The Scholarship of eXtension

Introduction

eXtension is an interactive on-line learning environment delivering "best of the best," researched-based knowledge from the top minds across the land-grant university system. It is a space where university content providers can collaborate to gather and produce new educational and information resources on wide-ranging topics while continually interacting with their customers to help solve real-life problems in real time. The works of faculty and other professionals in eXtension are based upon unbiased research and undergo a peer review process prior to publication on the public interface.

The focus of this paper is to discuss and provide guidelines for the multifaceted scholarly aspects of work done by faculty and other professionals in the eXtension environment.

The Scholarship of Collaboration

Work done in the eXtension environment is complex and challenging, as top faculty and professional minds collaborate virtually to develop educational works that best serve the needs of our clientele. Successful scholarly works are products of top content minds, vetted by Community of Practice (CoP) members. These works will continue to evolve as new research-based knowledge is discovered and utilized.

A cornerstone of content creation in the eXtension environment is collaboration by faculty and other professionals to jointly develop materials in a group effort. This is a major paradigm shift for university academics, moving from a “me” to “we” environment. In this setting of teamwork, it is recognized that numerous content experts jointly working on educational materials produce more in depth and higher quality products for the public. Collaboration by communities of experts in content creation produces the “best of the best” educational materials and programs for customers.

With input over time from these publics, the content also evolves (see next section, The Scholarship of Engagement), as appropriate, as research-based information is tested and modified over a wide array of practical environments and situations. Institutions supported by public tax dollars have an obligation to that public to provide the best products and programs possible. The Scholarship of Collaboration allows reduction of duplication of efforts nationwide, a more open and sharing environment for material development, and a higher quality, more in depth, vetted product for the public.

In a collaborative setting, content is approached from many perspectives, agreed upon, and then peer reviewed. The scholars involved must have content expertise, be willing to explore other perspectives, evaluate arguments presented, and reach consensus. Contributions in this environment are more difficult to document, but perhaps more significant as the scholarly products are the result of many top intellectual minds in that specific content area, not just one.

The Scholarship of Engagement

Another important aspect of eXtension is the continual interaction of faculty and professionals who serve in a variety of roles within their CoP as they interact with their respective Community of Interest (CoI) -- their customers or clientele.

Much of the contemporary discourse on the engaged university was prompted by the writings of Ernest Boyer, first in his 1990 Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate (New York: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching) and a 1996 article entitled, The scholarship of engagement (published in the Journal of Public Service and Outreach, 1,1, 11-20). In a synopsis of Boyer’s work on the Clearinghouse & National Review Board for the Scholarship of Engagement webpage (2007, retrieved from http://www.scholarshipofengagement.org/):

Boyer suggests that American education has moved away from its traditional commitment to public service and argues for a new commitment to service that he calls the scholarship of engagement. He describes a new paradigm of scholarship (as articulated in a Carnegie Foundation report entitled Scholarship Reconsidered) that assigns four "interlocking functions" to the professoriate. The first, scholarship of discovery, is basic research, pushing back the frontiers of human knowledge. The scholarship of integration involves placing discoveries within a larger context and initiating more interdisciplinary conversations leading to a new paradigm of knowledge. The scholarship of sharing knowledge recognizes the communal nature of scholarship and also recognizes other audiences for scholarship than the scholar's peers. Finally, the report calls for the application of knowledge as a reflective practice in which theory and practice inform each other.

From an Extension perspective, engagement is related to what we have always done and eXtension adds additional dimensions for engagement. However, the aspect that is perhaps new, or at least adds an additional perspective, is the notion of scholarship, and more specifically the scholarship of engagement.

Engagement and Scholarship

A simple form of engagement in Extension is to provide advice to individuals and groups on a specific problem. Relationships are formed and ongoing trust is established. Richer and more robust interaction and forms of educational products and programs are explored and shared with clients as the engagement continues. In the eXtension environment, this engagement occurs in an on-line environment with customer access at any time, from any place, in multiple formats and on many devices.

When theory and practice come together, engagement becomes scholarly. This involves a more focused, ongoing, collaborative working relationship with clientele that results in producing both public goods (results) and scholarly products (peer reviewed and publicly disseminated publications). According to Peters (2005:419):

What is important to recognize is that the process of engagement can lead to scholarly products of high quality that communicate original, innovative knowledge and theoretical insights that could not have been produced without engagement.

In addition, Alter (2005:470-471) states:

To be taken seriously as scholarship, faculty must successfully pass through the filter of peer review and evaluation. The same process should apply in the case of public scholarship.

