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
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).
There were eight projects which addressed themselves primarily to children and adolescents.
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.
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
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.
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.
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
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.
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
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
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.
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 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.
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.
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 Philadelphia in a number of towns and cities. And a supplemental grant helped to extend the program up into the junior high schools of Philadelphia. Although we are unaware of the idea having been taken up by sponsors other than Fellowship House, more than twenty years after the initial grant from the Foundation, the Arrow Program continues to be strong. That this is so is a tribute to the force of an idea, to the vision and courage shown by the leadership of the Philadelphia public schools and other cooperating school districts. It is regrettable that the contractual relationship with the Philadelphia schools fell victim to the funding crisis which has afflicted urban schools. As a result, the scale of the effort must necessarily have been diminished--with a consequent loss of an important contributor to learnings involved in civic competence.
There were four grantees working with preadolescent and adolescent children about which only a little can be said in relation to the Foundation's program. They were the Girl Scouts of the United States of America, the New York City Mission Society, the YWCA of Mississippi and the Lincoln Filene Center for Civic Education. Their treatment here will be minimal not because they were not worthy programs but rather because the Foundation's role was so minimal (Girl Scouts); or the project proved to be a onetime grant of small scope (New York City Mission Society); or the project was so inhibited by negative factors in its social context that its potential was only meagerly reached (Young Women's Christian Association-Mississippi District); or the Foundation concluded that it did not wish to undertake to support the production and publication of materials for use in schools (Lincoln Filene Center for Civic Education).
In July 1955, the Foundation informed the Girl Scouts of the U.S.A, that a grant of $20,000 to be expended over a two-year period had been made. The purpose was to begin a special program to involve girls from low-income, minority-group neighborhoods of New York City.69 A principal function of the staff to be employed was to recruit and train volunteer adult leaders. The difficulty of doing this has been the major obstacle to program expansion among low-income groups. Although citizenship is a major concern of the Girl Scouts program, the Foundation was as much interested in the potential impact of the special areas project on the adult volunteers as it was on the girls in the program. This was so because of indications that parents who had taken no part in community affairs previously, tended to move into other community activities after they had had some experience as Girl Scout leaders. Two important learnings were: (1) adult leaders could be recruited in East Harlem, providing that face-to-face contact was used rather than the somewhat mechanical procedure outlined in the Girl Scout manual and (2) leader interest and willingness to serve was no more difficult to maintain than in middle-class areas providing the initial recruitment was done in the right way. Transiency and more frequent pregnancies were a special problem, however, in maintaining the adult volunteer cadre. The grantee pointed out, also, that volunteer leaders gained in understanding and skills relevant to organizing community activities.
According to the grantee, the Foundation support allowed the Girl Scout Council to concentrate for several years in one area (after about eight years of patient effort) in order to prove that indigenous leadership could be developed in depressed neighborhoods and, indeed, that it was essential to do so. In order to assist the grantee to consolidate its gains in East Harlem, a further grant of $10,000 for 1958 and $5,000 for 1959 was made. This enabled formation of three Girl Scout neighborhood committees into a new district, reflecting the increase in program size. This expanded structure widened the opportunities for volunteer leader training.
The New York City Mission Society applied in June 1956 for a grant of $2,000 to complete a $12,000 budget for a project directed to recruitment and training of Puerto Rican youth of high school age and older. The goal was to train volunteer leadership in the Protestant churches in Spanish Harlem, using pragmatic, experiential methods. Those recruited agreed to attend weekly evening training sessions of two hours each from October through May for three years. The curriculum, based on a similar program in black Harlem, was to include principles of leadership and citizenship plus practical techniques of speaking, writing, conducting discussions, leading games and dancing, organizing groups and planning programs. In one of the Spanish Harlem churches, each member pledged to serve in a non-church community organization such as a political party, health council, PTA or similar organization. The project goal, according to the Reverend David Barry, executive director of the society, was not to form an organization but to help individuals become qualified to make organizations work more effectively.
The completion rate for the three-year program was nearly 100 percent. The society reported that enthusiasm increased over time as shown by the increase in enrollees and in attendance during the year. The most effective leaders were said to be recent high school graduates from the same ethnic groups and those adults who had other relationships with the young people--such as ministers, center directors or group workers. The least effective were those who had no background of involvement in the community, ethnic group or lives of the enrollees. Other insights gained were that: (1) materials must be directly relevant to the lives of trainees, (2) trainees must be separated according to levels of maturity and (3) goals must be concrete and appropriately recognized (credits or certificates, jobs as counselors or volunteer assignments). Because volunteers were found to be more effective than had been anticipated, fewer staff persons needed to be hired than had been budgeted. The 1956-1957 budget savings made an application for 1957-1958 unnecessary.70No further request was made of the Foundation.
In 1958, a three-year grant in the amount of $31,700 was made to the Young Women's Christian Association-Mississippi District. The purpose was to make it possible to employ staff to organize Y-Teen clubs for black girls in Mississippi. This was a special project of the YWCA. Although some success was achieved, the results were inhibited by the racial tension then existing. Efforts to mobilize the broader community to support the cost of the program were only minimally successful. The grant was not renewed.
The original grant to the Civic Education Foundation (CEF) was a tribute to the excellence of the materials produced by the applicant. (Later, as of September 1, 1954, the program was taken over by the Lincoln Filene Center for Civic Education of Tufts University.) The materials consisted of booklets ranging from about seventy-five to one hundred pages each dealing with a critical issue facing our nation. The pamphlets dealt with a controversial subject in a forthright way, acknowledging the problems and areas of conflict. They were readable and fair in their treatment of value problems. The emphasis went beyond matters of structure and organization of governmental and other institutions to explore function and process. Teacher guides were prepared which could be very helpful "in making the students' conception of citizenship responsibilities concrete rather than empty abstractions."71 Furthermore, the pamphlets had been preceded by analysis of objectives of civic education in relation to maturity levels.
Having signed a contract with a publisher, the CEF requested a subvention to undertake preparation of additional pamphlets. A grant of $25,000 was made in 1953, partly on the basis of assurances that a practical approach had been worked out for distribution of the pamphlets to the schools. In May 1954, however, it appeared that other sums were needed for consultants, for longer printing "runs" to reduce unit costs, for tryouts in classrooms. None of these purposes had been mentioned in the original application. In addition, the CEF concluded that its publisher was not an effective promoter and entered into a contract with the National Council for the Social Studies to undertake responsibility for promotion. In retrospect, it is clear that ambiguities in our exchange of rhetoric led to misapprehensions as to what our respective undertakings were. In any case, the Foundation found itself in the position of having paid for the writing of six pamphlets, but in danger of losing the investment unless it provided additional funds for printing. A further grant of $23,000 was made for this purpose. The titles produced were: Liberty and the Law, In God We Trust, Get into the Game!, Men to Remember, The X Goes Here and What About War?
We turn now to the group of four projects involving a somewhat older group, almost entirely college-age youth. Of these, three date from the beginning of the Foundation's grant-making activity. The grants to the American Friends Service Committee in support of its Interns-in-Community Service Program (ICS) had as their principal purpose improving the ability of college-age youth living in a residential setting (some for nine months but most for two months) to understand, as citizens but also as possible future professionals, the problems of low-income, urban communities and of what might realistically be done to solve them within the framework of social agency programs in such communities. It was hoped also that interns would become less authoritarian and more accepting of differences. Fortunately, it was possible to arrange for a study to be made by the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) which provided some valuable insights into the effects of the ICS program on the participants.
The Encampment for Citizenship was also a residential program (but for only six weeks) for college-age youth. (By 1966, however, it became necessary, because of recruitment problems for the campers to be drawn primarily from high school age groups.) The grantee's goal involved helping young people to gain a sense of responsibility as an individual citizen, an increased commitment to democracy through improved understanding of and the opportunity to practice the democratic process, the skills necessary to think critically about public issues, the skills of working together to deal with community problems and, last, but by no means least, the development of an attitude of acceptance of others even though of different background from oneself.
The third project in this group was conducted by the Citizenship Clearing House, affiliated with New York University Law School. It can be characterized as being primarily (but not entirely) an extracurricular program for college students, conducted, for the most part, as an adjunct of academic study in political science during the regular college term. Its principal aim was to promote an interest in and an understanding of the political process, particularly as it found expression through the political party system. Although headquartered at New York University, the activities themselves were conducted through cooperating institutions located across the United States.
The last of this group of four projects was located at a single institution--Springfield College in Massachusetts. From a content standpoint, the project focus was on intergroup relations and how to improve them within a citizenship context. It was hoped that the project might contribute to development of citizenship behavior through influencing content of courses in the campus curriculum but more significantly through so-called co-curricular learnings, especially with respect to improving attitudes toward members of other groups and with respect to changing the behavior of citizens in a desirable direction through joint campus-community activities.
One of the youth programs to which the ESF gave support over several years was the Interns-in-Community Service program (ICS), one of several intern programs sponsored by the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC). Programs were supported in both Oakland, California, and Chicago. In addition to the $86,500 made available to the AFSC for these projects, the sum of $5,536 was made available to the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) for a study of the impact of the ICS program on its participants.72The funding for Oakland extended over a period of seven years, from July 1953 to June 1960. Four grants were made for the Chicago program beginning in July 1955, the program extending over five years, ending in 1960.
The original AFSC application of April 13, 1953, to the ESF called attention to typical problems of industrialized cities in general and of the city of Oakland in particular: poor and insufficient housing, discrimination, delinquency, insufficient help for new arrivals and community disorganization in general. Given the existence of such problems, it was the position of the AFSC that individuals must accept the responsibility for helping others to deal with them. The Interns-in-Community Service program was based on this premise.
A primary goal was to provide an opportunity for interns to achieve a heightened awareness of, gain information about and insight into community problems; develop an increased motivation to help solve problems; come to understand what can realistically be achieved in working through social organizations and in cooperation with residents of a community; and acquire the skills appropriate to problem solving in a social agency/community setting. A secondary goal was to help residents of the communities in which interns were working to achieve the kinds of purposes noted. Obviously, the expected level of achievement with respect to such objectives would be higher in the case of interns than residents. (In fact, no evidence emerged from any reports on this program which would enable us to say that neighborhood residents were helped with respect to this secondary goal.)
These purposes were of particular interest to the Foundation because of their clear relevance to the development of citizenship abilities and also because it was proposed to pursue them in a milieu in which the desired behaviors could be actively practiced, if appropriate arrangements could be made. Other purposes were articulated by the AFSC which were not directly relevant to our purposes: to help solve social problems, to gain insight into the field of social work and to provide alternative service opportunities for conscientious objectors. To achieve the goals described, a program was devised involving various elements: (1) A group of young people (generally of college age) were to live in a residence under the leadership of an adult couple. Participants could choose a two-month summer program or a nine-month program. They were to receive maintenance plus twenty-five dollars per month in summer and forty dollars per month in the nine-month program. (2) The time of participants (aside from housekeeping tasks) was divided into two parts. The larger part was devoted to working in an agency program. The agency was expected in exchange to contribute something to the project budget as well as provide on-the-job training and supervision. In addition to work assignments, on one day per week there was to be an educational program.
The initial program in Oakland enrolled fourteen participants plus two adult leaders during the summer of 1954. The nine-month program enrolled only seven participants. The first group was assigned to work in twelve community agencies concerned with such problems as emotionally disturbed children, poor housing, integration and the need for recreation and day care centers. In the second year of the Oakland project, an intern was assigned to a low-income black area to interview and to study agency programs relating to health, especially TB. Response was slow in coming, but eventually local groups began to ask for speakers and films on health, a boys group went to a TB X-ray center and it was reported that attitudes became more receptive to health programs. Because two interns were available to make a study, the YMCA began looking at the problems faced by American Indians in Oakland. The result was the establishment of the American Indian Center. One of the interns became the executive director.73 Another intern-initiated activity led to pioneering work with families of prisoners.
In Chicago, in addition to work with social agencies, activities involving community organizations and block clubs made up a significant part of the ICS program. In 1955-1956, an intern organized two block clubs. Another ran a job referral service in a neighborhood house during the winter and spring. In the summer, he ran a playground program, selecting and supervising high school age staff. He also organized a parents playground committee. In the summer of 1957, it was decided not to assign interns to agencies or centers but allow them instead to work on the streets wherever children gathered in the hope that supervised play could be provided for the children and also that contact could be made with parents to encourage a greater sense of responsibility for their children. This move would seem to have shifted the focus from an agency service program to an attenuated form of group work. Along with working, the interns were trying to learn how to govern themselves, how to resolve personal conflicts through democratic means and conducting an educational program for themselves.
