Teaching/Communication/Extension/Profession,

Bishop, Charles E.

English

Research Papers in Economics

RESPONSIBILITIES  OF  LAND-GRANT
UNIVERSITIES  IN PUBLIC AFFAIRS EDUCATION
C.  E.  Bishop,  Director
The  Agricultural Policy  Institute
North Carolina State College
The  obvious function  of any  university  is to conduct educational
programs.  This  function,  as  commonly  conceived  of,  consists  of
three  interrelated  parts:  (1)  imparting  knowledge,  (2)  developing
skills,  including  decision  making,  and  (3)  evolving  attitudes  and
values.  Envisioned  is  a  great  reservoir  spilling  forth  information
which  permeates  the whole  of  society  and facilitates  the  evolution
of man.  But this  is  hardly  a sufficient  role  for  a university.  Clearly,
any  university  worthy  of  the name  must  do  more  than  serve  as  a
storehouse  for  knowledge  and  as  a  dispenser  of  information.  A
university must broaden  the horizons  of understanding  by  creating
new  knowledge,  mobilizing  information,  and  synthesizing  existing
knowledge in a manner which can give man greater control over his
environment.  All  great  universities  conduct  research  programs
which probe  the unknown  and seek  new truths.  Fundamentally,  in
their research programs the universities  seek to isolate the conditions
of change, to understand the processes  of change,  and to predict its
consequences.
Research  replenishes  and  fortifies  the  reservoir  of  knowledge
and provides  the fuel for the engine  of progress.  However,  research
results  in  progress  only  when it  is  used  to improve  the welfare  of
mankind.  Otherwise,  it  is  little  more  than  a  sterile  academic  exer-
cise.  Research  scientists,  themselves,  generally  gain  personal  and
professional  satisfaction  from  the  knowledge  that their  research  is
useful.  Accompanying  the obligation  of  the university  to  seek  new
knowledge,  therefore,  is  a  responsibility  to  present  this knowledge
to society  in  a manner  that enables  people  to relate  the  findings  of
research  to  existing  knowledge.  Only  in  this  way  can  the  new
knowledge be  judged relative  to the needs  of the people.
THE  MISSION  OF  THE  LAND-GRANT  UNIVERSITIES
This  obligation  to  transmit  new  knowledge  to  the  people  is
particularly  important  in  the  case  of  the  land-grant  universities.
These  institutions  are  not  just universities;  they  are  publicly  sup-
ported  universities.  The land-grant  universities  were  created  in the
belief  that  education  could  be  made  the  servant  of  the  masses
in improving the welfare of mankind.  The charter  of the  land-grant
101universities  was developed with  emphasis  upon people-not  things.
Therefore,  they  have  a  particular  responsibility  to  help  people  to
apply  knowledge  in  the  solution  of  their  social,  economic,  and
technological  problems.
If the land-grant  universities  are to perform this role in a credit-
able manner,  they must make the problems  and opportunities of the
people  an  integral  part  of  their  program.  Hence,  the  land-grant
universities  have  a moral obligation-not  just an opportunity-to  be
sensitive  to the needs  of people and to provide  dynamic  leadership
in improving  the welfare  of the people.  Confidence  and respect  are
earned  through  service.  Service  is  judged by the  effectiveness  with
which  needs  are  met.  Nevertheless,  research  and  educational  pro-
grams must not be  restricted to "felt needs."  The  "felt needs" often
are  ephemeral.  To  respond  blindly  to  each  expression  of  need  is
impossible.  Moreover,  to  do  so  reflects  a  lack  of  leadership.  The
land-grant  universities  are  expected  to  do  more  than  to  respond
and  to  react  to  pressures.  Their  programs  are  expected  to  reflect
leadership,  vision,  and perspective  in their  own right.
This role dictates that the programs of the land-grant  institutions
must be  forward  looking.  The  researchers  and  educators  must  ask
themselves  the question,  "What will be the problems  of tomorrow?"
The  extent  to  which  problems  can  be  anticipated,  the  causes  and
consequences  analyzed,  and  alternative  solutions  weighed  before
the problems  become  serious  is  a definite  measure  of  the effective-
ness  of research  and  educational  programs.  When problems  can be
anticipated and placed in a long-run context,  organized  and orderly
attacks  can  be  planned.  Programs  which  are  based  entirely  upon
generally  felt  needs  usually  are  too  late  to  aid  decision  makers
in  making  their  decisions.  One  of  the  goals  of  the  educator  is  to
prevent  problems  from  becoming  acute.  This  can  be  done  only  if
the  programs  of  the universities  provide  the  necessary  leadership.
