MICHEL M. HAIGH
COMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST

Background

ABSTRACT

This paper examines the use of computer technology and programs used in the Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service. One Extension educator was surveyed from each county to determine what kinds of technology and computer programs were available. The study also assessed the use of on-line communications resources, training, and computer use. Analysis is based on a 91 percent response rate. The study was performed using e-mail, fax, and the Internet. Results indicate that most county educators’ primary use of the computer is for word processing, they are comfortable using technology and consider it important to their jobs, and that there is a lack of training. There were an overwhelming number of additional comments about the importance of technology, lack of training, and the importance of print vs. on-line publications. Results of this survey will bring about changes in computer literacy and technology. It raises awareness about the frustrations that some Extension educators feel toward technology and the importance of on-line communication resources.


BACKGROUND


The Cooperative Extension Service
The Cooperative Extension Service evolved from a threefold arrangement of cost–sharing by local, state, and federal governments (Gerling, 1982). "The term ‘cooperative’ has its origin in the passage of the Smith-lever Act of 1914, which specifies that the work shall be done ‘in cooperation with the United States Department of Agriculture and shall be based on a mutually agreed upon plan of work’" (Morales Osegueda, 1997). The Smith-Lever Act produced the "county agent system" which is known as the Cooperative Extension Service (Fite, 1988). The Cooperative Extension System helps people improve their lives through research-based information delivered in an educational process (Rasmussen, 1989).

New technologies evolve and so do new methods for using old technology. These new technologies and methods are delivered to the public through the Extension Service (Sanders, 1966). With new electronic forms of communications technology available for disseminating information, demands are placed on Extension personnel to improve their communication effectiveness by increasing the use of new technology (Adekoya, 1984).

There are two ways that have been identified as opportunities for Extension personnel to gain practical technology skills. They are (1) in-service training programs; and (2) electronic communications workshops designed to teach technology skills (Adekoya, 1984).

According to an ECOP subcommittee on personnel training, staff members need in-service training and experiences to assist them with:
(1) developing technical competencies to keep them ahead of changes; (2) exploring educational and technological content to extend personal competencies; and (3) taking a broader view of their functions and responsibilities and utilizing up-to-date approaches in carrying out responsibilities (1977). Training extension personnel in the use of electronic communications technology is beneficial when incorporating the technology in the micro-training framework (Hargie and Sounders, 1981).

Baird and Mason (1982) stated that:
Most of the attitudes hindering full acceptance of a new communication technology centers around a common, albeit difficulty-to-acknowledge human reaction to change: Fear of the unknown, fear of failure, of inadequacy, fear of loss of power. In addition, there may be risks in giving up old comfortable habits both psychological and social (p. 282).

In 1984, Adekoya performed a study of Oklahoma County Extension educators. Only 16 county offices had microcomputers at that time. County educators predicted they would use electronic communications (microcomputers) often in the future. One of the problems predicted for using electronic communications was that of standardization between counties, availability of the equipment, and lack of training. Microcomputers were the least likely form of electronic communications
anticipated to be used for conducting leadership training activities, educational meetings, and club meetings. Computers were anticipated to be used mainly while Extension educators conducted client visits at the office. Educators indicated that the use of electronic communications equipment helped disseminate education and meet extension objectives. Adekoya recommended that: (1) the Cooperative Extension Administration commit time and energy for staff training and development
in the use of electronic communications equipment, (2) workshops on the new forms and use of electronic communications equipment in extension
activities should be conducted; and (3) operating funds should be made available to extension field staff to encourage continuous use of electronic communications equipment for extension activities (1984). "Extension employees must be allowed time and financial support to become computer literate" (Smith and Kotrilk, 1990, p.1).

PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to determine what kinds of technology and programs were used by Oklahoma Cooperative Extension educators in the year 2000. This study was developed to evaluate the use of computers, programs, and available communications equipment. It also identified areas where training is needed and evaluated the use of on-line communications. Specific objectives for the study were:
1. To describe some general demographic characteristics of the Extension educators in the Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service.
2. To determine the types of communication equipment available in each county.
3. To determine which computer programs are used most by county educators.
4. To determine the primary use of computers.
5. To determine attitudes toward technology, training, and on-line communication resources.

Method

METHODS AND PROCEDURES

The scope of the study included the Cooperative Extension Service field staff in the state of Oklahoma. A total of 76 educators were surveyed. One educator from each county was randomly selected to prevent duplication of responses in some of the questions asked. A stratified random sample population was derived from the OCES Personnel Directory listing FCS, 4-H, and Ag educators. Over 10% of Extension educators were sampled, so results can be related back to the general population.