A review of these typical activities reveals at once that learnings which can be specified to citizenship were closely intertwined with those appropriate to social work or related fields. Nevertheless, we can reasonably conjecture that these middle-class young people obtained a much more realistic picture of the kinds of lives led by those in the poorer sections of our cities. They could gain some sense of the relevance and value of efforts to deal with problems on the part of both public and private institutions. And from their own experience, they could see whether or not they could realistically make a difference.
In an effort to further the understanding of interns with respect to their experience, on one day per week time was to be devoted to self-education. Speakers, films and written materials were used to provide data on the social problems they were encountering. Through discussion, greater insight was sought. Time was also to be devoted to review of each intern's work experience and the problems arising therein. Typical topic areas included rural immigration, the American Indian in the city, penal programs, juvenile delinquency, discrimination in housing and employment, urban redevelopment and retarded children. As a further aid to understanding, interns visited such agencies as the juvenile court, a detention home and a mental hospital. As compared with an IAF staff meeting, the AFSC emphasized bringing in "information about" agencies, problems and programs, as distinguished from analysis of day-to-day intern experience. Observations made by NORC study staff, however, suggest that in some cases, at least, the education program was not taken seriously.
Evaluation of Results
The materials from which conclusions may be drawn concerning the impact of the ICS program are fortunately more extensive than would have been the case had the ESF relied only on reports prepared by the AFSC. The fact that the ESF was also contributing to support of the Encampment for Citizenship and had made possible a thorough study of the encampment program by Herbert Hyman, Charles Wright and Terence Hopkins, suggested the desirability of asking the cooperation of the AFSC in having a study made of the ICS program.74 Agreement was eventually reached to engage the National Opinion Research Center of the University of Chicago to make a study not only of the ICS but of the Interns-in-Industry (II) and Institutional Service Unit (ISU) programs as well. This study was subsequently published by Robert Dentler75under the title "The Young Volunteers: An Evaluation of Three Programs of the American Friends Service Committee." Furthermore, by using some of the instruments which had been employed by Henry Riecken in Volunteer Work Camp, his study of the AFSC work camp program, it was possible to make some direct comparisons as to the comparative effects on participation. But in appraising the results of the ICS program, we did not rely only on the professional study. Other data were also useful, including the views of the agency personnel working with interns as well as those of the AFSC itself. The data are sparse but indicative to some degree. Before considering the NORC findings, then, let us review the materials provided by the AFSC.
Agency Evaluations. Several agency heads commented on the interns assigned to them. Typical comments included the following. "Increased sense of job responsibility." "She grew in her understanding of herself and the dynamics of groups." "White interns learned much in working with Negroes." "The interns were working into responsible leadership roles in our program." "The intern was excellent but he had already done much work of this sort." "Interns learn a great deal, but conscientious objectors know a lot of this already." "Some idealism is leveled off; they can use their energies in a more practicable way." "There is ample evidence interns get a realistic picture of conditions which very few middle class people get." "He has grown very much in insight. He has matured and is much more realistic in his outlook." "The experience carried understanding far beyond a textbook level. They gained great insight into their own interests and motivations."77 Agency personnel also noted program gains which could not have been achieved without the presence of the interns. Some of these achievements were extraordinary, namely, the establishment of the American Indian Center in Oakland. On the other hand, a few interns did not measure up to their responsibilities at all.
Program Viability. Another kind of evaluative consideration concerns the question of program viability. As to this aspect, the AFSC did encounter difficulties. First, there were recruitment problems, especially for the nine-month programs. Nine months is a long time for a young person to commit to a purpose at the expense of earning needed money or pursuing an education. It was more difficult to recruit young men than young women, but social agencies found it much more difficult to arrange suitable placements for the women. In the 1957 summer program, for example, of the sixteen interns recruited by May, all were female. Thirteen agencies had requested assignment of male interns; none had asked for women.78
In an effort to discover how many Interns-in-Community Service there were, an attempt. has been made to summarize data contained in AFSC reports, but, unfortunately, the reports cover different, sometimes overlapping periods. However, Table 8.1 will be indicative. As can be seen, interns in summer programs outnumbered those in nine-month programs by about two to one. But agency personnel did not believe that two months was a sufficiently long period of time for an intern to become useful. This is possibly why in the 1957 summer program in Chicago, the AFSC experimented by making no assignments to agencies but rather sending the interns out into the neighborhood wherever children gathered. The AFSC reports did not comment on whether this approach worked or not.
Table 8.1. Numbers of Interns-in-Community Service
Nine Month Program
a. Participants in program groups not funded by the ESF are not included.
In spite of difficulties, however, the overall reaction on the part of the AFSC was that the program had more than justified itself. In fact, the AFSC seriously considered replacing in part the work camp or Interns-in-Industry programs with the ICS program.79 And by mid-958, ICS projects had been extended to St. Louis and Seattle. But these evaluative comments are rather crude indices of the impact of the ICS program on the interns, particularly with respect to the citizenship dimension. Fortunately, the NORC study permits a more useful reading concerning these matters. In reviewing this study, I will provide only a synoptic sketch of its design, content and conclusions. (Readers interested in the statistical methodology and additional detail as to content are referred to the published study.)
The NORC Study: The Interns
Stated generally, the aims of the study were to discover what changes (relevant to our interests) took place in ICS participants and what factors seemed to account for these changes--especially changes with respect to social and political maturity. More specifically, answers were sought to the following questions (but not solely these): Do interns learn something about ways of meeting such problems? Do interns become more involved in social service or other kinds of practical leadership in college or in their communities as a result of participating in the program? An effort was also made to arrive at comparisons of effectiveness, not only among the three kinds of intern programs, but also in relation to AFSC work camp and Encampment for Citizenship programs. The latter comparisons were made possible by utilizing instruments which had also been used by Riecken and by Hyman, Wright and Hopkins. The study was not concerned with program content per se, the worth of the services performed by interns or with the quality of project leadership.
The evaluation involved both interns and alumni. Some twelve instruments were administered on a before-and-after basis to Interns-in-Community Service (ICS), Interns-in-Industry (II), and Institutional Service Units (ISU) participants in the summer of 1958. The same scales were mailed to 659 ICS and II alumni. Of 200 ICS alumni, 100 responded; 165 II alumni (about 40 percent) returned the questionnaires. The alumni had been in various programs between the fall of 1951 and the summer of 1957. They were divided into two cohorts to allow determination of meaningful patterns of growth or erosion of achievement. The study staff also visited a winter project and conducted intensive interviews with five interns, Because too few interns in nine-month programs were available, the twelve instruments referred to above were not administered to them. In addition, one-fifth of the study budget was used to collect and prepare qualitative information. Through an adaptation of linear regression techniques it was possible to learn something differentially about each of the three programs. And the design allowed study of the how and why of change, for example, to connect results on an attitude index with differences in program organization.80
The evaluation design permitted analysis to proceed at four levels: (1) The limiting effect on possible change of the background characteristics of the participants. (2) The effect of individual characteristics in relation to the privileged status of intern families, previous experience in work programs and political role-set prior to participation. (3) Interpersonal relations and informal group structure. And (4) qualitative assessment of combinations of factors, such as special housing conditions.81
It is of interest, first of all, that the interns proved to be very much like the participants in the Encampment for Citizenship program which will be discussed below. The participants in both programs were dedicated to helping to bring about a better world and had a strong interest in social problems. But there were differences too. The interns averaged twenty-one years of age; encampment participants averaged nineteen years. The ICS program was a work program; the encampment program was a study program.
The typical intern was single, recruited from a college and able to serve at a distance from his home. They were, typically, young Protestants with only a small proportion being Quakers. Summer ICS interns were relatively homogeneous. The modal type tended to be a native-born, white, undergraduate female whose parents were college graduates, had moved once or twice and whose father held an executive position. Typically, she would be a regular attendee at a Methodist church and active in the college YWCA. Of the ICS interns, seven in ten were college undergraduates; in the other two intern programs the ratio was six in ten. The age range was eighteen years to twenty-two. These characteristics plus those already noted were typical of the inner core of each project group. In addition, each group would have, on the average, three or more demographically different members. Seven out of ten had taken part in an AFSC program previously.
It is important to note that two-thirds of the ICS interns were women (50-55 percent in the II program) because the ratio "affects the styles of interpersonal relations that come to characterize project groups as well as differences in attitude scale scores." Women tended, for example, to run higher on authoritarian scores. "The crucial differences between the characteristics of program participants, we believe are those of sex, nationality and race." But "participants are enough like one another by criteria of social backgrounds, age, geographic location and related factors to allow meaningful comparisons to be drawn between programs and among groups within programs."82
Factors Affecting the Results of Participation. The study noted that there were certain conditions in a project situation which significantly affected project results but over which the AFSC would have little control--except, for example, to choose a different city or neighborhood. Because recruitment was difficult, it was not possible to select, except within broad limits, on the basis of intern background, capacity, maturity or previous experience. Nor were the available jobs equally rewarding. Community organizations might provide better work opportunities than settlement houses, but too often the former were too poorly financed to be helpful. In too many cases, the alternative proved to be a group worker role, offering supervised play for children. On the other hand, the more demanding and rewarding the job held by the intern, the greater the competition with those program elements centered in the project residence. These included the following: participants must live in, eschew alcohol, live within their allowance plus maintenance; share housekeeping tasks; invest recreation and leisure time in group activities; participate in educational program and meditation periods; and operate on the basis of consensus in business meetings.
Clearly, the interns were expected to meet a formidable set of formal expectations laid down by the AFSC, but these were subject to erosion in various ways. The interns had or developed their own norms and preferences. Also, the very diversity of work assignments and schedules made conflict with the expectations inevitable-particularly in relation to the education and meditation period. "In combination, these are inherent organizational dilemmas in the system of internship." The staff concluded that "informal group factors are more variable, more pervasive and more influential in an ICS project than any other set of factors, alone or in combination." It is within the "unprogrammed network that standards are created, activities shared most intensively and influences exchanged. " The formal education program may have had no impact, yet the informal activities tended to focus on social and political content.83The project directors were no doubt a factor in the total picture, but no attempt was made to evaluate their performance. It was merely noted that a husband and wife usually served as co-directors, that they ranged in age from twenty-seven to thirty-five years, that their leadership was seen as volunteer service rather than a job and that they often lacked desirable background experience for their role.
The Effects of Participation in a Project. The problem of the evaluation, as we have said, was to discover what kinds of changes occurred, if any, in a significant proportion of the interns? How significant were She changes? With what elements in the program could they be connected? One of the first findings was the discovery on the pretest that many interns tended to score toward the extreme end of the range on many of the scales; hence, the possibility of further movement in a desired direction as a result of a two-month summer experience seemed unlikely. Nevertheless, changes did occur. "We can report with confidence that project participation, regardless of program, stimulated significant changes in three components. Participants became less authoritarian, less escapist in their political orientations and more knowledgeable about city problems."84In the ICS program there was also significant progress toward the nonviolent end of the scale. All programs were successful in developing political and social maturity. On other scales, although not statistically significant, changes were noted to be in the desired direction.
"Overall, the effect of participation is to stimulate significant change in young adults' interests in local politics; their belief in the ability of groups to affect political decisions in a free society; their interest in . . . civic organizations; and their readiness to act positively on a community service problem. Their interest in national politics and world affairs, extremely high to begin with, are improved or reinforced but not transformed by participation in the programs.85 In the process, they became more realistic about their own roles in political affairs. More specifically, the ICS interns crowded extreme values on the tolerance scale, yet two ICS groups changed significantly toward greater tolerance. They crowded extremes on the "Civil Liberties" scale also, but change, though positive, was not statistically significant. Nor was change on the "Democracy" scale statistically significant. Whether the various groups went one way or another depended on the degree of group cohesiveness. ICS participants were better informed about the city than those in the ISU and II programs and became more savvy over the summer. Even though crowding the extremes on the "Race Savvy" index, there was significant change in the case of both the ICS and the II.
