Preface | Introduction | Chapter 1 | Chapter 2 | Chapter 3 | Chapter 4 | Chapter 5 | Chapter 6 | Chapter 7 | Chapter 8  | Chapter 9 | Bibliography | Appendices | List of Acronyms | About the Author

Chapter 8

Preparation for Adult Citizenship

As pointed out in the introduction, our device of thinking of different groups of citizens as standing at a greater or lesser distance from a center conceived of as full, effective participation in our common public life did not readily accommodate the various categories of youth and young adult projects in support of which about 16 percent of the Foundation's grant funds had been expended. Youth and those young adults not yet eligible to vote could not perforce be considered as a part of the continuum. They must be considered to be in a state of "preparing for adult citizenship." However, to the degree that their future would be determined by the status of their families, they might be thought of as being distributed along the continuum in the same way. This report, however, will not attempt to so distribute them.

There were thirteen grantees in this category, eight of which served children and adolescents and the remainder served young adults. (See Appendix B.) The age groups ranged from children in primary grades and junior high school (Fellowship House and the Arrow program), to preteens and adolescents (National 4-H Club Foundation), to college age (Encampment for Citizenship). In some cases, the activities emphasized direct contact with young people (Fellowship House); in other cases, the central concern was with improving the ability of adults to serve a given youth clientele (National 4-H Club Foundation).

To gain a better perspective on the philosophical and programmatic commitments embodied in the projects concerned with youth, let us refer back to Chapter 1. In that chapter, the work of the University of Chicago's Committee on Education for American Citizenship is described, including the production of Civic Education in the United States: A Directory of Organizations by Robert Horwitz and Carl Tjerandsen. In the directory, Robert Horwitz pointed out that the many organizations concerned with citizenship education differed widely in their views as to the purposes and/or methods appropriate to this concern. His analysis is useful in describing and assessing the citizenship programs concerned with youth which were funded by the foundation.

The basic commitment of the Fellowship House project was to the development of attitudes (and at a deeper level, a concern with character traits) encouraging acceptance of others as persons and not rejecting them because they were members of, for example, a particular racial group. Achievement of such a goal was felt to be fundamental to the health of a democratic society, in part, because such attitudes encouraged a mode of operation or process whereby the ability of each citizen to share in the public life of that society could be improved. This commitment would be found congenial by the Encampment for Citizenship, the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC), Benton House, the 4-H Club Citizenship Improvement Study Program, the Girl Scouts, the New York City Mission Society, the YWCA of Mississippi, Springfield College in Massachusetts and, in a more tangential way, the Lincoln Filene Center for Civic Education (Tufts University). At the same time, each of these programs made a commitment to some other curriculum value which affected the character of that program. Of all the youth programs supported by the ESF, only the Citizenship Clearing House project did not include development of a certain character trait cluster as a central commitment. Its goal was to develop the understanding and skills necessary to political democracy, especially the effective functioning of political parties, as well as the attitude of interest in and willingness to participate in political party activity.

Reviewing the projects noted above as sharing one commitment but differing with respect to others, we can see that a differentiating commitment in the case of the AFSC Interns-in-Community Service program was its emphasis on learning to solve community problems through local institutions, agencies and citizen groups. The Center for Civic Education was concerned to encourage discussion of issues in the interest of reaching a reasoned choice. (In fact, this commitment was probably more central to the center than the development of character traits appropriate to democracy. Developing the attitude of preferring a reasoned choice was, however, important.) Benton House was also concerned that its clientele learn how to work responsibly with others to achieve a program rewarding to all. To a degree, the YWCA project in Mississippi had a focus similar to that of Benton House. The 4-H Club program emphasized the prime importance of successful completion of developmental tasks on the part of pre-teenagers and teenagers while developing the understanding, skills and attitudes appropriate to an expanding self-other consciousness on an ever-widening scale. This emphasis was based on the conviction that successful achievement of these developmental tasks was fundamental to appropriate participation in a democratic society. The Girl Scouts emphasized qualities of social behavior in which good citizenship was defined as service (for example, "adopting" hospital patients). For the New York City Mission Society, effective participation in and leadership of voluntary associations was a major collateral commitment. The Encampment for Citizenship, in addition to its commitment to the importance of developing or strengthening certain attitudes, stressed the importance of comprehension of and participation in public affairs--with respect to governmental structure, party politics, pressure groups and public issues. The Springfield College project was centrally concerned with the conditions necessary in a democratic society to achieve the degree of equality of opportunity needed "to realize legitimate human ambitions." Its focus on undergraduate curriculum, however, made that project more peripheral to Foundation aims than any of the others in this group.

With respect to project methodologies, it must be added, dogmatic methods were minimized. The emphasis, rather, was on experiential learning (for example, internships in community service). Where materials were produced, they were written in ways which would reflect a real-life situation more effectively than would a typical textbook treatment (for example, Center for Civic Education).

Programs for Children and Adolescents

There were eight projects which addressed themselves primarily to children and adolescents.

Benton House

Benton House was a Protestant-funded settlement house in the Bridgeport area of Chicago. Bridgeport lies north of the stockyards; its residents were of Polish, German, Lithuanian or Irish extraction. In January 1956, Benton House applied for and received a grant to make possible a program of education for citizenship for older teenagers and young adults--a group generally acknowledged to be rather difficult to work with, especially in a second and third-generation community of lower-middle or upper-lower income status. The sum of $42,000 was made available for a three-year period beginning July 1, 1956. An additional $14,000 was provided for the 1959-1960 year.

Given the general tenor of the application, it was significant that more than 200 youth, mostly over sixteen years of age, were involved in the activities of Benton House. This amounted to about one-fourth of all the teenagers coming to thirty-four such agencies in Chicago. What is especially noteworthy is that these young people were not only participating in gym and shop activities, but they were also active in the club program. It was also significant that at the time the application was made, the Benton House staff was conducting a self-evaluation with the assistance of a committee of its board. It had been decided to try to discover what progress was being made toward several objectives. As recorded in the final report, the objectives were: (1) to develop the attitude on the part of its clientele of making responsible use of house facilities, (2) to develop an attitude of taking the initiative to improve their facilities, (3) to develop an attitude of concern for the welfare of others, (4) to develop skills involved in planning a satisfactory program for a group or club, (5) to develop the skills of good group procedure, (6) to develop an understanding of the need for such group procedures and for program planning and (7) to develop acceptance of others regardless of race or ethnic origin or whether from east or west of Halsted Street.¹ These objectives, specified to the work with clients of the agency, were clearly relevant to a concept of good citizenship.

In its application, Benton House had articulated the following premises: (1) Good citizenship can be promoted through group work activities reaching the whole family. (2) By helping the individual to identify at least to some extent with Benton House, there might be a reduction of identification with the gang which tends to take violent shortcuts. (3) Teenagers want adult support as well as limits on their behavior. (4) Even in the case of those who have made a college or vocational choice, social relations with peers may be weak. (5) Social group work is the primary tool for a settlement house in promoting individual and group development toward responsible membership in the community. (6) Social training may be disastrous if confined too long to the family,² (7) If a family is under stress or so isolated that transition from family to peer group is made difficult or if the community is so shattered that groups of peers do not form easily or form only in opposition to society, then social training will suffer. The sickness of the individual and of society interact. The individual comes to adulthood with lowered ability to cooperate with others, and he will be less able to provide proper conditions for his children. The process becomes a vicious circle. The capacity for group life must be developed in groups. (8) Group work is a means rather than an end.³

According to the report prepared at the end of the first program year (1956-1957), it was evident that there had been mistakes. A decision had been made to work with groups from the previous year which seemed to show readiness to move toward a more goal-oriented program. But during the program year these clubs collapsed although the individual members continued to be involved in the young adult program. The reasons for the collapse were the competition of full-time jobs, becoming engaged or getting married, going into the armed services or deciding to go to night school. It was decided, therefore, that it would be more useful to start with the younger groups and see them "begin from a point on the scale where progress is more direct and practical toward readiness for moving, with the acquired attitudes and experience, into the ability to carry on programs without such intensive help as is possible under the grant."⁴

It helps to understand something of the problem faced by Benton House staff to know that nineteen members of various clubs were school dropouts. Fifteen boys and one girl were in more or less serious trouble with the law. One group of seventh and eighth-graders were under great peer pressure to quit the club; they were ambivalent about adult support. Few of the older teenagers had ever discussed their future with an adult. Looking back over the program, Fennessey commented that the sixty or so young adults who were coming to the house as the project was getting started were socially immature, that is, showing lateness in engaging in serious dating, having difficulty in undertaking any serious planning for the future and exhibiting a tendency to cling to the same activities year after year. They showed great resistance to officers in any kind of representative government. Their behavior was characterized by jealousy and breakdown of the organizational structure. They were unwilling or unable to carry through any responsibility. When the staff tried to establish a young adult council to help develop leadership, to take responsibility for its own program, to give service and understand what service means and how it is done and to open channels of communication among club groups and with individuals, very strong resistance was encountered as the year wore on and the council was allowed to die.⁵ At the teenage level, behavior was largely impulsive and often destructive. And the objective of the participants was conceived of as "having a good time" without the ability or the desire to plan even for dances or sports events in an organized kind of way.

In spite of difficulties noted above, there were some achievements in the first year. Some members of the group, for example, worked with the staff in three polio clinics. They painted and repaired equipment. A few were able to provide some leadership help to younger groups. They sponsored a splash party and dance for teenagers, but similar events for their own group were not so successful. On balance, then, the approach taken in the first year was judged not to have been sufficiently fruitful. It was decided, therefore, to concentrate on the development on somewhat different lines of a New Teens Program for seventh and eighth-graders, ranging in age from twelve to fourteen. The staff saw this age group as critical both for its own sake and for possible usefulness of the agency to them and to their families in the future. The rationale for this decision included the following points: (1) As individuals, most of this age group are eager, enthusiastic and open to new ideas. (2) While beginning to seek independence, they will still relate to adults and accept guidance if intelligently given. (3) Group bonds are strong but not "set." They will take in new members even if somewhat different from the core group. (4) It is easier to work with parents without alienating the children. This would permit the staff to lay the groundwork for relationships later on.⁶

To help staff, arrangements were made for six two-hour seminars to be held monthly with a psychiatrist who had worked in a settlement house to discuss such topics as: (1) what it means to a largely Catholic community to have a Protestant-sponsored agency working in it; (2) possible reasons why the neighborhood seems like a vast matriarchy with men so passive and hard to reach; (3) the apparent prevalence of alcoholism among the men, (4) the meaning of money and material things to the membership as related to what members seem to be willing to pay for and what they expect to get for free; (5) the meaning to the neighborhood of workers from minority groups placed in leadership positions in a community with strong prejudices against differences, especially against blacks whose moving into the area was expected and feared.⁷ These seminars provide evidence of the sincerity of the staff effort to improve its ability to work in the community.

