The Journal of Extension Goes Electronic: Results of a Subscriber Evaluation Survey

The year 1994 was a landmark one for the Journal of Extension because it was the first year the Journal began publication in an electronic format only. The decision to move to a totally electronic publication was prompted by the following factors:

(a) The Journal's Board of Directors found that it was difficult to produce and distribute an attractive hard copy publication while holding subscription costs at an acceptable level, (b) Subscriptions and related sources of revenue had not covered the costs of publication, and (c) A careful review of ways to increase and supplement operating revenue to assure continued hard copy publication (i.e., selling advertising space, charging reviewer fees, assessing page charges to authors, selling mailing lists, and increasing subscription fees) was found to be inconsistent with the Journal's philosophy or failed to generate income sufficient to merit implementation (Pigg, Summers, Sacks, Daniels, and Carrier, 1994).

In 1992, the Journal's directors authorized a pilot project to test the feasibility of producing and distributing the Journal electronically. The pilot project was conducted in 1993 by the University of Wisconsin-Extension with the assistance of 13 land- grant universities in 12 states. Following a careful study of results of the pilot project and a related evaluation, the Journal's Board of Directors decided to discontinue publishing the Journal in hard copy and to publish the Journal only in electronic form (see Pigg et al., 1994 for a thorough description of the pilot project and evaluation).

Virginia Cooperative Extension (VCE) was selected as the host institution for the first editorial and publication operations of the electronic Journal of Extension (1994-95). VCE editorial staff worked with the University of Wisconsin-Extension pilot project staff to convert the editorial and publication operations of the Journal to a totally electronic format. This process was successfully completed in approximately six months. The Journal became fully operational in its new electronic format in mid-1994.

In its electronic format, the Journal is published six times per year versus four times per year in hard copy. The decision to increase the publication cycle was based on a shorter manuscript submission to publication time because of the electronic format. In hard copy, the manuscript submission to publication time was typically one year or more. In the new electronic format, the manuscript submission to publication time has been shortened to six to eight months.

The electronic Journal can be accessed in two ways: electronic mail (e-mail) and World Wide Web. In the e-mail format, users subscribe to the Journal and receive an announcement of the current issue via e-mail. The e-mail announcement includes the contents of the current Journal issue with abstracts of the articles. Subscribers access full articles by sending requests via e-mail. In the World Wide Web format, users access the JOE home page (http://www.joe.org/)and can "point and click" to retrieve the current issue and articles.

In an effort to gain feedback about the new electronic Journal of Extension, it was decided to conduct a survey of current Journal subscribers about their use and perceived usefulness of the electronic Journal. Results of this survey are presented here, along with conclusions about the electronic Journal.

A survey instrument was developed and e-mailed to all electronic ID's on the Journal subscription list as of September, 1996 (N=2,037 subscribers). Individuals were given the option of responding by e-mail reply, fax, or surface mail. The survey consisted of six items: (a) Extension responsibility, (b) state, (c) last access of the Journal, (d) how the Journal was accessed, (e) the Journal article last accessed, and (f) perceived usefulness of the article in Extension work.

Response to the survey was much greater than anticipated. A total of 534 surveys were returned. The majority (83.5%) were returned by e-mail reply. Of the remaining surveys returned, 10.3% were returned by surface mail and 6.2% were returned by fax.

Of the 486 respondents indicating Extension job responsibilities, 43.6% were agents, 28.6% were specialists, and 11.9% were administrators. Among the 522 respondents reporting state or country of origin, 47 states were represented, as well as the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and seven foreign countries (Newfoundland, Australia, Republic of Korea, New Zealand, Canada, Argentina, and South Africa).

Most respondents last accessed the Journal in 1996 (402 of 418 reporting or 96%). The month most accessed was August, 1996 (42.1%). Of the 468 respondents indicating how they accessed the Journal, 32.9% accessed it through the World Wide Web, 29.5% accessed it through e-mail, 11.1% accessed it through Gopher, and 5.8% accessed it through a state developed local bulletin board. The remaining 20.7% of respondents indicated Other.