As  our  society  has  become  more  complex,  the  public  problems
which  have  emerged  also  have  become  manifold.  The  virtual
explosion  of  knowledge  in  this  decade  and  the  associated  techno-
logical  changes and economic  development  have brought a growing
interdependence  among  groups  in  our  society  and  have  created  a
greater  social  conscience  in our  universities.
Structural  stresses  and  strains  are  the  insidious  aspect  of
economic  growth  and  development.  Different  persons  are  affected
differently  in  the process.  The  universities  have  an  obligation  not
only to make possible  a greater  fulfillment  of  the  economic  life  for
those who bear the burden  of these changes  but also  to assist  those
102who  gain  from  them.  This  obligation  extends  to  the  people  as
individuals,  to  communities  as groups  of people,  and  to institutions
as instruments  of progress. The need  is  as broad as the problems  of
the  people  who  are  a  part  of  the  changes.  It  involves  the  whole
complex  of  local,  national,  and  international  changes  which  affect
the  environment  of  man  and  his  relationships  to  his  fellow  man.
To  cope  with it in  an effective  manner  demands  dedication  on  the
part  of the university  of  a broad  spectrum  of  its resources  ranging
from the physical  and biological sciences  to the social  sciences  and
humanities.
THE  IMPORTANCE  OF  PUBLIC  AFFAIRS  EDUCATION
The  Scope Report of 1946 leaves little doubt of the responsibility
of  the  land-grant  universities  for  conducting  strong,  purposeful,
forthright  programs  in  the  area  of  public  affairs.  It  defines  this
responsibility  as follows:
From  a  functional  standpoint  this  responsibility  includes:  (1)  the
diffusing  of  information,  (2)  the  development  of  interest  in  and
recognition of significant problems,  (3) the encouragement  of planning
the  best ways and means of  solving the problems  recognized  whether
by  individual  or  group  action,  and  (4)  stimulation  of  appropriate
action  by  people  themselves  in  accordance  with  the  decisions  they
themselves  have  reached.
In  1948  the  Joint  Committee  Report  on  Extension  Programs,
Policies,  and  Goals  recognized  that national  policy  considerations
require increased knowledge,  improved understanding  of the funda-
mental  changes  taking  place  in  our  society,  more  skill  in  decision
making,  new interests  in  group  and  social  problems  as  well  as  in
individual  problems,  and  changes  in  attitudes  and  values  of  the
people.  The report  emphasized,  however,  that the  role  of  the  edu-
cator  is  not  actually  to  produce  these  changes  but  to  create  an
environment  and  experiences  which  are  conducive  to  self  change.
Indeed,  this report  explicitly  recognizes  that the land-grant  univer-
sities  have  a  moral  obligation  to  conduct  meaningful,  effective
programs in the area of public affairs and that merely to disseminate
facts  relating  to  conditions  at  any  point  in  time  is  not  sufficient.
Instead,  the  obligation  extends  to  the  teaching  of  principles  that
relate to the  political, social,  and economic  structure  of our  society,
to  analyses  of the stresses  and  strains to which  it  is subjected,  and
to  alternative  programs  to  cushion  the  shocks.
These  were  bold  steps  forward.  History will  record  the  period
of  the late  1940's  as  one  in which  land-grant  university  leadership
took  giant  strides forward  in its  determination  to  make democracy
a working and effective form of political and social organization  for
103a nation. These  strides represent  a reassertion  of faith in democracy
and in the belief that a functionally  effective  democracy requires  an
intelligent  and  enlightened  citizenry  capable  of  acting  wisely  in
private and in public  affairs.  The  steps  constitute  a further  recogni-
tion  that  citizen  participation  as  well  as  citizen  awareness  and
understanding  of  public  problems  is  prerequisite  to  the  effective
operation  of  the  democratic  processes.  Clearly,  these  giant  steps
opened  wide  the  doors  for  the  land-grant  universities  and  chal-
lenged  them  to  fulfill  their  moral  commitments  to  educate  the
masses.  In  accepting  this  challenge  the  universities  committed
themselves  to  even  wider  public  service.
In view of the strong, forthright, positive legitimization  of public
affairs  education  by  the  land-grant  universities,  the  authors  of  the
reports  referred  to  above  must  be  disillusioned  by  the  rather  in-
effectual  programs  currently  conducted  by  the  land-grant  institu-
tions in  the area of  public affairs.  Certainly,  the  land-grant  univer-
sities  can  take  little  pride  in  the  meager,  irresolute,  vacillating
programs which have been developed.  Few institutions  have moved
ahead  under  their  own  steam  to  develop  creditable  programs  in
public  affairs.  The  resources  which  have  been  devoted  to the  area
by the  extension  services  are  far  too  meager  to  meet  the needs  of
farm  families  in  understanding  and  adjusting  to  the  changing
structure  of  agriculture.  Moreover,  nonfarm  developments  are  of
growing  importance  to  farmers  and  also  require  attention.
