Rural, Urban Clientele Are Linked

Panshin is correct when he writes: "Extension is the statewide, educational outreach arm of the land grant university, of the people's university. It's natural, proper, and necessary that Extension have a meaningful presence in our big cities. Extension is responsible for serving all people of the state." To my mind, what's not correct is the opponents' view that a broader client focus will work to the disadvantage of traditional clientele.

In the first instance, it's not likely that Extension will survive to provide education to any client group unless the political base of Extension is broadened. To be specific, can anyone argue that in the face of growing needs for public sector education by the citizenry in general, the ever smaller farm population can politically support federal, state, and local budgets for a narrowly focused Extension program? I think not. Extension capacity to meet the program needs of our traditional clientele in the long-term is ultimately linked to our ability to provide relevant public sector education for urban-metropolitan audiences.

Second, it's not correct to assume an enhanced capacity within Extension to meet the educational needs of urban- metropolitan audiences creates a programmatic dilemma for Extension. The problems we face as a society in areas like youth, water quality, labor force, safe food, nutrition, and care for the elderly are important to all citizens regardless of place of residence or occupation. Increasing our capacity to develop and deliver public sector educational programs on these critical issues benefits all of our clients-traditional and nontraditional.

Third, a broader Extension audience focus is critical to maintaining the relevance of our land grant universities. Specifically, Extension provides an important, but not exclusive, link between the citizens of the state and the research, resident teaching, and nonformal educational programs of the university. To limit Extension contact to certain geographical and occupational segments of the population denies the excluded groups access to an important mechanism for influencing the overall programmatic thrusts of their land grant university. We shouldn't exclude urban-metropolitan audiences from Extension any more than we should exclude the farm population from the undergraduate education and research conducted by the university. Land grant universities are for all the people in all dimensions of the university-teaching, research, and Extension.