Development of New Teens Program

With the additional resources provided by the grant, Benton House established a New-Teens department. In the first year (1956-1957), there had been, as we have seen, limited progress toward the goals of the program. However, the decision to work with younger adolescents in the following year was not entirely successful either. This was due to the fact that of the forty-three members in one boys club and three girls clubs, about a third of the total exhibited a kind of antisocial sophistication and a destructive behavior pattern which the core group was not yet strong enough to absorb. As a result, a great deal of staff time was required to deal with the problem, including extra club meetings, home visits, court appearances and individual conferences. By the fall of 1958, more cooperative behavior was being achieved.

According to the director, the fact that the staff had not known the boys until age thirteen meant that antisocial gang patterns had become established. The boys were, however, eventually able to plan their own programs, control individual behavior of group members, take part in the total Benton House program and pay for "extras" such as refreshments. (Paying for something was seen as an example of the principle that accepting something implies a reciprocal obligation.) The first breakthrough in the department occurred in the summer of 1958, twenty-one months after the program had started. Various trips to interesting places in the city were scheduled which "opened new doors" to the thirty members of the New-Teens Program. Such trips offered a realistic opportunity to plan and assign responsibility for such things as taking roll, collecting and handling bus money and controlling antisocial behavior. They acquired poise in strange situations. Their success in these activities carried over into activities in the house. For example, they were able to appoint and use committees effectively for parties and dances. "From this time on, through July of 1960 when the grant ended, this department never looked back. ...^"8 In 1959 there were sixty-four enrolled in the New Teens, and in 1960 the number had grown to ninety. The core group had by this time become large enough and experienced enough to set the tone for a high standard of behavior and of cooperative participation. It was the conclusion of the staff, however, that ninety was too many, that with two staff members, seventy was a more manageable figure. It was clear, for example, that ample staff time must be available to work with parents, schools and churches to deal with problems of the young people.

In 1958-1959, the various club presidents were asked to speak at the annual meeting of the board of directors. They sat with them through the dinner and reported back to their clubs about Benton House finances and the other details of running a neighborhood house. They were amazed at the amount of organization needed, of which they had been quite unaware. A further and important sign of progress was that in 1959, the parents, without exception, came to register their children for the program. Attendance by parents when invited to successive events went from three, to fifteen, to thirty-five, The young people showed increasing evidence of ability to participate in substantive activities. They gave a skating party, with the club representatives selling tickets. They planned a dance and a variety show. They functioned effectively in the fiesta which was the principal Benton House money-raising event. In 1959, the summer program enrollment rose to forty. There was a smooth adjustment of new members into the group. Ten of the young people moving up to the Teenage Program (at age fifteen) became volunteer junior leaders in the summer program for younger children.

There was further evidence of progress in the final year. They proceeded to an immediate election of officers in the fall. This may seem trivial, but it is very significant that they were able to accept the idea that there had to be some way of providing recognized leadership authority in the group. Previously, they would, as likely as not, have refused to accept direction from anyone. A few Spanish-speaking boys and girls were accepted into membership. The subgroups chose names with less antisocial overtones. When three new staff workers came to fill vacancies, they were readily accepted. The New Teens were able to achieve a good level of programming almost immediately. They made plans early for Christmas service activities such as caroling and collecting canned goods for later distribution. They took responsibility for two money-raising events to procure equipment for the gymnasium. The New Teens moving up to other teenager groups were able to function effectively.⁹By treating the New Teens as persons capable of responsibility and by encouraging them to assume it, the young people grew in ways of behaving fundamental to working with others in the achievement of a common task--a change highly important to effective citizenship.

Teenage Program

In 1956-1957, the first year of the project, the staff established as a requirement for membership in the Teenage Program that a teenager must be responsible for paying dues of three dollars per year. They saw this as a test of member responsibility and recognition of the value of the program. The staff also emphasized continuity of club activity which was contrary to the members' tendency to try first this and then that as a matter of whim. The staff saw an uninterrupted club period as necessary if the members were to see the value of the program, to be able to interpret what they were seeking in the club and to be helped to assume responsibility as members. The Nobles, who began the year as a group of frightened boys, moved significantly in the desired direction. At the beginning, their struggle was against adults and to achieve leadership among their peers. To help them learn to share and to cooperate with one another, the staff decided to try a combination of gym and social activity. If they could achieve this much as a base, then they could go on to plan their own programs, set their own limits and begin to get satisfaction from the club. The group ended the year with a sense of achievement, a real identification with the agency, behavior reflecting growth and evidence that many of their problems at the first of the year had been solved.¹⁰They even changed their name to Barons, thinking it sounded more respectable. The El Capri group showed similar development but went even farther. They scheduled basketball games with blacks. They "volunteered" their mothers to help with events, a significant reversal of their previous rebellion against parents.

Although the department's work progressed, some problems continued. In spite of encouraging formation of clubs, there remained more non-club teenagers than there were club members. Boy-girl relations functioned at a very elementary level. About all the boys were able to think of, at least at first, was basketball. A spirit of fierce competition prevailed between clubs and friendship groups to the point of being destructive. To deal with these problems, the staff came up with several responses. Three interest groups (Newspaper Club, Photography Club and Hobby Shop) were opened to all teenagers. The game room program was structured on one night a week; another night was free time. For those not skilled at basketball, gym classes and other sports were introduced. For the basketball-oriented group, six teams were chosen by lot in an effort to break up club cliques and to even out the ability levels among the teams. A basketball clinic was organized to provide individual attention to the less skilled. A committee of team captains made up schedules, set dates for the playoffs and attended to other necessary details. This was noteworthy because it was the first attempt at self-government at a departmental level. Progress with this group depended on achieving trust and a respect for each other, for the staff workers and for the agency. It was hoped that the members would be able to reduce resistance among themselves, toward peers of the opposite sex and to the staff workers. It was the conclusion of the staff that the planned program succeeded. Behavior problems began to disappear. Good relations with girls in the game room resulted in more girls becoming members; hence, the dances were more successful.

Because of the success of the teenage basketball tournament committee, the group workers suggested a similar arrangement for the game room. The teenagers developed a "self-propelled program," manning the public address system, arranging for refreshments and decorations and, "best of all, planning mass activities for all the teenagers."¹¹ In 1958-1959, the year started with two dances preceding registration, a demonstration of trust in the group and a conviction that the improved behavior of the previous year would carry over. The dances were used as further opportunities for learning. After an initial regression period, the El Capris promoted a roller-skating party to raise money for a bumper pool table.

This involved the whole house and was a big success. Attendance totaled 292, and the group was able to contribute $102 to the finance goal. This made the club the highest status group in the house. A formal Teen Committee was set up on a representative basis with elected officers. It sponsored all of the teen dances, set up new booths at the fiesta, bought all of the records for the juke box, cosponsored the roller party, set rules for the game room and had its own treasury.

By this time, the "teenagers had ... experienced a more creative program, self-government, self-discipline, responsibility, capability, trust and support from the agency, a change in themselves. ..."¹² In the 1959-1960 program year, two New-Teens clubs moved up into the Teenager group. These young people had been in the Benton House program for several years. The staff encouraged Teenagers not to move up to the Young Adult group but to stay to provide leadership for the younger members. At the start of this year, every teenager joined a club, a major change from what had happened the previous year. In the spring, the El Capris joined the Young Adult group.

By the end of the fourth year, a number of accomplishments could be listed. (1) The Teen Committee became a Teen Council with a permanent treasury. They had taken full responsibility for all dances and special events in the department. They sent two representatives to the Agency Carnival Committee. They sponsored and selected the movies for the game room. Behavior problems, brought up by the staff, were referred to the council for action. (2) All of the teenagers found clubs to join. This stabilized their behavior further. Several inter-club activities were conducted which was a new development. To work in larger groups was a sign of growing maturity, of a widening self-other outlook. (3) Movies on dating and on interracial activities were asked for and discussions were held afterwards. (4) The teenagers were so busy with other activities that no basketball tournament was held.

Young Adult Program

The Young Adult Program was a marginal problem at best for the first two years. At the beginning of the second program year, the staff concluded that those young adults remaining in the program would be the socially immature, the school dropouts or the timid. "This minority is not really at ease with the rest of the membership, hence, cannot be counted on to assume leadership otherwise expected of them."¹³The agency staff thought further that they ought to encourage these teenagers to move out in their final year but that there should be a plan for maintaining some contact with them. It was felt that with patience the staff could help this group which badly needed support to learn to handle themselves a little better, if not their environment. Because Benton House was the only experience that this group had had of democratic process, it came "too little and too late." The image of political activity in Bridgeport, it was pointed out, is authoritarian, and residents expected that graft would characterize it. They were fearful of bestowing rank or, power on peers. After careful discussion of the role of officers in an organization, the group was able to tolerate elections, but it was meaningless. The upshot was that they elected figureheads. The power remained with the real leaders who would not run for office. The use of democratic forms was on a very tenuous basis. It was thought also that the experience with the young adults reflected to some degree the attitudes of the community: placing a low value on education, emphasizing the role of the tavern as a recreation center and having a sense of isolation from the Loop (that is, the city center) and from any experience with urban services associated with the Loop.

On the basis of the experience in the first two years, the group workers almost decided to drop the program for the third year (1958-1959). Some progress was noted, however, when young men moved from the gym to the game room instead of going home, when girls were able to form a committee on refreshments, when all contributed to the collection for refreshments and the money was not stolen, when membership fees were paid for the third year without protests, when some took part in program planning, when subgroups achieved a measure of cooperation and when six adults agreed to referee in the gym for the teenagers. Before the program started in the fall of 1959, the staff met with "old" members "to lay the cards on the table" about the future of the Young Adult Program. Only three showed up, but a good discussion was held. They agreed to take responsibility for trying to get the program going. The result was that the program grew amazingly with seventy members taking part. They took up new interests including chess and wood-shop. Behavior improved. They consciously tried to help individuals solve problems. Some of the group continued to return to help Benton House on special projects. They began to fill leadership roles in lodge and church groups and looked forward to the possibility that some of the male members would join agency committees in the next few years. The staff concluded that it seemed "hopeful that the community at large may profit from the training and attitudes they are now putting to use."¹⁴

Adult Program

Benton House hoped to be able to improve the ability of adults to function more effectively in roles within Benton House and also in the community outside. The results were of sufficient significance to report here something about the progress made in developing their self-confidence and ability to work with others. I will only note evidence of interest taken in the wider community which had more direct implications for citizenship roles.

As evidence of increased confidence and interest in new experiences, many women not only attended a summer camp but an interracial one at that. This was considered by the staff to be an amazing step. Several members became PTA presidents. Some of the members joined the Bridgeport health interest group and the PTA. In the fourth year they sponsored five special events. They undertook responsibility eventually for Tag Day, an interagency fundraising event for a citywide charity, which resulted in a sizable increase in funds collected. The significant change was that an effort, once conducted by staff and a few volunteers, was taken over by adult members who took responsibility for organizing the participation by Benton House in this community-wide effort, including recruitment of the many adults needed to distribute tags on the streets and collect the money which the tags symbolized. The volunteer leaders even began to use the campaign as a way to interpret Benton House to the community.

At the start of the project, the staff ran the annual Fiesta Committee. In 1959, the members took over. There were two representatives from each club and interest group and several persons from the community-at-large participating. The committee set dates and prices, decided where the proceeds should go, prepared publicity and ran the affair, clearing $752. The 1960 fiesta was even more successful.

