8820
Assessing the future of urban extension education through focus group interviews
Harlan G. Copeland, University of Minnesota
Shirley L. Barber, Ramsey County Extension Service, St. Paul, Minnesota
Abstract
Formerly, the Ramsey County (Minnesota) Extension Service provided educational programmes to rural audiences; today, the county includes 265,000 urban and 207,000 suburban residents. Focus Group interviews were used to listen to county citizens, government and agency representatives discuss their concerns. The findings pertained to: (1) assessment of existing programmes, (2) image and identity, (3) programme implications for the future, and (4) staffing considerations.
Background and purpose of the study
The Agricultural (Co-operative) Extension Service has, since 1914, provided educational programmes pertaining to agricultural production and families in rural America. Funding for Extension programmes in all counties has been provided by the federal government (Smith-Lever Act of 1914), state legislatures, and county government officials. Today, the population growth is occurring in the urban areas of the formerly considered rural states such as Minnesota; more than 50 percent of Minnesota’s 4.2 million residents live in the seven county metropolitan area including St. Paul and Minneapolis.
An interest in how the Ramsey County (Minnesota) Extension Service could offer unique educational programmes to urban and suburban residents prompted this effort to listen to county citizens, agency and government representatives discuss their concerns. Ramsey County includes the city of St. Paul (population 265,000) and 16 suburban communities with an additional population of 207,000. The Ramsey County Board of Commissioners, faced with allocation of scarce public resources, was concerned about programme visibility and focus. While the approximate $200,000 allocation from county funds represented less than one percent of the total county budget, there were many needs competing for county tax dollars in an urban/suburban setting. The Minnesota Extension Service of the University of Minnesota was considering structural changes in the state and county organisation and moving toward educational programmes based on ‘issues’. Thus, information was desired in three general areas: (1) the relevance and appropriateness of current programming; (2) the perceived image of the Ramsey County Extension Service; and (3) the acceptability of proposed organisational and staffing changes.
Focus group interviews
A popular and widely used tool in marketing research[1], focus group interviews are increasingly being used as a needs assessment strategy in adult education. The focus group interview can elicit the opinions, attitudes and perceptions of people which an educational agency seeks to serve. Krueger[2] states that the focus group interview ‘is particularly effective in providing background information as to why people think or feel the way they do’.
Focus groups interviews are organised group discussions which are focused around a single theme. A typical interview consists of a series of group interviews, usually a minimum of three different groups and each group consisting of eight to ten people. The moderator/discussion leader introduces the topic of concern and then follows a predetermined questioning route. The group discusses the questions and shares insights and ideas. The moderator is careful to probe and seek additional clarification of certain responses. The entire group interview usually lasts less than two hours. The discussion is typically audio tape recorded and used with moderator notes for later, more careful analysis. The responses in each interview are then compared and attention is placed on identification of patterns of responses among the various groups. Levy[3] notes that:
The basic idea of the focus group is a simple one. A group of people is brought to discuss some certain topics, commonly for 1 to 2 hours. The interviewer - leader, moderator raises various issues, focusing the discussion on matters of interest to the researcher (and the client) in accordance with an outline or general guide.
Focus group interviews are a means of getting information. The function of the group is to provide that information and not to plan, vote or advise. Emphasis is not on consensus but on the diversity and range of opinions of individuals within the group.
To accomplish the task, Krueger’s[4] ‘Nine Step Process’ which required decisions about the purpose and whom to study, data users, a data collection plan and needed resources, the interview questions, moderating .he group interview, selection of group participants, conducting the interviews, analysing the data, and reporting the data was used.
Development of the interview questions
Three groups of information users were identified: (1) the Ramsey County Extension Committee, (2) the Ramsey County Commissioners, and (3) Minnesota Extension Service administrators. Informational interviews were conducted with five members of the Extension Committee, with two County Commissioners and with one Minnesota Extension Service administrator. Suggestions were sought regarding what questions should be asked, the timing of the interviews, and who should participate in the interviews.
Six themes emerged for focus group interview questions:
1.Programme focus - determining relevance and appropriateness of current programmes and directions for the future.
2.Image of the Extension Service with Urban/Suburban Residents - determining the presence of Extension in the county including facilities and location.
3.Structure - determining reactions to the restructuring plan and changes in roles and relationships proposed by the Minnesota Extension Service.
