The Journal of Extension -

June 2011 // Volume 49 // Number 3 // Editorial // v49-3ed1

  • Issue Contents
  • Previous Article
  • Printable PDF

Linking to JOE Articles

"Linking to JOE Articles," explains the many good reasons why JOE citations should link to the online versions of articles and not to the printable PDF versions. And "June JOE" highlights two Commentaries and four articles on livestock and dairying, barely scratching the surface of another rich issue.

Laura Hoelscher
Editor, Journal of Extension
Purdue University
West Lafayette, Indiana

In my April Editor's Page, I gave you "A Few Words About References" and how important scholarly citations are. In this issue I give you a few more words, this time about how authors should link to JOE articles when they cite them.

The JOE Submission Guidelines specify that authors are to cite relevant JOE articles in the articles they submit to JOE.


It's to showcase JOE, JOE articles, JOE authors, and Extension scholarship in general. We want readers to be aware of all that JOE offers scholars and practitioners.

When you cite a JOE article, you should cite the online version, not the printable PDF version. In other words, your citation to the April 2011 article "Spreading the Word About Extension's Public Value," should contain this URL: <>. Your citation should not contain this URL: <>.


The PDF version of the article is essentially a "dead end." While the PDF URL takes readers to an undoubtedly fine article, that's just about where it ends.

But when you link to the online version of the article, readers get a whole lot more. They get to see the article and the rest of what JOE has to offer, including guidelines, information about JOE, back issues to 1963, the JOE search engine, a link to a printable PDF of the article you're citing, and a link to the National Job Bank. Probably most helpful of all are the "live," searchable keywords that take readers straight to other JOE articles on the subject at hand.

Enough said? I hope so.

June JOE

The June issue starts with two great Commentary articles.

"Ozzie and Harriet Never Were: A Century Review of Family and Consumer Sciences and the Changing American Family" takes advantage of the centennial of North Carolina FCS to challenge FCS professionals—and the rest of us in Extension—to recognize that "Ozzie and Harriet never were a fair representation of family norms" and that "we must accept the variety of family forms and functions so that our services can be of use to all families, especially those that may not fit the ideal American family."

"Strengthening Communities Through an Engaged Citizenry: Opportunities for Extension Programming" argues convincingly that "targeting programmatic resources in ways that would help improve the level and quality of public discourse could leverage the impact of the many Extension programs we conduct in cooperation with our community partners."

There's a Feature on servant leadership, another on broadening Extension's capacity, and several on ways to better serve and more effectively reach our varied clients.

The last Feature and the first three Research in Brief articles focus on livestock and dairying. Interested? Be sure to read "Assessing the Need for an On-Line Educational Module for Volunteer Leaders on Bio-Security in Washington State 4-H Livestock Projects," "Wisconsin Dairy Business and Production Survey: Comparison Between Farms Planning to Expand and Farms Not Planning to Expand," "Challenges and Opportunities for New and Beginning Dairy Producers: A Pennsylvania Perspective," and "Pasture-Based Dairying in Michigan: Farmer Practices and Needs."

Once again, I've barely scratched the surface of a rich, rich issue.