Taking into account change on nine indices, the ICS achieved the greatest overall improvement and the ISU the least. Of ten groups studied, nine showed a statistically significant drop in their optimism about the power of the individual to influence events. Belief in group power, however, increased--but the least change occurred in the case of ICS groups. Perhaps they tended to be more realistic. Although interest in local politics was high, there were changes generally in a favorable direction (but not significantly). On the "Actionism" scale, the actionists increased from one-third to one-half of the total--but most significantly in the ICS. "We would conclude that project participation strengthens an action orientation toward community welfare and does so most effectively in ICS--meaning in this respect the program content shows through consistently."87
Motivation and Morale. The motives of participants were classified as follows: (1) to gain exposure to the workaday world and to achieve greater autonomy, (2) to find a group affiliation, (3) to provide career training, and (4) to engage in human service. The latter category seemed to be a stronger value in the ICS than in the other two programs. On the basis of its analysis, however, the study staff questioned any need for the AFSC to inquire into the motives of applicants. Provided they were otherwise suitable, their willingness to serve could be taken as sufficient. The staff concluded that "motivations most relevant to individual and group growth will tend to develop during rather than prior to the summer. They will be individual expressions of group standards."88
Differences in morale were found among the programs. In ratings of one's group as a learning group, as a source of lasting friends, as a human service group, as a source of fun and as a means of resolving personal problems, the ISU groups rated highest and II groups lowest. But the significant point which emerged from the analysis was that high morale did not correlate positively with attitude change or maturation.89The "happy" groups were those in which participants came with friends, whose parents were supportive and who believed that their project expectations were substantially met. But the evidence indicated that such groups were not likely to achieve maturity or to change attitudes appreciably. "Morale is a sound indicator of social gratification; it is in no sense an indicator of growth."90
Because the ten summer groups under study differed in several respects, an attempt was made to discover whether such factors as group composition, social organization and group environments were related to attitude change.
1. Group composition variables included sex, age and racial, ethnic and socio-economic differences. The groups with a higher percentage of women tended to change most favorably. This factor correlated with a significantly greater involvement in project life and greater concern initially with public affairs. This was judged to be a group effect. Because women respond more positively to project roles, a higher proportion of women influences the group norm, with which individuals in turn tended to identify. "Women are relatively greater stimulators of group change."91
With respect to age, the younger the group, the lower the initial concern with politics was likely to be, the lower the reported involvement in project life and the less likely a shift to more mature political and social attitudes.92 It is important to note here that the age differences were small--the range being from 20 to 22. The main difference on this dimension was "greater ego integration among the older members--an integration grounded in crystallized career goals."93It must be noted further that age was not an important enough determinant to account for individual differences in attitude change. But the groups with larger proportions over twenty-one seemed better able to focus on issues relevant to growth in the area of political affairs, hence, more capable of stimulating group gains.
A third aspect of group composition was heterogeneity with respect to racial, ethnic, and socio-economic differences. First of all, it was noted that the range of heterogeneity was rather narrow. But heterogeneity was greater in groups with a higher proportion of women. With respect to the effects of heterogeneity, several points were made. It was not highly associated with attitudinal change. It was negatively correlated with group solidarity, especially consensus (Rs=.47). Racial, ethnic or socio-economic differences did not directly influence group change but did affect group social structure which in turn influenced change. Conversely, "Homogeneity ... fosters greater solidarity but may lead to resistance to change." Similarly, the greater the integration of a group (that is, direct association among members), the less is the likelihood of change. In fact, ".. . integration is strongly and negatively associated with attitude change! The more isolates a group contains, the more likely the group is to exhibit favorable attitude changes."94Consensus was also strongly and negatively correlated with attitude change.
2. Evidently, political concern and involvement of interns at the beginning of the program were significant factors. "Groups with the highest proportion of politically concerned members at the start . . . are much more likely to achieve favorable attitude changes." Such members "have a greater readiness to learn from the summer experiences, and this readiness is transmitted to or affects less concerned group members." They also became more involved personally which correlated positively with favorable attitude change.95
3. The character of the living facilities and their relationship to life in the neighborhood environment, even though these factors could not be quantified, were, nevertheless significant. Of the four ISU groups, the two living within the institution were judged to be most effective. They reported higher personal involvement, which was consistent with living in. Relying on qualitative analysis, the study staff concluded that the most effective environments were characterized by slight overcrowding, ready exposure to life in the immediate neighborhood and access to other community groups. It was helpful, too, if the group members saw themselves as separated from home, family and school.
4. In addition to the group influences on social and political growth just noted, a variety of other individual factors, which varied from person to person, was found to affect change. One of these was "choice status level," which had to do with being identified more or less frequently as the group member with whom others felt they agreed most in discussions. Average or high choice status was associated (to a higher degree than low choice status) with becoming more pacifistic and less authoritarian. It was also observed that those who were accorded average choice status experienced the highest proportions of changes.
Dentler saw in these patterns, three significant conclusions. First, they indicated that at least some of the attitude scales embodied standards which were also the focus of project group development, standards by which group members made comparisons and evaluations of one another. Second, it was the average status person, the person in a follower role who changed the most toward the AFSC norm. The least integrated changed the least. Third, the least solitary groups changed most favorably but the least chosen individuals tended to change least frequently. "There is, in other words, a contrast between group and individual differences. Mild social stress seems to stimulate group development, but individual neglect has no such effect.... To some extent, this occurs at the cost of isolated and ideologically deviant members. . . . Where little disagreement occurs, acceptance may run high; but growth becomes less likely."96By coping with peripheral members who do not identify with AFSC standards, the group comes to organize around the approved norms.
5. Dentler speculated that certain other individual differences might account for variations in patterns of change or lack of it, but in only a few tests did the indices disclose change at a statistically significant level, although in other cases there was change in a desirable direction. (a) Participants whose fathers were in professions or were technical workers and/or whose parents had been to college, changed more than other participants. The changes were significant on the civil liberties scale. (b) Some participants had had previous experience in AFSC projects; they changed less. (c) Changes on the "political maturity" index was affected by the participant's degree of political involvement previously; the more involved, the less change. If not activist at first, the participant was more likely to be favorably influenced. For the "less active interns, participation amounts to adapting to the political norms held by the political activists."97 (d) Those who were less satisfied with their jobs were found to be more likely to change their attitudes in a favorable direction. The study staff suggested that those with higher job expectations were likely to be the more dedicated interns; hence, they identified more vigorously with project goals. (e) Those who changed most were the white, upper-middle-class members. This may have been due to an indirect influence--the urge to move, in the face of heterogeneity, toward accommodation of differences.98
Reference has been made to the fact that certain instruments used by Riecken and by Hyman, Wright and Hopkins were also used by Dentler. Each showed similar attitude changes although the content of each program differed radically as among the intern, work camp and Encampment for Citizenship programs. Each attributed the changes to identification with group norms which occurred through the informal social process. Reference group identity, internalization of camp ideology and the impact of a climate of group attitudes were the frameworks closely connected with changes in participants by Hyman, Wright and Hopkins, by Riecken and by Dentler, respectively.
Changes Summarized. In spite of the fact that many participant scores on various indices were crowded toward the desired target values, on a number of them further change was achieved at a statistically significant level. Even where change was not at a significant level, it was, nevertheless, in the desired direction. Participants became less authoritarian, more knowledgeable about urban problems, more realistic about political action, including being more convinced of the ability of groups to influence the direction of local and national politics, and more interested in joining social action and service associations. These were outcomes which could be directly connected with overt program intentions, that is, to promote in individual interns greater flexibility of outlook, tolerance of ambiguity, ability to work toward the solution of political problems and improved understanding of social problems.
Differential Effects Among Intern Programs. A question of great interest to the grantee was whether one intern program achieved significantly greater changes than another. In exploring this matter, the study staff concluded that although greater overall change occurred among ICS or II interns, it would not be warranted to judge one program to be more desirably influential than another. Because content differed among programs, certain elements might affect one or more scales differentially, but not others. In fact, there were greater differences within programs than among them taken as wholes. It was pointed out, for example, that one ICS group changed in an undesirable direction where as an ISU group achieved the greatest favorable change among the ten groups. Yet taken as a whole, the ISU interns became less supportive of civil liberties, perhaps as a reflection of security considerations in institutional settings.
Having pointed out these differences, the study staff noted that there were more similarities than differences among all three. To some degree the similarities might reasonably be connected with the fact that the interns had all responded to a set of expectations derived from the AFSC ethos. But beyond this factor, the study reported, "There is considerable basis ... for concluding that the successful impact of all three action programs derives chiefly from informal voluntary association with a group of peers organized under standards of democratic relations, high interpersonal tolerance and shared attitudes of political liberalism."99
Program Effectiveness Regarding Grantee Goals. Earlier in this account, three questions were posed regarding program effectiveness. The staff concluded that the following responses were warranted:
1. Do interns become more intelligently concerned about urban social problems? The study concluded that interns in all three programs improved significantly on the "urban savvy" scale. On the "race relations savvy" scale, the II interns improved most.
2. Do interns learn something about ways of meeting social problems? The study staff noted a statistically significant shift on the part of ICS interns toward greater realism regarding political affairs. "They become more realistic politically meaning they are less disposed to avoid, ignore or underestimate the importance of organized political action and the responsibilities of citizenship." They also developed a stronger commitment to nonviolence. (Not all groups, of course, would necessarily agree with the AFSC position valuing nonviolence as a contributor to solving social problems.) On the "tolerance," "activism" and "civil liberties" scales, the ratings were too high on the pretest to permit significant change. However, participation in the project "unquestionably reinforced these dispositions."100
Although not statistically significant, the largest changes on the "democracy" scale were achieved by ICS interns who were already crowding the desired end of the scale. The study staff took special note of this because they considered this to be the most meaningful indicator on the question of learning ways to solve problems. An interesting point about changes on the "democracy" scale, in contrast with all the others, was that the greatest amount of change occurred in the younger groups. (Rs=.51) Another important finding was the strong negative correlation between change toward greater democratization and a high rating on group morale. (Rs=.68) Higher social conflict apparently was associated with internalizing standards of democratic process.
3. Do interns become more involved in social service activity and other kinds of community leadership? The conclusion was that interns are disposed to becoming more involved in community leadership roles and in service and civic organizations. But a better clue can be found from the analysis of the data on the alumni. This will also tell us something about the stability of the changes.
The NORC Study: The Alumni
The data collected on the alumni showed that they were almost identical with the 1958 interns. The study staff predicted (1) that the alumni attitudes would be close to those of the summer, 1958 posttest and (2) that if political and social maturation were stable, continuing processes, alumni scores should be superior. "Impressively, both hypotheses are at face value strongly confirmed."101 The alumni scores were significantly less authoritarian, slightly less apathetic politically, more tolerant and showed a higher regard for civil liberties. They were more democratic, showed greater urban savvy ("savvy" is a term in the titles of two of the scales used by the study) and scored better on estimates of individual as well as group potency. The alumni and summer interns were identically low on political escapism, nonviolence and race relations savvy. On no scale was there a noteworthy difference between ICS and II alumni. But even where there were differences between alumni and summer 1958 interns, they were slight except that alumni were generally more extremely non-authoritarian.
The study indicated that in the ICS program there was a marked persistence of the relevant characteristics. ICS alumni and summer 1958 ICS participants gave almost identical ratings for morale with respect to program, job and project group elements. They tended to remain in close touch with one another. They recruited for the projects. "It is reasonable to speculate that project life continues to operate as an influential reference point in the changing behavior of alumni." They tended increasingly to join groups having social and political significance. They maintained membership in intercultural and interracial organizations while showing an increasing pattern of involvement in civic, political and neighborhood associations from youngest to oldest cohorts.102 Nearly a fifth of the alumni belonged to seven or more organizations; the median number was 3.5. Although not "political" in outlook, they came increasingly to vote regularly (in higher proportion than the Encampment for Citizenship alumni). At the same time, their tendency to seek political contacts decreased with age.
The study staff concluded, "They are destined, we believe, to identify increasingly with values of individual autonomy, altruistic service to others on an individual basis and voluntary participation in civic associations.... The young volunteers will make unusually well-informed, reasoning citizens, strongly committed to the values of democratic procedures, to the search for nonviolent means of solving social problems and to belief in the supreme worth of the individual."103
On the basis of its analysis, the NORC study offered several
recommendations for the consideration of the AFSC and others concerned with
somewhat similar programs. Briefly, these recommendations included the following:
1. Program directors should not try to promote group solidarity. They could not control its direction in any event.
2. There was no point in being concerned about dating and pairing because it had no direct bearing on the group's capacity for growth.
3. Coed groups were best, provided there was a sizable component of women. Men would gain most from such a group. The age factor could be improved by recruiting fewer college freshmen and sophomores in favor of participants twenty-one years and older. Given heterogeneity of background as being desirable, recruitment methods should be broadened beyond the orbits of AFSC staff on college campuses. And there should be more emphasis on newcomers to AFSC projects. Good though this advice may have been, the difficulty of recruiting enough interns may have forced the AFSC to accept less than ideal prospects.
4. Several recommendations related to the environmental setting and to the schedule. The residence/headquarters should be located as close to the work locations as possible. Intergroup contact should be easily achieved. The setting should differ markedly from home and campus milieus. And because the goal was (or should have been) growth of the participants rather than solution of a problem, the schedule should allow for free evenings.
