Gratto, Charles P.

English

Research Papers in Economics

PUBLIC  POLICY EDUCATION-A  MODEL
WITH EMPHASIS  ON  HOW
Charles P. Gratto, Extension Economist
Iowa State University
The past proceedings of this conference show that a major com-
mitment to devising  and improving public policy teaching methods
was  made  at  the  first  conference  in  1951  and  has  continued  to
the  present.  Material  presented  here  has  ranged  from  technical
discussions of adult education methods  to  case  studies containing
elements  useful  to those  engaged  in  public  policy education.  The
discussions during more than two decades have been diverse,  rich,
and fruitful.
This  paper  seeks  to  extend  that  commitment  by  taking  an
approach  that  has,  up  to  now,  been  neglected.  An  attempt  will
be made to integrate,  in a single model,  the main features  of more
than twenty years of work in  public policy education.  The reasons
for developing  the  model  are:  (1) to  enlarge  understanding  of the
process of public policy education,  (2)  to facilitate communication
among practitioners,  and (3)  to provide a basis for further develop-
ment  in theory  and practice.
THE ISSUE  CYCLE
Participants  in the resolution of a public issue generally proceed
as follows:
1.  People  become disturbed by some condition.  The concern,
tension,  or  anxiety  aroused  by  the  condition  causes  people  to
search  for some  sort of relief.
2.  The  search  for relief generates  discussion  which  gives  the
issue  a name  and defines it in action terms.  At this stage the issue
is  not  defined  very  scientifically.  Information  about  the  problem
may  consist  largely  of folk  knowledge.  Some  real  or  imagined
adversary  is  often singled  out.
3.  The  cutting  edge  of the  issue  clashes  with  the  realities  of
budget making,  resource limitations,  or the interests of those who
are  either neutral or antagonistic  toward  those with  the problem.
When  the  clash  of interest  is  of sufficient  magnitude,  debate  on
priorities ensues.
4.  The debate  forces a  ranking of priorities  and  sets the  stage
for resolution  of the issue.
405.  During debate,  participants  are  led to a more  realistic  view
of the  problem.  More  objective  and  scientific  knowledge  comes
into play. The structure of the problem is seen more clearly. While
value judgments  may  converge  but  little,  objective  views  of the
issue do converge. The stock of available knowledge is augmented
by research,  or at  least existing  scientific  knowledge  is  carefully
organized  and applied.
6.  Alternatives  are  considered  and the effects  of each are  laid
out.  Participants  weigh  the  effects  of alternatives  on  a  complex
scale having  many  social and economic  dimensions.
7.  A  public choice  is made.
8.  Action  follows.  Action may imply change,  or it may  simply
be  a continuation  of the  status quo.
9.  The action  is evaluated;  its effects  are  measured.  If people
are  "satisfied"  with the  action,  the  issue  recedes.  If they  are not
"satisfied,"  the cycle  resumes and the  process continues until  the
issue is  finally resolved.
The issue  cycle  is  shown  as  a  flow chart  in  Figure  1. Implicit
in the flow chart is some time dimension.  This is usually measured
in  months at least, and  issue cycles  often  span years.
(1) Concerns  (9)  Evaluate
Out
(2) Issue  (8) Action
(3) Conflict  (7) Choice
(4) Rank  priorities  --  (5) Structure  (6)  Alternatives
FIGURE  1.  Issue  cycle  flow chart.
THE INTERVENTION CYCLE
When  it  is  decided  that  a  public  policy  education  program  is
in  order concerning  a  particular  issue,  a  second  time cycle  is  set
up. This  is termed the intervention  cycle.  Figure 2 shows the issue
cycle  and the general form of the intervention cycle.  The interven-
41U 0
Q
ci,
0 r-
(1)
r.
4-j
Q))
u
>1tion  cycle  consists  of four  cells:  (1) preparation,  (2)  resources,
(3) program delivery,  and (4) evaluation.
The cell definitions  are quite straightforward.  The prepanation
cell contains  those activities  which  are  required to  initiate  a pro-
gram.  These include  planning,  study of the issue,  and preparation
of the first  versions  of the teaching  materials.  The  resources  cell
has  to  do  with  the  accumulation  and  deployment  of  teaching
resources-teacher  time,  space,  travel,  materials,  and  coordina-
tion of the program effort.