The staff was also concerned that the young adults and adults in the membership learn more about local, state, and national government so that they could participate more effectively as citizens. In 1958, a former member of the Shaitan club, a part-time worker with young adults, and a young woman volunteer in the New-Teens attended a legislative seminar in Washington, D.C., sponsored by the National Federation of Settlements. In 1959, the Chicago federation had a legislative seminar in Springfield, and six women and one man from Benton House took part. Afterwards, they decided to hold a report meeting for members and friends. In the fall, they called a meeting to discuss the school dropout problem, which was effectively reported in the local newspaper. Thirty parents came, and the discussion was said to be adequate. The staff considered this to be highly significant progress.¹⁵ A month later, three adults attended the biennial legislative seminar in Washington, D.C. One paid all of his expenses; Benton House subsidized two-thirds of the cost for the other two. Two participants gave a follow-up report to the board of directors of Benton House.

A very important development was the organization of a group of volunteers to work in the library and to serve as instructors and as aides on trips or at parties, at other special events or in the large summer program. A training program was organized for adult volunteers in the summer program. They discussed agency policies and programs, their own functions, their relation to staff and assuming responsibility. In the last year of the grant, thirty-five men and women served as volunteers. It had become a status position in the house program. As many as twelve teenagers also served as volunteers. When a Bridgeport health interest group was organized, Benton House hosted the first meeting on tuberculosis. A Benton House representative was elected to office in the group. The group staffed the TB X-ray unit, worked on rat control, visited health agencies and sponsored first-aid and home nursing courses as well as leader training and public meetings on health topics. In 1960, the group sponsored the first community health fair.

These examples represent a significant movement into the wider world by a number of people who had been unwilling to take responsibility for any activity outside their own homes. By being encouraged to assume responsibility, they became able to be responsible. As with the South Chicago Community Center, we cannot help but be impressed by the understanding, skill and dedication of the Benton House staff. Given these qualities, the unusually large number of youth who were reached by its programs can be more readily understood. The staff demonstrated their skill and understanding in many ways. One example can be seen in the teenager program. To enable the basketball program to work better, they encouraged choosing the teams by lot so that each would have a reasonable chance to win. For those with an interest but poor skills, a basketball clinic was organized. For others, other sports and gym classes were organized. The staff was aware that participation depended upon recognizing the variety of skills and interests represented and then taking seriously the need to provide for them. They had a clear picture, not only of the kinds of qualities the responsible adult should manifest, but also of the behaviors appropriate to each age level.

The staff also realized their need to gain a better understanding of the Bridgeport community in order to know why certain behavior occurred and also to gain a better sense of how to work with family, church and school to help to deal with the young people who were in trouble. The Benton House project was distinguished, too, by the breadth of its group work concepts which went beyond the development of a feeling of belongingness (a basic and essential learning) to include the deliberate development of the information, understanding, attitudes and skills essential to group problem solving. It is implicit in the above but should be noted explicitly that the emphasis of the staff on developing a sense of responsibility for the welfare of others and for an organization, as well as a conviction that one's efforts can make a difference, contributed significantly to an essential aspect of citizenship education in a democratic society. And, in fact, there was evidence that both young and older adults were beginning to join and take part in a variety of voluntary organizations in the community. It should be noted, too, that there was evidence that these changes were beginning to take place within a framework of acceptance of ethnic differences.

Postscript

Following the termination of the grant, the board of directors voted to continue the program budget at the same level for 1961. It was expected that it would probably be necessary to cut back for 1962 but not to the former level. Even so, the willingness to assume responsibility for a larger budget provides strong testimony for the positive evaluation of what the board had observed as a result of the grant. A letter from the director provided additional information on progress toward the original project goals. In 1961, the Fiesta Committee earned $1,100, a significant increase. Members began to contribute individually to fundraising programs. A new women's group made up of twenty-four new house members was formed. It sponsored a lecture on African culture by a black professor. The Golden Agers (who three years before had been unable to make coffee) took responsibility for supervising a recreation evening as part of a citywide Senior Citizens Week held at Chicago's conference center. And more parents, including fathers, began not only to attend family night programs but also to serve on the committees.

So, the learnings stimulated by the grant continued to develop, strengthening not only the abilities of individuals but also the ability of Benton House to serve Bridgeport and, indeed, contributing new and more aware leadership to that community. Not everyone, perhaps, will accept these changes as being accomplishments. The orientation of the Benton House program was middle class. In a sense, it was trying to substitute middle-class for lower-class values. It valued the ability to take responsibility, the willingness to give to others if one received from others, the willingness and the ability to set a goal and work toward it, becoming aware of a wider community beyond one's neighborhood and learning how to function there, learning how to give and accept authority and developing a willingness to accept others without regard for color. The group was seen as a vehicle to do more than help its members to feel better; it was also a problem-solving mechanism. All of these seem fundamental to any concept of functioning citizenship. Their achievement was a tribute to the courage, integrity, insight and skill of the Benton House staff.

The National 4-H Club Foundation

Of the several youth programs to which the ESF contributed, the 4-H Club project achieved the broadest impact. It is fortunate, therefore, that the project was so thoroughly documented in the final report prepared by Dr. Glenn Dildine, its coordinator. This account draws heavily on that report. But first, a brief comment on the organizational basis of the program will be helpful.

The 4-H Club program is a major activity of the Cooperative Extension Service organizations in the land grant colleges and universities in the several states and Puerto Rico. The term "cooperative" reflects the fact that the program involves agreements covering cooperation and funding at federal, state and county levels. The extension program was originally conceived as a way of bringing the results of scientific research from laboratories and experiment stations to rural areas in order to improve productivity and the quality of rural life. In time, work with young people became an important part of this mission.

By 1954, there were approximately 2,000,000 young people in the 4-H program. (By 1975, there were 4,300,000.) A little over half ranged in age from ten to thirteen years, a little over one-third from fourteen to seventeen years, and the remainder from eighteen to twenty-one years. They were organized into 85,000 4-H clubs, served by a professional staff of 13,000 extension workers who contributed about one-third of their time to the program. In addition, there were about 285,000 volunteer adult and junior leaders working with the clubs. At the county level, a typical organizational pattern includes a county agricultural agent, county home demonstration agent and a county 4-H Club agent. If there were funding for only two agents, the agricultural and home demonstration agents would devote part of their time to 4-H Club work.

In the beginning years of the development of cooperative extension work, the program emphasis was on assisting farmers to increase the efficiency of production of food, feed and fiber, Programs to help the homemaker followed. The family garden, preserving food, making clothing, etc., were the early focus of the assistance provided by home demonstration agents. When 4-H Club work began, the program activities followed the program pattern for adults: Typical activities for young people involved selecting and fattening a steer or designing and making a dress, the results then being judged competitively and prizes awarded. Concerns about this model led to the establishment in 1949 of the National 4-H Club Foundation in order to carry out experimental studies and training in the hope of finding a firmer ground for the program. It was also charged with responsibility for establishing a National 4-H Club Center to help expand cooperative extension's educational contributions to the 4-H Club program.

By 1954, there was a growing body of data suggesting the desirability of basing the 4-H program on somewhat different principles, at least for the adolescent and post-adolescent age groups. There was concern about the membership dropout rate, the average tenure being only two and a half years. Also, the rapid shift in population from farms to non-farm locations suggested that a review of priorities was needed. The key question was whether the emphasis on competition as the principal dynamic in the projects carried on by boys and girls in the 4-H Club program was not becoming counterproductive-British experience having shown that a shift away from activities which emphasized individual competition to programs which emphasized cooperation was helpful in retaining older youth in youth programs. Such concerns led to the idea that new research findings on the developmental process in young people needed to be examined and adapted to the requirements of the 4-H program.

Because of increasing awareness of the need to look at 4-H Club work from a different perspective, Cooperative Extension's Committee on Organization and Policy had asked the National 4-H Club Foundation early in 1952 to undertake a study-training project which was subsequently established as the "Research and Demonstration Project Related to the Developmental Needs of Youth and Training in Human Relations for the Leaders of Youth." Dr. Glenn Dildine became the project coordinator for this activity. Concomitantly, it was becoming increasingly clear to the National 4-H Club Foundation as well as to certain Extension Service staff at federal and state levels that although the effectiveness of extension workers depended on how well they understood and worked with people, most of the extension staff were being trained to work with things.

Subsequently, it was decided to specify further the 4-H Foundation's focus on citizenship, and this decision led to a project proposal forwarded to the Emil Schwarzhaupt Foundation in January 1954, and, then, after discussions between the applicant and myself, resubmitted in April 1954. To finance the project, a grant of $80,000, to be expended over a three-year period, was made by the Emil Schwarzhaupt Foundation. Glenn Dildine became the director of the new project (Citizenship Improvement Study), and Ralph W. Tyler agreed to serve as chief technical consultant.

The broad purposes of the Citizenship Improvement Study (CIS) were set forth in the application in the form of five "anticipated outcomes" which pointed the way for study activities: (1) to create, test and diffuse a citizenship program for the 4-H clubs of the United States; this program should: (a) improve the experience and activities in citizenship for the 4-H Club member, (b) improve the program materials and procedures in citizenship for the 4-H extension worker, (c) provide workshops and conferences in citizenship education and program planning and (d) be flexible enough to meet the needs, interests and abilities of 4-H members, age ten to twelve; (2) to provide an increasing number of trained extension workers who are competent to carry out an effective citizenship program from the county, state and national level; (3) to make recommendations to land-grant colleges and universities for the improvement of the professional training of extension workers as it relates to citizenship education; (4) to cooperate with other youth organizations in order that the local 4-H citizenship activities may have an unlimited impact on the life of the community; and (5) to provide guidance and direction for further research projects as it relates to citizenship education in the 4-H Club program. The final report stated that anticipated outcomes 1, 2 and 4 had been realized and went on to indicate what more needed to be done with respect to 3 and 5.¹⁶

Defining Citizenship

One of the first tasks before the study staff was to develop an acceptable definition of good citizenship. It was necessary for the study staff to take primary responsibility because: (1) It was evident that extension personnel did not have a clear, coherent view of what citizenship implies or what qualities they thought the good citizen should have. (2) Many tended to equate citizenship with activities that were so labeled. They did not, with few exceptions, understand that the activities were only means, which might or might not be effective in realizing the real ends which were to learn to think, feel and act as a "good democratic citizen should." (3) It was evident also that even among those who could see that good citizenship must be defined with respect to certain behavior, many were prepared to accept inadequate or even inconsistent behavior as constituting good citizenship. (4) It seemed quite unrealistic to expect that state and county extension personnel living in widely different parts of the county would be able, on their own, to agree on an acceptable definition within a time frame consistent with the limitations of the project.

It was concluded, therefore, with the endorsement of the Technical Advisory Committee that the central staff should develop a guiding definition which would incorporate "the basic value assumptions of our democracy, previous research results in citizenship education and the practical opportunities and limitations of the study."¹⁷ At the very beginning, it was agreed that the definition must meet three tests: First, it must be educationally sound; that is, it must be defined with respect to ways of thinking, feeling and acting--behavior which could be learned. Second, it must be consistent with basic democratic values.  And third, it must be appropriate to and feasible within the framework of the 4-H Club program.