5. On perhaps a more critical dimension, the study staff discerned a tendency on the part of some regional AFSC officials or project directors to apply orientations derived from clinical psychology or casework because of concern about individual "adjustment." The staff thought such efforts were dangerous and, instead, felt that project directors should concentrate on managerial organization of the project environment.
Because interns were well motivated, it was concluded that project directors should stop being concerned about this and concentrate on more legitimate objects of attention (not extending, for example, to individual factors or interpersonal relations of the members). Examples would include: (1) It was important to try to improve the quality of work assignments. The younger interns evidently were not interested in working with children. Interns were interested in working with/learning about community organization. They wanted direct experience in helping community residents to solve their problems, and in operations of urban service organizations. Group work experiences were not satisfactory substitutes. The best kind of job fit involved such activities as interviewing, assisting researchers, or some similar activity. (2) If the AFSC believed that certain standards of conduct were essential, then they should be made explicit. In the study staff's opinion, the project staffs were too laissez-faire in their approach, too slow to make clear project expectations with respect to use of alcohol, boundaries between sexes, and the nature of the didactic program. "The existing normative structure must be promptly articulated if rapid accommodation is to occur."104(3) The study staff felt, too, that the participation of group members in project management could have been improved. Business meetings should be fixed in number and limited in duration. There were too many committees for the good of the project because the committee structure tended to undermine the function of the business meeting and led to factionalism.
The NORC study has been reported in some detail not only because it provided an evaluation of these AFSC intern programs but because it represented a contribution to an understanding of an important area of citizenship activity. Further, the methodology employed allowed the analysis of the intern programs to be connected not only with the AFSC work camp program but with the Encampment for Citizenship as well. Although the AFSC staff did not agree with all of the findings, Thelma How, an AFSC official, wrote, "On the whole, we have found it most helpful. Naturally . . . the focus of many of our programs has changed. The program focus is urban affairs and civil rights. The definition of service is changing, and I suppose community development would describe the program better. The project groups try to act as a catalyst rather than serving people in the community.... I have reread the complete study.... and it is amazing how relevant it continues to be." She noted that some negative factors in the group living aspect had been modified and improved. "In conclusion, you should know the study is considered to be currently relevant and acts as a reference as we plan new programs in relation to present-day issues.”105
The reader will note some shift in emphasis from a social service orientation toward one concerned with individual growth in a community development context. Given the characteristics of intern alumni as identified by Dentler, one may conclude that they could be counted on to become valuable, active participants in the political life of this country. Their roles would be enacted in voluntary associations, especially in local communities, rather than in partisan political groups. The latter would be left to others. One may speculate that the striving for power for its own sake (admittedly an extreme commitment), rather than to advance a program based on principles applied to political issues, would not appeal to them. But in efforts to solve local problems through organizing groups for such a purpose, intern alumni would be expected to be in the forefront.
Were the results worth the cost? The answer is by no means clear. During the years when the ICS program was underway, the cost of maintaining an intern in a nine-month program was estimated to be about $1,000--a substantial sum at the time. Also, it must be recalled that changes in the interns on some indices were not statistically significant because the interns were already so far along toward the maximum values on such indices that little further change was feasible. The study staff noted, however, that it was likely that the values became more firmly held as a result of the project experience.
In support of an affirmative answer to the question of whether the grants were worthwhile, we can take note of three points. First, the interns became more realistic in their views about how to apply their knowledge and energy to their concerns in the field of public affairs. This would seem to be a valuable gain in a group likely to become highly active in community affairs. Second, the AFSC changed its program targets in part because of what was learned--emphasizing urban affairs and civil rights and changing the concept of service in the direction of community development. Third, the NORC study was not only helpful to the AFSC but provided valuable insights to the field of youth education as well.
Simultaneously with the negotiations with the American Friends Service Committee which resulted in grants in support of its Interns-in-Community Service program, the American Ethical Union requested a grant of $10,000 to support a study (to which the Ford Foundation also contributed) of the impact of its Encampment for Citizenship on the participants--a study which was undertaken by the Bureau of Applied Research of Columbia University and subsequently published by Hyman, Wright and Hopkins. Its positive findings led to a further grant of $50,480 (in 1956) which made possible expansion of the encampment program. In 1958, $5,000 was provided so that Algernon Black might undertake a book on the encampment, The Young Citizens.106 The idea of the Encampment for Citizenship had been developed by Black, its education director over many years. As he reported in his book, during the Great Depression, he had observed the work of the Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) and the AFSC work camps. He noted that these programs helped young people find dignity and self-discipline, a sense of worth, responsibility and trust. They provided a chance to learn about social conditions, cultural differences and political and economic forces. Young people were helped to move from "self-centeredness to social awareness, from competitiveness to cooperation, from working only for monetary rewards to giving service."107 But he saw two significant weaknesses in these programs: (1) They lacked diversity among their participants, the CCC camps recruiting mainly from the working class and the AFSC work camps from the more privileged segments of society. (2) Little if any attention was given to exploring the meaning of democracy and its strengths and weaknesses or to understanding the issues facing the nation.
In the 1956 application, Black saw the following considerations as critical: the responsibility of the individual citizen as the cornerstone of democracy; the importance of alert, informed and intellectually effective leadership; faith in democratic process; the need for information and training in how to think for oneself about public issues; the importance of skills of community participation and political action; and the opportunity to develop understanding of and mutual respect for other citizens of diverse backgrounds. Based on such concerns, the applicant had developed a detailed and well-articulated curriculum designed to promote responsible, informed and effective citizenship. The encampment curriculum embodied three principal content areas. The first was ideological clarification. Participants were to be helped to clarify the history and meaning of the democratic heritage as a way of ordering society, as a method of community participation and political action, and as a philosophy of human nature and human relations. The aim was to foster an intellectual and emotional commitment to the democratic way of life. A second content area was understanding of public issues. Participants were to be encouraged to locate and define the major issues facing the American community on local, state, national and international levels; become informed about the factual background; and develop an awareness of the different viewpoints and the various social forces at work. The aim was not to provide solutions to be accepted but to develop a method of thinking so that participants could work out their own solutions in the future. And the third area was community participation and political action. Participants would be helped to learn the practical techniques of democratic action, be afforded the benefit of the experience of effective citizens and leaders and would presumably become aware of the role which civic organizations, government agencies and political parties can play to better the common life. These were the educational objectives.
What, then, was an encampment? The New York City encampment was scheduled each summer on the campus of Fieldston School, maintained by the Ethical Culture Society in the upper Bronx near the Hudson River, with facilities to accommodate for six weeks an intensive educational program on a residential basis. The essence of the encampment was an intertwining of an "actual experience in democratic living and the practice of citizenship ..." and a "planned and focused program which would concentrate upon the specific goals of the didactic or academic educational process.108 These elements were seen as interdependent because without the experience of democratic living, the didactic learning process would be sterile, and without the intellectual dimension the living experience would be much less valuable.
To serve such a program, there were certain basic elements: The dormitories could accommodate to groupings of fourteen to sixteen, which were considered optimum to further group experience. The location was separate from but readily accessible to the city. An encampment of 100 to 125 would not be so large that an individual need feel lost or that he did not or could not count for something. On the other hand, the group would be large enough to generate problems which would need to be dealt with by the group.
The recruitment process sought to bring together young men and women in the eighteen-to-twenty-three-year age range and representing a diversity of religious, ethnic, economic and regional backgrounds. Aside from the principle of equal access, the diversity was sought to promote more dynamic interaction and growth. It was the encampment hope that the image and experience of unity in diversity would produce immunity to bigotry and prejudice. The recruiters also sought to identify evidence of leadership or leadership potential. No academic requirements were set.
The staff (educational, recreational, administrative), obviously, would be a critical element in determining success or failure of the encampment. Criteria of selection included having a democratic viewpoint and being able and willing to share the residential experience with campers, thereby contributing to diversity. To a degree, the staff selection process was one of self-selection. The teaching staff, with variations over the years, covered the following areas: an expert in government including theory of democracy and antidemocratic movements and processes; two persons with backgrounds in social psychology, sociology and intergroup relations (one being responsible for a workshop); two persons with backgrounds in economic theory and the American economy, specializing in either labor-management relations or agricultural economics and conservation (one being responsible for a workshop); and an expert in international affairs and U.S. foreign policy.
The challenge to the teaching staff was great. It was essential
that a teacher be able to deal with a highly diverse student body (including
those greatly lacking in intellectual skills and commitment) in such a way
as to engage interest and motivation while at the same time building a regard
for thinking based on factual data and logical processes. Black quoted a
faculty member: The teacher
must strike a balance ... between straight, factual exposition of the lecture topics, the discussion group in which questions arising out of his lectures are threshed out and where personal experience is related to the subject, and the workshops in which students, individually or jointly, turn out a piece of work.
[After he has presented the groundwork,] ... he becomes a secondary figure, Then his job becomes education in the truest sense of the term: drawing people out, helping them translate the abstraction of the morning into the personally significant problem of the afternoon. The fact that the teacher lives with the students is of great importance. He is accessible and can therefore be challenged.... Knowing the composition of the group he faces, he must rethink the problems he presents in new terms.
The students are there by choice.... The university, the free and lively exchange of views and experiences, is always in session. The curriculum, having as its core the history and meaning of democratic processes, is lived as much as it is taught. I do not know of more favorable circumstances under which teaching and learning can be conducted.109
The recreation staff was responsible for leading a recreation workshop concerned with the philosophy and techniques of recreation and the uses of recreational programs in education and in working with delinquents or the handicapped. In addition, the staff worked closely with the Recreation Committee of the camper government to set up the activities which would provide for change from the heavily task-oriented educational program and at the same time help to bring the whole group together.
The administrative staff was just as central to the success of the enterprise. It was the delicate task of the director to orchestrate the complex elements which were in a process of continuous interaction--an interaction of freedom and responsibility. It was important not to be too laissez faire, else campers and staff would not expect enough of themselves and each other, would forget what they were there for and would fall short of their goal. But if too severely task-oriented, relations with campers and other staff would be jeopardized. For the staff as a whole, the ability to listen and counsel so that campers could learn to see, to gain insight for themselves, was important. A quality which helped the staff to achieve its goals was the perception on the part of campers that the staff was there primarily for altruistic reasons and was genuinely interested in the campers.110
The Program in Action
Living Together: A Community in Process. Like the legs of a three-legged stool, each of the several major elements of the encampment was indispensable. According to Black, only if interpersonal communication and interplay were active and positive would the didactic educational program work well. Sharing of experiences and viewpoints was essential to good group discussion and helped to make the lecture real; conversely, the formal educational program gave perspective to experience.
How did the encampment achieve a sense of community? Several elements helped. The campers were quite aware of the diversity of the group members and, as with the ICS program, diversity helped growth. There were no competitive activities except in sports. The recreation program provided release of energy and tension. All campers shared some activities: lectures, films, parties, meals. Various camper groups included different "mixes." One's dorm group had one assigned membership, the discussion group another, the study trips still another. The diversity of associations applied to meals and recreation groups as well. All staff members lived in and shared experiences with campers. And the charge to contribute to the group from one's own experience and to make a difference contributed to one's self-image, and this helped in turn to build a feeling of belongingness.
Camper Government. It was a basic principle that campers must share in the enterprise at every level, that campers must be involved in planning and decision making. Hence, although all campers must of necessity share in housekeeping duties, they must also have a voice in deciding how the tasks were to be accomplished; and some program elements could not be achieved unless campers took responsibility. Examples were sports events; the Friday evening activities for all campers, such as dances, trips to take advantage of cultural opportunities in the city and the daily newscasts. While the principle of sharing in decision making was not an issue, this principle did not necessarily extend to all decisions. Campers differed from staff in age, experience and, consequently, outlook. The resolution of differences was not made easier by the fact that campers were all "freshmen," so to speak, and would not be aware of the background for staff decisions. Hence, the staff deemed it essential to establish a framework which would make it explicit that much was expected of all members of the encampment. With these expectations clarified, it would be possible to increase camper involvement in decisions until something like a partnership emerged.
The process of forming the camper government began at the opening evening session. The ground rules were described and formation of a camper government was invited. By the end of the first week, it was expected that the form of government (for example, representative body versus town meeting) would have been decided upon. An executive committee of campers and staff (in a ratio of two to one) was also established which could consider basic questions of structure, schedule and planning but with the understanding that the director must have the final word. He could not permit decisions to stand which would compromise the encampment's basic commitment or the legal and financial responsibility of the sponsor.