There are 77 counties in Oklahoma, but only 76 of them have operating Extension offices, therefore only 76 were surveyed. This was a technology survey, and technology was used to distribute the instrument and collect data. The survey took place over a two week time period. The period was not longer because of statewide events that would take county educators out of their office for travel and vacation time. Dillman agreed that using an e-mail questionnaire is appropriate when gathering information in a short amount of time. The time required for survey implementation is reduced from weeks to days. The newness of using the Internet (e-mail and web) has not been researched indepth (2000).

"Electronic surveys can be used to reveal the behavior of people who use computers as a communication mode. Sproull found that an e-mail survey produced higher response rates at a lower cost . . .. findings support . . . that electronic surveys did not adversely effect the return rate or responses" (Kawasaki & Raven, 1995, pp. 1, 5).

The survey instrument was researcher designed. A panel of communication specialists familiar with technology reviewed the content and validity of the instrument. There was a need to keep the questions and the use of computer language simple in the questionnaire to reduce confusion among respondents. The four-part questionnaire consisted of checking and fill-in-the-blank questions to gather demographic information, including the types and number of computers available in each office. There was a Likert-type scale used to rate computer programs on their level of use, and the third section used a four-point Likert scale to discover educators’ attitudes toward technology, training, and on-line communications. The Oklahoma State University e-mail directory was used to correspond with participants. An e-mail message was sent to each individual, personalized with their name and PIN number. (Messages were not sent through the listserv, but rather as an individual e-mail.) "Personalize all e-mail contacts so that none are part of a mass mailing that reveals either multiple recipient addresses or a listserv origin" (Dillman, 2000, p. 367). This respects individuals’ confidentiality and improves their response rate.

This message read much like a traditional cover letter, and respondents were asked to click on the web address to take them to the survey form. The introductory web page that appeared gave further instructions on PDF forms, submitting their responses, and a number to call with questions. Surveys were distributed in person to those who attended the FCS/4-H statewide in-service. Dillman stated that when survey participants appear at a location of interest, and it is possible to sample them, it is then appropriate. Participants are given questionnaires and a request to complete them (2000). Thirty-nine percent were returned while in-service was taking place; others decided to fill the survey out electronically. "Utilize a multiple contact strategy much like that used for regular surveys" (Dillman, 2000, p. 367).

Multiple contacts are important for responses in traditional survey methods: "they are essential for e-mail surveys" (Dillman, 2000, p. 367). The time between contacts should be shortened when using e-mail surveys from one week to two or three days, "to increase likelihood that the recipient will connect the memory of the first contact and the second" (Dillman, 200, p. 368). Four contacts were made in a two-week period. Three days after the initial e-mail, reminder e-mails followed. This reminder was again personalized and sent to each individual with the web address included. Three days after the reminder, a follow-up e-mail was sent, and three days later there was a follow-up phone call with nonrespondents.

Since technology is unpredictable and the researcher did not know what everyone’s computer capabilities were, the option was given to fax back responses. "Inform respondents of alternative ways to respond, such as printing and sending back their responses" (Dillman, 200, p. 369). Many people find it easier to examine and respond to long messages if they are printed on paper. Offering this mode of return also increases confidentiality (Dillman, 2000). Twenty-six percent of respondents chose to fax back their responses, and 35% returned theirs by using e-mail. A 91% response rate was achieved in the two-week period. Data was coded into a program called PC File, then run through the SAS statistics program to run descriptive statistics.

Results

FINDINGS

Findings for objective 1: To describe some general demographic characteristics of the Extension educators in the Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service.

Half (50.8%) of the respondents were Family and Consumer Science educators. Agricultural educators (43.3%) and 4-H educators (6%) also responded. Fifty-three percent of those responding were female. Over 58% of respondents fell between the ages of 25 to 45 years old. Nearly one-third of respondents (32.8%) was between the ages of 45 to 55 years old. There was one participant under the age of 25 and one over the age of 60.

Over two-fifths (46.4%) of participants had worked ten years or less as an Extension educator. Over one-third (34.4%) had worked 11 to 20 years in Extension, and less than one-fifth (18%) of participants had worked 21 to 30 years. One respondent had worked 31 years as an Extension educator and was retiring in January of 2001.

One question asked participants who the most computer literate person in the office was. Over half (54%) of respondents named their secretaries as the most computer literate person in the office. Agricultural agents (19.1%) and Family and Consumer Science educators (17.5%) were also considered computer literate in the office.

Findings for objective 2: To determine the types of communication equipment available in each county.

Several questions asked participants to identify the available communications equipment in their offices by placing a check mark next to the technology they had available. Over one-fourth (27%) of the counties do not have laptop computers. Nearly half of the counties (48%) have two laptops. Nearly three-fourths (73.5%) of those laptops are less than three years old, and 98% are Windows-based computers. Fifty percent of educators’ desktop computers were less than three years
old, and 20% of educators had desktop computers over five years old. All of these were Windows based.

