transitional to urban oriented opinions concerning the current role of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban and urbanizing areas. However, when the responses of the county workers were ranked according to the period of time in which they received their bachelor's degree, the county workers who had received their bach— elor's degree in the period of 1920 to 1940 had a larger proportion of re- spondents in the urban oriented category than did the other two time period groups. The majority of respondents generally agreed that Extension educa- tional assistance to urban people should be increased. The responses varied only in the degree of increase and there were no significant dif- ferences when tested by the various independent variables. The majority of all respondents said Extension workers in their counties and states should spend 21 to 60 percent of their time working with urban residents. County workers respondents representing counties high in total population, population per square mile, and percentage of urban population per square mile, and percentage of urban population responded in greater numbers in the 61 to 100 percent category than did county workers repre- senting the medium and low categories of these same independent variables. 129 In comparing the responses of the county workers to the responses of the state directors there was a larger proportion of county workers who said Extension workers should spend 61 to 100 percent of their time working with urban residents. Transitional responses were given by a majority of all respondents to the kinds of assistance that the total Extension program should provide for urban people in agricultural production, management, and natural re- source development; and community and public affairs. The second highest number of responses occurred in the rural oriented category for the agri- cultural program area and in the urban oriented category for the community and public affairs program area. There was a larger proportion of state directors than county workers who said the kinds of assistance the total Extension program should pro- vide for urban people is in the area of community and public affairs. This , combined with a greater proportion of county workers responding withrural oriented responses accounts for a significant difference in the chi square. The majority of the respondents gave urban oriented responses in re- gard to the kinds of assistance the total Extension program should provide for urban people in extension home economics , and 4-H and other youth extension work. The trend in the number of responses in both of these program areas went from lowest in rural oriented to highest in urban oriented. The majority of the responses as to the kind of assistance the total Extension program should provide for urban people in marketing and utilization 130 of agricultural products was in the rural oriented category. The second highest number of responses to this question was in the urban oriented category. When the responses of the county workers were ranked according to the population per square mile and percentage of increase in population from 1950 to 1960 those county workers from counties medium and high in each responded with a majority of responses in the rural oriented category. The majority of the responses regarding the extent of urban Extension work undertaken in: (l) agricultural production, management and natural resources was little to some; (2) community and public affairs was little to some; (3) extension home economics was moderate to very much; (4) 4-H and other youth extension work was moderate to very much; (5) mar- keting and utilization of agricultural products was moderate to very much, but in this category closer to 50 percent of the responses were moderate to very much than in the other program areas which indicates fewer responses. The majority of the respondents rated the effectiveness of urban Ex- tension programs in the above five program areas as moderate to very high. The greatest majority were in the areas of extension home economics, and 4-H and other youth extension programs. The majority of the responses and county workers representing counties which were in the medium and high categories in terms of total population rated the effectiveness of the urban Extension programs in agricultural pro- duction, management, and natural resource development moderate to very high and workers from low total population counties said it was very low 131 to low; the opposite of the above was said by the county workers in low and high percentage of rural-farm population. The majority of county workers representing counties of low and high percentage of population increases from 1950 to 1960 said it was moderate to very high while the majority of those representing counties in the medium group said the ef- fectiveness of agricultural programs was very low to low. The. majority of state director respondents representing states of high total population said the effectiveness of urban agricultural programs was moderate to very high. The majority of the state directors representing the states of low and medium total population said the effectiveness was very low to low. In regard to the effectiveness of urban community and public affairs programs, the majority of county worker respondents representing the counties ranked low and medium in population per square mile replied that the effectiveness was moderate to very high, while those from the high category of counties said it was very low to low. The effectiveness of this same program area as viewed by a majority of the state directors ranked on the basis of total population was: about equal numbers in the very low to low, and moderate to very high categories by those from low population category states , moderate to very high from medium states, and very low to low from high population states. Testing of Hypotheses Evidence for the support of the hypotheses is presented in this sec- tion. 132 Hypothesis 1: Certain personal background factors of county Coopera- tive Extension Service workers are positively related to their opinions con- cerning the present scope of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban and urbanizing areas. This hypothesis is partially supported by the evidence gathered in this study. One test of significance resulted in a significant difference. The test compared the responses of the county workers grouped according to the period of time in which they received their bachelor's degree by their opinions of the current role of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban and urbanizing areas. Further evidence to support this hypothesis may be seen in the type and distribution of responses in the tables of Chapter IV. The responses tended to be transitional or urban oriented concerning the current role; moderate to very much concerning the extent of urban Extension work undertaken; and the moderate to very high con- cerning the effectiveness of urban Extension programs. Hypothesis 2: Certain personal background factors of county Coopera- tive-Extension Service workers are positively related to their perceptions of the future role of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban and urban- izing areas. This hypothesis is partially supported by the evidence gathered in this study. One test of significance resulted in a significant difference. This test compared the responses of the county workers as to the kinds of assistance the total Extension program should provide for urban people 133 in the area of extension home economics, according to the period of time in which they received their bachelor's degrees. . Further evidence indi- cating support of this hypothesis is available in the type and distribution of responses. The responses tended to be: increased moderately or sub- stantially in regard to future educational assistance to urban people; 21 to 60, and 61 to 100 percent concerning the proportion of time county workers should spend working with urban residents; transitional and urban oriented regarding the kinds of assistance Extension should provide for urban people in three of the five program areas. Hypothesis 3: Certain locational factors of county Cooperative Ex- tension Service workers are positively related to their opinions concerning the present scope of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban and ur- banizing areas. This hypothesis is fairly well supported by the evidence gathered in this study. There were four tests of significances which resulted in sig- nificant differences, however, all of these tests concerned the effective- ness of urban Extension work. Three of these tests were applied to ques- tions on agricultural production, management and natural resource develop- ment and one was applied to a question Concerning community and public affairs. Further evidence indicating support of this hypothesis is avail- able in the type and distribution of responses. Hypothesis 4: Certain locational factors of county Cooperative Ex- tension Service workers are positively related to their perceptions of the future role of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban and urbanizing area S . 