Recreation Program. The recreation program was thoughtfully integrated into the total program. "Recreation, by its emphasis on what an individual is and does, rather than on what he says or what social or political views he holds, makes for unity and appreciation beyond many of the barriers that divide."111 And by providing classes in sports and cultural activities, new interests and skills could be developed. The recreation workshop was made up mostly of persons interested in careers in which organized recreation was an element. They learned something about the rationale, concepts and principles underlying the field and acquired new skills in practice. The workshop often carried out plans of the Recreation Committee. "Indeed, without the recreation program, the encampment would be impossible as an effective enterprise."112
The Education Program. Content, of course, was an important element in the education program, but content to be learned for some purpose. A curriculum plan (previously worked out by the staff) was discussed with campers on the first day. Comments and suggestions were invited. The role of the Education Committee (reporting to the camper government) was described: to observe and evaluate, to convey criticisms and make recommendations, to plan evaluation sessions and to conduct supplementary education programs of its own. Typically, the curriculum included four major units: (1) history and meaning of democracy and the challenges to it; (2) human resources of the American community and the problems to be solved, especially of minorities; (3) private and public roles of the American economic system; and (4) international affairs and U.S. foreign policy.
In the 1955 encampment, faculty were drawn from a variety of institutions and organizations including Rutgers University, Michigan State College, Queens College, the American Labor Education Service and the New York State Committee on Discrimination in Housing. Their presentations covered such topics as Citizenship in the American Community; Political Parties: Their History and Functions; The Soviet Economy: Programs, Problems and Practices; and The Emergence of the United States as a Great Power. Their efforts were assisted by such guest speakers as Patrick Malin, the executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union, speaking on Civil Liberties, Security, and Loyalty; a New York City councilman on City Government and Political Action; Goodwin Watson, Professor of Social Psychology at Columbia University, on the Psychology of Prejudice; Kenneth Clark, Professor of Psychology at City University of New York on Discrimination and Segregation: Case Study of Schools; a businessman and an investment specialist on The American Economy: How It Works and Its Strengths and Weaknesses; George Weaver, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer, CIO, on Problems of Automation, Employment and a Balanced Economy; Benjamin Cohen, Under Secretary-General of the United Nations, on The United Nations and the World Community; and Eleanor Roosevelt on The United Nations and What the Individual Can Do in His Own Community.
It must be understood, however, that the role of discussion groups was emphasized in order that the didactic elements might be understood but, more important, become connected with the life experiences of the campers. Although the evaluation study addressed itself almost entirely to attitudinal objectives and scarcely at all to the information, understanding or skills objectives of the didactic program, it was noted that interest and motivation in the educational program seemed to be high. In addition to lectures by staff and guests, use was made of documentary films, field trips, a materials library, the contributions of campers from their own backgrounds and the special workshops (which emphasized investigation and techniques of action). Because campers were least experienced or informed with respect to the units on the American economy and foreign affairs, nearly two-thirds of the time was devoted to them.
There were, however, some problems. Some lecturers found it difficult to present their material in a way that connected with the experiences of campers. Hence, in the unit on the economy, as an alternative, a labor-management arbitration might be role-played. Films were used to provide facts, to dramatize and add realism, to provide an opportunity for propaganda analysis and to suggest a means of communication which could be used back home. But very few films could measure up to educational requirements in an encampment context. Field trips were an important part of the educational program. Though stopping short of actual experience, they were much better than books or lectures as a means of conveying some sense of reality about a problem or institution. They were especially helpful to the less book-minded. But it was hard to accommodate needed lead-time to arrange a field trip with the wish to keep a program flexible.
Even more important than field trips were the discussion groups. Varying in size from twelve to eighteen, they were deliberately organized with a diverse membership. It was perennially difficult, however, to find staff with an adequate grasp of the range of subject matters involved who were also able to lead discussions. Part of the difficulty lay in differences as to the goals of discussion. Was it to re-explore the lectures, to ventilate group member feelings, to test lecture content in relation to the experiences of group members? For Black, "the most effective person from the encampment viewpoint is the one who by his questions acts as a midwife to participation through which campers achieve new levels of clarification and understanding."113
The workshops were also a highly important element in the encampment scheme--being referred to as the "cutting edge" because their purpose was to provide practical training for action. Some workshops emphasized problem solving (for example, workshops dealing with civil rights, juvenile delinquency or labor-management relations); others emphasized action (for example, politics, propaganda analysis or community organization). But no workshop emphasized one to the exclusion of the other. The basic approach involved becoming as informed as possible on the problem of one's choice, considering how one would act as an individual in one's personal world and trying to be realistic about the forces working for and against one's action goal. In spite of the emphasis given to the workshop aspect during the years covered by Black in his study, The Young Citizens, the encampment was still dissatisfied with the results. It was thought more time should be scheduled. But the basic problem was the difficulty of recruiting broadly qualified staff, that is, staff qualified with respect to group work concerned with developmental processes and also having a grasp of the social sciences.
On the basis of its own observations, the administrative staff was convinced that very positive results were achieved. Fortunately, the study funded by the ESF (later extended with funding from the Ford Foundation) and conducted by the Bureau of Applied Social Research of Columbia University is available to provide independent evidence. What follows is a summary of the evaluation study of the 1955 encampment participants and alumni of the nine preceding encampments, amplified subsequently by comparable data on the 1957 and 1958 encampments in New York and on the 1958 California encampment.114
These were the stated aims: (1) to measure change in the campers with respect to attitudinal outcomes rather than changes with respect to information or skills learned, (2) to learn whether growth occurred in the desired directions and whether this could be reasonably attributed to the encampment experience, (3) to learn whether other unanticipated and undesired changes had resulted and (4) to learn whether desirable growth persisted after campers had returned to their home communities. To provide the necessary data, questionnaires were completed by the campers before and after the six-week encampment and six weeks after returning home. A study was also made of the alumni of the nine encampments preceding the 1955 encampment. An effort was made to determine and eliminate change or growth which might normally be expected to occur in a six-week period even without the encampment experience. What then were the findings?
1. The campers were a diverse group representing a cross-section of the main groups in our society except that they did not include conservative viewpoints to any significant degree. A few data will indicate the degree to which the campers were liberal, tolerant, democratic and non-authoritarian. On the racial discrimination scale, for example, the median score was never higher upon arrival at any of the four encampments studied than 0.9 on a scale of 10.0. Campers were an ideologically deviant group. They were in essence self-selected, responding to the sponsor's announcement of a program for those concerned with social problems and the need to seek democratic solutions for them.
The actual makeup of the 1955 encampment included seventy-five whites, thirty blacks, thirteen American Indians and two others. The percentages of women in the four encampments studied were 54, 57, 58 and 65 percent, respectively. There were Protestants, Jews, Catholics and others. They came in significant numbers from every region. Their family backgrounds included business and the professions (one-third), middle-class or upper working class (one-third), semi-skilled or unskilled workers (one-fifth) and ranches and farms (one-seventh). Of the thirty blacks, half were from the South, one-third from the Midwest, three from the East and one from the West. Of the whites, twenty-nine were from the East, twenty-seven from the Midwest, ten from the West and only eight from the South. This distribution was typical of the other mainland encampments studied. Of the blacks, 40 percent were from upper or upper-middle class homes, 30 percent from middle-class homes and 30 percent from working-class homes. For whites, 35 percent were from upper or upper-middle class homes, 35 percent from middle-class homes, 16 percent from working-class homes and 14 percent from farms. There was great diversity available to each camper.115
The campers tended to evaluate jobs on the basis of their public service and altruistic character to a greater degree than most of their contemporaries. Between four and five out of ten would choose service-oriented jobs. Less than one in ten would choose politics. About three in ten would choose careers in business, arts, science or engineering. They were about evenly divided between those who would emphasize scientific study of a problem and those who would opt for immediate social action. As a group they were not extremely activist. Of the 1955 campers, 60 percent thought that participation in public affairs would be one of the two activities from which they expected to gain greatest satisfaction. A study of Harvard, Radcliffe and Miami University students showed that only 37 percent had a similar expectation.
With respect to "bent-to-act," according to a national study, 38 percent of high school students thought it would do little good to write to Congress compared with a range of only 10 to 16 percent for the four encampments.
Another important dimension had to do with the camper's view of himself in relation to the rest of society. Did he see himself as isolated and alone; if he did, did he also feel that it would be useless to appeal on moral grounds for the resolution of social problems? In the 1955 encampment, only six campers believed there was no difference in views between themselves and others with respect to civil liberties, economic planning, race, international affairs or the urgency of social reform. About two-thirds believed there were significant differences with respect to three or more of these issues, and half believed the differences were "very great" on one or more issues. In each encampment, between 30 and 40 percent saw themselves as standing relatively alone, but 40 to 50 percent believed a sizable minority thought as they did. With respect to feelings of anomie (feeling an absence of norms), the average camper score was 3.5 on a scale of 1 to 10 with 10 representing the highest feeling of anomie. These data are significant in that they show a likelihood that campers would not be reluctant to make decisions to act.
2. What were the campers' reactions to the program? Although their expectations were very high, an astonishingly high percentage reported that their expectations had been met, and a very high percentage said they had been more than met. About 32 percent said they were generally satisfied but indicated that some specific expectation had not been met. The encampment schedule was very tight, with very little free time. This could have led to significant resistance from persons of an antiauthoritarian bent to begin with. Only 14 percent indicated that there had been too little free time. Of the 86 percent, over a fourth had expected that there would be a great deal of free time. Evidently, the encampment program was successful in enlisting the energy and attention of the campers. In fact, the study concluded that "there is strong evidence that the most salient feature of the total encampment experience was the community life. This does not mean that the educational experience was ineffective or unimportant. But it does mean that what was psychologically central to the campers was the group experience in democratic living....116
3. Analysis of the data collected showed that significant changes occurred. Overall, the campers became more democratically oriented and effectively committed. The campers became more approving of traditional civil liberties; this was one of the areas of greatest encampment impact. They became more tolerant of freedom of expression for nonconformists. They became stronger in defense of civil rights for minorities. They changed very little on the political/economic conservatism scale (which was desirable from the encampment's point of view because this was not an objective in any case). The campers became more optimistic about solving pressing social problems and remained firm in their belief in the potency of group action in solving social problems, though their belief in the effectiveness of individual action declined. They showed a small increase in the tendency toward political action through accepted social channels. And they formed friendships during the summer irrespective of race.
They did not become unrealistic as to the ease of solving problems, more provincial in their concepts of a democratic society or prejudiced in reverse, as shown by the fact that friendships were formed proportionately toward whites and blacks. They also did not become more radical in their political ideology or alienated from the common man; nor did they become "harsher" in their opinions about the "average American," nor more inclined to see Americans or the United States as unbound by moral imperatives. Indeed, the study found "considerable evidence" that the encampment dispelled at least in part feelings of alienation and separateness from other Americans.117 In short, there were no undesirable changes noted.
4. In attempting to account for the changes which occurred, the study staff pointed out that the elaborate didactic program was well integrated into the communal life; hence, the effects of one could not be readily separated from the other. "Clearly, the didactic program provides the main fund of knowledge and the vehicle for training in special skills. But such effects are outside the bound of our evaluation. . . . But the didactic program is also directed to the very effects we have under study.... So, too, the very quality of the communal life strikes these lessons home." "Our hypothesis is that both components--didactic and communal--are necessary for the success of the encampment. The didactic work clarifies the purpose and articulates the flux of experience. The communal life, in turn, gives verisimilitude to the abstract didactic formulations." Because a control group approach would not be possible, an inferential method was used "to suggest that each component is important to the Encampment, but not sufficiently important as to account for the changes by itself."118
To check on the impact of the communal life, camper scores were divided into two groups on the basis of whether they had indicated they looked forward most eagerly to the didactic or communal aspect of the encampment. It was found that both groups changed. On some scores, one group changed more than the other; on other scores, the reverse was the case. "Thus the evidence again supports the hypothesis. . . . Furthermore, the data suggest that the informal communal life is at least as important to the changes as is the didactic program."119
Scores on the indices of tolerance and attitudes on civil rights and civil liberties showed major increases. "Here, too, the community life provided the natural arena for the growth of these sentiments. Interpersonal relations among different ethnic groups of campers were obviously related to just such sentiments as tolerance, civil rights and civil liberties. Thus the community life continually provided opportunity for enacting the norms that were stressed in the ideology of the encampment.”120
The study staff concluded that it was warranted to believe that the overall success of the encampment was in considerable measure a function of "the atmosphere within which campers lived--the lack of frustration, the rarity of trauma, the gratification of their hopes and expectations about the summer, the generally favorable environment."121 On this point, the reader will recall that this position is not consistent with the findings of the NOW staff. Because the latter study compared the extent of change among groups which differed with respect to morale factors, the NORC results would appear to be better grounded. The NORC report specifically recommended, for example, that the AFSC should procure a residence which would be a little uncomfortable on the ground that this would encourage change on the attitude scales although at the expense of high morale. And, in fact, Dentler reports on the basis of a personal communication from Hyman that a subsequent study of two encampments showed disruptive experiences "to be conducive to favorable attitude changes in individuals."122
But there is a more important aspect of the dynamic of change which the study staff saw as relevant to the question of how attitude changes derived from the experience of communal life. They found the view useful that "under certain conditions the individual identifies himself with various groups whose standards, in turn, become his and provide guides to his attitudes, opinions and conduct. At times, a group of which the individual happens to be a member also serves as his reference group for attitudes, opinions and conduct. To deviate from the norms for such a group, then, may threaten his status and prestige in the group; conformity often leads to rewards and personal gratification." Furthermore, "Campers are attuned to the dominant ideology before they come to the encampment; once there, they are confronted with an institution that emphasizes democratic group functioning and the active participation and absorption of the individual into the community, which is intrinsically an attractive one for the average camper."123The study staff considered the evidence to have provided strong support for the notion of the reference group as a significant factor in attitude change. (Unfortunately, no analysis was reported of differential changes in relation to the proportion of women in the four encampments--ranging from 54 percent to 65 percent. The NORC staff had concluded that a higher proportion of women tended to increase movement toward desired changes in the AFSC/ICS program.)
