Promising Strategies for Engaging Culturally Diverse Audiences


Published on

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Promising Strategies for Engaging Culturally Diverse Audiences

  1. 1. Presented by Jean T. Berger Associate Professor Department of Youth Development
  2. 2. Wisconsin demographics  Comparing statistics from 2000 Census results to US Census Bureau 2009 population estimates  for more information  Most recently updated in August, 2010  Provides information for each state, compared to total United States Population, as well as demographics for each county within a state
  3. 3. On July 1, 2009, there were estimated to be 5,654,774 people living in the state 5.4% Increase in total population since 2000 census 6.4% - under 5 years old 23.2% - under 18 years old 13.5% - 65 years and older 50.3% - female
  4. 4. What does Wisconsin look like?  White persons (2009)  89.4% of total population  (Up from 88.9% of total in 2000)  84.6% were whites reporting as not Hispanic
  5. 5. Wisconsin’s Racial minorities  Black persons (2009)  6.2% of total population  (up from 5.7% in 2000)  Asian persons (2009)  2.2% of total population  (up from 1.7% in 2000)  American Indian and Alaskan native persons (2009)  1% of total population  (no significant change)
  6. 6. Percent of change (Wisconsin 2000 to 2009)  White persons +5.9%  African American or Black persons +15.1%  American Indian and Alaskan native+19.1%  Asian persons +40.1%
  7. 7. Hispanic or Latino Ethnicity  In 2000, there were 192,921 persons reporting to be Hispanic or Latino (includes all races)  3.6% of total Wisconsin population in 2000 census  In 2009, the Hispanic or Latino population was projected at 5.3%, or approximately 299, 703  Percent of change was an increase of 55.3%
  8. 8. Find your local data   Provides a census summary for all states and all counties within states (2009 data)  Compares state’s data to the total US population  Compares county’s data to that of their state  Offers information for cities with populations of greater than 25,000 (2006 data) compared to that of the state
  9. 9. Interpret your data  Wisconsin Applied Population Laboratory   Contact Dan Verhoff, Director, for specific project needs  Source for estimates and projections of subset population data  Valuable information may have already been compiled…  Hispanic Chartbook (2000 census data)  Hmong Chartbook (2000 census data)
  10. 10. Developing Multicultural Understanding Work Team  Mission Statement:  To Develop understanding, inclusion, and acceptance through education, engagement, and celebration of all people.  Goals  To develop resources that support UW-Extension work with multicultural communities and issues  To expand the cultural context in which Youth Development work is accomplished (community club programs & outreach efforts)
  11. 11. DMU research subcommittee  Jean Berger, Marathon County  Lori Laberee, Sawyer County  Monica Lobenstein, Jackson County  Lesly Scott, Dane County  Tim Talen, State Specialist
  12. 12. What is the question?  We want to know “what works” in developing Extension programming that meets the needs of culturally diverse populations  Developing relationships  Marketing  Delivering programs  Evaluating  Sustainability
  13. 13. Sources of Information  O’Connor, C.; Small, S.A.; Cooney, S. M., (2007). Culturally Appropriate Programming: What do we know about evidence-based programs for culturally and ethnically diverse youth and their families? What Wroks, Wisconsin Research to Practice Series, 1. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin- Madison/Extension.  Concern about the cultural appropriateness of programs for youth and families from various cultural, racial, and ethnic backgrounds.
  14. 14. Sources of Information  Hobbs, B. (2008). Keys to Effective Extension Programs with Latino Audiences, Oregon State University Extension Service.  Hobbs, B.; Sawer, B. (2009). Findings from the first ten years of the Oregon 4-H Latino Outreach Project, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR.  Review of Oregon’s 4-H Outreach experience reveals some key elements of effective program design and implementation.
  15. 15. Sources of Information  Perkins, D.F.; Borden, L.M.; Villarrel, F.A.; Carlton- Hug, A.; Stone, M.R. and Keith, J.G. (2007). Participation in Structured Youth Programs: Why Ethnic Minority Urban Youth Choose to Participate-or Not to Participate. Youth & Society 2007; 38; 420 (  Article reports the findings from a Michigan study that examines urban, ethnic minority youth participation in youth programs (structured out-of-school experiences within a youth-serving organization.)
  16. 16. Sources of Information  Guion, L.A.; Chattaraj, S.; Sullivan Lytle, S. (2004). Strengthening Programs to Reach Diverse Audiences: A Curriculum to Planning and Implementing Extension Programs for Ethnically Diverse Audiences. University of Florida, Gainsville. Journal of Extension, Volume 42, Number 1 - February 2004.  Article describing theoretical framework and usage of “Strengthening Programs to Reach Diverse Audiences” curriculum. Curriculum is available online form University of Florida and accepted into the National 4-H Collection of Juried Experiential YD Curricula.