134 This hypothesis is fairly well supported by the evidence gathered in this study. Six tests of significances resulted in significant differences. Four of these tests were concerned with the proportion of time Extension workers should spend working with urban residents and two were concerned with the kind of assistance the total Extension program should provide for urban people in the area of marketing and utilization of agricultural products. Further evidence indicating support of this hypothesis is available in the type and distribution of responses. Hypothesis 5: Certain locational factors of State Cooperative Exten— sion Service Directors are positively related to their opinions concerning the present scope of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban and ur- banizing areas. This hypothesis is partially supported by the evidence gathered in this study. Two tests of significance resulted in significant differences. These two tests involved the total population of the states and the responses to the questions concerning the effectiveness of the urban Extension pro- grams in: agricultural production, management, and natural resource de- velopment; and community and public affairs. Further evidence indicating support of this hypothesis is available in the type and distribution of responses. Hypothesis 6: Certain locational factors of State Cooperative Exten- sion Service Directors are positively related to their perceptions of the future role of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban and urbanizing areas. ‘li‘ I'll-Ill“ 135 This hypothesis is partially supported by the evidence. gathered in this study. It is the lea st supported of the six hypotheses. None of the tests of significance resulted in significant differences; however, the responses tended to be: in the direction of moderately to substantially increased Extension educational assistance; 21 to 60 percent of the Ex- tension workers' time should be spent in urban work; in the transitional to urban oriented categories concerning the kinds of assistance the total Extension programs should provide for urban people in the various program areas . CHAPTER VI SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, LIMITATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS The material presented in this chapter include the summary, conclu- sions, implications, limitations, and recommendations as the title indi- cates . Summary The focus of this exploratory study was on the views of county Coop- erative Extension Service workers and State Cooperative Extension Serv- ice Directors pertaining to the scope of responsibility of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban and urbanizing areas of the United States. Background information for this study was abstracted from the 1960 U. S. Census of Population. This information was used to select 150 counties, three in each state , as potential areas from which to draw the random sample of county Cooperative Extension Service workers. All State Cooperative Extension Service Directors were included in the sample. An opinionnaire was constructed to gather the data from the county workers. An adaptation was the opinionnaire used to gather the data from State Cooperative Extension Service Directors. One hundred and seventy-two or 86. 0 percent of the 200 potential respondents provided usable responses which were included in the study. The chi square test of significance was used to determine if there 136 137 were positive relationships between the responses, and the independent variables. The independent variables were personal background and loca- tional factors for the tests of the responses of county workers. Only the locational factors were used in the tests of the responses of State Directors, because personal background information was not requested of this group of respondents. The tests of significance resulted in fifteen tests being significant. Those county workers who received their bachelor's degrees in the period 1920 to 1940 responded with a larger proportion of urban oriented responses than did those who received their bachelor's degrees more re- cently. The county workers from the highly populated, urbanized counties gave a larger proportion of responses which indicated that Extension workers should spend a major portion of their time working with urban residents than did those county workers from the less populated and urbanized counties. In response to the same question, the county workers indicated a major portion of time in a greater proportion than did State Directors. The majority of the responses to questions concerning the role of the total Cooperative Extension Service in urban and urbanizing areas indicate greater efforts should be exerted in urban and urbanizing areas. J, The responses to questions concerning specific Extension program areas were generally in the same direction as the questions concerning the total Extension program, however, there were variations in how the 138 respondents viewed the individual program areas. The program areas of extension home economics, 4-H and other youth extension work, and community and public affairs were generally rated by the respondents as higher in terms of extensiveness, effectiveness, and potential in urban areas than agricultural production, management, and natural resource de- velopment; or marketing and utilization of agricultural products. Conclusions The evidence obtained through the analyses of the data has been used as the bases for formulating the conclusions presented in this section. 1. Contrary to popular beliefs, evidence gained in the study indi— cates that as a group the county worker respondents who received their bachelor's degrees in the period from 1920 to 1940 were more urban oriented in their responses than those who received their bachelor's de- grees more recently. It would appear that the county worker who received his bachelor's degree in an earlier period of time and his work experience tend to help him perceive the current role of the Cooperative Extension Service in ur- ban and urbanizing areas as being more urban oriented than younger county workers. This difference may be due to the training and work experience of the older county workers and more specialized training which limits the perspective of the total Cooperative Extension Service for the younger county workers. 2. The role of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban and urbanized 139 areas is not sharply defined. However, there is a trend toward greater involvement of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban oriented educa- tional programs and projects directed to urban people. 3. It is generally agreed upon by both county worker and state direc- tor respondents that extension workers should spend a substantial propor- tion of their time working with urban people. The county workers tend to believe more time should be spent with urban work than do the state di- rectors. 4. County Cooperative Extension Service worker and State Coopera- tive Extension Service Director respondents tend to agree in their views of the role of the total Cooperative Extension Service in urban and urbanizing areas. 