It was concluded after extended discussions that a good citizen in our democracy is: A person who is effective in cooperative, self-other relations because he deeply understands himself and others and understands democratic working relations; realistically accepts and believes in the positive potentials in all people. As a result, he effectively and habitually ACTS with deep concern for the common welfare (self and others) and takes into balanced account "freedom with responsibility," both his rights from others and his obligations to others.¹⁸

This behavior was seen as consistent with the rubrics of Head (clearer thinking), Heart (to deeper loyalty), Hands (to longer service) and Health (to better living) the elements of the 4-H pledge. This became the accepted definition for purposes of evaluating project activities.

Study Design

Because the guiding definition of citizenship emphasized behavior to be learned, the primary focus must accordingly be on teacher-learner relations. It was concluded that the most fruitful approach would be an experimental "action study"--a design in which central staff and participants would be joined together in a total study process: Staff members would deliberately build themselves into the design as both

subjects and objects of study. They would consciously try to develop with participants various kinds of planned program situations and experiences, activities aimed at effective citizenship learning within all involved. Then they would help participants measure and evaluate results, against some emerging set of criteria for "good citizenship." Staff would similarly evaluate [their] own teaching success, using criteria [objectives] describing agents as good teachers of citizenship. This would involve a deliberate decision to share responsibility for the total study process as widely as possible with everyone participating in the study. "Controls" here are internal; "before" achievement is measured against "after" achievement within all groups participating in the experiment.¹⁹

The model hypothesis to be tested might then be stated as follows: "They (either agents or club members) will learn these particular new understandings, attitudes, and skills in action, if I (staff member or agent) work with them in this particular way."²⁰ In proposing this model, the study staff concluded that it would meet, in a way that the other models would not, two commitments in the grant proposal. The first was to create, test and diffuse an improved citizenship program for the 4-H clubs of the United States, and the second was to provide an increasing number of trained extension workers competent to carry out an effective citizenship program from the county, state and national level.

This design was developed, therefore, at two levels. In Level 1, the learners were selected club members and/or adult volunteers; the teachers were the county agents. The latter took responsibility for deciding on working objectives with and for their selected group (planning and conducting appropriate citizenship learning opportunities and collecting and evaluating data on the learner group and on themselves as teachers). In Level 2, the agents were the learners and the study staff/state coordinator "team" members were the teachers. The team with help from agents developed working objectives for the learnings sought in agents, provided consultant (teaching) help to agents to encourage learning these objectives and collected data and evaluated results at Level 2.²¹

Getting Started

It was decided to seek participation of one state in each of five regions, eventually being specified to Ohio, Oregon, Puerto Rico, Texas and Vermont. In three locations, the state 4-H Club leader served as CIS coordinator; in the other two the assistant state 4-H leader served. Twenty-five county agents in all, in a few selected counties in each state, worked with a "focus club" in each of their counties. The choice of counties was made following an exploratory session in a state at which the local extension agents were asked to write their answers to two questions. The first was, "How do you define a 'good citizen,' thinking of the qualities within a young person which lead him to act as a 'good citizen' should?" The second was, "You are now doing many things in your county which you believe build toward good citizenship. Which one of these activities would you choose if you could concentrate some extra attention on it for about two years?"

As might be expected, the responses were varied. But they showed that each agent had a notion of what "good citizenship" is and what activities would lead club members toward it. (The quality of responses also varied, of course.) The discussions which followed showed the agents that their own ideas and beliefs were important in guiding their choices of activities to be pursued. "Although many had not stopped to think about it, they saw that they could define good citizenship as three interrelated kinds of inner qualities of young people--understandings and feelings and attitudes which lead young people to act democratically in relation to other people. "²² Because different agents started with different beliefs about what kinds of knowledge, feelings, attitudes and actions are most important in a democracy, the pattern of activities which they would conduct would also be different. And, in addition, they saw that it would not be possible to work on all of the activities in which they might be interested. Choices would have to be made.

To help the agents to get started, the study staff reviewed the three steps in the traditional extension program process with which agents were familiar. The steps required clarifying objectives, developing a program and evaluating results. It soon became clear, however, that development of a program of citizenship education was a far more complex task than the typical project-oriented extension approach. Eventually, it was found necessary to evolve a five-step approach.

Because of the great variety of views about citizenship which could plausibly be advanced, an acceptable definition of citizenship was an essential first step. Fortunately the definition developed by the staff proved to be acceptable. This became Step I in the CIS process. This step was essential because it eliminated trivial views of what constituted good citizenship and, of course, forced attention on options other than 4-H production projects. But there were further difficulties. Agents and the staff discovered it was not possible to proceed directly to development of objectives (the first step in the traditional program process). It was necessary for each county to decide on a program focus, an area of work, within which objectives could be established. Specifying the county focus became Step 2.

The decision about county focus involved three questions: (1) What should the pilot group (regular club, specifically constituted club, junior leaders, selected members or adult volunteers) be? (2) What area of 4-H activity (conducting meetings, recreation program, officer training, community service) should be chosen in which to work? (3) What kinds of citizenship learnings (growth in self-esteem, skill in use of parliamentary procedure, understanding how to use committees, growth in concern for others, etc.) should be sought? Once decisions had been made on these points, the county group could then proceed to Step 3 which required the formulation of specific "working objectives" the understandings, attitudes and skills which the county group wanted young people to learn.

One difficulty which soon emerged was that to an agent an objective was usually visualized in the form of a program goal or purpose. An example of such a formulation might be a stated intention to reduce the quantity of feed required on the average to produce a pound of chicken. Such a program goal would involve technical changes in flock operation, such as altering the feed mix. A simple measurement could determine whether or not the goal had been reached. But in the CIS, the objectives involved choices among many possible kinds of changes in the behavior of persons. Agents tended to confuse educational objectives with activities rather than changes in behavior.

Step 4 (Step 2 in the conventional extension program process) involved the question: How do we tackle the job with these young people? It required planning and conducting program activities appropriate to the specific objectives. This, in turn, had two parts: selecting experiences which would help young people achieve the learning objectives and conducting them in such a way that the new learnings would become incorporated in their way of doing things. Step 5 involved evaluating what had occurred (Step 3 in the traditional process). Were the learning objectives achieved? Could the teaching successes and failures be accounted for? These questions were difficult to deal with. Agents lacked understanding of the process whereby it could be determined whether one's teaching had succeeded or failed and why. It was necessary to learn how to record data indicative of behavior of both teacher and learner and do so in such a way as to relate the behavior to the ongoing learning/teaching experiences.

It was only as the project proceeded that agents began to see how complex these tasks were. It was unprecedented in extension work to be both subject and, object of the research, to conduct educational work and study it and themselves at the same time. And, of course, it was necessary for the study team to maintain the central focus, that the goal of this educational experiment was improvement of education for citizenship. Helping county and state extension personnel understand this expanded program process and become able to use it set a task for the study team which in some cases was not successfully completed until the end of the second year.

But this was only part of the problem. Implicit in the definition were expectations about understanding certain principles of human development and of learning. The agent must be able, for example, to recognize the growing-up changes the individual was trying to make and how the learner viewed them because "this inner perspective on himself is the mainspring of his behavior and growth."²³Such an understanding would be essential to any undertaking to inhibit undesirable behavior and replacing it with the desired behavior. (In this connection, Dildine saw Robert E. Bills' Self-Other Index as a useful guide.) As one example of a need to focus on what people are like, the CIS emphasized strongly the need to understand and appreciate individual differences which in a democratic system can make the world a better place in which to live. "We need a variety of viewpoints in a democratic club to keep us from deciding too quickly on too limited plans."²⁴The variety in individuals would also make it possible for each member to contribute in accordance with his special interests and abilities. But we can take advantage of individuality only as we understand ourselves and others. This "hinges on recognizing that each person says and does the things he does, as a direct result of the way he consciously or unconsciously sees himself and feels about himself in a situation. We can learn to interpret any person's actions only by learning to see and feel, deeply, as the other person does, not trying to interpret another person's behavior by how we would think or feel in a similar situation."²⁵

Dildine saw another need as well, the need to replace inappropriate concepts of how learning takes place with approaches consistent with sound principles. For example, neither "You've got to tell them" (authoritarian) or "You can leave it to the kids" (laissez faire) was considered to be an appropriate approach.  Somehow another approach must be worked out which would provide appropriate guidance while recognizing that the club member was the person who must do the changing in his or her unique way. The staff continued to underscore the principle that "Learning is personal, resulting from things going on within the learner.... The things we do to and for young people may or may not achieve our objectives; the results we desire will occur only if young people are actively, willingly a part of all that is going on. Effective teaching becomes more and more a process of doing things with young people."²⁶Good teaching involves helping them move voluntarily toward personally appropriate, socially acceptable new behavior.

To help the agents understand what elements were involved in teaching/learning in a democratic framework, a learning model was provided which outlined the steps in learning as follows: (1) The individual is confronted with some situation within or outside the individual which stimulates perceptions and feelings (thinking and feeling come into play). (2) A first interpretation of the situation is made and modified in the light of new knowledge (perhaps from a learning experience set up by the teacher). (3) Alternatives for action are explored to determine which promises the greatest personal satisfaction. And (4) an alternative is chosen and action begins (doing) aimed at a satisfying response to the situation as perceived. Each of these steps is modulated by the individual's core attitudes, feelings and values.²⁷

Clearly, learning is an individual matter. Situations and stimuli will be uniquely perceived and of course modified by a unique set of core feelings, attitudes and values. Hence, learning situations must be flexible in order that adaptations may be made to accommodate individual differences. The challenge for the teacher is to help the individual discover that present behavior is inadequate to the present situation and to suggest possible new patterns. This can be done through demonstration and by analyzing the interaction of elements in the new pattern. Mastery can occur when the teacher (agent or study staff member) provides an appropriate sequence, sufficient repetition so the new pattern is incorporated into continuing behavior and integration of each new step into the life experience of the group.²⁸

In order for this learning process to work effectively, certain conditions must be satisfied if citizenship qualities are to be learned: (1) There must be an opportunity for intelligent participation in something club members (or agents) feel is important. (2) Club members must be allowed to take as much responsibility as they can handle at all stages. If each member feels free to make suggestions and to share in planning and action, all have an opportunity to learn. In this way self-esteem, self-confidence and skills can grow. (3) The teacher must provide a warm, supporting climate of feeling. And (4) the members must recognize some "expertness" in their area of interest on the part of their leaders.²⁹

Evaluation of Progress Toward Level 2 Objectives

How successful were the study team's activities in helping CIS pilot county agents achieve the objectives as defined for their own development as citizenship program leaders? Detailed diaries and other records were kept by agents and by the staff coordinator teams. Each agent was responsible for evaluating the development of his own pilot club, and these evaluations provided some of the most significant data on agent behavior and growth. Because experience indicated certain gaps in the original evaluation procedure, during the last year of the study agents completed a form "Agent's Self-Evaluation" and later a "Self-Evaluation Supplement."