Meanwhile  farmers  continue  to be bombarded  from  all sides  by
conflicting  opinions  and advice with regard  to what is  best for their
welfare and the welfare of the nation.  In a few instances  the farmers
themselves  have  voiced  their  disillusionment  with  the  land-grant
universities  and  their  unwillingness  to  reallocate  their  resources
to provide  more  effective  leadership  in  this important  area.
The  reluctance  of the  land-grant  universities  to  develop  strong
programs  of  public  affairs  stems  in  part  from  the  fact  that  the
educational  techniques which  have been  employed by these univer-
sities are  not readily  transferable  to  the  area  of public  affairs.  The
educational programs  of the land-grant universities  "cut their teeth"
on  the belief that one  of the responsibilities  of the universities  was
to make decisions  for their clientele.  Consequently,  the agricultural
extension  services  of  the  nation  developed  around  the  idea  that
extension  was  responsible  for  advising  farmers  concerning  the
varieties  of  crops  to  plant,  the  amounts  of  fertilizers  to  use,  the
production  and marketing practices  to employ, and  related matters.
The  universities were  quick  to see that the area  of public  affairs
104was a controversial  area  and that they  could not in good conscience
plead  for  academic  freedom-freedom  of  intellect,  speech,  and
action-and  at  the  same  time  provide  specific  recommendations
to the people  with regard to the position they should  take on public
affairs issues.  Above all,  the universities  desired,  and found it neces-
sary, to maintain an environment  conducive to free and independent
inquiry  if  they  were  to  perform  the  research  and  education  roles
expected  of  them by the people.  Obviously,  this  was  impossible  if
they  should  become  partisan  in matters  of  public policy.
Research  can  and  does  provide  a  great  deal  of  information
which  is  useful  in  policy  formulation.  Nevertheless,  in  most  in-
stances  educational  programs  in public  affairs  cannot  be postponed
until  the  relevant  facts  become  available.  Frequently,  the  nature
of  the work  is  such  that  the  facts  simply  do  not  exist.  Decisions
must  be  made  before  the  relevant  information  can  be  generated
through  research.  Alternatives  which  have  not  been  tested  and
which  lie  beyond  the  bounds  of  empirical  experience  must  be
examined.  The  world  in  which  we  live  must  be  evaluated  with
respect  to  worlds  that  might  be.  How  individuals  and  groups
would fare in these worlds must be estimated.  Hence,  it is necessary
to hypothesize  and to  theorize with  regard  to possible  outcomes.
Yet,  meaningful  educational  programs  in  public  policy  cannot
be conducted without involving controversial  questions.  The univer-
sities  recognized  that  in  the  development  of  programs  in  public
affairs they are operating in an area characterized  by long-cherished
values  and opinions.  The  very essence  of public  policy  problems  is
conflict,  compromise,  and consent.  Policy  involves  value  judgments
concerning  what is  good and bad  and how society  should  be struc-
tured  and  operated.  These  ideas  are  deep-seated,  conflicting,  and
powerful.  Moreover,  the  hierarchy  of  valuations  differs  among
individuals. Consequently,  given the  same data,  analyses,  and scien-
tific  conclusions,  individuals  and  groups  may  arrive  at  different
decisions  with regard  to which  policies  are desirable.
Indeed,  the very  existence  of these  conflicts  magnifies  the need
for public affairs  education.  The  public affairs  specialist  is  expected
to  deal with  conflicts  in ideas.  The  most  powerful  force  in  coping
with  ideas  is  other  ideas.  In  a  democratic  framework  the  merit  of
ideas  is tested by bringing them  into conflict  with other  ideas where
the  conflicts  can  be  identified  and resolved.  In  this  process  beliefs
with respect to facts  may be  challenged  and subsequently  rejected.
When  this happens,  valuations  based upon  the rejected  beliefs  are
undermined  and  discarded.  Thus,  in  some  instances,  research  and
education  may  lead  to  reconciliation  of  differences  in  valuations.
105Even so,  generally  it will not be possible  to reconcile  differences
in valuations  and  to arrive  at agreement  with  respect  to the  desir-
ability of policies. Seldom,  if ever,  is opinion on policies  unanimous.