5. The five major program areas of the Cooperative Extension Service, as listed in the opinionnaire, ranked by all respondents in order of the number of urban oriented programs and projects are: extension home eco- nomics; 4-H and other youth extension work; community and public affairs; marketing and utilization of agricultural products; agricultural production, management and natural resource development. Thus it appears that the programs (as they are now structured) are perceived as being adaptable to the urban situation in the order listed above. Implications The results and conclusions of this study have several far-reaching implications. They demand an objective appraisal of the Cooperative 140 Extension Service and its role in serving the society of today. First, it must be recognized that there is a clientele in urban and urbanizing areas vocalizing requests for the type of educational assistance which the Cooperative Extension Service has so capably provided in rural areas. Second, it must be recognized that there is an ever-increasing interrelationship and interdependency of all segments of the society, and there is a need for an educational institution such as the Cooperative Ex- tension Service to inform, interpret, and assist in helping people in their decision—making as individuals and groups. These general implications are followed by more specific implications. 1. The current enabling legislation for the Cooperative Extension Service is subject to a wide range of interpretations. It would appear that this legislation at the three levels of government should be reviewed and revised if necessary to assure that the legislative intent is articulated in accord with the needs of society and the land-Grant University philos- ophy of education for all. It appears that the Smith-Lever Act is often referred to when jus- tifying Cooperative Extension Service work. It must be remembered that this Act is only one-third of the legal framework in which the Cooperative Extension Service functions. The state and county governments also have roles here. 2. Programs of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban areas need to be more than rural programs adapted to the urban environment. There is 141 a need for evaluation of what has been done in the past and what can be done in the future. Underlying this is the need for personnel and resources to operate effective urban programs. 3. The personnel of the Cooperative Extension Service selected to serve in urban areas should be employed on the basis of their knowledge of and willingness to work with urban people and problems. The results of this study show that this has not been achieved in the highest degree. Only one of the respondents in this study received his bachelor's degree in a discipline other than agriculture or home economics. On the basis of this , it could be argued that COOperative Extension Service workers in urban counties are trained in subject matter areas which are traditional to the Cooperative Extension Service and are not necessarily trained to work with urban people. Limitations l. The complexity of the Cooperative Extension Service makes a study of the organization rather difficult to perform. Recognizing this situation, the design of this study involved careful development of the opinionnaire, selection of the sample, and analysis of the responses. Nevertheless , there were certain limitations inherent in the design and procedures which limit the application of the findings. 2. The basic limitation results from the construction of the opinion- naire. This instrument was pretested, but the first time it was actually used was in this study. The large proportion of open-ended questions 142 contained in the instrument necessitated coding of responses by the re- searcher. This interpretation of the responses by the researcher provided an Opportunity for his biases to enter the data. The terms used in the opinionnaire may have biased the respondent's answers. Terms such as urban and Cooperative Extension Service, are examples. However, they were the best terms found after considering the alternatives. The order in which the questions appeared may have influenced the responses by breaking up the thought patterns of the respondents. In general, the opinionnaire sought a wide range of information which some of the respondents could not provide because they were not involved in all of the specific program areas, and their relative short length of tenure in the Cooperative Extension Service. However, responses from all county worker positions was desired in an effort to obtain results which would reflect the total role of the Cooperative Extension Service. 3. Only those directly involved in the daily and over-all policy deci- sions were included in the sample. It is recognized that there are others who act to influence the total Cooperative Extension Service programs. These are the various clientele groups, legislators who provide financial support, and Land- Grant University and United States Department of Agri- culture administrators. These people were not included in the sample be- cause of the variety of the organizational structures and differences in terms used in the various state Cooperative Extension Services. However, this study presents the current views of key Cooperative Extension Service 143 workers toward the role of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban and urbanizing areas. 4. Because of the variety of titles for the position of state Coopera- tive Extension Service Director there is some question as to whether or not the individual directly responsible for the administration of the Coop— erative Extension Service at the state level in all states was asked by the researcher or the recipient of the opinionnaire to respond to the opinionnaire. 5. Another limitation of the study is in validity of the responses. Did the respondents answer the questions as they see the situation or did they give the answers they thought were being sought? The validity of the responses may have been ascertained by in-depth interviews , before and after tests , or some other research method. Recommendations As a result of this exploratory study of the role of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban and urbanizing areas the following recommenda- tions are made concerning further study in this area. 1. There is need for further study of this study topic to pursue in greater depth the findings, and for determining policies and procedures. A. The study should be of an in-depth nature of Cooperative Ex— tension Service work with urban residents to determine programs now being conducted and potential program areas. B. The individuals who serve in staff positions and are respon- sible for the subject matter work of the five major program areas of the 144 various state Cooperative Extension Services should be asked to partici- pate in this study. This would provide an important and necessary view of the subject matter resources available to county workers in urban areas. C. It is further recommended that all county worker positions in counties which are included in the U. S. Bureau of the Census, Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas be named potential respondents in this study of their work with urban residents. This would give a more complete view of the total Cooperative Extension Service in urban and urbanizing areas, and a large sample for performing statistical analyses. 2. In order for the Cooperative Extension Service to most effectively meet the educational needs of people there is a need for investigation of the characteristics of urban, suburban, rural, and rural-farm cultures. 3. There is also need for studying the various aspects of training requirements for Cooperative Extension Service workers for working in urban counties. In this study area the basic preparation of potential county workers and the retraining of county workers for urban Cooperative Exten- sion Service work should be considered. It is inevitable that the Cooperative Extension Service will be working more and more with urban people and their problems. The current trends point in this direction. The requests from urban people for educational assistance, the growing urban society. and the ever-increasing- interrela- tionships and interdependencies in the whole fabric of the society are causing the Cooperative Extension Service to move toward an urban clientele. 