Other electronic communications equipment counties had included CD-ROM drives (97%), color printers (94%), scanners (93%), digital cameras (88%), and Zip drives (36%). One office had several scanners, but reported, "We don’t know how to use them." The same held true for digital cameras.

Findings for objective 3: To determine which computer programs are used most by county educators.

A four-point Likert-type scale was used to determine the frequency different computer programs were used. The scale ranged from "always use" (4) to "never use" (1). Over three-fourths (79.1%) of participants use Microsoft Word "always," and 17.9% use it "often." Over half (56.7%) of Extension educators use Microsoft Excel "seldom" or "never." Two-fifths (43.3%) of respondents use Microsoft PowerPoint "often," while 34.3% of educators use it "seldom." Over half (57%) of the respondents "always" use Internet Explorer, while 38.8% "always" use Netscape Navigator as their Internet browsers. Seventy-one percent of Extension educators use Adobe Acrobat Reader "always" or "often." Adobe Pagemaker and Adobe Photoshop were "seldom" used. Microsoft Publisher was "seldom" or
"never" used by 63.6% of respondents. Microsoft Word was rated the most commonly used program (77.6%). There was also a blank called "other" where educators could write in what other programs they use. Those written in included Print Shop, Access, Quicken, and WordPerfect.

Findings for objective 4: To determine the primary use of computers.

One question asked respondents to decide their primary use of the computer. Over two-thirds (66.7%) said their computer was mainly used for word processing. Two-fifths (20%) of county educators use their computer primarily to answer e-mail.

Findings for objective 5: To determine attitudes toward technology, training, and on-line communication resources.

The last part of the survey asked participants to circle their level of agreement with statements on a four-point Likert scale. The scale ranged from "strongly agree" (4) to "strongly disagree" (1). Over 91% of educators "strongly agree" or "agree" with the statement "I am comfortable using the computer." Nearly two-thirds (65.6%) of educators thought their current computer’s capabilities (i.e. speed of computer) meet their needs, but 68.6% of respondents "strongly agree" or "agree" with the statement "I need updated computer equipment in my office." This discrepancy is explained by the additional comments that suggest that up-to-date
computer software and other technology needs to be "consistent and compatible" between counties. Over half (68.6%) of Extension educators "disagree" or "strongly disagree" with the statement "I have received adequate computer training in the programs I need to use." All respondents "agree" (32.8%) or "strongly agree" (67.7%) with the statement that said "Being familiar with computer programs is important to my job."

As technology becomes more available and printing costs increase, there is a constant push towards placing more Extension fact sheets and publications on-line. Over 92% of Extension educators "agree" or "strongly agree" with the statement "The Internet is a good way to access Extension publications." Some Oklahoma Cooperative Extension fact sheets are placed on the web only and not printed. This offers a "print on demand" quality. This idea needs to be approached carefully because almost half of Extension educators (45.3%) "disagree" or "strongly disagree" with the statement "Web only fact sheets are useful." One respondent voiced his concern that technology is unreliable and having something only available on the Internet when a computer does not work is very inconvenient.

Over four-fifths (88.9%) of Extension educators find "Pete’s Electronic Archives Resource Library" (PEARL), an Oklahoma Cooperative Extension fact sheet archive, a useful resource for on-line communication resources; however, only 82.1% of respondents had visited the web site. This can be explained by the additional comments that stated the educator had not visited the site, but their secretaries found it very useful. Also, 91% of respondents "agree" (31.3%) or "strongly agree" (59.7%) with the statement "I would like to print fact sheets on demand from my computer when needed." Nearly two-thirds (64.6%) of educators would like to receive fact sheets on a CD, which would allow them to print on demand.

Many respondents took time to fill in the additional comment section. Some of the more interesting comments about technology are included. One educator said "We need to have the same current, up-to-date computer systems in each agent’s office. Also need district area agents who are very computer literate! We need in-service training on computer programs, how to use computers, networking, etc. We know basically how to type, save, and print." Several identified the need for training: "We need current and frequent computer training. With viruses and other needs, Extension could greatly benefit from a computer specialist in each district." Another educator addressed the monetary resources issue; "County staff does not have the same resources to get equipment and software that they do on campus. Usually we have to beg, borrow, or scrounge money to buy what we now have." There is also an apparent interest in the future technology qualifications of personnel: "I am definitely interested in becoming more computer literate. What I know I have learned on my own. Those of us that have been in the system awhile are behind those coming out of college now. Any staff hired to help us needs to be down to earth and able to communicate with staff and not just have computer knowledge."

