Managing Change in Extension

Abstract

Managing change in extension is capitalizing on today's strengths while building tomorrow's niches. A shrinking support base, increasing competition, and rapid changes in what people need and want in off-campus education are strong forces for change in extension programs. But inertia inherited from past success, the difficulties of changing mental habits, conflicting clientele signals, and rewards schema that give no clear signals all complicate change management. Symbiosis is needed between faculty and all levels of administration in order to find the support, and the will, to manage change constructively.

DIE EFFEKTIWITEIT VAN LANDBOUVOORLIGTING MET VERWYSING NA DIE KOMMERSRIëLE LANDBOUSEKTOR IN SUID-AFRIKA.

“…In die eerste plek kan dit toegeskryf word aan 'n gebrek aan 'n holistiese benadering waar die Morligters slegs die produksiekant van die totale sisteem as hul verwysingsraamwerk gebruik het en 'n geskiedkundige gebeurtenis as 'n pcrmanente verskynsel beskou het (Holt, 1989). Die logiese beginsel dat produksie begin by bemarking, is gerieflik gefgnoreer.…”

A Model for Creating Engaged Land-Grant Universities: Penn State’s Engagement Ladder Model

“…This tension still exists and is evidenced by (a) an increasing emphasis on the disinterested pursuit of truth through scholarly research in a manner unconstrained by the needs of communities (Bonnen, 1986(Bonnen, , 1992(Bonnen, , 1998Lynton & Elman, 1987); (b) college, department, and faculty isolation and "turf " battles (Bonnen, 1986(Bonnen, , 1992Lerner & Simon, 1998); and (c) the segregation of "basic" and "applied" research (Bonnen, 1998;Lerner & Fisher, 1994). Adding to the isolation is the fact that outreach and extension in land grant institutions, key conduits to communities, have often been marginalized by faculty, while outreach and extension professionals often view faculty as being out of touch with the real world (Bonnen, 1998;Henderson, 1988;Holt, 1989;Lerner & Simon, 1998;Swanson, Farner, & Bahal, 1990). Moreover, some faculty and administrators operate on the mistaken belief that reliable and valid research can only be conducted in well controlled environments (i.e., laboratories) and not in communities (Aronson & Bierman, 2002) and so eschew the need for community connection.…”