145 If the Cooperative Extension Service, an educational institution, is to continue to serve society, it too must change, with society, as it has in the past. These necessary changes can be made by the Cooperative Extension Service only if it understands itself and its roles, and if there is a desire to continue to make useful contributions toward informing and educating the people. BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Bliss, R. K. , et al. (ed. ). The Spirit and PhilosophLof Extension Work. Washington: Graduate School, United States Department of Agricul- ture, and the Epsilon Sigma Phi, National Honorary EXtension Fra- ternity, 1952. Boone, E. I. and C. M. Ferguson (ed.). An Image of Cooperative Exten- sion: Implications for Extension Administration. Publication 18. Madison, Wisconsin: National Agricultural Extension Center for Advanced Study, 1962. Boone, E. I. and C. M. Ferguson (ed.). Changing Dimensions in Agri- culture and Home Economics: Impact on Cooperative Extension Ad- ministration. Publication 13. Madison, Wisconsin: National Ag— ricultural Extension Center for Advanced Study, 1962. Boulding, Kenneth E. The Image. Ann Arbor, Michigan: The University of Michigan Press, 1956. Dixon, Wilfred I. , and Frank I. Massey, Ir. Introduction to Statistical Analysis. New York: McGraw—Hill Book Company, 1957. Kelsey, Lincoln David and Cannon Chiles Hearne. Cooperative Exten— sion Work. Ithaca, New York: Comstock Publishing AsSociates, 1949. McCurdy, Charles P. , Ir. (ed.). Proceedings of the American Associa- tion of Land-Grant Collegesand State Universities 75th Annual Con— vention. Centennial Convocation, Vol. II. Washington: American Association of Land-Grant Colleges and State Universities, 1961. McCurdy, Charles P. , Ir. (ed. ). Proceedings of the Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Collefis 76th Annual Convention. Washington: American Association of Land-Grant Colleges and State Universities, 1962. United States Department of Agriculture. After a Hundred Years: The 1962 Yearbook of Agriculture. Washington: U.- S. Government Printing Office, 1962. 146 147 United States Department of Agriculture. Land: The 1958 Yearbook of Agriculture. Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1958. United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. The County and City Data Book, 1962. Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1962. ’ United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Statistical Abstract of the United States. Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1961. Public Documents National Resources Board. General Conditions and Tendencies Influencing the Nation's Land Refinements. Part I of the Report on Land Planning. Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1936. Rummell, Leo L. One Hundred Years of Better Living through Education and Research in Agriculture and Home Economics. Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station, Public Information Series 63, and College of Ag- riculture and Home Economics, Extension Bulletin 422. Wooster and Columbus: The Ohio State University, 1962. United States Congress. Act of 1862 Donatinllands for Colleges of Ap- riculture and Mechanic Arts. 12 Stat. 503. United States Congress. An Act to establish agricultural experiment sta— tions in connection with the colleges established in the several States under the provision of an act approvedjuly second, eighteen hundred and sixty-two, and the acts supplementarxthereto. 24 Stat. 440 (1887). United States Congress. Act of 1914jroviding for cooperative extension work. 38 Stat. 372, and amendment (7 U.S.C. 341 et seq.). United States Department of Agriculture, Federal Extension Service. 1962 Statistics on Activities of Cooperative Extension Service. (ESC-555) , Washington: Federal Extension Service, 1964. United States Department of Agriculture, Federal Extension Service. "Ranking of. States and Puerto Rico Based on Percentage of Funds Available from Each Source for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1963, " FES form MO-406 (ll-—62). Washington: Federal Extension Service, 1963. 148 Articles and Periodicals Mast, C. L. Jr. , and Associates. County Agent Directo_ry, 1963. Chicago: C. L. Mast, Jr. . and Associates, 1963. Miller, Paul A. "The Evolution of Extension." Agricultural Leaders' Digest, 40 (March 1959), pp. 12-13. Unpublished Material Bonnen, James. "The First One Hundred Years of the USDA-Land-Grant System: Some Observations on the Organizational Nature of a Great Technological Pay-Off. " East Lansing: Michigan State Uni- versity, 1962. (Mimeographed.) Jones, Robert M. "The Cooperative Extension Service Legal Mandates and Directives. " East Lansing: Department of Resource Develop- ment, Michigan State University, 1963. (Mimeographed graduate student term paper.) Kaufman, Charles R. "An Analysis of the Responsibilities of the Exten- sion Service with Non-Farm Families. " Unpublished master's degree research paper, Michigan State University, East Lansing, 1956. Kimball, William James. "The Relation Between Personal Values and the Adoption of Recommended Farm and Home Practices. " Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, The University of Chicago, Chicago, 1960. Miller, Paul A. "Cooperative Agricultural Extension Work in the Indus- trializing Society. " East Lansing: Michigan State University, 1959. (Mimeographed.) Smith, Norman J. "Agricultural Extension Work in Densely Populated Counties of the United States. " Master's degree research paper, Michigan State University, East Lansing, 1958. (Mimeographed.) Other Sources Michigan State University. Personal interview with Herbert A. Berg, Assistant Director of Michigan Cooperative Extension Service. November 28, 1962. ADDITIONAL MATERIALS WHICH WERE USEFUL AS BACKGROUND TO UNDERSTANDING THE COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SERVICE IN TODAY'S SOCIETY Books United States Department of Agriculture. A Place to Live: The Yearbook of Agriculture 1963. Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1963. ' United States Department of Agriculture. Farmers in a Changing World: The Yearbook of Agriculture 1940. Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1940. Public Documents and Publications of Learned Institutions Center for Agricultural and Economic Development of Iowa State University and College of Agriculture of Colorado State University. The Century Ahead. The proceedings of a seminar on Agricultural Administration in the Land-Grant System held June 16-19, 1963 at Fort Collins, Colorado: Fort Collins, Colorado: Colorado State University, 1963. Clark, Robert C. and N. P. Ralston (eds.). Directing the Cooperative Extension Service. Publication 15. Madison, Wisconsin: National Agricultural Extension Center for Advanced Study, 1962. Iowa State University, Cooperative Extension Service. Nonfarm Services of the Cooperative Extension Service. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State Uni— versity, Cooperative Extension Service, 1963. Kearl, Bryant E. and O. B. COpeland. A Guide to Extension Programs for the Future. Raleigh: The Agricultural Extension Service, North Carolina State College, 19 59 . Miller, Paul A. (chr.) . The COOperative Extension Service. . .Today: A Statement of Scope and Responsibility. Subcommittee on scope and responsibility of the 1957 Extension Committee on Organization and Policy of the American Association of Land-Grant Colleges and State Universities, 1958. 149 150 The Oh1o State University Agricultural Extension Serv1ce "Scope of Urban Extensmn Extension Agent Survey in 16 Urban Count1es 1n Ohio The Ohio State University (Agricultural Extension Service) Columbus: November 1962. "Report of Seminar on Land-Grant Colleges and Ramsey, Ralph (chr.). Universities Serving Commun1t1es Chicago, Illinois, November 1, 19 60. " Lexington, Kentucky: Subcommittee on Resident and Exten— 51on Teaching North Central Rural Sociology Committee 1962. Sabrosky, Laurel K. A Survey of Urban 4—H Club Work in the United Un1ted States Department of Agriculture, Federal Ex— StatesL 1962. tension Service Circular 542. Washington: United States Depart- ment of Agriculture, 1963. ' Profes- Un1ted States Department of Agriculture Federal Exten51on Serv1ce. Annual Conference, January 9 11 sionalism for Extension Workers. 