What specific evidence of scholarly contribution should we expect to see for faculty involved in public scholarship? Fundamentally, we need to see evidence of scholarly excellence through engagement. I think, by and large, we can look for the same evidence we typically expect: educational initiatives grounded in current and emerging science; innovation and creativity in teaching, specifically educational program development and design, teaching methods, and educational support materials; significant, positive impact on student learning and behavior; coherent, productive research programs that make important contributions along the knowledge continuum, as evidenced by a robust and continuous stream of peer-reviewed, scholarly publications; participation, though attendance and making presentations at professional, technical, and scholarly meetings; regular publication in professional, popular, and non-peer reviewed publications and outlets; acquisition, sustained over time, of external funding to support education and research programs; participation in departmental and university governance; and service contributions to one’s profession and the public.

Thus engagement as scholarship involves a more purposeful approach than just simple engagement, with the expectation of producing scholarly products.

Evaluation Criteria for the Scholarship of eXtension

With this perspective of scholarship in mind, we offer a set of evaluation criteria to assist in determining the extent to which eXtension work can be considered scholarly collaboration and engagement. These criteria were adapted from the Clearinghouse & National Review Board for the Scholarship of Engagement (2007), retrieved from http://www.scholarshipofengagement.org/. The more criteria that are met results in a stronger form of collaborative and engagement scholarship. In applying these criteria, one should be mindful of the variation in institutional contexts, the breadth of faculty work, and individual promotion and tenure guidelines.

Objectives/Questions

• The basic purpose of the work and its value for the public good is stated.
• There is an "academic fit" with the individual’s role, department, Extension, and university mission.
• Objectives are defined that are realistic and achievable.

Context of theory, literature, "best practices"

• The individual shows an understanding of relevant existing scholarship in the work.
• The individual brings the necessary skills to the collaboration.
• The individual makes significant contributions to the work and identifies his/her specific contributions.
• The work is intellectually compelling.

Methods

• The individual uses methods appropriate to the objectives, questions, and context of the work.
• The individual describes a rationale for selection of methods in relation to the context and issue.
• The individual modifies procedures in response to changing circumstances, if necessary.

Results

• The work meets its objectives and impact is documented.
• The work contributes to the discipline and to the community.
• The work opens additional areas for further exploration and collaboration.

Communication/Dissemination

• The individual uses a suitable style and effective organization to present the work.
• The individual communicates/disseminates the work to appropriate academic (peer reviewed), Extension, and public audiences consistent with the mission of the institution.
• The individual uses appropriate forums for communicating the work to the intended audience.

Reflective Critique

• The individual critically evaluates the work.
• The individual brings an appropriate breadth of evidence to the critique.
• The community is involved in the critique.
• The individual uses evaluation to learn from the work and to direct future work.
• The individual is involved in a local, state, and national dialogue related to the work.

Scholarly Work by Communities of Practice

Given the above, the following list provides examples of scholarly work conducted by eXtension Communities of Practice.

• Development of science-based content in a specified area occurs within and between Communities of Practice (CoP).
• CoPs are scholarly in design by bringing together inclusively the top minds of a particular content area to work collaboratively to develop the best educational products and programs nationally, thus reducing duplication of efforts across the system.
• CoPs function similar to a professional journal in that information is "published" only after review by peers
• CoP leader(s) function as journal editors by inviting participation and contributions and by facilitating scholarly review
• Author teams are developed in specific content areas to develop the “best of the best” content for public publication
• Faculty content reviewers (minimum of two reviewers per article)
• Journalist review for language, educational design, content design
• Articles accepted for publication
• CoP membership is open to all and is national in scope
• True collaborative effort of top faculty in various disciplines and content areas
• Individual contributions tracked through the technology applications
• Cross pollination of content development due to multidisciplinary teams
• Tracking utilization of public content to help determine scope of outreach.

Individual Faculty Scholarly Contributions to a Community of Practice

The following list provides specific examples of scholarly contributions by CoP members to eXtension.