The  program  cell includes  all  of the  learning  activities  which
impinge on the issue cycle.  A partial listing of such activities  might
include personal contact, conferences,  fairs and exhibits, radio and
television,  meetings,  short  courses,  workshops,  seminars,  and
written communications ranging from leaflets through monographs
and  including  correspondence.  The  evaluation  cell  includes
activities  designed to measure  the  effectiveness  or the  impact  of
the program.
Note that the intervention  cycle,  through the arrows from  the
program cell  to  the  nine  cells  of the  issue cycle,  is  portrayed  as
impinging on all cells in the issue cycle.  Intervention, through pub-
lic  policy  education,  is  possible  at  any  point or cell  in  the  issue
cycle.
In  general,  awareness  education  programs  have  intervened  in
cells: (1) concerns,  (2)  issue, and (3) conflict. Typical policy educa-
tion programs have intervened in cells: (4)  rank priorities, (5) struc-
ture,  and  (6)  alternatives.  Programs  conceived  to  explain  the
options  created  by,  and  the  effects  of,  a public  choice  intervene
in cells:  (7) choice,  (8) action,  and (9)  evaluation.
INTERVENTION  STYLES
Client Versus Issue  Orientation
It  is  useful to  point  out here that each  cell of the  issue cycle
contains  all  of the  people  involved  in  the  problem  at  any  point
in real time. As the issue cycle proceeds, the number and diversity
of people  increases  from  cells  (1) concerns,  through  (7) choice.
Thereafter,  the number  and diversity  probably decline.
This raises crucial questions regarding intervention styles. Pub-
lic  policy  education  can,  at one  extreme,  be  aimed  at a  specific
and  limited  group  of people,  for  example,  commercial  farmers,
local officials,  or community leaders. At the other extreme,  public
policy  education  programs  can  be  oriented  toward  an  issue,  for
example,  environment,  education,  or health.  Then  the  program
43is aimed  at all of the people  in all of the cells in a particular  issue
cycle.
If the program  is  aimed at a particular  set of people  for a long
time, then programs  are called  forth which  are appropriate  to the
issue  cells  in  which  those  people  are found  at  various  points  in
real time.  For one  issue,  a particular  set of people  may be  found
in the concerns  cell, and  intervention  there may  continue  as long
as  they  remain  in  the  issue  cycle.  For  another,  a  particular  set
of  people  may  enter  the  issue  cycle  at  the  priorities-structure-
choice  stage.  For  still  another  issue,  they  may  not  be  involved
until  the  cycle  is  nearly  complete.  In  short,  one  extreme  is  pro-
grams  designed  for,  and  in conjunction  with,  a  narrowly  defined
client  group.  This mode  of program  design  will  be called  "client
oriented."
At  the  opposite  pole  is  issue  orientation.  Here  the  program
is  directed  at  the  issue  and  is  meant  to  serve  all  of the  people
in  a given cell or cells  (sometimes  all the cells)  in  an issue  cycle.
The  program  may  be  directed  at  a  particular  cell  or may  follow
the issue  cycle in  its entirety.  The  issue is  chosen  first;  selection
of clients follows.  This mode of program design  is  termed  "issue
oriented."
While  it  is  not intended  to  debate  here  the  relative  merits  of
the  client-oriented  and  issue-oriented  program  approaches,  it  is
appropriate  to  list  some  of the  advantages  and  disadvantages  of
each.
A client-oriented  program has  as  its  strong point  a  very close
communication  with a given set of people. The practitioner  knows
his students; often he has had or develops a close and long standing
relationship  with  them.  He  has  their  trust.  He  understands  how
they  think and knows  how  they  like to  learn.  On  the minus  side
this close relationship,  by  its nature,  limits the number of persons
who can  be served by  the program.  In addition, the program  may
become  a  captive  of the  client  group  unless  an  unusual  degree
of educational  leadership  is  exercised  by the practitioner.
An  issue-oriented  program  allows  the  practitioner  to  probe
deeply  into  the  issue  and  to  develop  a  detailed  knowledge  and
understanding  of  the  problem.  He  may  become  an  expert  in  a
field  of knowledge  on which  the issue  cycle depends.  He  reaches
large  numbers  of diverse  people  and  groups.  His main  problems
are  to  protect  his  reputation  for  objectivity,  to  deal  effectively
with action-oriented  groups  when he  is  education minded,  and to
44reach  a  constantly  changing  audience,  all  or  part  of which  may
be new to  him.
INTERVENTION  ROLES
Figure 3 shows the several intervention roles which are theoret-
ically possible.