5. Did changes persist? Granted that change did occur, we must ask how enduring it was. As noted above, the campers were asked to complete questionnaires six weeks after their return home. In considering the results, we must take note of the fact that the encampment was different from "going to school." In the latter case, the individual left his home only intermittently and for short periods. But the encampment involved total removal for over six weeks, followed by a return to one's home community. "Such a process calls for much more than remembering it; it demands persistence, plus the translation and adaptation of what one has learned in one setting to suit another setting."124 Another factor to be taken into account was the youthfulness of the campers, at least in lacking the autonomous status of self-supporting adults in their home community.
To gain some insight into the impact of the return, data were sought on the attitudes previously studied, campers' changed perceptions of their home communities and whether these changes led to any action being taken, changes in the character of their informal personal relationships and resulting impact on their ability to function and the ways campers thought their home lives had been changed, changed perceptions about social problems and changed perceptions about relations with the rest of society.125 These data would allow answers to the question: "How did the group react to the world outside, once they had lost the moral support of the encampment?"
1. Although many of the campers who returned to their home communities were not bothered by what they saw, of those who were, the principal reactions were directed to the prevalence of racial prejudice and to the provincialism of the community.
2. The reactions of the forty-five campers who were bothered by something in the home community were of particular interest to the study staff. Of these, twenty-five said they had not tried to do anything, but fourteen said they would in the future. Of the twenty who did try to do something, half acted individually through arguing their positions with others; the remainder tried to work through an existing agency such as the NAACP. Eight out of ten said they had become more interested in joining local organizations.
3. There was little evidence that the encampment experience led to disruption of family relationships. Relations were often broken, however, with friends who reacted against statements or actions reflecting the encampment ethos.
The assertions made to this point are based on what the 1955 campers said they felt, thought and did on their return home. What about those changes recorded at a more basic level through the use, for example, of attitude scales? How stable were these changes? Did the results revert to the level at the beginning of the encampment or remain at the level at the end or settle somewhere in between? What effect did the community have? Although the exigencies of testing in the home community setting led to eliminating certain scales, the picture which emerged is clear. The salient social opinions and attitudes characterizing the respondents in the home setting closely approximated the values recorded at the close of the encampment. These included views on civil liberties, civil rights for minorities, discrimination, tolerance of nonconformity and access to the radio to express unpopular opinions.
The level of preference for action in the local community remained stable. Campers did not change significantly in their commitment to immediate as compared with long-range action. The belief in the possibility of ending prejudice had gone from 81 percent at the end and to 92 percent six weeks later. But the median estimates of years required to achieve the goal shifted from fifty-nine years to thirty-one to fifty-four-which shows that they were not impervious to community views. Their faith in group potency remained quite stable, but the loss of faith in individual power which occurred during the encampment was not restored by the return home and even decreased slightly. Given the rather liberal outlook of the campers in relation to the sponsor's concern for the encouragement of effective, democratic citizenship, the question of their perceived relationship with the rest of society was an important one. This was especially so because Riecken's study of work campers showed a trend toward increased alienation. The Hyman group wished to test the hypothesis that the encampment would have a similar effect.
The Hyman study, which asked each camper on how many of a set of issues his views differed from the rest of society, produced an interesting result. The numbers of those believing that Americans would differ from campers on four or five out of five issues rose from 41 percent at the beginning of the encampment to 46 percent at the end and to 52 percent six weeks after returning home, Their sense of alienation appears to have increased. Those who believed differences would be limited to no or only one issue rose from 9 percent to 17 percent but reverted to 9 percent after returning home. It appears that the larger group of encampment campers were like Riecken's work campers. But overall, the increase in alienation among encampment participants was not especially significant. In any case, the interpretations placed on these results in the two studies are not the same. Riecken emphasized psychological aspects of the data, warning against the dangers of moral elitism, bordering on priggishness. Hyman and his colleagues, however, noted that the alienated showed a tendency toward action as great as or greater than the unalienated.126Hence, the tendency toward alienation may in fact be combined with a greater willingness to try to do something about social problems.
Another hypothesis tested was that the campers might lessen their feelings of aloneness and anomie. Evidence was found to support this. At the beginning, about a third felt that only a small minority of Americans felt as they did about social problems. After six weeks, only a fifth felt this way. More than half felt a sizable minority shared their views. Similar results were obtained in 1957 and 1958. On the anomie scale in 1955, the median score dropped from 3.5 to 2.3 by the end of the encampment. (In 1957 and 1958, only small changes took place in these scores.) Six weeks later, the median score had risen only to 2.9.
On the question of "harshness" of view (for example, stereotyping with respect to anticipated answers to a question about access by Communists to the use of the radio to broadcast their views), the results were not clear-cut, but the data do not seem to support the view that either the encampment experience or the return to the community leads to a significantly "harsher" view. In the aggregate, then, the general picture is one of relative stability of change after six weeks of living in the home community.
But there were significantly different results among subcategories of campers. Although whites, blacks and Indians all changed significantly and in equal degree as a result of the encampment, the last group lost much. Indians became much less tolerant of nonconformity, and they lost in support of civil liberties. Three of eight said they wanted to apply something learned in the encampment, but only one of the eight did, compared with eight out of sixteen blacks and 60 percent of the sixty-five whites. There were fourteen respondents from the South (some white, some black). They retained the achieved levels with respect to action orientation, sense of individual potency, support of civil liberties and civil rights and tolerance of nonconformity. They did recede from their optimism about ending prejudice and about trying to take action on some problem. As a group, the sixteen blacks (from the South and elsewhere) remained fairly stable except in those areas where social pressure would be the greatest (belief in potency of individual action and in tolerance).
One other analysis of the campers in the home environment was attempted in an effort to discover whether the campers could "operate autonomously, without benefit of active support of friends or family, or of reinforcement from the encampment." Analyses of various sub-categories of support indicated that ideological gains were maintained whether family or peer support was present or not. Whether they had face-to-face or only written contact with other campers had no effect. "These overall findings suggest that the campers have gained considerable strength and autonomy, that their ideology is supported internally rather than by external means."127 But the fact of face-to-face interaction or the possibility of it did have a differential impact on the wish to act as well as decision to take some ac tion.128
Valuable as the data reported above may be, they necessarily represented only short-range, effects. Obviously, it would be highly useful to obtain comparative data over a longer period to check on the degree of stability of changes already reported. It would be useful to know if changes might surface which had not previously been evident. And it would permit checking on behavior which would not have been likely to occur in a sufficient proportion of cases in the earlier study of the 1955 encampment. To provide a basis for further analysis, two other studies were undertaken. First, in 1955, the study staff conducted a sample survey of the alumni of the nine encampments from 1945 to 1954. And, second, a follow-up study was made in 1959 of the 1955 alumni. The latter was especially valuable because it provided comparative data for essentially the same population.
The 1955 Campers in 1959. In 1959, the recollections of the 1955 campers were still salient for a third of them, and this did not depend upon whether they had maintained contact with others who attended in 1955. The results as tested by the civil liberties scale were stable; on civil rights and "more tolerant," the percentages were nearly stable. Their level of belief in "group potency" held stable as did the scores on "anomie." Their optimism about solving the problems of race and war fell but remained stable with respect to cancer.
The proportion of those who had tried to apply encampment principles rose from 37 percent six weeks after the encampment to 58 percent by 1959. About the same proportion described a specific event as those who had done so in 1955. Their voting record was substantially higher than that of the general population. Nearly nine of ten reported recent discussions of politics. Forty-five percent had written at least one letter to a public official. (Only 15 percent of American adults had done this and one-third of the college-educated.) Seven of ten belonged to at least one club or association; over one-third belonged to three or more--which is exceptional. Nearly half of those reporting membership said they were currently holding office in one or more organizations.
With respect to differences in stability and change, there was little evidence of severe losses in encampment-sponsored attitudes or opinions, even among subgroups in stress situations. There was no substantially greater drop in liberal opinions among blacks as compared with whites with respect to civil liberties and civil rights, tolerance, levels of optimism or time perspective on solution of problems. Apparently, these results were not significantly affected by the amount of contact with alumni or with staff or with other reference group processes. Contacts with staff and reunions and contacts with other 1955 campers in 1958 did tend to lead to an increase in action efforts. The study staff concluded that opinions were strengthened by the encampment experience because they become public and "serve the function of relating the individual to the new group that surrounds him at the time." Later, they can be maintained because they can become private in the home community but this is not true of action.129
The Encampment Alumni/1946-1955. Because the Encampment for Citizenship was a cyclical program, it was not enough to take a reading on the campers in a single year. The cycles might differ significantly. Also, such a study would measure only fairly immediate effects. What would be found out about campers over a number of years? A long-term longitudinal study was out of the question. Instead, it was decided to study the alumni of preceding encampments. "By comparing groups differing in the length of time they are removed from contact with a program rather than in the length of their exposure, and assuming equivalence at the point they depart, the stability of effects is examined."130In effect, the past history (1946-1954 campers) would be used to project the future histories of the 1955 cohort.
Obviously, certain methodological problems would be encountered. For example, if the address of a 1946 camper were unknown, did this reflect death, the mobility typical of the age group or lack of identification with the encampment program? Also, responses about current behavior could be taken as accurate, but what about responses concerning events as much as nine years in the past? A variety of cross-checks indicated that the final sample (42 percent of the original sample of 520 which was constituted by taking alternate names on a list of over 1,000 alumni) was valid as a basis for checking stability of change but not to ascribe the causes of change.
The findings for civil liberties, tolerance, and optimism regarding social problems were substantially similar as between the 1946-1954 group and the 1959 results. Political behaviors differed by a very few percentage points. The 1959 results showed 71 percent belonged to at least one association, 34 percent to three or more; nearly half of these held office. For the 1949-1951 group, the comparable figures are 84 percent, 47 percent and 42 percent. On "action taken" and "intent to act," "the agreement is very high.131In neither study did interaction with other encampment persons affect attitudes but in both studies interaction contributed to action consistent with encampment goals.
In sum all of the studies made by Hyman and his colleagues supported the conclusion that the encampment program was successful.
Past history teaches of the difficulty of producing alterations in the character in short periods of time, and it is partly this ultimate standard that dictates the judgment of success. Changes within the realms of basic values and action orientation were small. But favorable changes within each of the three realms of character (cognitive, attitudinal and perceived relation to society) were frequent. Moreover, such changes were not accepted unless they clearly exceeded the effects demonstrated in comparative action programs or the changes that would otherwise occur for all the reasons external to the encampment. Finally, unanticipated but unfavorable changes within these three realms were negligible.132
Having enabled the encampment sponsors to determine that its program was effective, the Foundation provided $50,480 for a two-year period beginning July 1, 1956, to allow employment of a field worker to achieve a more effective base for financial support and recruitment. Of the grant, $14,000 was allocated for scholarships. Further support was provided in the amount of $24,000 for two years beginning July 1958 and $5,000 each for the 1960 and 1961 West Coast Encampments. In addition, the ESF assisted Algernon Black (in the amount of $7,000) to write and publish his book on the encampment program. The encampment never succeeded, however, in establishing a firm funding base. Each year saw a reenactment of the annual budget struggle, a struggle made no easier by inflation which forced a rise in annual tuition from $350 in 1963 to $750 in 1970. (The actual cost in 1970 was $1,050.) Some conception of the problem may be gained from the fact that the 1972-1973 budget was $121,000 of which about half came from tuition and fees and the other half from contributions.
