A pilot program based on an action learning model and using a combination of Wisline Web and face-to-face sessions was initiated in June 2001 and is still underway in spring 2002. It serves Family Living Educators in Cooperative Extension. During circle sessions members jointly explore issues involved in selecting and fulfilling various FLE roles in community collaboration that each member brings to the group. Results of this ongoing pilot program show that action learning can be conducted at a distance quite productively for participants who know each other fairly well. Face-to-face sessions are a very valuable complement and are especially important when participants do not know each other before the program.
INTRODUCTION
Problems facing families have grown ever more complex as ethnic backgrounds and family structures have become increasingly diverse and as both communities and the service system have become more and more fragmented. During the 90's the need for service providers to connect and collaborate and to engage and empower citizens, families and communities was recognized across social, economic and environmental sectors. Family Living Educators (FLE) in Wisconsin Cooperative Extension expanded their involvement in a broad array of community partnerships, coalitions and other multi-sector, multi-stakeholder groups. State leadership was provided by the Parent Support and Community Partnerships theme group. This group supported development of resources and training on conducting and evaluating community collaboration.
During this period Family Living Educators gained considerable experience in community collaboration. In many cases they served as initiators and filled key leadership roles in new coalitions. These roles carried new connotations for the mission of Extension to educationally extend the research and resources of the university to citizens and communities. FLE were engaged in community development efforts with organizing and facilitative roles. These responsibilities expanded on roles previously focused on teaching and dissemination of information. As years passed more and more community coalitions, networks, councils and other groupings formed. Funders began to mandate collaboration. Issues of sustainability of coalitions arose. As the programming environment kept changing new demands and opportunities arose for FLE roles in community collaboration. Recently a Family Living/4H Team has conducted a survey of FLP and 4H to assess this changing environment and it's implications for Extension work in collaborative groups addressing children, youth and, or family issues.
Collaboration poses many challenges for FLE practice and may call for new ways of supporting such practice. Each collaboration is dynamic and the context of multiple collaborations is dynamic, thus learning for effective practice must be ongoing. The work of Family Living Educators is currently supported by: access to print resources offering guidelines for community collaboration, by intermittent face-to-face conferences or training sessions, by informal networking with colleagues and others, and, or consultation with state specialists. Distance learning technology has had little application in this arena other than via access to web-based resources. Meanwhile, in the larger context of Cooperative Extension in general, provision of continuing staff development for county faculty and staff has been changing in several ways. A market system allows educators maximum choice in seeking professional development inside and outside Cooperative Extension. In-depth face-to face sessions over 2 and 3 day periods for learning about complex issues and skills have been introduced and well received. And finally, educators are seeking to conserve travel time and expenses for staff development.
Action Learning Circle
The action learning circle approach offers a potential format for supporting and deepening the ongoing learning that is necessary for FLE who are engaged in community collaboration. This approach was originally developed in England by Reg Revans to address issues related to nationalization of coal industry. In the U.S. a subsequent and related model, action science was developed by an MIT/ Harvard team led by Chris Argyris and Donald Schon for use in corporate leadership development.
Both models emphasize a facilitated action-focused group learning process in which each member shares action issues and discovers their own assumptions. The group helps the sharing member define problems and identify solutions. The member then tests solutions & in subsequent sessions shares results while continuing the process.
This basic model was adapted for application in the non-profit arena by Carter McNamara of the Management Assistance Program (MAP), based in Minneapolis, MN in an approach called Leaders Circles. A survey of several thousand non-profit leaders in the Minneapolis area showed that they sought to gain outcomes of problem-solving, learning, networking, information, support, affirmation and renewal from leadership development programming. A subsequent review of peer-based leadership development programs indicated the new design should focus on developing highly reflective skills, e.g. skills in inquiry, keeping mindful of one's environment, and generating actions based on learning. Such skills respond to the conflicts in structures, values and emotions that surround and shape leader's actions in contemporary situations. The action learning approach fit these criteria quite well.
[Home] [Order the Book] [Accessibility Statement]
[Other Distance Education Resources] [The Essential Videoconferencing Guide] [Training for Videoconferencing] [Instructional Design at ICS] [Interactive Services at ICS]
If you have trouble accessing this page, require this information in an alternative format or wish to request a reasonable accommodation because of a disability contact: Rich Berg berg@ics.uwex.edu.
© Copyright 2006 Board of Regents, University of Wisconsin
Last updated May, 2006