To check on the effectiveness of the teaching team, these forms were analyzed for data indicating the agents' perception of the help they had received. The teaching teams maintained their own records of their activities with club agents. In addition, each state coordinator prepared a chronological summary of team contacts with the agents. In keeping with the concept of the "teaching team," the evaluation of the Level 2 objectives was conducted cooperatively by the study staff and the state coordinator. The necessary analysis and summary of the data on agent behavior required a special session of several days duration for each state.

It would be inappropriate to try to repeat here the very detailed exposition of activities conducted by the study staff and of the data and their interpretation which allowed evaluation of the results of the study team's work as teachers of citizenship educators. However, some representative results will help the reader get some sense of what progress was made toward achievement of these objectives. With respect to Aim 1--understanding, accepting and using CIS steps and principles in program development--the overall average achievement of extension staff was 2.5 on a scale of 3. The value reached with respect to individual growth was the same. (A distinction is made between normative achievement and individual growth because a considerable achievement level in the area of some specific knowledge, feeling or skill may not necessarily have represented much growth on the part of an individual agent who might already be an able person with respect to the matters involved in a given CIS objective.)

Aim 2 was concerned with achieving at least a limited understanding and acceptance of and skill in understanding behavior. Here again, the values for normative achievement and individual growth were the same, standing at 2.3 on a scale of 3. With respect to Aim 3, concerned with applying the CIS educative process to other extension work beyond CIS, the average for normative achievement was 2.8 and for individual growth 2.7.

The study staff considered that the overall averages of 2.5 out of a possible 3 points on each measure represented a gratifying accomplishment. All of the data combined to "document the high level of understanding, interest, concern, and effectiveness which agents demonstrated. They took full responsibility, step by step, for their challenging and difficult role in the study."³⁰Other data supported the conclusion that achievement and growth were high. Agents attended all scheduled work sessions except when prevented by clearly unavoidable circumstances. Their participation in the work was active and interested. They dug into the exploration of new background principles, "became creatively involved in developing and testing out appropriate next steps, committed themselves to a thought-out course of action back home, worked at carrying this out before the next scheduled session. In each state, pilot county agents developed high enthusiasm, both for their county work with their citizenship clubs and for periodic opportunities to meet and work with each other and with the coordinating team."³¹

Of the thirty-five agents who started the study program, eight dropped out involuntarily because they were transferred elsewhere; only two dropped out for personal reasons. At the end of the study, almost every agent subscribed to the statement, "I strongly believe in the guiding definition of citizenship which we have used in the CIS." The average achievement scored on this objective was 2.5/2.6. This is significant because prior to the CIS project, "there was no generally accepted, educationally valid definition in 4-H Club work." The least progress in relation to the definition had to do with its use beyond face-to-face groups and using scientific method to improve the status quo. The fact that growth in use of the citizenship definition did not extend beyond face-to-face groups should not surprise us. The strong emphasis on applying human development principles would tend to place the focus on face-to-face groups. They would be the primary locus of interpersonal, self-other relations. And, in any case, interests and concerns of the younger age groups representing the bulk of 4-H membership would tend to be limited to such groups.

The lack of progress in the use of scientific method to improve the status quo is a point about which we can only speculate. Although the notion of how to think about community problems, for example, is certainly central to needed citizen abilities, it is likely that the particular formulation of the behavior (in terms of scientific method) would seem controversial. Rural conservatism might find uncomfortable the notion of changing the status quo, especially through applying "the scientific method" which might be seen as an unwelcome challenge to community beliefs.

With respect to Steps 2 and 3 of Aim 1, in which the task was to move from the definition to specific working objectives, the achievement scores were 2.6/2.6 and 2.7/2.9. For Step 4 (planning and carrying out teaching activities related to objectives), the scores were 2.5/2.4. For Step 5 (evaluating the connection between the learning achievement of club members and the teaching help of agents), the achievement scores were 2.6/2.5. In Aim 2, achievement scores were somewhat lower (2.3/2.3), reflecting the fact that less time than would have been optimal was given to the goal of acquiring understanding, acceptance and skills involved in understanding the behavior of those with whom one was working.

Effectiveness of the Teaching Team

With respect to the question of the effectiveness of the teaching teams, using several data which permit internal cross-checking, the evidence "supports the general conclusion that agent learning resulted directly from their CIS experiences, consciously guided and directed by the teaching team."³² In addition to analysis of the study experience, an effort was made to assess the value of experiences outside the CIS which involved learning about human development/ human relations principles. Some of the outside experiences had to do with college-level courses emphasizing principles of individual and group development and behavior but without much attention being paid to their applicability to on-the-job problems: "Apparently knowledge of principles failed to carry over into skill in using principles as sources of hypotheses to test against dependable data on behavior. So again, any previous or concomitant help had to be repeatedly supplemented and applied before it resulted in competence for our CIS objectives."³³

Several agents commented that regular in-service training and extension program planning had been helpful, activities involving the three steps underlying CIS Aim 1 (developing objectives, developing related programs, evaluating results). "However, my experience with these agents and extensively with others reveals several major gaps in the training reported, all related to effective use of program development in action (that is, needed in the CIS)."³⁴ The principal deficiencies observed were due to the fact that little attention was paid to the length and complexity of the step between a statement of overall purposes (goals) and specific working objectives of a given educational activity such as 4-H citizenship club program. Throughout much of the study, agents showed only a little gain in their ability to develop valid, workable learning objectives related to citizenship. It was only in the final months that through repeated effort, analysis and encouragement on the part of the teaching team that they were finally able to select and state workable specific objectives. A third point was that it "took our agents long, repeated practice to consistently make the essential distinction between objectives within learners as ends, and program activities guided by the teachers as means. Yet this concept is basic in traditional program development too."³⁵

One exception to this judgment (that is, that the impact of CIS activity was much greater than was outside activity) is noted in the final report. It appears that eight agents had attended a human development/human relations workshop, but the other seventeen had not. To test the hypothesis that "workshop participants will reveal higher achievement test scores than non-participants because workshop experience is directly related to all CIS objectives,"³⁶a "sign test" comparison was used. The result supported the hypothesis to a highly significant degree. On a test of normative achievement, on only five out of fifty-four items was non-participant achievement higher than participant achievement. On the personal growth dimension, on only fourteen items was non-participant achievement higher out of a total of fifty items. The results were statistically significant at the one percent level. The results indicate that the intensive workshop strongly reinforced the CIS learnings of those agents who participated in both.

As for the amount of any extra help received from study staff, there did not seem to be any appreciable difference among the various agents in the study. Apparently, the length of time spent in the project by the agent was the more important factor. An effort was made by using the sign test to determine whether the agents who began with the first field session and continued throughout the full two years of field work would achieve significantly more than those who entered late. It was found that the amount of elapsed time was a significant factor. These results still obtained when allowance was made for those who had participated in the human development/human relations workshops.

Evaluation of Progress Toward Level I Objectives

I have devoted a good deal of space to the training aspect of this project. I have done so because Dildine has outlined very clearly the ambiguities and complexities inherent in efforts to change, through a learning program, behavior concerned with dealing with our public life. It was especially difficult for persons who by education and experience were most at home in matters dealing with technological change. In spite of the detail with which I have treated the training aspect, Dildine's final report treats it in far richer detail. I can only encourage the reader to consult this excellent exposition of a major attempt to undertake citizenship education in action. Having said this, it must be recognized that the ultimate end-in-view was change in 4-H Club members. What evidence then, of desirable change at this level did the evaluation effort reveal?

In this connection, Dildine provided some gross evidence on this point when, in reporting on work sessions in each of the pilot states, he recalled:

After the usual data review and analysis, some agent would lean back thoughtfully, and then almost explode with something like, "Why, this club is really active now. Members are enthusiastic, really taking responsibility even when I'm not around. More members want to come in." And maybe, "People in the community are beginning to take notice, too." None of these pilot groups disbanded voluntarily during the study; agents reported that most of them wanted to keep on meeting after we officially ended field work in 1957.³⁷

But the more useful evidence of the success of agent training by CIS staff can be found in the digests of reports by agents in the pilot counties on what was learned by club members. I will not attempt to summarize this record but instead will offer only a few examples from it. In state A, agents 1 and 2 undertook to help one boy and one girl, representative of the whole club, to learn to take effective democratic leadership toward the solution of problems both in the club and in the community. To initiate the CIS project, a citizenship club was newly created from the membership of a boys' 4-H Club and a girls' 4-H Club in the community. These young people met twice a month as a mixed club, some times with agents in attendance and often with invited consultants and community members. Each member continued to carry on his individual 4-H project in addition to participating in the activities of the citizenship club.

The citizenship club had decided to begin by discussing health.

They arranged for physical examinations for all members. These revealed the prevalence of round worm and hook worm parasites (primarily carried through unsanitary toilet conditions). This led to the conclusion that trying to organize a program to provide sanitary latrines for the whole community would be an appropriate goal for the club. The members began by talking to their parents about the need to improve health, conducted a survey of the latrine situation and held community meetings on health problems. In all of this, agents acted as counselors, with club members and their committees doing most of the discussing, deciding and carrying out.

Quoting the agents, "We attend some meetings, but we serve as counselors only. We seldom call meetings. We could sense immediately their preference for meetings summoned by themselves. Especially the fifteen-to-eighteen-year olds seemed to prefer great things (that is, community projects) more than mere demonstrations or project activities. They want to feel involved."³⁸

As a direct outgrowth of the planning and organizing activity carried out by the citizenship club, 140 new latrines of approved design were eventually constructed, one for almost every family needing one. The club members had to make arrangements for all of the labor and materials (assisted, of course, by civic authorities and community members), and they scheduled the work plan for the distribution of materials and construction of the latrines. The health project was followed by the construction of a new club/community house: securing a gift of land from a community member, raising funds for materials and services and organizing the activities. Soon after the CIS program started, the members began publishing their own newspaper to report to the members, parents and the community. The only help that the agents provided was counseling and mimeographing.

As noted above, the agents chose a boy and a girl to whom they gave special attention in an effort to further their development as democratic leaders. The agents observed that the boy and girl had become more democratic in their style of leadership and had learned how to identify and define community problems, how to follow through on the various steps to solve them and how to include other agencies and community residents in their solution. In sum, they had become able to feel and accept the need to participate in leadership necessary to the solution of community problems. This development led the agents to conclude that their own efforts as agents had been successful in leading the group to learn to take and carry out responsibility on their own.

In carrying out the program, there were group meetings, workshops and forums; role-playing to explore the problem and analyze the situations to be faced; work on the part of several special committees; discussions on how to plan and conduct visits to community residents; tours to health units and to other organizations; conferences and lectures; preparing publicity for local papers; and club recreational activities. "After completing the study, we can see that this way of working (organizing and planning suggested by CIS) made it easier for agents to work on the problem. They found the CIS method of working of significant value....^"39

In state E, agent 23 chose as the citizenship learning focus an attempt to help the executive committee of the junior leader group to gain some understanding of, greater belief in and beginning skills in involving the whole group in responsibility for planning and conducting business meetings. The county junior leader group had been in existence for several years. However, it became evident that the program and the participation in it was largely dominated by the adult advisors who were "supposedly" selected by club members. In actuality, certain adults volunteered and the group was expected to rubber stamp their appointment.