100%  /
Specialist  C
Specialist-Teacher
Teacher-Specialist
Teacher-Resource  broker
Teacher
Process orientation  100%
FIGURE  3.  Roles for intervention.
In  the specialist  role  the professional  views  himself as having
a  main  or  even  total  obligation  to  his  subject  matter  area.  His
other  skills  are  secondary  and  are  developed  only  as  they  are
needed  to promote  his subject matter interests.
The specialist-teacher  role is  familiar to  most extension  work-
ers.  In  this  role  much  attention  is  given  to the  maintenance  of
a  high  degree  of professional  skill,  but  a  substantial  portion  of
the specialist's time  is  also given over to teaching  methods.
A less common role is that in which the specialist's  main inter-
est  is  in  teaching.  His  subject  matter  competency  is  secondary
but  respectable.  He  has  a  strong  professional  interest  in  educa-
tional methods  and actively  seeks to advance  his skill and to con-
tribute systematically  to the stock of knowledge  on methods.
In  the  role  of teacher-resource  broker,  interest  in  methods
dominates.  The  learning  and  problem-solving  process  is  para-
mount,  but  the  role  includes  an  additional  function,  to  assist  in
obtaining  resources  that  will help the process  along.
The final  role  is  that of teacher  only.  Here  the process  is  all.
The  special  competence  hinges  on  helping  groups  understand
themselves and thus  carry on their business  more effectively.
45The role  in which  a specialist casts himself largely  determines
the  style  of intervention  and  so  shapes  the  entire  programming
effort.
For  example,  the  specialist  role  implies  little  in  the  way  of
intervention.  It means going about one's professional activity  and
responding to specific extension teaching requests without actively
seeking  them.  No  organized  extension  teaching  program  is
included  in this  role.
In  the  specialist-teacher  role  active  intervention  is  implied.
Learning  resources  may  be  brought  to  bear  at  any  point  in  the
issue cycle.  Programs may be directed  either to the entire popula-
tion  of a  cell  or  cells  or to  that  part  of a  constant  client  system
which  is  in one or more issue  cycle  cells.
In  the  teacher-specialist  role,  intervention  is  still  implied.  The
program  is  intervention  oriented.  Subject  matter  is  still  specific
but  takes second  place  to learning.
In  the  teacher-resource  broker  role,  intervention  is  aimed  at
groups,  and  the  learning  is  not closely  directed.  Various  outside
resources  are  brought  in  as  the  teacher  or  the  group  perceives
a need  for them.
Finally,  in  the teacher  role,  learning  elements  are  not  strongly
directive  but are  aimed  at helping  the  group understand  itself and
so improve  its performance.  No  precondition  is  placed  in subject
matter, and the group itself is to perceive needs and acquire needed
resources.
LEARNING  ELEMENT  MODEL
Programs  will  vary  according  to:  (1) the  particular  issue  cycle
chosen,  (2)  the client group chosen,  and (3)  the perception  of the
specialist  role,  and  thus  the  choice  of the  model  of intervention
and the  degree of direction  of the learning  process.  However,  all
practitioners  seek  programs  that  are  composed  of effective  pro-
gram  elements.
Interestingly  enough,  the  model  for  an  ideal  learning  element
bears  a  close  resemblance  to  the  issue  cycle-intervention  cycle
model.  The  major  difference  is  in the  time dimension.  The  issue
cycle and the intervention cycle proceed in real time.  The learning
element  proceeds  in  learning time.
In  the  learning  time  dimension,  it  is  usually impossible  to  deal
with the entire  issue cycle.  Ordinarily,  the best that can be done
is to go from  concerns  through alternatives  and back  to concerns.
46Simulation  as  a  teaching  method  can  extend  the  issue  cycle,  in
its  learning  time dimension,  through  choice,  action,  and  evalua-
tion.
Put  another  way,  in  a  learning  situation  there  is  a  person  or
group  of people  who  are  caught  up  in an  issue  cycle.  The  goal
is  to  proceed  as far  as  is  practical  through  the  cells  of the  issue
cycle and  in a manner that increases the stock of useful knowledge
held by  the person  or group.
Any  particular  learning  element  can  be  evaluated  in  terms  of:
(1)  how well  it permits  the  issue cycle  to be traversed by the par-
ticipants,  (2)  how well it allows for articulation  between the teach-
ing resources  and the issue  cycle  in learning time,  and  (3) what it
costs  in relation to  other alternatives.