1963. Washington: United States Department of Agriculture, 1963 Periodicals " Extension Service Review. 33 "Knowledge Wholesalers , Aiton, E. W. 139+153. (July 1962) , Blalock, T. C. , Mary Nell Greenwood, and Roland H. Abraham. the Public Thinks of Extension, " qurnal of Cooperative Extension. I (Spring 1963), 47- 54. "The Multiversity - Are Its Several Souls Worth Savmg" " Kerr, Clark. Harper's Magazine, 227 (November 1963), 37-42. , " journal of "What McKain, Walter C. , Jr. "Rural Suburbs and Their People Cooperative Extension. I (Summer 1963), 76-84. "Extension' 5 Lowell H. Watts, and W. Robert Parks ' , 239-246. Vines, C. A. , Future, " Lurnal of Cooperative Extension. I (Winter 1963) Unpublished Materials "Recent U. S. Population Trends Beale, Calvin L. , and Donald J. Bogue. and Their Causes" (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1962) "An Analysis of the Behavior of County Extensmn D1rec- Ferver, Jack C. tors as Coord1nators of Michigan State University Commumty Develop- Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, The University of ment Programs. Wisconsin, Madison, 1961. 151 Garman, George J. "County Extension Agents Perception of Needed 4—H‘ Program and Procedural Adjustments When 4-H Enrollment Increases to 5, 000 Members in Ohio Counties. " Unpublished Master's thesis. The Ohio State University, Columbus, 1963. Haygood, Kenneth. "Status Report on the Ford Foundation Grants for Ur- ban Research, Education and Extension. " Chicago: Center for the Study of Liberal Education for Adults, 1962. (Mimeographed.) Indiana Cooperative Extension Service. "Indiana Cooperative Extension Service Act of 1963. " Lafayette: Indiana Cooperative Extension Serv- ice, 1963. (Mimeographed.) Kalangi, Christopher J. "An Analysis of Training Needs of Extension Agents in Urban and Farm Counties. " Unpublished Ph.D. disserta- tion, The Ohio State University, Columbus, 1963. Kimball, William J. "Resource Development-—Perspective, Progress and Potential, " Paper read at the North Central Rural Sociology Seminar ‘ on Resource Development, Nebraska Center for Continuing Education, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, Nebraska, December 17-19, 1963. Luebbe, Donald John. "Michigan County Government's Perception of Its Responsibility and the Responsibility of the Cooperative Extension Service. " Unpublished Master's thesis, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, 1962. Ratchford, C. B. "The Land-Grant College--The Cooperative Extension Service and Their Relationship to Progress in the South During the Next Decade. " Paper read at Southern Region Supervisory Workshop, Hot Springs, Arkansas, October 1-5, 1962. Sower, Christopher, and Paul A. Miller. "Changing Power Structure in Agriculture and Rural Society, " Paper read at the annual meetings of the Rural Sociological Society, Ames, Iowa, August 27-29, 1961. Suggitt, Frank W. "Cooperative Area Analysis and Development as Applied to Michigan and Its Environs. " Unpublished Master's thesis, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1956. VandeBerg, Gale L. (chr.). "Recommendations for Cooperative Extension Educational Work in Milwaukee County, " Report of university com- mittee (of University of Wisconsin). Madison: University of Wiscon- sin, 1962. (Mimeographed.) 152 VandeBerg, Gale L. (chr.). "Supplemental Report to Recommendations for Cooperative Extension Work in Milwaukee County, " Report of univer- sity committee (of University of Wisconsin). Madison: University of Wisconsin, n.d. (Mimeographed.) Zeidler, Frank P. " Town and Country Problems as Viewed in the Urban Setting, " Milwaukee, Wisconsin: 1963. (Mimeographed.) APPENDICES 153 0.0 2.20 0.22 002 020.02 2 202 couuc2cuax 2.22 0.20 0.2 00 200.20 2 220 co2cau 0.0 2.00 0.22 222 000.202 2 022 00:20 2.22 2.02 2.00 02 000.00 0 000 0222socco- 0.2 0.22 2.20 002 000.022 2 002 c0022200 0.2 2.02 2.22 00 000.20 2 022 an: 0.02 2.22 -- 00 202.022.2 20020-2002: 0.02 0.20 2.22 0 202.200 0:002 0.2 2.02 0.22 22 000.222 2 022 02:02 .00 2.0 0.20 0.22- 22 020.20 2 022 2:0: 2. 0.00 0.02 200.2 020.220 2 02 2002.: 0. 0.00 0.20 220 000.000 2 00 :2a2oco: 2. 2.00 0.02 200.2 000.200 2 02 c2aoccuz 0.0 2.20 2.02- 02 222.20 2 000 220100 2.22 2.20 0.02 20 000.220.2 .20-occ2z 2.2 0.02 0.02 20 222.220 2203-0 2. 0.20 0.0 202.0 202.000.2 2 2 0:20: 0. 0.20 0.22 000.2 022.000 2 20 c0023. 2. 2.00 2.02 202 002.000 2 02 0:02200 2. 0.00 2.00 000 202.002 2 222 22.0 on 2.2 0.20 0.022 000 000.000 2 02 0500.: 0.2 0.00 2.00 022 022.022 2 002 0000 0.0 0.22 0.22 222 002.220.2 c.02no2: 2.02 2.00 0.02 00 022.200.2 a202o00 0. 0.00 2.02 202.2 002.020 0 20 220020: 0.2 0.02 2.00 202 002.202 2 20 smaouonn222m 2. 2.00 0.02 000.2 202.022.2 2 22 xooo2ou2: 2. 0.00 0.00 000 200.020 2 02 0000 n. 5.0m 0.m mm“ .A Hnm.mom m an #00.“ N. 0.00 O.FON QFN 30.nnn n 50 UHG’OHQ 0.0 0.06 m.m mmo mhm.ov2.m caucuszonunul ~.~ 0.3. 0.02. 2... 00m 40.0; 002.202.— 2.2 0.20 2.00 222 002.202 2 00 0002000 ouc222 2.02 2.02 2.02 22 002.22 2 220 x00030 2.2 2.00 0.202 200 020.002 2 00 220500000: 2.2 0.00 0.00 002 000.202 2 202 020000 y»: 2.2 2.00 2.20 020 020.200 2 20 020520200 0.0 0.02 0.22 022 200.00 2 200 use: 0.2 2.22 2.22 202 000.002.2 000222.: 0.0 0.00 2.00 022 202.000 020:0200 2.2 0.20 0.02 22 002.022 2 202 uooonocoa 0. 2.20 0.22 200.2 022.000 2 00 co>00 :0: 0.2 0.20 0.0 022 202.202 2 002 0:02202900 2. 2.20 0.22 220 000.000 2 02 0200020: 0.02 2.02 0.02 02 000.002 2 002 200000024 2. 0.20 0.02 220.2 000.200 2 20 020222202 0.0 2.20 2.0 22 002.000 0:20: 0.2 2.02 2.02 020 022.020.2 uao2uooccou -- 0.002 0.02 202.2 020.220 2 00 0000220 2.2 0.02 2.20 20 202.202 2 022 00.2 2n 2. 2.00 0.202 020 002.002 0 202 co0200200 -- 0.002 0.02 000.0 200.200 2 00 uo>aoa 0. 2.00 0.00 000 000.022 2 022 00:00 canon 0.00 0.2 2.00 0.002 20 002.022 0 202 03:00 2.2 2.20 0.22 22 220.202.2 0:22-2:02 2.2 2.22 0.22 22 200.202.2 00020200 0.2 2.00 0.02 222 002.022 2 202 sense: 0. 0.00 0.00 202 020.220.2 2 02 00020 :00 2. 0.00 2.02 020.2 200.020 2 20 song-2000 0. 0.00 0.022 000 020.202 0 22 cue-no 2.0 0.00 0.02 220 000.222 2 022 0020202 2. 0.00 0.00 200.2 222.02o.0 2 2 0020004 .02 0.02 0.00 2.2 02 002.02o.2 2xusucox 2.2 0.00 0.00 002 002.222.02 02:0o022nu 0. 0.00 2.22 222.2 020.002 2 022 ouuoocaax 0.2 2.20 0.22 222 000.202 2 222 2200250 o.~ 2.00 v.vm vvm An~.mcn A no 020.2303 02.5." 2.0.9“ m.v2- 02. 3.2 .02. n va 222020.200:- A.n @.vo o.o- NOM Nmb.nv~ n OHN COICEOH. 0.0a 0.2-m 0.2. Hm firmino N 050 COIHOUUOH. h.v~ 0.20 n.v~ ha 220.02.22N .023! 0.02 0.Nv n.01 cm Nhn.8h.~ cancel-24 2.22 0.00 2.00 22 220.20 2 220 20:20 0.2 2.20 0.22 000 022.002 2 022 x2o2 2.2 2.00 2.00 02 200.002 2 222 0:20 2.2 2.02 2.22 202 000.022 2 022 cc22 0.2 0.00 0.002 22 020.200 2 02 000022.: 0.0 0.00 0.22 022 200.222 2 002 2).:xu-2n 0.2 0.02 2.22 22 202.202.2 acou2u¢ 0.02 2.20 2.0 00 220.202.2 .302 2.02 0.00 -- .11 020.02 22 020.2 0:000:200 0. 2.20 0.02 022.2 200.200 2 22 c0220: -0222023-2os202 0. 0.20 0.02 000 002.220 2 00 0200 0.2 2.02 -- .11 220.20 2 022 02:402202 2.0 2.22 0.02 202 002.222 0 222 c022< 2. 0.00 -- -| 220.20 2 202 aoauosoc< 0.02 0.20 0.02 022 000.200.0 0:02002 0.2 0.22 0.02 000 202.022 020022 0.2 2.02 0.00 200 000.202 2 202 0202 0.2 2.00 0.02 202 202.022 2 00 02200: 0.2 0.00 0.202 200 000.222 2 202 000200 2.22 0.20 mama 002 002.222 0 202 :o0200: 2. 0.00 0.22 222.0 022.022.0 2 2 xooo 0. 0.00 0.22 000 000.020 2 20 coon-2000 0.0 2.00 2.02 002 002.200.02 020:2222 2.22 0.00 2.0 20 002.002.2 0:02:22 IIIlllllllllllllluuauumuum .0.0 anamou uuquumuun .0.0 xxxuxgmflHHHWIIIIIJ . . c2 . . c2 2...... 01...... .32. .5 a... .2... :2... .5 x u mMHHZDOO "2.222222% 220.22 000: 0.0 0.22 2.00 020 002.000.0 002 002:0;oca 0.22 0.00 2.02 22 000.20 00 002020 0.22 0.02 0.20 00 000.00 00 0:20 2.22 0.00 0.22 02 000.00 :00002000: 2.22 2.02 2.2 0 000.020 002 020020: 0.2 0.00 2.02 000 222.200 200 0022:00 0.0 2.00 0.02 002 020.002 022 x002200 0.0 2.20 0.00 022 020.002 02:2022> 0.22 0.02 2.02 20 002.000.0 020 :ou0c20002 2. 2.00 2.02 000.2 200.000 000 00022:: uu- 2.00 2.20 022.0 202.002.2 000 concouu2zo 0.2 0.00 0.02 020.2 000.000.2 000.090 0.2 0.00 0.22 002 002.000.02 002 20:0: 0.0 2.00 0.20 02 000.00 202 :00: 0.0 0.00 0.20 02 000.00 20 0002 0200 0. 