In spite of the recurrent budget struggle, the sponsor did succeed in establishing other encampments. The first extension encampment was located in International House in Berkeley. The site proved to be unsuitable, underscoring the importance of having proper facilities. Without separation from other groups, a sense of belonging was difficult to generate. It was not possible to organize dormitory groups as had been done in the other encampments; recreation facilities had to be shared with others. To be more specific, in a comparison of changes in eight attitude areas in four encampments (New York encampments for 1955, 1957 and 1958 and California for 1958), the California group scored lowest on four, next to last on three and highest on only one.133 Several factors may have been involved here. The California encampment was in its first year, there was some deviation with respect to social composition of the California group, and data from different years were being compared (of necessity because otherwise the number of cases would have been too small). Hence, the data indicating lower ratings must be treated with some caution.134 In 1961, a new dormitory was used. But it was not until the next year that cooperative houses became available which provided separation and ample space for living, education and recreation. Finally, the role of the camper government became meaningful. The encampment concluded that the idea of "living and learning together" could be transplanted.135
The encampment also wanted to try out its ideas in a different cultural context--specifically, Puerto Rico. It was thought that Operation Bootstrap would provide a kind of social laboratory to which the encampment could be related. It was thought, too, that training for leadership would be relevant to the needs of industrial and technical development in the Caribbean and elsewhere in Latin America. The first Puerto Rican encampment was held at El Yunque in 1961 with Puerto Rican government and assistance from other foundations. The roster included thirty-eight non-Puerto Ricans and nineteen Puerto Ricans from the U.S. mainland; nineteen resident Puerto Ricans; five Chileans; seven Guatemalans; one citizen each from Costa Rica, El Salvador, and Nicaragua; seven Jamaicans; and one citizen of Trinidad for a total of ninety-nine.
The program was carried out under great difficulties. Facilities were overcrowded. Excessive rain cut short the time out of doors, and, even indoors, rain on the roof made talking difficult. There was no space for an office. Not only was access difficult, but there was no telephone, which complicated arranging field trips. These difficulties ultimately had the effect of strengthening the camper government but not without struggle because its jurisdiction had not been made sufficiently clear. In spite of the initial requirements that all must be able to speak English, eleven arrived who spoke only Spanish. Because a separate discussion group had to be arranged for them, some of the integrating effect was lost.
In retrospect, it was seen that too many were admitted. The age range was too great. The blacks from the mainland were too young and were poorly prepared as compared with the West Indians. The facilities made dorm grouping difficult, and the campers tended to group by nationality. All in all, much was learned, and, with better facilities, subsequent encampments in Puerto Rico were more productive.
By 1971, 54 encampments (or their equivalent) had been held with over 4,500 campers. In 1965, for example, there were 261 campers: in New York (110), Puerto Rico (74) and Berkeley (77). By 1972 other encampments had been held in Arizona, Kentucky, Mexico, Great Falls, Denver, Washington D.C., New York City, White Plains and the Adirondacks. The Adirondacks encampment (1972) emphasized conservation and environmental issues; the Denver and White Plains encampments, urban social change.
In 1964, a Center for Education in Democracy was held in Berkeley for a younger group, fifteen to eighteen years of age. The term was dropped after 1966 because all programs except the Puerto Rico encampment were reorganized to serve a high school age group. By 1966, it had become too difficult to recruit college students.136 Why this was so is not disclosed in the record, but it may have been due in part to the student unrest in universities in the sixties and to the impact of the draft as military commitments escalated in Vietnam. Beginning in 1968, new funding relationships were established, with several encampments receiving scholarship aid through Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and the U.S. Office of Economic Opportunity. But in 1975, only a single encampment was held.
In retrospect, was the ESF grant worth making? We would certainly say that it was, although the program did not spread in the same way as Highlander's citizenship schools. Given the far higher cost per individual served, no comparable expansion could be expected, although the sponsor did succeed in achieving a significant expansion from one encampment per year to three and in some years more. By 1975, there had been about 5,000 campers; not a great number in a population of over 200 million. But many of them would, we think, weigh heavily in the scales. According to one encampment admissions director, Cynthia Kelley, "At least four references are required from each student. We want to make sure the applicant is really interested in civic service."137And they are. A list of alumni and their life roles shows that they count in their communities. For example, one has been a congressman, one an associate director of the Peace Corps and another, chairperson of the New York City Human Rights Commission under two administrations.
We must also consider the criticism that, like the Interns-in-Community Service, the campers were already much closer to encampment goals than the general or even the college-educated population; hence, why invest the resources to move them even further? It is arguable whether the resources would have been more effectively used elsewhere. But to be more committed to civil rights and civil liberties than before must be beneficial in a democracy, especially when support is given when life attitudes are being crystallized. And with respect to improvement of civic competence, as distinct from value-set, there were significant gains. Willingness to take action was significantly increased. Expectations about social problem solving became more realistic. There emerged greater appreciation of and commitment to the value of joining others to seek some social goal. The workshops provided an opportunity to see how one can and why one must move from a merely superficial view of a community problem to a grasp of it based on the facts about its nature and extent, the interests involved in the problem, the resources available to work on it and how one might go about trying to involve others in solving it. The experience of living together cross-culturally gave concrete meaning to what might otherwise remain a cliché. And the didactic elements of the program provided an intellectual framework for feelings perhaps only vaguely held.
The record shows that campers joined more community organizations and held more offices in them, suggesting that they would do more than their part in the solution of community problems. Voter participation was far above average for the general population. Whether or not the program was cost-effective, as the current jargon would put it, we cannot determine. But we must acknowledge that a democratic society could only benefit from incorporating into adult citizenship a body of young people committed to democratic values and to action to achieve them, and who had had an intensive opportunity to consider these values on a reasoned basis as well as the realities of trying to close the gap between goal and practice. The evaluation studies show that there were significant changes in ways of thinking, feeling and acting which we associate with civic competence.
The grant of $13,400 to the Citizenship Clearing House (CCH) in 1954 was unique among the projects financed by the ESF in that it was the only one concerned directly with the political party system. The principal assumption of this project was that in a democracy, governing could not be accomplished except through a political process based on the political party system. A second principle was that because of the special educational opportunities provided to college students by society, they had a special responsibility to participate in this process, and, furthermore, specific steps could be taken with college students which would enhance the prospect of their participation in the political party system. The CCH program was carried out through some twenty (at the time of the grant) state and regional affiliates, with local sponsorship being provided by such institutions as Amherst and Harvard and New York University in the East; Michigan State College, the University of Minnesota, and the University of Kansas in the Middle West; and the University of California and the University of Washington in the Far West.
Although some activities concentrated on changes in the classroom curriculum which were designed to promote a more functional understanding of the political party role and process, extracurricular activities played a more prominent part in the program. More specifically, the ESF grant was provided to assist six of the affiliates, located from Maine to Southern California, to bring students together with party leaders, to provide legislative internships, to support workshops on the political process for younger college faculty and to support regional conferences including students, faculty and party leaders. As examples of these activities, we may note the following. Political party convention teams to observe and in some cases to participate in the process were organized which included forty-one students and nineteen faculty from twelve institutions; in Michigan, 400 students and twelve faculty from eleven institutions were brought together in a one-day bipartisan legislative conference with sixteen political leaders; over 200 students from fourteen colleges and universities obtained information from candidates for office in nearly 200 towns in Kansas and Missouri in an attempt to discover who runs for office and for what reasons; and about 130 students and faculty in thirty-four institutions in Eastern Pennsylvania met for two days with thirty political leaders to explore ways of making academic instruction more useful with respect to practical politics and to improve field work for students, especially in party organization activities.
We may assume that this project reached a group of young people from families which were above average in income and social status. We may assume further that some of the future leadership in our society would be drawn from such groups. It would seem reasonable also to surmise that the introduction to political party leaders in a context designed to encourage discussion of their role and function would encourage some college students at a later stage in their lives to become more involved in political party activities. And for those who did not elect to take active part, it seems reasonable to suppose that they would have developed a better basis for judgment concerning the political process in their communities. Having said this, it must be noted that the ESF contributed only marginally to the work of the CCH. Because funds from other sources were made available on a much more extensive scale, it did not seem to the Foundation that it could make enough of a difference to warrant allocating additional grant funds from its modest resources.
In 1956, an application was received from Springfield College in Massachusetts requesting support for the establishment of an intergroup relations program. Although supporting intergroup relations projects was not included as one of the agreed purposes for which grants by the Foundation would be made, the application indicated that the college wished to explore the impact of such a project on the development of improved citizenship behaviors on the part of the student body. On this understanding, a grant was made for a three-year project at the rate of $10,800 per year for three years beginning July 1, 1956.
The grant decision also took account of the fact that Springfield College was noted for its training programs for workers in a wide variety of social agencies, including youth programs. Relevant to this emphasis was a point made in the application to the effect that while the influence of the home and the neighborhood gang were greater, the next most important influence affecting the attitudes and behavior of youth was the youth worker. If an expanded intergroup relations program could be shown to produce or to encourage significant citizenship behavior, this would be a useful discovery.
With the appointment of Dr. Hans Spiegel as director in September 1957, the work of the Community Tensions Center began. As it turned out, most of the director's attention was devoted to curricular aspects of the project: the development of new intergroup relations courses and the encouraging of other faculty to incorporate intergroup relations concepts and principles into courses not central to the intergroup relations field. It was assumed that the curricular offerings which reflected intergroup relations materials would have a favorable impact on the development of attitudes of acceptance toward various minorities, attitudes necessary to the effective implementation of the goals of a democratic society.
But insofar as project goals were concerned, it was the director's view that the more significant changes in citizenship behaviors would take place in the area of co-curricular activities. Included in the co-curriculum would be the informal discussions in dormitories, special field trips, student undertakings in the community, efforts to influence institutional policy with respect, for example, to the regulations governing acceptance of off-campus rental listings by the college housing office, the activities of clubs and interest groups as they impinged on intergroup concerns, etc.
Is there evidence that the outlook of students at Springfield College changed in a desired direction in the period when the grant was in effect? Spiegel does cite data which suggest that some progress was made. In the spring of 1960, at a time when students on many campuses were demonstrating their views with respect to the student sit-in and related activities in the South, Springfield College students considered carefully a decision as to whether to picket the local Woolworth store in sympathy with Southern sit-in students as was being done by students from other colleges. Students went to New York to talk to officials of the National Student Association, the NAACP, CORE, the Woolworth Company and the Anti-Defamation League. They decided instead of picketing, to start a scholarship fund for a Southern student demonstrator who had been dismissed from his college. They planned and conducted a march through downtown Springfield to the steps of the city hall to initiate a day of prayer and established a Human Relations Committee in the student council to work on intergroup issues on and around the campus. Words had been translated into deeds. The Human Relations Committee went on to conduct a study of the discrimination practiced by barbershops, planned a course of action, discussed it with the administration and the student council, talked to the shop owners and, coincidentally with a poster campaign of the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination, the practice was changed.
At the same time, it must be noted that in his book, Changing Values in College,138 Philip E. Jacob said that at Springfield College, students' love of people and altruism (the "social value" on the Allport-Vernon Study of Values) increased during their stay so that this became the preeminent value for students among all of the values which are part of the scale--even though the degree of social sensitivity characterizing freshmen students was no higher than the average for college freshmen. This increase was said to be unique among colleges for which data were available in 1957, and it would be difficult to account for apart from their particular college experience. Aside from the assertion itself, what strikes us is that from the 1957 date of publication, it would appear the result reflects the particular character of Springfield College rather than the impact of the Community Tension Center, which did not become fully operational until the fall of that year.
Of the various groups of projects supported by the Foundation, the youth project grantees were among the more successful in bringing about behavioral changes appropriate to citizenship. Not all succeeded for the same reasons although I must mention again the fact that we cannot know what all of the reasons were. The information in some cases is too sketchy. Nevertheless (without recapitulating the objectives achieved), I would like to summarize some of the principles which appear to have led to achievement of the objectives.
1. The grantees were committed to democratic values of shared respect, shared responsibility and shared power. These allowed and encouraged participation.