DISCUSSION
The  model  focuses  on  a  few  key  components.  These  are:  (1)
the  issue  cycle,  (2)  the  intervention  cycle,  (3)  intervention  styles,
and  (4) learning elements.  Because these components are common
to  all  public  policy  education  programs,  they  can  be  used  as  a
basis  for a  checklist  of questions  which  each  practioner  may  ask
himself.
1.  Issue cycle
a.  What is  the  structure  of the issue?
b.  How  far has  the  issue cycle  progressed?
c.  Should  this  issue  cycle  be  added  to,  retained  in,  dropped
from the  list of program concerns?
2.  Intervention  cycle
a.  Where  is intervention  desirable,  appropriate,  possible?
b.  Are sufficient resources available to conduct a program that
will  make a difference?
c.  What is  the best way  to assemble  and deploy  available  re-
sources,  provided  they are sufficient?
d.  Is  the intervention issue  oriented or client oriented?  Which
should it  be?
3.  Intervention  style
a.  What  intervention  style  is  proposed?  Is  it  appropriate  to
the  issue,  the  intervention  cycle,  the  client  system,  the
abilities  and interests  of the practitioner?
47b.  Would  another intervention style  be more  effective  in  this
situation?
4.  Learning elements
a.  Does the design of the learning elements (meetings,  written
material,  media) harmonize  with what is known or has been
decided  about  the  issue  cycle,  the  intervention  cycle,  the
client  system, and  the intervention  style?
b.  Does the  design of learning elements  maximize  the chance
of the  participants  to  explore  the  issue  cycle  within  the
limits of the learning situation?
Every practitioner  (or team of practitioners)  will give  somewhat
different  answers  to  these  questions.  Differences  will  be  due  to
varying  conditions  in  each  state,  experience,  skills,  professional
goals,  available  resources,  the  views  of those  with  whom  he  (or
the team) works,  and similar objective constraints.  Subjective con-
siderations  or value judgments enter  also.
Considerable  variation  in the answers to questions in the check-
list  is  tolerable.  Part of the  difference  would  be due  to objective
factors  beyond  the control of practitioners.  Part of the  difference
would  be  due  to  a  divergence  of  values,  and  that  part  should,
for now,  be isolated  from  a study of methods.
However,  variation  not due to  objective  considerations  or dif-
ferences  in  values should be reduced.  This variation  is mostly due
to  a lack of knowledge  of adult education  methods  in  general  and
public policy education methods in particular.  At this writing there
is  no  measure  of the  variation  due to  the  need to  improve  knowl-
edge  of "how  to teach"  public  policy.
The  author  must  leave  to  each  reader  these  tasks:  (1) testing
his  program  and  perceptions  against  the  model  and  discussion
given  here  (or against a  model of his own  construction  if he  finds
this  model  inadequate),  (2)  finding  which  parts  of  his  program
diverge  from  his  chosen  standard,  (3)  finding  which  parts  of the
divergence  could be remedied  by improving  public policy teaching
methods,  and  (4)  attempting  to  carry  out  the  improvement  and
communicating  the  results  of  such  efforts  to  his  fellow  prac-
titioners.
SUMMARY
It  is possible  to  identify a  sequence  of events  termed  an  issue
cycle.  The progression  involves  the steps taken  by people  as they
resolve  public  issues.  A  public  policy program  is  an  intervention
48intended  to  increase  the  amount of objective  or scientific  knowl-
edge used by the people who are involved  in the issue.  A  program
may be issue oriented or client oriented  and may intervene  at any
point  in  the  issue  cycle.  Intervention  styles  vary  from  directive
to  supportive.  A  program  consists  of  learning  elements  which
should  be designed  to maximize  the use of the resources available
for learning.
The descriptive  model sketched above can be used to generate
a  list  of questions  which  stimulate  the  public  policy  educator  to
look  at his  program  and  how  he  executes  it.  The  answers  given
by  public  policy educators  will  vary  due  to objective  differences
among states,  values of the individuals,  and lack of understanding
of  policy  education  methods.  Variations  due  to  the  first  two
sources  are  unavoidable,  but variation  due  to  lack  of knowledge
of methods  should  be  remedied  by  individual  and group  study of
how  to conduct  public policy  education  programs.
49

PUBLIC POLICY EDUCATION- A MODEL WITH EMPHASIS ON HOW

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Research Papers in Economics