0.00 0.00 022 002.200 :00: 2.0 0.00 0.02 0 200.200 000 202000 0.2 0.02 0.20 002 200.002 22 0222-0 -- 0.00 0.2 022.2 000.200 02 0.2200 -- 0.00 0.00 002.2 000.002 00:09 0.0 0.00 0.00 200 000.00o.0 000 :->222:0 0.2 2.00 0.02 002 002.00 00 002000 0.2 0.00 0.20 202 020.00 02 cono2>aa 0.2 2.22 0.22 000 202.002 sou-0:000 2.2 2.00 0.22 20 220.000 020 :oumc2::om 0. 0.00 0.00 02 200.00 000 0:000:02: 2.22 0.20 2.2 2 220.22 200 :3020 0.2 0.20 0.202 02 020.202 Cuoxaa canon m.n v.00 ~.o5 n ¢5n.no« 002 0:02:02: 0.0 2.00 2.00 222 202.20 502 0222>c0020 «.1 0.5a 5.0“ VQH N5N.nma «m2 ecu-Oauanu 0.2 ~.vo «.mn «no.2 oov.nvm 0:220200 00000 0.22 2.00 0.0 02 022.220.2 20 oucoo2>oum q_0 0.20 0.20 02 020.02 002 0202 :00 0.2 2.00 0.02 22 200.00 222 0:0: 0.0 0.00 0.02 02 020.20 000202 00°00 0.02 2.00 0.02 0 000.000 0 020020002200 0. 0.20 2.22 020.2 000.200 202 0:050 0. 0.00 2.02 200.2 220.020 0 000000224 2.0 0.00 0.02 002 002.022 02ca>20uccom 0.22 0.00 2.0 20 220.020.0 .mp0 \1412uqauu-x. .uuauua-un. 2». 00 .2... ........ .2... 02.0.2.2 .252... 2 00 zulocu2a: 2 002 0:00 0 202 nal-00020 600006 2 20 00209 2 20 clog-2:0 n awn Ozocdloo aloaa2xo 22 020 0002 2 22 00022-00 2 0 00000250 0200 0 200 can: 0 020 00290 0:000 2 000 0000 000000 0020- 2 022 02:0:o2xu-x 0 022 09002200 0 220 0:02200150 0:22ounu 0020- 6 mm BOUCOSOUIII .5- AH SIIIII 0 02 0220 220» :0: 2 200 0:0 0:00 n 020 nob-nu 2 222 022220:200 002:0: :0- 02 002 cocoa 2 20 nos-u 0 00 000200 500206 iii 2 200 020000200 2 002 0000:2200: 2 002 000020002220 anaconidu Ill 0 202 00:00: 2 220.2 0220 2 202 02020 000>oa 0 000 20200 a non hay-oucld 2 20 0020000 Isa-anon 2 002 «:00-0022;» 0 000 0200-02: 0 220 0000000 induce! 2 22 02:00 .00 N 00 cacao.» 2 002 0:0-20 «anal-2! 09-20 .0.0 ummuMWIIIIII :2 2:00 00000 APPENDIX B TOTAL NUMBER OF COUNTY EXTENSION WORKERS IN SAMPLE COUNTIES State Number of State Number of County Workers .- County Workers Alabama ; Delaware Jefferson 8 Kent 3 Madison 7 New Ca stle 4 Mobile 7 Sus sex 4 Ala ska Florida Anchorage l Borward 5 Pa irba nk s 2 Da de 13 Palmer 2 Hillsborough 11 Arizona § Georgia Maricopa 11 l Cobb 5 Pima 4 ! DeKa lb 8 Final 7 1 Fulton 6 1 Arkansas 1 Hawaii Jefferson 5 ; Hawaii 2 3 Mississippi 10 3 Oahu 19 Pula ski 5 ' Maui 7 California Idaho Los Angele s 18 I Ada 6 Orange 9 i Bonneville 3 San Diego 1 3 '. Canyon 6 Colorado Illinois Adams 6 Cook 8 Denver 5 DuPa ge 3 Bl Pa so 3 Lake 3 Connecticut Indiana Pa irfield 6 Allen 6 Hartford 7 lake 6 New Haven 7 Marion 11 156 157 State Number of State Number of County Workers County Workers Iowa Mississippi Blackhawk 4 Harrison 5 Linn 3 Hinds 6 Polk 5 Washington 5 Kansas Missouri Johnson 5 Green 5 Sedgwick 7 Jackson 8 Wyandotte 3 St. Louis 8 Kentucky Montana Fa yette 3 Ca scade 4 Jefferson 6 Missoula 2 Kenton 4 Yellowstone 4 Louisiana Nebraska Ea st Baton Rouge 5 Douglas 5 Jefferson 4 Lancaster 5 Orleans 2 Sarpy 3 Maine Nevada Aroostook 10 Clark 5 Cumberland 5 Elko 5 Penobscot 4 Wa shoe 4 Maryland New Hampshire Baltimore 6 Hillsborough 7 Montgomery 7 Rockingham 8 Prince Georges 7 Strafford 5 Massachusetts New Jersey Essex 6 Bergen 5 Middle sex 12 Essex 6 Norfolk 8 Ocean 5 Michigan New Mexico Macomb 6 Bernalillo 4 Oakland 7 Chaves 5 Wayne 8 Dona Ana 4 Minnesota New York Hennepin 4 Erie l7 Ramsey 3 Nassau 23 St. Louis 6 Westchester 4 158 State Number of State Number of County Workers County Workers North Carolina Tennessee Cumberland 4 Davidson 5 Guilford 9 Shelby 8 Mecklenburg 6 Sullivan 5 North Dakota Texas Cass 4 Dallas 6 Grand Forks 4 Harris 8 Ward 4 Taylor 4 Ohio Utah Cuyahoga 3 Salt Lake 4 Hamilton 3 Utah 3 Lake 1 Weber 4 Oklahoma Vermont Comanche 6 Chittenden 4 Oklahoma 8 Rutland 4 Tulsa 7 Washington 3 Oregon Virginia Cla cka ma 3 9 Fairfax 7 Lane 9 Henrico 4 Multnomah 7 Norfolk 4 Pennsylvania Washington Allegheny 5 King 8 Bucks 4 Pierce 7 Philadelphia 2 Snohomish 5 Rhode Island West Virginia Kent 3 Cabell 3 Newport 3 Harrison 5 Providence 3 Kanawha 4 South Carolina Wisconsin Charleston 2 Dane 6 Greenville 5 Milwaukee 5 Richland 4 Waukesha 6 South Dakota Wyoming Brown 4 Fremont 6 Minnehaha 4 Laramie 3 Pennington 5 Natrona 3 TOTAL (all states) 882 APPENDIX C CORRESPONDENCE AND OPINIONNAIRE: COUNTY WORKERS 159 COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SERVICE MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY ' EAST LANSING Office of the Director AND U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE COOPERATING May 9, 1963 Dear The demand for Extension assistance in urban areas is constantly growing, It is not easy for university administrators nor for Extension workers to know how to handle all the new demands. The attached opinionnaire is an attempt to obtain insights on Extension work for urban and urbanizing areas. This study is being undertaken by Mr. Kaye Bartlett, a graduate student at Michigan State University and one who has had some experience with this problem as an Extension worker in Ohio° All State Extension Directors and three randomly selected Extension workers from more densely populated counties of each state are being asked to respond to the concise opinionnaire” Your contribution in this study of urban Extension work will be most appre- ciated. Would you please return your responses in the enclosed envelope as soon as possible, Mr. Bartlett would like to begin tabulations on May 25., Sincerely, William J. Kimball Extension Program Leader Community Resource Development and Public Affairs Attachment 160 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY EAST LANSING DEPARTMENT OF RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT May 9, 1963 Dear What is the role of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban and urbanizing areas ? Will there be increased assistance to urban people in the future ? Your responses to the enclosed opinionnaire will be valuable in suggesting answers to these questions which are being heard more frequently every- where. ‘ Your State Extension Director has been informed of this study and is aware of this request. You may be assured that any information submitted will be handled in strict confidence. This study of urban Extension work is part of my graduate program at Mich- igan State. I would appreciate hearing from you by May 25. If you are interested in the finished study, I'll be glad to send you a copy of the abstract. Very truly yours , K. F. Bartlett KFBzdm Enclosure 161 Dear Extension Workers: One hundred twenty-one Extension Agents and forty-three State Extension Directors have responded to the opinionnaire, "The Role of the Cooperative Extension Service in Urban and Urbanizing Areas. " Would you please return your completed opinionnaire as soon as possible. Your responses are important, and I would like to include them in this study. Sincerely, K. F. Bartlett Dept. of Resource Development Michigan State University East Lansing, Michigan 6/13/63 Sample of follow-up postal card. 162 OPINION NAIRE THE ROLE OF THE. COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SERVICE IN URBAN AND URBANIZING AREAS Please answer the following questions from the vantage point of your position as the questions relate to the total Extension pro- gram. Your contribution to this study should be helpful to fellow Extension workers in programming future educational activities for urban and urbanizing area residents. I. In your opinion what is the current role of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban and urbanizing areas? 20 In your opinion should Extension educational assistance to urban people be: (Please check your choice.) Increased: _1. Slightly ___2. Moderately _3. Substantially Decreased: _4. Slightly _5. Moderately _6. Substantially _7. Held the same _8. No opinion 3. What proportion of time do you think Extension workers should spend working with urban residents of your county? (Please check your choice.) __1. 0% _2. 1-20% _3. 21-40% _4. 41-50% _5. 61-80% _6. 81-100% From what sources do you think Extension will receive its support in the future ? I A. Financial support-government and other. (Please indi- cate the approximate support Extension presently re— ceives from the sources listed below, in percentages left of the slash. Right of the slash please indicate in percentages what Extension may expect to receive in the future.) 