When agent recognized subordination of young people to adults as basic problem in the club, he chose objectives for focus aimed toward greater responsibility and confidence within the group to manage its own affairs.  As a result, the program more and more became young people's own, and responsible participation steadily increased-this has created some concern among formerly dominant group of adults, contributing among other things in threat to agent's tenure in county.⁴⁰

The reference to the difficulty faced by the agent in relation to adult leaders indicates how complex the dynamics can be of trying to help a group of young people move toward greater independence and the development on their part of a democratic mode of participation. Not everyone believes in democratic practices. Agent 23 developed an interesting set of specific working objectives and the goal became to develop a beginning skill in, understanding of, belief in and desire to achieve this range of objectives.

The changes sought were: (1) to maximize individual participation so that each individual might grow and the group would get the most help from the individual; (2) to promote free discussion on the part of the group in arriving at decisions and a perception of when to use discussion. This objective involved developing the ability to discuss freely but without being forced to a decision; the ability to state a different viewpoint yet be willing to go along with the majority; and provision for follow-up in such a way as to gain minority support and continuing concern on the part of the majority for the viewpoint of the minority; (3) to develop skill in the use of basic parliamentary procedure and learning under what circumstances to use it. This involved several sub-objectives: being able to test the group as to where it stood before trying to reach a decision; avoiding the use of parliamentary procedure until the decision was reduced to a choice between only two alternatives; and (4) to learn how to use committees, including a realization of their value; learning to share responsibility; learning to use committees to plan important aspects of a job to be done and to bring in significant suggestions for group action; and learning to use action committees to carry out group decisions. This objective further included helping committee members learn how to function as a committee and to understand that they were responsible for reporting committee action back to the whole group.

It was the conclusion of agent 23 that there had been considerable learner achievement toward acquiring at least a beginning level of skill in the area of the first two objectives and some growth with respect to the third and fourth. As to understanding, there had been some growth in the first objective and considerable growth in the second. Evidence on the third and fourth objectives was inconclusive. In the area of belief in and desire to, there was some growth with respect to the first, considerable growth on the second, not enough evidence to form an opinion on the third and very little growth with respect to the fourth. (The point should be made that the principal focus of agent 23's project was the executive committee rather than the whole club although some activities were designed to improve participation on the part of all junior leader club members.)

CIS Contributions in Other "Problem" Areas

In reporting the results of the CIS program at Level 1, Dildine was able to point out ways in which agent 5 in state A had used the CIS approach to convert a "regular" 4-H project into one which realized significant citizenship objectives.

Her evidence shows that project work, aiming primarily at teaching certain understandings and skills in the adult world of work (economic competence), can also contribute to democratic self-other relations (citizenship and the 4-H pledge) if we consciously and intelligently aim for these broader, more complex qualities in our members. This carries the implication that broader citizenship development may even be retarded through project work, either because adults fail to identify and direct their teaching toward democratic citizenship objectives, or because they (probably unconsciously) actually aim for undemocratic learnings. This conclusion is worth far more extensive experimental testing than we provided in the CIS.⁴¹

In an article in the National 4-H Club Foundation journal, Dildine described what agent 5 had learned about the connection between a 4-H project activity and the CIS program:

Delores was thirteen, just beginning to mature into womanhood. She lacked self-confidence. She didn't understand, and so was disturbed by, the physical changes going on within herself. Her inner confusion and uncertainty showed up in poor posture and grooming, in conflict with parents, in retiring behavior in school and 4-H Club. The agent decided that one of her primary teaching objectives in general citizenship should be "to help Delores understand her physical situation and by accepting this as normal and natural, become more generally self-confident, leading toward more active, cooperative participation and responsibility at home, in school and in the club.⁴²

As a first step, agent 5 invited a public health nurse to talk with the girls in the club about adolescent physical change and the care of the body and diet which these changes would require. They went on to discuss some of the implications for a girl's changing role in relation to adults, other girls and boys. The agent also worked with Delores on how to help her parents understand and accept these facts, even though they strongly conflicted with her parents' traditions.

Meanwhile, the girls were pursuing their sewing project. "All at once [agent 5] realized that sewing could make an important contribution to the things Delores needed to learn about herself and her relations to others (that is, citizenship)."⁴³If Delores could learn the mechanics of sewing, the selection of styles and materials appropriate to her figure and how to carry herself as well as gain greater confidence in her own ability to do these things, then the agent saw this growing understanding, skill and self-confidence as providing Delores the necessary start toward gaining more general self-confidence and skills in her self-other relations. One was the key to unlocking the door to the second.

Agent 5's evaluation showed that there was considerable growth in the area of the secondary contributory learnings. In the primary citizenship area, "She made some growth in her understanding of herself as a maturing girl; she is now more accepting of herself; she understands better how she can contribute to other people. She has increased considerably in skill in handling herself during this period of adolescent change; she is more cooperative and helpful at home, at school and in the club. Behind this is evidence of growth in general self-confidence."⁴⁴ Agent 5 reached the general conclusion that Delores' growing self-confidence was freeing her to be more cooperative and responsible at home, in school and in 4-H Club work.

In conclusion, Dildine underscored the importance of recognizing that because young people are different, each will need different kinds of help in learning the inner qualities which will lead to the right kinds of outward actions. Furthermore, many may achieve the conventional measure of "success" in the same project, but the inner learnings may not be at all the same. To translate specific project learnings into citizenship learnings will require emphasis on clearly aiming for specific project learnings which contribute to responsible, cooperative self-other relations rather than just toward personal self-advancement.

This report of agent 5's experience with Delores cast light on one problem being discussed by leaders in the extension program throughout the country, that is, to discover how to use a "regular" 4-H Club project to promote citizenship objectives in a forthright and concrete fashion. But this concern was only one of several then current. Another concern attached to the enormous volume of records being maintained on 4-H Club projects. Was record keeping becoming an end in itself? Was the potential benefit being realized?

In state D, agent 15, who was a state 4-H Club supervisor, worked with a county home demonstration agent on ways of using the record-keeping process as a tool to promote citizenship development. The primary objective of this activity was to help club members "understand, value and keep their own 4-H records through which they evaluate their own growth and achievement.⁴⁵ If this were to come about, it was necessary to understand and apply several ideas in their record keeping. If the record were to be considered a good one from a citizenship point of view, it would show the help that the member had received from others and what he had contributed to the assistance of others. It would show what he had accomplished in one or more club tasks including taking part in planning, maintaining records, undertaking and sharing in activities on a whole variety of projects. The record would show what participation there had been in the community, what had been contributed by the individual in the school. In effect, the record became more significant as it showed a contribution to the growth of the individual and the club rather than merely serving as evidence of how he won a contest. For agent IS, collecting good data and self-evaluation became an effective tool for teaching citizenship qualities along with project competences. It was also noted that where volunteer leaders kept and analyzed records in the same way, it could help their growth as well.

Community Service as a Citizenship Activity

Another kind of "problem" became evident as work got underway in the field because many agents chose community service as their activity focus. But it was only in Puerto Rico that club activities assumed high visibility at a community level. "Various 'community projects' emerged which met significant needs in committees (health, sanitation, roads, pure water, educational and recreational centers, etc.). Through these activities club members demonstrably learned many of the objectives aimed for...."⁴⁶

But on the mainland there did not seem to be readily available activities equivalent to the construction of 140 latrines in a single community. In Puerto Rico, of course, basic facilities, taken for granted on the mainland, did not exist in pilot club communities, nor had society as yet developed the political or educational organization to provide them. On the mainland, lack of basic facilities was not a pressing need in the pilot counties, and "the kinds of community services which seemed available and acceptable to adults were quite limited (putting up welcoming signs at entrance roads to county, helping with fairs, etc.). These activities proved of only secondary interest to club members in comparison to the strong attraction they found in focusing on their own club and peer group, and on peer-adult relations in their own clubs."⁴⁷

Furthermore, Dildine pointed out, as we have become more highly industrialized and organized, we have deferred more and more the involvement of young people in social responsibility. "We are tending to insulate youth more and more in club and school, even through college, with little chance to become involved in our increasingly complex adult problems and decisions."⁴⁸ Hence, on the mainland the emphasis was placed on activities in which young people could take real responsibility about matters that were of significant concern to them, that is, their own developmental tasks. These tasks were competence in face-to-face relations with each other and peer groups, the challenge of working toward more adult man-woman interaction, the search for self-directive yet supportive relations with key adults in their lives and the search for personal values to live by.

A fourth problem area was the International Farm Youth Exchange (IFYE) which was coordinated on behalf of extension through the National 4-H Club Foundation. State D tried to apply CIS program principles to working with IFYE alumni in that state. It was hoped that by using CIS principles and procedures, they might begin to identify and start working on some possible leadership roles that would take maximum advantage of IFYE experiences aimed at fostering democratic self-other relations and that could realistically work in the home situations of IFYE alumni.

Limitations of time, staff and money precluded any significant progress toward the objective. But the CIS involvement with the IFYE program was sufficient to point some directions for further study and work. IFYE alumni would need help in getting themselves involved "in a variety of special teaching situations definitely focused on a broadened concept of their long-range educational role. Alone in their home communities, they find it difficult to see how to go beyond the 'traditional' slide talks which IFYE's give on returning from abroad."⁴⁹

It was suggested that IFYE alumni could help with the development and recruitment of potential IFYE participants, the orientation of IFYE delegates and host families, etc. They might also take responsibility for educational activities concerned with promoting international understanding sessions at 4-H roundup and at state junior leadership lab events. It was discovered that it would be especially useful if several alumni could work together. The national annual IFYE alumni conference would be an appropriate vehicle to provide continuing experience and educative leadership for a range of citizenship objectives in a wide variety of back-home situations. In short, it was concluded that the CIS program development procedures and the broad CIS definition of democratic citizenship would be effective as guides in working with the IFYE alumni.

Programs for Teenagers

Another significant outcome of the CIS project involved work with teenagers: `By focusing on self-other relations in more complex aspects of living, we were actually hitting the deep concerns of adolescence, such developmental tasks as competence in family and adult relations at a near-adult level; group management; values to live by; educative competence.^"50Dildine, however, pointed to the need to distinguish between two levels of development among adolescents because each implied a somewhat different set of objectives and, therefore, different program activities. The two levels involved programs for Junior Leaders on the one hand, and programs for less mature teenagers on the other. To some degree, of course, the two groups would overlap, nevertheless, the two levels were determined to be significantly different.

Dildine pointed out that in many states it was assumed that teenagers would enroll in junior leadership projects. But the CIS study noted that "not all teenagers are mature enough yet to effectively work toward a particular role in educative leadership, that is, working easily in subordinate relation to adult leaders, as `helping teachers' with younger members."⁵¹Such a role requires mastery of a new pattern of peer relations, including those with members of the opposite sex and learning to handle the beginnings of adult identity and self-direction in a world in which adults seem to dictate all the decisions. One consequence is that he tends unconsciously to reject association with younger members who remind him of what he has rejected. At the same time, he often resists adult authority and thus has difficulty in accepting the "junior" role.