There are four sections of the Journal: Feature Articles, Research in Brief, Ideas at Work, and Tools of the Trade. When asked to indicate the type of article last accessed, the majority of respondents indicated accessing Feature Articles (89 of 140 or 63.6%). This was followed by Ideas at Work (14.3%), Tools of the Trade (12.1%), and Research in Brief (10.0%).

For perceived usefulness, the majority of respondents reported that the article they last accessed provided general information on a topic (171 of 406 or 42.1%). Of the remaining respondents, 35.7% indicated that the article provided information they might use in the future, 8.1% indicated that the article provided information they could put into use immediately, and 14% indicated Other.

Finally, an analysis of comments from 203 respondents indicated that 72.9% liked the electronic Journal and used it, 20.2% didn't like it and didn't use it, and 6.9% lacked the capability to use it.

Conversion from hard copy to a totally electronic format for the Journal of Extension represented a major change for Extension users. Results of this subscriber evaluation survey provide useful data for making an initial determination of the extent to which this change was successful. Some conclusions from this study are:

Response to the survey was much greater than anticipated. While we had no idea of the number of responses we would receive, we did not anticipate a response of the magnitude we did receive. Having 534 individuals respond greatly exceeded our expectations and we feel was indicative of the relevance and importance readers feel the electronic Journal is as the official peer reviewed publication of the Cooperative Extension System.

Access of the electronic Journal is equitable. As reported above, 43.6% of the respondents were agents, 28.6% were specialists, and 11.9% were administrators. In addition, 47 states were represented as well as the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and seven foreign countries. One of the concerns expressed as the Journal went electronic was that it would be exclusionary and not be accessible by all in the Extension system. While the electronic format may be somewhat exclusionary in the short run, it would appear from these results that there is more electronic equity in the Extension system than many had realized.

Access of the electronic Journal is achievable. Initially, the electronic Journal was accessible by e-mail only. In 1995, the Journal developed a World Wide Web home page. Throughout the entire electronic conversion process, assistance was offered to all states to develop mechanisms to make the Journal electronically accessible to all Extension personnel. As reported above, 32.9% accessed it through the World Wide Web, 29.5% accessed it through e-mail, 11.1% accessed it through Gopher, and 5.8% accessed it through a state developed local bulletin board. From these results, it would appear that there has been much effort to make the Journal electronically accessible through a variety of means.

The electronic Journal is a useful publication for Extension work. Regardless of the format, the true value of the Journal is in its usefulness to Extension work. Of those answering the survey questions, 35.7% indicated that the article last accessed provided information they might use in the future and 8.1% indicated that the article provided information they could put into use immediately. Additionally, 72.9% indicated that they liked the electronic Journal and used it. Given this, it would appear that the electronic Journal continues to be an effective publication to further the work of Extension.

In its new electronic format, the Journal can better serve the Extension system through publishing articles in a shorter time frame. The relevance of the Journal as a peer reviewed publication is still critically important. However, in its new electronic format with shorter submission to publication times, its significance as a timely communication mechanism becomes more pronounced especially for agents seeking and reporting new ideas for programs. Having almost half of the respondents being agents (43.6%) supports the relevance of the Journal as a timely communication mechanism.

Finally, in its new electronic format, the Journal can better serve the Extension system through providing a more diverse perspective of ideas from increased international exposure. Subscribers from seven foreign countries responded to the survey. In addition, user statistics for 1996 indicated that 17 different countries accessed the Journal. Submission of international manuscripts with relevance to the US Extension system are on the increase. Consequently, the new electronic Journal is enhancing its effectiveness through broadening its diversity of ideas through increased international exposure.

Pigg, K. E., Summers, J. C., Sacks, T. C., Daniels, C., & Carrier, J. (1994). The Journal of Extension goes on line. Columbia, MO: Extension Journal, Inc.