163 _% / _% 1. Township government _% / _°/o 2. City government _% / _% 3. County government _% / _% 4. State government _% / _% 5. Federal government _% /_% 6. Business _% /_% 7. Foundations _% /_% 8. Industry _% /_°/o 9. Organizations _% /__% 10. Other - Specify 164 Pre sent/ Future AAAAAAAAAA vvvvvvvvvv B. Support other than financial. (Please indicate the direc- tion of future Extension support other than financial in the parentheses at the right of the above sources using the following scale: (1) =Less Support; (2) =About the Same; (3) =More Support. 5. What kinds of assistance do you feel the total Extension program should provide for urban people in each of the following areas? (Please describe.) 1. Agricultural Production, Management and Natural Resource Development 2. Community and Public Affairs 3. Extension Home Economics 4. 4—H and Other Youth Extension Work 5. Marketing and Utilization of Agricultural Products 165 6. What personal experiences have you had in urban Extension work? (Please describe: Types of pro- grams, subject matter, educational methods, etc.) 7. To what extent has urban Extension work been under- taken in the following areas in your county? (Please circle your choice on the scale for each area.) Extent of Urban Extension Work in Your County 1 2 3 4 5 Little Very or No Some Moderate Much Much 1. Agricultural Produc- tion, Management and Natural Resource Development 1 2 3 4 S 2. Community and Public Affairs 1 2 3 4 5 3. ExtensiOn Home Economics 1 2 3 4 5 . 4. 4-H and Other Youth Extension Work 1 2 3 4 5 5. Marketing and Utilization of Agri- cultural Products 1 2 3 4 5 166 8. In your opinion how effective have urban Extension programs been in your county? (Please circle your choice on the scale for each area in which there has been an urban Exten- sion program in your county.) Scale of Effectiveness of Urban Extension Work in Your County 1 2 3 4 5 Very Very Low Low Moderate High High 1. Agricultural Production, Management and Natural Resource Development 1 2 3 4 5 2. Community and Public Affairs 1 2 3 4 5 3. Extension Home Economics 1 2 3 4 5 4. 4-H and Other Youth EXtension Work 1 2 3 4 5 5. Marketing and Utiliza— tion of Agricultural Products 1 2 3 4 5 9. Please check your position. 1. Agricultural Agent 2. Consumer Information Agent 3. 4-H Club Agent 4. Home Demonstration Agent 5. Marketing Agent 6. Resource DeveIOpment Agent 7. Other (Specify) 80 10. Your major subject matter interest(s) 11. Number of years in Extension work. 1. 0-2 2. 3-5 3. 6-10 4. 11-15 5. 16-20 6. 21 and over 167 12. Number of years of Extension work in this County? 1. 0-2 2. 3-5 3. 6-10 4. 11-15 5. 16-20 6. 21 and over 13. Formal education. (Please check all degrees held and indi- cate major field of study for each degree.) BS MS PhD Indicate major field of study beyond the highest degree held, if work has been done. 14. Male Female THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION APPENDIX D CORRESPONDENCE AND OPINIONNAIRE: STATE DIRECTORS 168 COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SERVICE MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY ° EAST LANSING Office of the Director AND U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE COOPERATING May 9, 1963 Dear The demand for Extension assistance in urban areas is constantly growing. It is not easy for university administrators nor for Extension workers to know how to handle all the new demands. The attached opinionnaire is an attempt to obtain insights on Extension work for urban and urbanizing areas. This study is being undertaken by Mr. Kaye Bartlett, a graduate student at Michigan State University and one who has had some experience with this problem as an Extension worker in Ohio. All State Extension Directors and three randomly selected Extension workers from more densely populated counties of each state are being asked to respond to the concise opinionnaire. Your contribution in this study of urban Extension work will be most appre- ciated. Would you please return your responses in the enclosed envelope as soon as possible. Mr. Bartlett would like to begin tabulations on May 25. Sincerely , William J. Kimball Extension Program Leader Community Resource Development and Public Affairs Attachment 169 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY EAST LANSING DEPARTMENT OF RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT May 9, 1963 Dear What is the role of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban and urbanizing areas ? Will there be increased assistance to urban people in the future ? Your responses on the enclosed opinionnaire will be valuable in sug- gesting answers to these questions, which are being heard more fre— quently these days. All State Extension Directors are being asked to participate in this study of Urban Extension work. A similar opinionnaire is planned for County Extension Agents who are working in more densely populated counties of each state. From such areas in your state agents have been randomly selected to participate in this study: Your cooperation will contribute greatly to this study which is part of my graduate program at Michigan State. You may be assured that any informa- tion submitted will be handled in strict confidence. I would appreciate hearing from you by May 25, if at all possible. If you are interested in the finished study, I'll be glad to send you a copy of the abstract. Sincerely , K. F. Bartlett KFBzdm Enclosure 170 ._ .‘.——-wfiy—_—.’F Dear Extension Workers: One hundred twenty-one Extension Agents and forty-three State Extension Directors have responded to the opinionnaire, "The Role of the Cooperative Extension Service in Urban and Urbanizing Areas. " Would you please return your completed opinionnaire as soon as possible. Your responses are important, and I would like to include them in this study. Sincerely , K. F. Bartlett Dept. of Resource Development Michigan State University East Lansing, Michigan 6/13/63 Sample of follow—up postal card. 171 OPINIONNAIRE THE ROLE OF THE COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SERVICE IN URBAN AND URBANIZING AREAS Please answer the following questions from the vantage point of your position as the questions relate to the total Extension pro- gram. Your contribution to this study should be helpful to fellow Extension workers in programming future educational activities for urban and urbanizing area residents. 1. In your opinion what is the current role of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban and urbanizing areas? 2. In your opinion should ExtenSion educational assistance to urban people be: (Please check your choice.) Increased: _1. Slightly _2. Moderately _3. Substantially Decreased:_4. Slightly _5. Moderately _6. Substantially _7. Held the same _8. No opinion 3. What proportion of time do you think Extension workers should spend working with urban residents of your state? (Please check your choice.) _1. 0% _2. 1-20% _3. 21-40% _4. 41-60% _5. 61-80% _6. 81-100% 4. From what sources do you think Extension will receive its support in the future ? A. Financial support. . (Please indicate the approximate sup- port Extension presently receives from the sources listed below, in percentages left of the slash. Right of the slash please indicate in percentages what Extension may expect to receive in the future.) 172 173 Pre se nt/ Future % / % 1. Township government ( ) % / % 2. City government ( ) % / % 3. County government ( ) % / % 4. State government ( ) °/o / % 5. Federal government ( ) °/o / % 6. Business ( ) % / % 7. Foundations ( ) % / % 8. Industry ( ) % / °/o 9. Organizations ( ) % / % 10. Other - Specify ( ) B. Support other than financial. (Please indicate the direc- tion of future Extension support other than financial in the parentheses at the right of the above sources using the following scale: (1) = Less Support; (2) =About the Same; (3) =More Support. 5. What kinds of assistance do you feel the total Extension program should provide for urban people in each of the following areas? (Please describe.) 1. Agricultural Production, Management and Natural Resource Development Community and Public Affairs Extension Home Economics 4-H and Other Youth Extension Work Marketing and Utilization of Agricultural Products 174 6. Are urban areas in your state now participating in Extension sponsored activities ? (Please describe.) 