• National and Regional leadership roles
  • CoP Leader
  • Content Team Leaders
  • National Reviewer
  • National eXtension Content Management Board
• Publication of peer reviewed content in eXtension as lead author or as contributing author
• Working across CoPs as a contributing author and/or reviewer
• International, National and Regional recognition for expertise and contributions
• Professional presentations on behalf of their national CoP
• Publications in professional journals on behalf of the CoP
• On-line professional papers to peers via web conferencing
• On-line professional presentations to clientele
• Invited web cast speaker
• Invited pod-cast speaker
• Author of blog sites, webinars, chats, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and other social media within content expertise area
• High quality interaction with CoI via Ask the Expert

Institution Examples

University of Missouri

• Division of Extension Non-Tenure Track Faculty Hiring and Promotion Process (PDF)

Excerpt: Criteria for Promotion

The factors that are to be considered in promotion decisions are 1) quality and quantity of Extension activities and 2) leadership and participation in professional activities and service.

a. Extension Activities - The primary criterion for promotion of Extension faculty members shall be demonstrated Extension scholarship. In making this qualitative judgment the faculty promotion committee may consider, among other factors, the extent to which the candidate:

1. transfers or applies knowledge, and/or applied research,
2. documents impact through programming, evaluation and curricula development,
3. exhibits creativity and innovation through the application of new teaching techniques, delivery systems and learning approaches,
4. generates revenue through contracts, grants, fees, and gifts,
5. contributes to eXtension through participation in Communities of Practice,
6. engages audiences representing the diversity of their assigned area.

In addition to Items 1-6 above, the promotion committee shall consider:

1. recommendations of the supervisor (and where appropriate, the Program Director within their respective program area),
2. evaluations by colleagues, with particular weight given to evaluations by those who have significant experience in Extension activities,
3. information provided by others who have had the opportunity to observe the individual.

b. Professional Activities and Service - Extension faculty members are expected to demonstrate their participation or leadership in activities designed to promote professional growth. The Extension faculty members may satisfy the requirements of this section through activities connected to their assignment or by renewing their knowledge in their discipline. Such activities might include, for example, engaging in leadership roles at workshops designed to improve their knowledge of current trends in teaching, speaking at state or national conferences, or participating as leaders in regional, state or national associations and societies.

Extension faculty should have a record of effective service at the university, local, state or national level.

Utah State University

Dear all:

As you know, eXtension is a Cooperative Extension program that provides internet access to information on a wide range of topics. To date, faculty and other professionals from seventy-four 1862, 1890 and 1994 land-grant institutions jointly develop eXtension materials for placement in twenty-six Communities of Practice (CoP), with another 24 CoPs under development. Content placed in a CoP is agreed upon by participants and then peer reviewed. The information is publicly available using internet search engines, with credit given to the “local” Extension organization when the browser is engaged.

Please know that USU Extension administration is very supportive of USU faculty and staff involvement in eXtension activities. This is a wonderful venue for disseminating public information that will certainly gain importance over time. eXtension also provides opportunities for contributing to national and international forums in an area of expertise.

In order to give proper weight and credit to activities involved with eXtension, we have developed the following guidelines:

• Ask An Expert – each answered question should be considered as a contact.
• FAQ – each accepted FAQ should be considered equivalent to an encyclopedia entry.
• Review of a FAQ - requests for a review should be considered equivalent to a review of an encyclopedia entry.
• Content page – each accepted content page should be considered equivalent to an Extension fact sheet.
• Revision of a content page – each revision should be considered equivalent to the revision of an encyclopedia entry.
• Review of a content page – requests for a review should be considered equivalent to a review of a journal manuscript.
• Co-leader/leader of a Community of Practice – this occurs after the Community of Practice has been developed, and includes responsibilities for revisions and up-dates. This should be considered equivalent to being a member of an editorial board or a co-editor of a journal.
• Development of a Community of Practice – this is considered equivalent to the development of a flagship program, with a 2 to 3-year duration. A proposal for the Community of Practice (COP) is prepared and submitted for a competitive review. If selected, funding is provided for the development of the COP, including the identification of experts who will contribute information. COP funding is considered to be a national competitive grant; ongoing operation of the COP beyond three years could lead to future competitive grants.
• Participation in the eXtension annual conference offers opportunities for national presentations and poster sessions.

I will make changes to the Role Statement templates for agents and specialists to reflect the value of eXtension activities. Because of the significant time involved with the development of a COP proposal, as well as serving as a co-leader/leader, these activities should be added to the annual work plan.

I hope you will consider getting involved in eXtension. It is a wonderful way to expand your reach.