As a result, he is not yet ready for the more mature responsibility of educative leadership with younger members, under the direction of adults... . Once he has mastered these preoccupations, however, he tends to become easier with and more objective about himself. This frees him to become more willing to enjoy cooperative yet subordinate responsibility with adults, more willing and able to understand, accept and teach younger members.⁵²

For the junior leaders, therefore, the emphasis was placed on self-other understanding and skill in the various roles of democratic leadership. This was taken to include understanding the human behavior cycle and its application to self and others, understanding developmental tasks of young people and their relation to program development and understanding the effects of different styles of leadership. In the role of an apprentice-teacher, it was necessary to understand 4-H organization as it applied to his own club and beyond, beginning to understand and gain skill in assuming a democratic teaching role and the application of principles of human behavior as observed in individual and group situations. The goals also involved using principles of human behavior as a basis for the educational programs in accordance with CIS principles and procedures. In working with junior leaders, it was a basic principle that every effort be made to maximize their responsibility for decision making at all steps of the activity. Obviously, if these objectives were to be achieved, adults must assume responsibility for their own competence in providing ideas, guidance and limits in an appropriate manner.

For the less mature teenagers, the identified need focused on mastery of key developmental tasks. To a significant degree, the objectives for the less mature teenagers paralleled those for the junior leaders in that they also stressed deepening understanding, acceptance and skill in interpreting one's own behavior and that of others, individually and in groups. But they were to be helped to work through these tasks without being expected to take responsibility for educational activities with younger members.

Many kinds of activities were useful in promoting these objectives. Skits, socio- and psycho-drama, films and serious discussion were all ways in which members could learn to experience and interpret behavior in a group setting. Any real opportunity available to members to make decisions as they worked on the program was supportive of the objective. Recreation proved one of the most effective tools for bringing about these learnings because "play" offers an informal opportunity "to try on new ideas and ways of acting." The CIS staff also found an unrecognized degree of concern on the part of teenagers for "education" (that is, serious programs) based on ideas having significance for them. In addition, the study staff found that many groups were eager to engage in activities involving ways to relate their own group program to a larger responsibility within an expanding community focus. Activities which had proven merit were study programs, "sister" clubs, domestic cultural exchanges, responsible participation in 4-H and other community activities such as fairs, camps, etc.

Obviously, the scope of the CIS definition and the implications of the 4-H Club pledge outlined a far greater task than the CIS project could possibly encompass. The emphasis in CIS was on teaming how to organize and operate in a democracy for effective group organization and control within one's own club and community. It was only to be expected that faced with a complex task, the participants in the various pilot counties would choose to work on the more immediate and obvious implications of that broad task. A further limiting factor was the very short period of time, only three years, allotted for the study. And finally, the fact that most club members ranged in age from ten to sixteen necessarily limited the scope of outlook and feasible outreach of the participants.

Although the reasons for the limitations are clear enough, Dildine still felt that the wider applications of citizenship learnings should be explored. He asked:

How can we best deepen and extend essential citizenship ways of thinking, feeling, and acting out into our relations with people we may never see, in our state, other states, our nation, other nations in our increasingly interrelated world?

The natural next step for education of young people is to help them learn to apply the same basic democratic commitments and ideas to one's responsibilities for continuing development of government and politics in our own country. Following the CIS, we have made a significant start here in the citizenship short courses conducted at the national 4-H center, where emphasis on operation of national government is a natural.⁵³

In addition to exploring one's responsibilities vis-à-vis government and politics, another important area for learning beyond face-to-face relations in Dildine's view, would be the understanding of one's roles and responsibilities with respect to economic effectiveness. This area might involve learning to understand the various ways we organize to do business in this country, the relation of these various ways to our basic democratic values, the impact of our changing times and the issues involved in the relationship of government to the development of our economic system. One's roles and responsibilities in the continuing development of our educational system, dedicated to opportunity for all, would provide another focus for continuing expansion of citizenship understandings. Many of the points made in relation to the economic system would also apply to the educational system. And, finally, the CIS approach should, he thought, be applied to an understanding of the complex problems facing the United States in the area of international relations. But these were offered merely as signposts for further study and experimentation.

What Followed?

Although 1957 was the last year in which the CIS conducted active field work as part of the project, there is a great deal of evidence that much significant work followed.

Continuity of Achievement. No organized follow-up was undertaken to discover what evidence could be found of the degree of permanence of the CIS results, but contact between Dildine and a number of the CIS participants did provide some information. In state A, the state coordinator had retired but was still active in education work and was using CIS principles and procedures continuously as a basis for his in-service help to other staff members and as a consultant in national and international rural youth work conferences. "He repeatedly credits his participation in the CIS for important new insights and ways of working." A county agent took a year's leave of absence during the last months of the CIS and based his masters thesis in sociology on the CIS citizenship club. This agent later became the state 4-H Club leader and was in a position to promote the CIS pattern on a statewide basis. "During a recent international conference on rural youth work, he was chairman of conference evaluation, and here used the study pattern of evaluations skillfully." Another county agent continued to provide follow-up reports to Dildine which demonstrated "her retention and continual application of CIS learnings."⁵⁴

In state D, the state coordinator, who was still associate state 4-H Club leader, involved her state leader in the work throughout. Since the study, they have evolved their own state guide for developing 4-H Club programs around the CIS design, with its broad definition of citizenship as core. It was reported that each year since 1956, their annual junior leadership labs have adapted study concepts and steps in a deepening series of focuses on citizenship growth in young people and adults. Many state project materials show the influence of the study; and the state coordinator served effectively on the Evaluation Committee for the 1960 annual 4-H conference (citizenship was a conference theme). And two of the three participating agents were reported to be effectively using their CIS learnings in various ways.

In state E, the state coordinator had subsequently resigned but showed evidence of continuing competent use of CIS principles in her work. A participating county agent on graduate leave reported on the CIS to a graduate group and "effectively analyzed and interpreted study principles and procedures, gave examples of continual application since the end of CIS, stated several times that this was the most helpful in-service experience of his many years in extension. He also reported that his citizenship club members had retained their CIS growth."⁵⁵

Publications and Workshops to Spread Results. The final report of the Citizenship Improvement Study, totaling 229 pages, was mimeographed in an edition of 200 copies, of which eighty went to state and federal extension staff (one or two to each state extension office; to federal extension service 4-H and young men's and women's programs and to the federal extension research and training offices). In addition, many hundreds of copies of several project documents were distributed in the course of the study.

Published materials were supplemented by a good deal of direct consultant help, "largely through work conferences on improving citizenship programs both in youth and adult work." In Montana, for example, Dildine had met for three consecutive years for a week each year, with a total of about 100 county agents and state supervisors, to develop varied 4-H citizenship programs. This arrangement was on a continuing basis. With the establishment of citizenship short courses at the National 4-H Club Foundation center, an opportunity was provided for follow-up with groups attending such short courses from the several states. In the case of two state groups which had attended such short courses, Dildine participated in follow-up which involved all county 4-H agents and 4-H leaders. This activity was on a continuing basis in Vermont and had also been extended to Connecticut and Iowa. In Texas, Dildine had participated in the annual state junior leadership lab over the previous four years. Each lab had focused on some aspect of citizenship leadership in action as a basis for follow-up back home. In each year, seventy-two teenage club members plus thirty county and state professional workers participated. This activity was also on a continuing basis. In 1960-1961, sessions were held throughout the week at the national 4-H Club conference for 200 young 4-H leaders from all fifty states on "Meaning of Citizenship" and on "Implications for Citizenship Work Back Home."

Beginning in 1959, Dildine had been directly involved in planning and conducting the citizenship short courses at the national 4-H Club center. A "Guidebook and Sourcebook for Citizenship Short Courses for Older 4-H Club Members" (January 1961) was based directly on the CIS. Its twenty-three pages outlined an approach to planning and conducting a citizenship short course. In July 1961, a two-day workshop was held for participants in the western states which dealt with the implications of the CIS study process and results for the conduct of the extension project in public affairs, sponsored by the Fund for Adult Education and the Federal Extension Service.

The national workshop in human development and human relations for extension workers had, since 1956, emphasized application of the steps and principles of the educative project (the five-step design) to back-home responsibilities. Beginning in 1956, these workshops had drawn participants from the ranks of professional extension workers in all fifty states and from the national level as well. Because the National 4-H Club Foundation served cooperative extension as a "spearheading educational agency to test out new areas of programs and to develop guidelines for further application," the years following completion of field work included steps to transfer responsibility from the foundation to the operating groups in cooperative extension. A very important step was taken when extension's subcommittee on 4-H Club work, meeting April 18-20, 1962, decided that the Citizenship Improvement Study should be the basis for the citizenship emphasis as a part of the total 4-H Club program.⁵⁶

Writing in 1965, Dildine reported that "as we hoped, the definition of citizenship developed by this study has become almost universal in 4-H Club work, and has served as basis for a series of citizenship materials produced by national committees and the FES 4-H group. The experimental design we developed is being used increasingly, and not limited only to citizenship programs."⁵⁷The "4-H Citizenship Education Handbook," prepared by Charles Freeman and circulated initially in March 1966, provides impressive evidence of the carryover of CIS principles and procedures into the 4-H Club citizenship program on a national scale. Prepared for extension staff and adult leaders, the fifty-seven-page handbook discussed how adult leaders can apply the principles originally outlined by the Citizenship Improvement Study to promote citizenship as an effective component of the total 4-H program.

What Was Achieved?

1. A powerful educational agency was helped to change in very significant ways. Through the processes developed by the Citizenship Improvement Study, a state in each extension region was significantly involved and affected. (It must be noted, of course, that certain elements of the process had been used earlier to deal with problems which had become matters of concern prior to starting the CIS project.) (a) The CIS gave great impetus to legitimizing further extension's educational program by emphasizing the necessity of basing an educational program on decisions about ways of thinking, feeling and acting and by helping extension personnel to grasp the difference between achieving changes in behavior and the activities which were the means to such achievement. This was a great step forward. (b) Basing the program development process on an understanding of what boys and girls are like and how they change, on their interests and concerns and on the kinds of support they need at different stages of their development was a revelation to many. (The human development/human relations workshops conducted by Dildine and others in the early fifties had, of course, anticipated and, indeed, laid an indispensable foundation for the CIS contribution) (c) It was demonstrated that by working with boys and girls in accordance with CIS principles and procedures, regular 4H Club project activities could be made to yield citizenship values also.

2. Not every extension professional would find the CIS rationale congenial. Undoubtedly, some were too authoritarian to tolerate its openness and its emphasis on learning responsibility by being encouraged to practice it. But for others, it opened a door through which they gladly entered.