Most  policies  are made  possible  only  by the fact  that those  in  the
minority  consent  to  abide  by  the  will  of  the  majority  until  they
can acquire a majority.
The  universities  recognized,  therefore,  that  they  could  not
within the scope  of their normal operations  make  recommendations
with  regard  to  policies.  To  "become  involved"  in  public  affairs
was to run the risk of compromising  academic integrity.  Science  has
not yet developed  a method  of specifying  "best"  policies.  Research
and  education  provide  information  and  techniques  of  analysis  to
aid us  in gaining  an understanding  of the effects  of policies.  People
decide  what  is  best  with  reference  to  their  valuations.  But  the
boundaries  between  education  and  policy  are  not  always  clearly
defined  [1].  The  staffs  of the  universities  are  composed  of people.
These  people-products  of  society-possess  their  own  valuations.
And,  indoctrination  is  difficult,  if  not  impossible,  to  separate  from
education.  Nevertheless,  with  confidence  in  the  academic  integrity
of its -staff, the universities  must accept  this  risk.
A further danger is that the programs  of the universities  may  be
"out  of phase"  with public  opinion at any  point  in time.  The  land-
grant  universities  cannot  assume  inevitable  and  automatic  support
of knowledge.  They must  serve  deservedly  to maintain the support,
confidence,  and public trust vested  in them.  In  any  bold,  imagina-
tive,  forward-looking  program  mistakes-errors  of  commission-are
likely to be made.  But, these will probably be of only passing impor-
tance  in comparison  with the errors  of omission.  To  fail  to develop
programs which  anticipate  the real needs of the  people  is  to under-
mine  the  confidence  of  the  public  in  the  universities.  The  most
favorable  image that the  university  can develop  in the public  mind
is that  of an interested institution  which  is  ready,  willing,  and  able
to  meet the  needs  of  the  people.
IN  CONCLUSION
When the people  of the nation  gave  the universities  the  author-
ity  for  free  and  independent  inquiry,  they  vested  in  these  institu-
tions  the  public trust  to  cope  with  controversial  questions.  They
expect the universities  to serve as  an intellectual haven where  deep-
seated and conflicting points of view may be expressed and debated.
The  universities  are  expected  neither  to  make  nor  to  administer
public  policy.  They  are  expected  to help  people  to understand  the
society  in  which  they  live,  to  analyze  problem  situations  which
106develop  in it, and  to evaluate  alternative  courses  of  action  to  cope
with  these  problems.
A point that has been repeatedly  emphasized  in this  conference
is that in our  society  pressure  groups,  organizations,  and  citizens  as
a whole make  ultimate  decisions  on policy  matters  by voting in  re-
ferendums,  selecting  and electing  candidates,  developing platforms,
and exercising  their voice  through pressure  groups  and  representa-
tives.  Nevertheless,  only  those  who  are  aware  of  the  issues,  the
alternatives,  and  their  consequences  are  in  a  position  to  make  in-
telligent  decisions.  Educational  institutions  have  the  responsibility
of creating  this understanding.  To fail in the development  of strong
educational programs  in public  affairs  is to  leave the uninformed to
the mercy  of  those  who  would  tell them  what  to  do.  In  a  society
which  is  organized  and  operated  through  a  highly  centralized
government,  where  decisions  are  made  by  arbitrary  decree  and
obedience  is  assured  by force,  this procedure  may  be  appropriate.
It  most  certainly  is  not  appropriate  in  a  society  in  which  good
government  depends on the will and wisdom of the people.
In a free and open society  a free and continuous flow of informa-
tion is an essential element of citizen  awareness  of issues and citizen
participation  in  the  democratic  processes.  Such  a  flow  of  informa-
tion  is  not  automatically  achieved.  It  must  be  pursued  resolutely.
The  public  affairs  programs  conducted  by  the  universities  and  by
other institutions will assume even more importance  in this informa-
tional and educational  role  in our society  in the  future.  The accept-
ance  of  this  role  by  the  universities  and  the  effectiveness  with
which  it  is  carried  out  may  well  determine  whether  that  great
social experiment which we have  come to know as American  democ-
racy will reach  the state  of maturity  and fruition which  it  so  richly
deserves.
REFERENCE
1.  W.  R.  Parks,  "Farm  Policy  and  the  Role  of  the  Land-Grant  Institutions,"
Proceedings of  Farm Policy Review  Conference,  Agricultural  Policy  Insti-
tute,  November  1961,  pp.  37-48.
107

RESPONSIBILITIES OF LAND-GRANT UNIVERSITIES IN PUBLIC AFFAIRS EDUCATION

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Research Papers in Economics