2. At least some grantees were alert to the importance of understanding who and what the participants in their programs were. Several examples will illustrate this point. Benton House came to see that once the seventh and eighth-graders had been caught up in neighborhood gangs, changes in behavior could be achieved only with great difficulty. Therefore, it was decided to begin work with boys and girls a year younger. The Citizenship Improvement Study saw the importance of shifting away from competition as the motivating factor with older 4-H members. The significant differences between those who were ready for the junior leadership role and those who were not was seen to be a highly important factor.
3. Several grantees saw the importance of the community as a factor in learning. Benton House made a deliberate effort to learn about Bridgeport in order to understand better the difficulties faced by its young people, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, seek a basis for closer cooperation with family, church and school in the interest of helping more effectively young people in trouble. The encampment saw the importance of diversity in the campers, a diversity carried even further by the organizational structure of the encampment. This diversity in Encampment for Citizenship and Interns-in-Community Service groups was a powerful factor in molding attitudes.
4. The educational approaches were based on principles which were effective for the following reasons: (a) The more successful grantees had thought about the adult citizenship role and then derived the relevant behavior for the age groups with which they were working. These became the objectives of their programs. Grantees did not confuse activities with the qualities of thinking, feeling and acting which they saw as necessary to functioning as a citizen. If the ability and the willingness to take responsibility is an essential aspect of the citizen's role, then grantees undertook to develop such a sense of responsibility. (b) Experiential educational methods were favored. Responsibility was learned by participants because of being encouraged to assume it--for example, by conducting a health survey or chairing a committee or planning and carrying out a fundraising event. In the encampment, camper government carried a great deal of responsibility for decision making. (c) The residential experience created a reference group which was a potent factor in influencing attitudes and propensity to action in both the encampment and ICS programs. (d) Benton House believed that a sense of obligation for what one had received was an essential value in a democracy and, therefore, adopted a policy of charging dues and encouraging participants to undertake activities providing support of house facilities. These were seen as necessary attempts to foster a sense of the reciprocal relationship between giving and receiving. In CIS, one county project included restructuring record keeping (a massive undertaking in the 4-H program) away from recording steps taken toward winning some competition to a recording of what help one had given to and received from others.
Among the illustrations given, the reader will note parallels with principles which made for successful outcomes in the IAF, Highlander and other community-oriented programs.
1. Ruth F. Fennessey and Ignacia Tories, "Four Years of Progress: The Aims, Methods and Results of the Program Under the Schwarzhaupt Foundation Grant," July 1961, pp. 4-5, ESF files.
2. Paraphrased from ibid., p. 7. The individual learns among peers the morality which is as essential to the adult as his conscience, a morality not imposed as an absolute by the father as superior power but by the conventions or rules of the game accepted by the body of equals as the first condition of their cooperation (George C. Romans, The Human Group [New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co., 1950], pp. 314-15),
3. Fennessey and Tories, p. 18.
4. Ruth F. Fennessey, executive director, "Benton House Report of First Year, July I956 to July 1957," p. 3, ESF files.
5. Ruth F. Fennessey, notes of interview with Tjerandsen, March 12, 1957, ESF files.
6. Fennessey and Torres, p. 22.
7. Ibid., pp. 29-30.
8. Ibid., p. 47.
9. Ibid, pp. 48-51.
10. Ibid., p. 53.
11. Ibid., p. 58.
12. Ibid., p. 65.
13. Ibid., p. 69.
14. Ibid., p. 74.
15. Ibid., p. 82.
16. Glenn C. Dildine, "Citizenship Improvement Study: Final Report of a Three-Year Study (1955-1957) Conducted in Pilot Counties in Five States Representing Extension's National Regions," conducted jointly by the Cooperative Extension Service and the National 4-H Club Foundation, Feb. 1962, Chapter I, p. 2, ESF files.
17. Ibid., Chapter 4, p. 7.
18. Ibid., Prologue.
19. Ibid., Chapter 4, p. 2.
20. Ibid., pp. 2-3.
21. Ibid., p. 6.
22. Ibid., Chapter 3, p. 6.
23. Ibid., Chapter 6, p. 23.
24, "Your Citizenship Improvement Study," no. 4, June 1957, p. 3, National 4-H Club Foundation, mimeo.
25. Ibid., p. 8,
26. Glenn C. Dildine, coordinator, CIS, "Second Statement of Plans for Use with Pilot Centers," Sept. 16, 1955, p. 4, ESF files.
27. CIS, "Guidebook for Agents and Consultants," Section F, p. 25, ESF files.
28. Ibid., p. 26.
29. Dildine, "Citizenship Improvement Study," Chapter 7, p. 10.
30. Ibid., Chapter 6, p. 41.
31. Ibid., p. 42.
32. Ibid., p. 47.
33. Ibid., p. 48.
35. Ibid., p. 49.
36. Ibid., p. 50.
37. Ibid., Chapter 7, p. 12
38. Ibid., p. 16.
39. Ibid., p. 16b.
40. Ibid., p. 32.
41. Ibid., p. 36.
42. Glenn C. Dildine, "4-H Club Project Work and Citizenship," National 4-H Club Foundation Journal, March 1958; quoted in "Citizenship Improvement Study," Chapter 7, p. 37.
44. Ibid., p. 38.
45. Ibid., p. 40.
46. Dildine, "Citizenship Improvement Study," Chapter 7, p. 41.
47. Ibid., p. 41.
48.Ibid,, p. 42.
49. Ibid., p. 44.
50. Ibid., p. 44.
51, Ibid., p. 45.
53. Ibid., p. 49.
54. Glenn C. Dildine, "Report on the CIS to Committee of Three," Jan. 1961, pp. 3-5, an attachment to "Action Report," Special 4-H Committee on Citizenship, Jan. 4-5, 1961, ESF files.
56. Minutes of the extension subcommittee on 4-H Club work, April 18-20, 1962, ESF files.
57. Glenn C. Dildine, letter to Tjerandsen, Dec. 10, 1965, ESF files.
58. The grant to assist other fellowship houses will not be reviewed here because it was not directly germane to work with children.
59. Byron Lukens, director, Community Educational Relationships, Philadelphia Public Schools, notes of conversation with Tjerandsen, March 12, 1953, ESF files.
60. Marjorie Penney, in The Arrow Program: A Handbook for Volunteers and Teachers to Help Children Toward Democratic Living, by Sarah L. Love in cooperation with Anne Wright (Phila., Pa.: Fellowship House, 1959), p. 6. Sarah Love was coordinator of the Arrow Program in Fellowship House, and Anne Wright was a district superintendent of the Philadelphia school system.
61. Ibid., pp. 6-7.
62. The play concerns the attempt of Fenimore Fox to sow discord between the white rabbits and brown rabbits. He is foiled for two reasons. Raymond Rabbit (white) and Robert Rabbit (brown) want to remain friends. As part of his plot, Fenimore Fox had engineered the selection of Herman Ermine (emphasizing his whiteness in order to further divide Rabbit Town) to become mayor of Rabbit Town in the spring. But the fox did not know that Herman Ermine would change his coat and appear as Willie Weasel (with a brown coat) when the snow was gone. Having learned from Raymond and Robert what Fenimore Fox was up to, Willie Weasel was able to expose the plot and show that even though his fur had changed, he was the same person they had chosen for mayor. The lesson was evident to the white rabbits and brown rabbits in Rabbit Town.
63. Love, p. 44.
64. Recommendations to the trustees of the Emil Schwarzhaupt Foundation from the Committee on Education for American Citizenship in the University of Chicago, April 27, 1953, p. 62, ESF files.
65. Marjorie Penney, letter to Tjerandsen, April 27, 1955, ESF files.
67. Unsigned memorandum from Fellowship House to the ESF,
Oct. 1962, ESF files.
68. Fellowship Farm newsletter, undated; enclosure with letter from Marjorie Penney, Jan. 18, 1975, ESF files.
69. The application stated that sixty of every 100 girls in the United States were members of lower socio-economic status groups.
70. New York City Mission Society, "Report on Leadership Training Programs for High School Youth," Nov. 1, 1957, ESF files.
71. University of Chicago Committee on Education for American Citizenship, "Recommendations to the Trustees," p. 47, ESF files.
72. The value of this study was further enhanced because it proved possible to relate it to Henry Riecken's study of work camp volunteers (Volunteer Work Camp) and Hyman, Wright and Hopkins' study of the Encampment for Citizenship, of which more will be said below.
73. AFSC/Chicago, Fifteen Months Report, June 1954-August 1955, ESF files.
74. Herbert H. Hyman, Charles Wright and Terence K. Hopkins, Applications of Methods of Evaluation: Four Studies of the Encampment for Citizenship (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1962).
75. Robert A. Dentler, "The Young Volunteers: An Evaluation of Three Programs of the American Friends Service Committee" (Chicago, Ill.: National Opinion Research Center, University of Chicago, June 1959), mimeo.
76. Henry Riecken, Volunteer Work Camps: A Psychological Evaluation (Cambridge, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Press, 1952).
77. Comments by staff members of ten agencies in which interns were working.
78. John Willard and Jack Ross, AFSC/Chicago, notes of interview, May 13, 1957, ESF files.
79. AFSC/Oakland, Progress Report, March 27, 1956, ESF files.
80. Dentler, p. 50.
81. The study covered participants in ten groups. The groups were divided as follows: ISU--four groups, ICS--four, and II--two. Ten foreign students included in the study are not dealt with in this report.
83. Ibid., pp. 14, 15, 17, 18,
84. Ibid., p. 70.
85. mid., p. 71.
86. Ibid., p. 86.
87. Ibid., p. 94.
88. Ibid., p. 117.
89. Ibid., p. 126.
90. Ibid., p. 130.
91. Ibid., p. 155.
92. Ibid., p. 156.
93. Ibid., p. 157.
94. Ibid., pp. 159, 160.
95. Ibid., p. 170.
96. Ibid., p. 175.
97. Ibid., p. 178.
98. Ibid., p. 179.
99. Ibid., p. 193.
100. Ibid., p. 194.
101. Ibid., p. 134.
102. Ibid., pp. 136, 137.
103. Ibid., p. 143.
104. Ibid., p. 209.
105. Thelma How, secretary, Youth Services Division, AFSC, letter to Tjerandsen, Feb. 2,1968, ESF files.
106. Algernon D. Black, The Young Citizens: The Story of the Encampment for Citizenship (New York: Frederick Ungar Publishing Co., 1962).
107. Ibid., p. 13.
108. Ibid., p. 38.
109. Ibid., pp. 84-85.
110. Hyman, Wright and Hopkins, p. 128.
111. Black, p. 180.
112. Ibid., p. 189.
113. Ibid., p. 243.
114. The results are reported in Hyman, Wright and Hopkins.
115. Ibid., p. 96.
116. Ibid., p. 135.
117. Ibid., p. 154.
118. Ibid., pp. 170, 171.
119. Ibid., p. 179.
120. Herbert H. Hyman and Charles R. Wright, "Youth in Transition: An Evaluation of the Contribution of the Encampment for Citizenship to the Education of Youth," Bureau of Applied Research, Columbia University, March 1956, mimeo, Chapter 5, p. 5.
121. Hyman, Wright and Hopkins, p. 181.
122. Dentler, p. 211.
123. Layman, Wright and Hopkins, pp. 183, 184.
124. Ibid., p. 191.
125. Mail questionnaires were sent out about six weeks after the encampment ended and were returned by 89 percent of a panel of 100 campers on whom data had been obtained at the beginning and at the end of the 1955 encampment.
126. Hyman, Wright and Hopkins, p. 153.
127. Ibid., p. 223.
128. To determine the impact of the encampment on those who returned to college campuses, ninety-seven questionnaires completed by campers in the 1957 and 1958 encampments were analyzed. The campers "became somewhat more activity oriented, somewhat more willing to have diverse political views expressed on campus (tolerance) and slightly more influential in their relations with friends; in the specifically academic side of college life, only their attitude toward the handling of controversial issues in the classroom seems to have been affected, and this but slightly; in the sphere of values proper no change of any magnitude or consistency took place" (ibid., p. 241), "It seems that for campus life the encampment has no 'overflow' effects" (ibid., p. 259).
129. Ibid., pp. 295-96.
130. Ibid., p. 303.
13I. Ibid., p. 318.
132. Ibid., p. 166.
133. Ibid., p. 183.
134. Ibid., p. 182.
135. Black, p. 331.
136. Paul G. Barker, director, Encampment for Citizenship, letter to Tjerandsen, Feb. 25, 1975, ESF files.
137. Quoted in Landt Dennis, " 'Doers' Not 'Talkers,' " Christian Science Monitor, May 9, 1970, p. 1I.
138. Philip E. Jacob, Changing Values in College (New York: Harper, 1957).