7. To what extent has urban Extension work been undertaken in the following areas in your state? (Please circle your choice on the scale for each area.) Extent of Urban Extension Work in Your State 1 2 3 4 5 Little Very or No Some Moderate Much Much 1. Agricultural Produc- tion, Management and Natural Resource DeveIOpment 1 2 3 4 5 2. Community and Public Affairs 1 2 3 4 5 3. Extension Home Economics 1 2 3 4 5 4. 4-H and Other Youth Extension Work 1 2 3 4 5 5. Marketing and Utilization of Agri- ‘ cultural Products 1 2 3 4 5 8. 175 In your Opinion how effective have urban Extension programs been in your state? (Please circle your choice on the Scale for each area in which there has been an urban Extension program in your state.) ‘ Scale of Effectiveness of Urban Extension Work in Your State 1 2 3 4 5 Very Very Low Low Moderate High High 1. Agricultural Production, Management and Natural Resource Development 1 2 3 4 5 2. Community and Public Affairs 1 2 3 4 S 3. Extension Home Economics 1 2 3 4 5 4. 4-H and Other Youth Extension Work 1 2 3 4 5 5. Marketing and Utiliza- tion of Agricultural Products 1 2 3 4 5 THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION APPENDIX E OPINIONNAIRE RESPONSE CODING SYSTEM (The responses to the instrument for obtaining data on the role of the Co- operative Extension Service in urban and urbanizing areas were recorded on the instrument. These data were then coded according to the following coding systems and incorporated on Hollerith cards for analysis.) Hollerith Card Column Deck One l-3 Opinionnaire Number 001-150 County Cooperative Extension Service Worker ZOO-249 State Cooperative Extension Service Director 4 Deck Number 1 First Deck 2 Second Deck 5-10 Computer Problem Number Assigned by MSU Computer Center 11-12 Blank 13 Re spondent's Position 0 No response, response not classifiable Agricultural Agent Consumer Information Agent 4—H Club Agent Home Demonstration Agent Marketing Agent Resource Development Agent Other Agent Position State Cooperative Extension Service Director mVOIU'IrbOONI—fi 14 Number of Years in Extension Work No response 0-2 3-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 Zl-over CDU'IAOONHO 176 Hollerith Card Column 15 16 17-18 19 20-21 22 23-24 177 Number of Years in Extension Work in County 0 mmAsz—i No response, response not coded (higher than column 14) 0-2 3-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 Zl-over Major Subject Matter Interests of Respondent 0 No response 1 Technical subject matter 2 Educational methods 3 Human development Year Bachelor's Degree Attained 00 No response (Raw Data) Bachelor' 3 Degree Major 0 No response 1 Technical subject matter 2 Educational methods 3 Human development Year Ma ster's Degree Attained 00 No response (Raw Data) Master's Degree Major 0 No response 1 2 Technical subject matter Educational methods 3 Human development Year Ph. D. Degree Attained 00 No response (Raw Data) Hollerith Card Column 25 26 27 28-30 31-32 178 Ph.D. Degree Major 0 No response Technical subject matter Educational methods Human development “NH Major Subject Matter Interests Beyond Highest Degree Held 0 No response 1 Technical subject matter 2 Educational methods 3 Human development Sex of Respondent O No response 1 Male 2 Female Blank State 01 Alabama 26 Montana 02 Alaska 27 Nebraska 03 Arizona 28 Nevada 04‘ Arkansas 29 New Hampshire 05 California 30 New Jersey 06 Colorado 31 New Mexico 07 Connecticut 32 New York 08 Delaware 33 North Carolina 09 Florida 34 North Dakota 10 Georgia 35 Ohio 11 Hawaii 36 Oklahoma 12 Idaho 37 Oregon 13 Illinois 38 Pennsylvania 14 Indiana 39 Rhode Island 15 Iowa 40 South Carolina 16 Kansas 41 South Dakota 17 Kentucky 42 Tennessee 18 Louisiana 43 Texas 19 Maine 44 Utah 20 Maryland 45 Vermont 21 Massachusetts 46 Virginia 22 Michigan 47 Washington 23 Minnesota 48 West Virginia 24 Mississippi 49 Wisconsin 25 Missouri 50 Wyoming Hollerith Card Column 33 34-38 39-43 44—45 46-47 48-50 51 52 179 Federal Extension Service Region 1 North Central 2 Northeast 3 South 4 West Total Population Raw data which has been rounded with the la st three digits dropped 00000 Response not classifiable Population Per Square Mile Raw data 00000 Response not classifiable Percent Urban Residents Raw data 00 Response not classifiable Percent Rural-Farm Residents Raw data 00 Response not classifiable Percent Increase in Population '50 to '60 Raw data 000 Response not classifiable In your opinion what is the current role of the Cooperative Extension Service in urban and urbanizing areas ? 0 No response, not coded 1 Rural oriented 2 Transitional 3 Urban oriented In your opinion should Extension educational assistance to urban people be: 0 No response 1 Decrease substantially " moderately " slightly Held the same Increased slightly " moderately substantially \ICDCDAOON 180 Hollerith Card Column 53 What proportion of time do you think Extension workers should spend working with urban residents in your county? 0 No response, not coded l 0 percent 2 1-20 percent 3 21-40 percent 4 41-60 percent 5 61-80 percent 6 81-100 percent 54 What kinds of assistance do you feel the total Extension program should provide for urban people in each of the fol- lowing areas ? A. Agricultural Production, Management and Natural Resource Development 0 No response, not coded 1 Rural oriented 2 Transitional 3 Urban oriented 55 B. Community and Public Affairs 0 No response, not coded 1 Rural oriented 2 Transitional 3 Urban oriented 56 C. Extension Home Economics 0 No response, not coded 1 Rural oriented 2 Transitional 3 Urban oriented 57 D. 4-H and Other Youth Extension Work 0 No response, not coded 1 Rural oriented 2 Transitional 3 Urban oriented 58 E. Marketing and Utilization of Agricultural Products No response, not coded Rural oriented Transitional Urban oriented “NP-‘0 Hollerith Card Column 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 181 What personal experiences have you had in urban Extension work ? 0 No response, response not classifiable 1 Rural oriented 2 Transitional 3 Urban oriented To what extent has urban Extension work been undertaken in the following areas in your county? 0 No response Little or no Some Moderate Much 5 Very much Ame Agricultural Production, Management and Natural Resource Development Community and Public Affairs Extension Home Economics 4-H and Other Youth Extension Work Marketing and Utilization of Agricultural Products In your opinion how effective have urban Extension programs been in your county? 0 No response Very low Low Moderate High 5 Very high “>me Agricultural Production, Management and Natural Resource Development Community and Public Affairs Extension Home Economics 4—H and Other Youth Extension Work Marketing and Utilization of Agricultural Products 182 Hollerith Card Column 70-80 Blank Deck Two 1—3 Opinionnaire Number 4 Deck Number 5—10 Computer Problem Number 11-12 Blank Approximate present financial support received from all sources by Extension Raw data (percentages) 00 No response 13—14 Township Government 15—16 City Government 17-18 County Government 19-20 State Government 21-22 Federal Government 23-24 Business 25-26 Foundations 27—28 Industry 29-30 Organization 31-32 Other 33-34 Blank The financial support Extension may expect to receive in the future from all sources Raw data (percentages) 00 No response 183 Hollerith Card Column 35-36 Township Government 37-38 City Government 39-40 County Government 41—42 State Government 43-44 Federal Government 45-46 Business 47-48 Foundations 49-50 Industry 51-5 2 Organizations 53—54 Other 55-56 Blank The direction of future Extension support other than financial 0 No response 1 Less support 2 About the same 3 More support 57 Township Government 58 City Government 59 County Government 60 State Government 61 Federal Government 62 Business 6 3 Foundations 184 Hollerith Card Column 6 4 Industry 6 5 Organizations 6 6 Other 67-80 Blank atUJA “Si W1] ,.. I.” "Pr w: ”1‘: _ my; f'n J. 54"” I ‘ .....-o- I p. a— -‘ (”.5104 3"?" “L3‘ 135 {A -- “’3‘ JAN 1 .A;.-wb‘6““’" .- 39’ HICHIGnN STATE UNIV. LIBRARIES 1|1""11(WI)!HUIWIWNIWWWWWI 31293101065757