4.Staffing - determining reactions to the proposed sharing (clustering of Extension staff among seven metropolitan area counties.
5.Funding - determining the perceptions of cost effectiveness and potential for funding partnerships for Extension programmes.
6.Uniqueness - determining what Extension does best, what is unique; determining the existence for potential programme duplication.
The timing of the project was not a concern, but the information was desired as soon as feasible in order to assist with the implementation of a new county extension director role.
Four types of people were identified as sources of information about perceptions of current Extension programmes and of future directions:
1.Users of Extension programmes (including volunteers who assist with the delivery of educational activities).
2.Potential users of Extension programmes (i.e. current non-users).
3.Representatives from public and private agencies who have co-operated in the past with Extension programmes or could in the future.
4.Ramsey County Extension Service professional and support staff.
Both broad and narrow questions were developed and reviewed by the County Extension Committee members and by an evaluation specialist with the Minnesota Extension Service. Three sets of appropriate questions were developed[5].
Selection of focus group interview participants
Recommendations for participants were requested from the County Commissioners, the County Extension Committee members, and the County Extension staff. Sixty-six of the 73 recommended participants accepted the opportunity to participate. Several individuals changed appointments in order to participate. Three current programme users declined due to scheduling conflicts and two non-users also declined-one for lack of transportation (and not desiring a ride when offered) and one who indicated being shy about speaking up in a group meeting. One private agency representative declined citing the reason of ‘being too extended’ and one public agency representative failed to return the telephone call.
All potential participants were called two to seven days prior to the actual group session in which they participated. Two individuals telephoned all potential participants using a prescribed telephone procedure.
Eight focus group interviews were scheduled. There were two groups of current Extension volunteers and programme users, two groups of public and private agency and county government representatives, two groups of Extension potential users/non-users, one mixed group of current Extension users and agency representatives, and one group of current county Extension professional and support staff. The groups included 18 males and 48 females with ages ranging from a recent high school graduate to retirees.
Data collection
The interviews were held at ‘neutral’ sites that allowed for audio tape recording. Rides were provided for those requesting this assistance.
Each session was planned for 60 to 90 minutes. Light refreshments were provided at each session.
Each participant came knowing that the session would be audio taped and that facilitators would be taking notes during the session. Participants were informed that confidentiality of individual responses would be protected in the final written report.
All eight sessions were moderated by the senior investigator; he had no official connection with the county Extension programme, and was introduced to the interview participants as such. Only four of 66 participants personally knew the moderator The second investigator served as assistant moderator for all eight sessions. While a member of the county Extension staff, she served as a recorder only and did not enter into any of the group discussions.
Table name cards were in place as participants arrived. The group facilitator opened each session with a standardised welcome[6] followed by self-introductions by participants.
At the conclusion of each session, complimentary gifts were distributed. The gifts included a complimentary drawing for a Christmas tree, a package provided by a corporation, and a sample packet of Extension publications.
The data were collected during a two-week period in late January-early February, 1987.
Data analysis and reporting
Following the interviews, the audio tapes for each session were transcribed into verbatim transcripts. (This consumed approximately 107 hours of secretarial time.)
The transcript data and notes were analysed for general themes pertaining to image, assessment of existing programmes, future programme directions, programme focus, and staffing considerations. These themes were subsequently examined for sub-points.
Quotations from participants were used to illustrate the findings and conclusions of the study. Quotations were reported verbatim when possible. Minor editing was used to reduce the length of statements. Care was exercised to avoid altering the intended meaning of the participant.
Preliminary oral and written summary reports were shared with the County Extension Committee and the Minnesota Extension Service Executive Administrative Committee by the investigators. A final oral report was given to the County Commissioners by the County Extension Director.
The written report was presented in three ways: (1) an executive summary of the findings and recommendations, (2) the detailed findings and conclusions which were highlighted in bold type face, and (3) the detailed evidence (i.e., the observations and opinions) provided by the participants which was indented.
Findings and conclusions
The following perceptions were offered by the focus group participants:
Assessment of existing programmes
1.Accessibility by adults and youth to programmes was a strength.
2.Extension is good at providing diverse programmes that meet changing needs of people.
3.Extension provides quality educational programmes.
4.Extension staff are good at teaching and providing information.
5.The materials and information are current, research based, and available.
6.The opportunities for cross-cultural, intergenerational learning are valued.
7.Extension programmes provide a unique access to University sources.