Many have ideas on how to make the situation work: "We need training on what is available,how to access and use it. All counties are at so many different places on the technology scheme. Yet there has been little or no effort to train us on just plain old everyday use." And another said, "I couldn’t get my computer to access the survey. I feel Extension has done a terrible job in helping us acquire technology equipment and when we do find the money to buy it in the county, we get very little technical help. We need a much better plan in place on how to purchase equipment as well as a formal plan of instruction." The 91% response rate may be related to the need of Extension educators to ask for help. One thought this survey was a way of asking for help: "I need two new desktop computers and a laptop, but our budget can’t stomach it. Can you help?"

Chi-Square analysis was performed on several questions to see if there were valid relationships between demographic responses and their responses to two agreement statements. There was no significant relationship found between a respondent’s age and the statement "I am comfortable using the computer." Analysis also showed there was no relationship between a respondent’s gender and the level of agreement with the statement "I am comfortable using the computer." Further
analysis proved there was no significance between an educator’s years of Extension service and the statement "Being familiar with computer programs is important to my job." This leads the researcher to believe that age and gender do not play a role in a person’s being comfortable around technology; the population surveyed is comfortable using technology. Technology knowledge is important to the population’s role as Extension educators and is not influenced by the number of years they
have served in that role.

Conclusions

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the findings of this study:
1. Most county educators in Oklahoma are between the ages of 25 to 45 years of age.
2. Almost half of those surveyed have worked for ten years or less for the Extension service.
3. Secretaries are considered the most computer literate people in most county Extension offices.
4. Laptops, scanners, CD-ROM drives, and color printers are forms of electronic communications technology that are present in most county Extension offices.
5. Microsoft Word is the most common computer program used. The primary use of computers is word processing activities.
6. Extension educators use Adobe Acrobat.
7. County educators are comfortable using computer technology and consider it important to their jobs.
8. Computer training is a need for Extension educators.
9. County educators would like updated computer equipment and programs.
10. The Internet is a good resource for accessing on-line Extension publications. County educators find PEARL a useful on-line resource.
11. Printing publications on demand is an option most county educators need. There is not a consensus about the usefulness of web only fact sheets (those that are not printed but only available on the web.)
12. Being familiar with technology is important for an Extension educator.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The following recommendations are based on the findings of this study and the conclusions that were reached. Many of these recommendations have been adapted from Adekoya’s study performed in 1984.
1. The Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service needs to commit time and energy for training county staff in the use of computers, scanners, digital cameras, and other forms of electronic communications equipment.
2. Workshops and in-services focusing on electronic communications need to be held for all county Extension educators.
3. Training needs to be held at each county Extension office, so educators are trained on the equipment they work with daily.
4. Monetary resources need to be invested in technology located in the county offices.
5. A plan of action must be formulated and implemented that will move Extension towards consistency and standardization when purchasing technology in county offices.
6. Extension needs to invest in hardware and software that is consistent among counties.
7. The findings of this study should be communicated throughout the Division of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources so the results may serve as a guide for designing a plan of action for the future of on-line communications resources such as web only fact sheets.
8. Further research should be conducted to further examine the attitudes of county Extension personnel toward technology, since this study only sampled a few individuals.
9. Further research should be conducted to further examine the use of on-line publications and fact sheets.



REFERENCES

Adekoya, A. A. (1984). Perceptions of Oklahoma cooperative extension personnel regarding their use of electronic technology in disseminating extension
education information. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater.

Baird, M. and Mason, M. (1982). Training teleconference users: how to tackle it. In Parker, L.A. and Olgren, C.H. Teleconferencing and Electronic Communication: Applications, Technologies and Human Factors.
Madison: University of Wisconsin-Extension Press.

Dillman, D. (2000). Mail and Internet surveys. The tailored design method.
New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

ECOP Subcommittee on Personnel Training and Development. (1977).
National policy guidelines for staff development.
Durham, N.H.: University of New Hampshire.

Fite, R.C. (1988). Extension and outreach. Centennial histories, 1890-1920.
Oklahoma State University, Stillwater.

Gerling, J.F. (1982). Oklahoma cooperative extension service agricultural agent’s
perceptions of frequency of practice of adult education principles.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater.

Hargie, O. and Sounders, F. (1981). Social skills in interpersonal communication.
London: Crom Helm.

Kawasaki, J.L. and Raven, M. R. (1995). Computer administered surveys in extension.
Journal of Extension, 33 (3).

Morales Osegueda, S.G. (1997). An assessment of teaching/training style preferences
among Oklahoma cooperative extension field staff.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater.

Rasmussen, W.D. (1989). Taking the university to the people.
Seventy-five years of cooperative extension.
Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University Press.

Sanders, H.C. (1966). The cooperative extension service.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.

Smith, N, and Kotrlik, J. (1990). Computer anxiety among extension agents.
Journal of Extension, 28 (4).