• Roadmap for Excellence: Extension Agents (PDF)
• Roadmap for Excellence: Extension Specialists (PDF)

University of Nevada, Reno

Scholarship of eXtension
Incorporating eXtension Into Annual Performance
University of Nevada, Reno

Basic Tenets:

• Research and scholarly activity are linked closely with outreach teaching
• Initial years may be different than subsequent years – as with other effort
• Balance is important
• Use language to describe accomplishments that campus peers can relate to

Teaching

Cooperative Extension

• Utilizing eXtension information in outreach teaching
• eXtension programs can and should show the same critical elements as other methodologies – identified need, educational process, curriculum appropriate for audience, output measurement (metrics), qualitative and quantitative evaluation and impact assessment
• National recognition and involvement needed for promotion
• National presentations through web cast or pod cast
• Recruiting and collaborating with other faculty on campus on eXtension work
• Working with the media to promote eXtension and extend scholarly knowledge
• Measurement of student learning as a part of eXtension experience
• Utilization of eXtension curriculum/ information through train the trainer methodology
• Evaluation of programs can be shown down to the county level
• National level teaching
• Multi-function and multi-state outreach teaching

Resident Instruction

• Incorporating student projects into eXtension – these could be related to subject matter or could be capacity building project that deal with process questions
• Utilizing eXtension information in classroom teaching
• Student projects, extra credit, thesis projects

Research

Cooperative Extension

• Scholarly products have gone through a defensible peer review
• Scholarly products described in the language and terminology understood by campus audiences and individual contributions identified
• Grant acquisition
• Scholarly research related to educational methodologies of eXtension
• Journal articles related to eXtension methodology
• Professional presentations and papers related to eXtension
• Applied research with Community of Interest
• Published needs assessment and evaluation
• Curriculum
• Recruiting and collaborating with other faculty on campus on eXtension research and scholarly activity
• Research on delivery method comparisons
• Ability to quantify peer reviewed work
• Acting as a reviewer
• National level research
• Multi-function and multi-state research

Resident Instruction

• Student project could incorporate writing projects for eXtension or literature searches
• Thesis research through eXtension

Service

• National membership
• Acting as a reviewer
• Promotion of eXtension through state and national associations
• Participation on an eXtension committee

The Ohio State University

We have two levels of employees (not counting classified civil service support staff):
 
1.) Associate & Professional (A&P).  These are non-faculty positions that include non-educators working on specific tasks. It also includes county and state educators on a non-tenure track status. All of our new educators start in A&P (we have four levels I,II,III, IV), generally at levels I or II. They can apply for faculty when the reach level III. Their review to go to faculty goes through the dept of Extension faculty P&T committee. If successful they transfer a year later to an untenured assistant professor. All promotions are effective in the year following the review (~6-8 months). Promotions within A&P are completed internally w/in the dept of Extension via an elected promotion committee and separate administrative review (mirrors the faculty process but is dept only). You can find the information on p. 34 of this document: http://extadmin-cms.ag.ohio-state.edu/policy-handbook/promotion-and-tenure/a-p-promotion/ap_guidelines__revised-6-27-2010.docx/view

2.) Faculty. This is the typical Assistant, Associate, and Full.  Tenure to associate must be w/ tenure. You can find the eXt info on page 20 of the dossier outline materials found here: http://extadmin-cms.ag.ohio-state.edu/policy-handbook/promotion-and-tenure/faculty-promotion-tenure/promotion_and_tenure_dossier_outline_2010-2011-revised.doc/view
 

Summary

The environment of eXtension is a catalyst for transformation of the Cooperative Extension System of the Land Grant Universities nationwide. Faculty and professionals involved in content creation for eXtension are change agents in how educational products and programs are developed.

Scholarship must be broadened in its definition to reflect not just the individual content expertise, but also the scholarship of collaboration and the scholarship of engagement. The research based knowledge of the world is growing in geometric proportions and it takes many great minds working collaboratively and in an engaged manner with the public to have that knowledge make a real difference in people’s lives.

References

Alter, T.R. (2005). Chapter 12: Achieving the promise of public scholarship. In Peters, S.J., Jordan, N.R., Adamek, M., & Alter, T.R. (editors). Engaging campus and community: The practice of public scholarship in the state and land-grant university system. Dayton, OH: The Charles F. Kettering Foundation.

Clearinghouse & National Review Board for the Scholarship of Engagement. (2007). Retrieved from http://www.scholarshipofengagement.org/

Peters, S.J., (2005). Chapter 11: Findings. In Peters, S.J., Jordan, N.R., Adamek, M., & Alter, T.R. (editors). Engaging campus and community: The practice of public scholarship in the state and land-grant university system. Dayton, OH: The Charles F. Kettering Foundation.