8.Extension provides low cost, if not free, effective programmes.
9.Extension serves people in different areas of their lives and during all stages of their life span.
10.Extension (staff) provides practical education that helps consumers make wise decisions.
11.The county Extension programme offers innovative activities/ programmes.
12.Extension staff are effective with low income and minority families.
13.Extension programmes are effective in developing leadership abilities of participants and volunteer leaders and teachers.
14.Current Extension programmes in consumer education, youth development, nutrition, horticulture, and home economics were considered effective and valued.
Image and identity
1.The general public does not know about the Extension Service.
2.When people do know about it, Extension has a rural image among urban and suburban residents.
3.The typical urban/suburban resident is not aware of the range of programming that is available because of the image he/she has.
4.The county fair connotes a rural and agricultural image.
5.The image of Extension among programme users, while not limited to agriculture and rural, was fragmented; people intensely involved in one programme were unaware of other Extension programmes.
6.The name (Agricultural Extension Service), the facility (a barn), the billboard (for the County Fair) - all connote ‘rural’.
7.Some agency staff were not aware how to access the agency; some were only partially aware of how Extension could be a resource to them.
8.Knowledge of Extension comes from direct personal involvement with the agency rather than from publicity of agency outreach.
9.Public officials have a limited view of Extension and its contribution to the county and city.
Future programme directions
1.The linkage with the University of Minnesota (for research-based information) should continue.
2.Co-operation among agencies (in programme delivery) was not only desirable but essential for the future.
3.Extension has a record of co-operative programming that is viewed positively.
4.Duplication of other agencies’ programmes should be avoided; however, there is a place for some ‘healthy duplication’, and agencies need to distinguish between ‘similarities’ and ‘duplication’.
5.There was a high level of interest among agency representatives in inter-agency co-operation and building ‘partnerships’.
6.Problems of ‘turf protection’ and ‘agency recognition’ among agencies need to be recognised and resolved for co-operation to result.
7.The Extension Service and public school community education should develop more programme partnerships in suburban areas.
8.Current Extension programmes were considered relevant and valuable; they should be continued and expanded with the consideration of some identified concerns.
9.Important audiences for Extension to reach include: the young, working non-traditional family; un-reached youth; retired adults; ethnic and minority audiences; parents; single people; and agency staff members.
10.Extension should continue to serve middle class families in the areas of basic family living, life management, leadership development, and effective decision-making.
11.The Extension programme emphasis should address issues related to human development, community leadership, and environment and natural resources; a lower priority should be given to economic development.
Programme focus
1.The Ramsey County Extension programme lacks a clear programme focus.
2.Extension should focus on education rather than service.
3.Extension should focus on urban needs and problems.
4.Extension should focus on families and youth, volunteer development and leadership development.
5.Extension should focus on agency co-operation and referral.
6.Extension should focus on doing the current programmes they do well.
7.Extension should develop a marketing plan to inform the public and agency personnel about Extension.
8.Extension needs to focus on how to handle the dilemma of a desired increased visibility and serving urban needs with a currently over-extended staff working with established programmes which are valued by the clientele served.
Funding
1.The value of Extension programmes in problem prevention, in supplementing services of agencies, and in recruiting donated services from volunteers should be recognised.
2.People have little understanding of Extension programme costs.
3.Cost effectiveness is becoming an important criterion in funding public programmes such as Extension.
4.The measurement of Extension programme effectiveness, while needed, is difficult to do.
5.Those who allocate scarce public resources must be kept informed.
Staff considerations
1.The Extension staff received a very positive image in terms of effectiveness, availability, innovativeness.
2.Extension needs additional staff; the current staff was seen as being very much overextended.
3.Vacant staff positions that remain unfilled present programming problems.
4.More volunteers should be utilised by Extension; however, competition for volunteers is increasing, and it is becoming increasingly difficult to recruit volunteers.
5.The Extension volunteer staff expressed a strong need for ‘the right of access’ to the Extension staff member co-ordinating the volunteer’s programme; reservations were expressed about sharing Extension staff members across two or more counties.
6.Extension needs to resolve the dilemma of meeting increased programming expectations and requests from a diverse clientele while facing increased competition for volunteers with limited staff time for recruitment, development, and support of volunteers.
[1] Levy, 1979
[2] Krueger, Richard A., (1986) Focus group interviewing. St. Paul, MN: Department of Vocational Education, Unive