3. Of the five assignments accepted by the CIS staff, some were more fully redeemed than others. (a) The definition of citizenship proved to be viable on a broad front. (b) The development and testing of an educative program in pilot centers was achieved. Pilot club members covered all ages from ten to twenty-one, and in each club there was evidence of important growth in those citizenship qualities aimed for. (Cooperation with other youth-serving agencies was achieved in Puerto Rico community services activities. There were some comparable results in a few centers on the mainland.) (c) Effective reporting was achieved on a broad scale. The program of citizenship short courses conducted at the National 4-H Club Foundation center is only one way in which the CIS learnings continue to be promulgated. Little was done directly to promote pre-professional training in citizenship education although the materials produced would prove highly relevant to such an endeavor. (d) To develop competent leadership was a major assignment. The Level 2 results, together with the follow-up, suggest that a very significant contribution was made to achievement of this assignment. (e) Assignment 5 was to identify gaps and provide guidelines for needed further study. This was done in considerable detail in the final report.

In sum, as one reviews the volume of CIS material in all its complexity, one is impressed with the ability of the study staff to manage a difficult task of great magnitude, involving novel principles and procedures of a kind threatening to many, yet working so skillfully and with such empathy that virtually no professional in the pilot programs withdrew voluntarily. And furthermore, it is remarkable that so many years after the close of a project conducted for only three years, there is tangible evidence that the lessons learned have retained their dynamic.

Fellowship House

Fellowship House in Philadelphia was one of the early applicants for support from the Emil Schwarzhaupt Foundation. Because its emphasis was on the need to improve intergroup relations, the initial reaction of the ESF was negative, as the project seemed to lie somewhat outside its scope. However, further investigation pointed up the extraordinary contribution being made by the applicant not only to the involvement, training and utilization of large numbers of adult volunteers in work contributing toward leadership in a democratic society but also to the training of professionals in such social institutions as the schools. The training received by teachers and principals was based on insights gained from the fields of psychology, sociology and anthropology concerning prejudice and discrimination and the tensions arising therefrom. And the fact that such elements were being incorporated into the curriculum of a large school system in order that citizenship objectives might be served, appeared to warrant reconsideration and, eventually, Foundation support.

Two projects were funded for a three-year period beginning July 1, 1953. A grant of $12,000 was made to allow a staff person to visit fellowship houses elsewhere and assist them to improve their organizational structure, community support and program.⁵⁸ An additional $12,800 was allotted for expansion of the Arrow Program which had been conducted for some years in cooperation with the Philadelphia schools. (A grant of $2,000 was also made to ensure preparation of a report on the project. Eventually, a manual on the Arrow Program was prepared and published by Fellowship House.) To understand the project better, it will be useful to summarize the genesis and role of Fellowship House.

Background

Fellowship House was started in 1931 by members of the Committee on Race Relations of the Society of Friends as a response to their concern about Jim Crow practices in Philadelphia. Marjorie Penney served as director from 1935 to 1969. The growing visibility of hate groups led to the organization of the Fellowship Commission in 1938, which led, in turn, to a decision to establish a training center in intergroup conflict areas. The first Fellowship House was opened in 1941 and replaced in 1957. By 1953, the Fellowship Commission was functioning with a membership including 8,000 dues-paying individuals plus agency members. Among the long-standing members were the ten chief officials of the city, including the mayor and city attorney.

Fellowship House programs were many and varied. Training programs in human relations were presented on a regular basis to groups ranging in size from thirty-five to ninety. Every school principal in the Philadelphia public schools had participated. Part of the training course for teachers in schools was conducted by the curriculum office of the school district but the groups met in Fellowship House. Between October and May, sixteen blocks of seven-unit courses were offered, to which Fellowship House contributed staff. An important contribution was its development of techniques specifically adapted to dealing with twelve-year-olds, fourteen-year-olds, etc.⁵⁹Staff members from churches, synagogues and other community organizations were also involved. An active speakers bureau was maintained. And, in addition, the Arrow Program was conducted in the elementary schools of the city. But the demands, not only from the schools, but also from city playground directors, outran the ability of Fellowship House to respond. That it was able to do as much as it did was a tribute, not only to the staff, but to the more than 800 volunteer members, each of whom had agreed to contribute a minimum of ten scheduled work hours per month. Clearly, a minimum of 8,000 work-hours per month represented a significant contribution to civic activity.

Arrow Program

From the early days of Fellowship House, games, dolls and stories were combined in a program to help children in the neighborhood to reduce the hostility that divided them.

To the children's leaders at Fellowship House one thing seemed clear; only an orderly attack could conquer such old lies in young lives. The leaders met for many sessions. They examined the training programs of the Boy Scouts and the Girl Scouts; also children's material used in churches and synagogues. They read what slight stuff was then available in human relations. . . . They dreamed of a "package" simple, attractive, mobile--which could be carried by volunteers to the churches and recreation centers, and eventually to schools.⁶⁰

The name "Arrow" in the program title came from Indian lore--crossed arrows mean friendship and broken arrows, peace. Eventually songs, games and stories were evolved. Then came the Fellowship Doll Library. "It helped to tell children and teachers that great lives are found in every age." Finally, little plays (such as "Herman Ermine") became part of the package which was to develop into Arrow Week and Arrow Days.⁶¹

The way the program functioned was that at the invitation of a school, an Arrow Week would be scheduled. Fellowship House volunteers would familiarize themselves with the school's neighborhood and its problems; meet with faculty and parents, whenever possible, to encourage their participation; put up posters, doll displays and exhibits to stir interest and suspense; and cast and rehearse "Herman Ermine in Rabbit Town."⁶²The play was presented to the school assembly on a Friday. A volunteer demonstrator would then meet with each class and encourage discussion among the children about the play, what they liked and did not like, who was trying to do what to whom and how one makes and keeps friends. Sometimes other stories were told, using a flannel board. Suggestions were discussed with teachers about follow-up. Many other "tools" were used, specified for different grade levels. At the end of the day, there would be a creative period in which a child would express in a note or drawing what the day had meant for him. According to the final report, Arrow Day had a very significant and lasting impact on the children.

An important goal was to involve parents in Arrow Day. The meetings with them often became the means of opening other doors leading to further communication and attitude change. Similarly, the volunteers met with teachers to discuss ways in which brotherhood could be built into the school program. The Arrow Program manual disclaims the possibility that Arrow Week can eradicate prejudice based on race, religion or any other factor but there is evidence that "the program moves the children emotionally and intellectually. ..."⁶³

The Fellowship House proposal embodied a human relations focus, a field, as we have seen, that the Foundation proposed to avoid because so much was being done by others. The decision to approve the application was made primarily on the basis of the heavy involvement of adult volunteers in presenting the Arrow Program. And the grant was requested for the purpose of adding a staff person to recruit more volunteers and to strengthen the training of volunteers. The role of the volunteers necessarily involved them in a variety of citizenship learnings: information about and understanding of concepts relating to prejudice and equality of opportunity, skills of organizing and skills involved in negotiating between a public and a private agency. These were important learnings. But there were other reasons supporting the decision. Influencing attitudes of children in the direction of greater acceptance of differences and the appreciation of others for what they are rather than for what they look like was also a valuable gain for a democratic society. Furthermore, there was evidence that the program itself was accepted and could be expanded significantly.

This volunteer group has worked with about 26,000 children in the past three years, and currently the request for the introduction of this program into schools far exceeds the capacity of Fellowship House to serve the demand. There is at present a waiting list of thirty schools. Two elementary school districts have requested the program be devoted to their districts alone since "We need it so much."⁶⁴

That this was possible was due in part to the fact that the Philadelphia public schools were cognizant of and concerned to promote so-called "extra-learnings" which go on outside of the formal curriculum. And, in fact, a special Office of Community Educational Relationships had been set up as part of the office of the superintendent. One-third of the time of a staff member of that special office was devoted to working with Fellowship House.

By April 1955, the Arrow Program had been significantly expanded. As a result of the grant, it was possible to employ a public school teacher of many years' experience to take full-time responsibility for the program. "Her job was to strengthen the volunteers, take over details they should not manage and add an extension program so that when the program left any school its contacts and benefits might continue."⁶⁵The inability to provide follow-up had been of special concern to the school administration. During 1954-1955, over 9,000 children participated in the Arrow Program. As Marjorie Penney put it, more than 600 teachers, plus hundreds of parents, "have heard old concepts of democracy made real in new and engaging ways."⁶⁶

Fellowship Program in the High Schools

But the Fellowship House role was not limited to the Arrow Program in the elementary schools or to the training programs conducted at the house for teachers and school administrators. In the junior high schools, there were either Fellowship Clubs or Fellowship Committees as part of student government.   These groups were often called upon to deal with real life conflict situations and the schools used Friendship House and its techniques as a resource to deal with conflicts. In each of the senior high schools, Fellowship Clubs met once a week on an extracurricular basis rather than during the regular school schedule. Once each month, the clubs held a general assembly at Fellowship House; this was useful in furthering integration since many schools in the system tended to be homogeneous in makeup. Beginning in July 1956, the Foundation made a grant of $4,000 per year for three years to enable Fellowship House to work with the Philadelphia public schools to introduce and adapt the Arrow Program to the junior and senior high schools. Seven other cities had also expressed an interest in similar service.

The Arrow Program Outside Philadelphia

In July 1959, the Foundation made an additional grant of $8,000 to employ staff to attempt to extend the Arrow Program over a two-year period to children in schools outside of Philadelphia, particularly in Levittown, Chester and Rutledge in Pennsylvania and in Wilmington, Delaware.

The work was excessively slow and difficult. Sometimes, teachers were interested, but principals fearful. At other times, teachers or home and school associations opposed any recognition of human relations problems which principals were willing to face. In a number of communities, it was impossible to Start at the elementary level. Instead, families connected with Fellowship House introduced PTA study courses or single speakers in order to break the deadlock.... Six mothers from Eastern Montgomery County were recruited as doll librarians. They came to Fellowship House for training in this Arrow technique and then offered their services to non-school groups--men's and women's groups, Brownie and Scout troops, Sunday schools and the like.

There was one occasion when an Arrow Week was requested by a suburban school and abruptly canceled because a Negro family moving into that hitherto all-white neighborhood spelled trouble for any innovations. ... Private schools were generally more courageous than public schools. Top administrators were understandably braver than their subordinates. In one case, the superintendent of schools invited the director of Fellowship House to open the school year, addressing the entire school personnel of the township. This did not, however, insure a warm reception further down the line! In areas where Arrow programs could not be scheduled in the schools, emphasis was transferred to the churches, and programs were devised for their children's groups.⁶⁷

In a period of nearly three and a half years, only forty-nine Arrow programs were held in twenty-two communities. In addition, there were thirteen Arrow Play Parties with an attendance ranging from sixty to 150 children at each (these parties being held at Fellowship House), and nineteen day-long tours to Fellowship Farm involving about 1,300 children. But, by 1974, Marjorie Penney was able to report: "We are deeply involved with schools--all over the Delaware Valley. This program has become very popular." She continued:

Thousands in the Delaware Valley and across the nation have been touched and changed through Fellowship encounters and programs. Many have been activated to help create fairer, more just communities. Much of the work has been and is now in schools. For years, until the recent urban crisis in funding, Fellowship was under contract by the Philadelphia school system to teach the "facts about folks" to administrators, teachers and students on all levels. Innovative methods of reaching and teaching developed by Fellowship are in use across the country.⁶⁸

If expansion of an idea is one test of its effectiveness, we can say that the Arrow Program met this test, at least up to a point. It did succeed, in establishing itself outside of Ph