  17. 17. Setting the stage…  Extension’s Organizational Culture  Extension across the country recognizes the need for outreach  The roots of Extension programs are often grounded in a White/European American culture and belief system  Extension professionals often benefit from professional development designed to increase their background in specific cultures and multicultural sensitivity
  18. 18. Setting the stage…  Extension Leadership must make a long term commitment to serve the new audience…starting with the “non-discrimination statement” and continuing to result in valuable programming for real people!  Commitment at BOTH state and county level  Sustainability beyond an initial grant period  Professional development for staff  Specialist support  Translation of materials into multiple languages
  19. 19. Setting the stage…  Educator/Agent Outreach is a personal and professional commitment  Long term commitment  Respect new ways of “doing”  Programs cannot be wholly turned over to outreach staff  Cultural communities will associate the program with people, not an organization  May require giving something else up
  20. 20. Setting the stage…  Existing Extension Audience must support the new efforts (especially in youth development and similar programs where strong partnerships already exist).  Raise awareness before moving toward outreach  Work together to identify outreach strategies  Encourage and acknowledge partnership opportunities  You may encounter opposition
  21. 21. 1. Identify a program where you have attempted to reach out to a new audience (preferably a new culture) 2. What were two or three key factors to your success?
  22. 22. Strategies for effective implementation gained from the Oregon Latino perspective And echoed in the other literature overall…
  23. 23. Key Findings  Programs respect and reinforce the cultural identity of participants – develop cultural pride  Programs are contextual – based in the reality of the lives of participants  Programs set high expectations and help participants to achieve their goals  Programs reinforce existing social capitol of participants
  24. 24. Key Findings, continued…  Participants are involved in active learning and are making real contributions  Programs provide opportunities to learn in affinity groups – and to expand to multicultural experiences  In the case of youth programs, parent involvement is encouraged
  25. 25. Tools Developed  Surveys for Educators and Community partners were developed by the DMU research team  Questions assess:  Establishing the need for the program  Describing the targeted audience  Partnerships that supported success  Relationships within the cultural community  Evolution of the program over time  Key successes & challenges
  26. 26. Preliminary findings from existing programs  Responses from Marathon, Racine & Waushara Counties – all related to youth development  3 Latino programs, 1 Hmong program  Needs assessment  Census data  Community surveys (United Way, regional needs assessments, etc.)  4-H Expansion & Review discussions  Coalition identified needs  Community scans, and personal observations
  27. 27. Preliminary findings from educators  What Key actions helped to initiate the program?  Commitment by state and local educators  Grant funding  CYFAR initiatives  VISTA support  United Way Support
  28. 28. Relationships and connections instrumental to the program  School District connections – administration, teachers, ESL programs, teacher’s aides, and custodians  Religious organizations – Latino connections to Catholic churches, Hmong connections to Hmong congregations  Community coalitions – migrant groups, women’s groups, etc.  4-H Leaders Federation  CYFAR and VISTA
  29. 29. What prompted partners to choose to participate?  Leaders in Hispanic community believe that youth and families need more opportunities to learn English, learn skills, be recognized positively within larger community  Schools have limited resources to meet needs of youth in ESL programs  Need to develop more parental relationships  Need to build trust with parents (a youth program could do this)  Librarian noted that the Hispanic population is using the building and services a lot, but that language barriers with adults has caused caution interacting with them (Waushara)
  30. 30. How is this work different because of the new audience focus?  Trust Building comes first  Uncommon skills are needed (language, cultural understanding  Needed to learn the priorities of the cultural community (both parents and youth)  How was timeline affected?  Time consuming – building coalitions and partnerships is a long term goal and isn’t realized instantly or easily  This work takes YEARS to accomplish goals – exponentially longer than traditional efforts  Changes in personnel greatly add to the time needed for completion
  31. 31. How did the program evolve?  The initial efforts often grew to replication or expansion of program ideas (Summer clubs grew to afterschool)  New ideas were added at the request of participants or partners (soccer as a new vehicle to keep kids interested)  New partnerships formed (Literacy Council)  New ways of identifying participants (Hmong youth eventually self selected after initial identification by School Counselors)
  32. 32. What resources did both sides bring to the table?  Facilitation by faculty member  Financial support and training for hired staff  Needs assessment  Food & supplies needed for programs  Partners organized and communicated with families  Organized family nights  Called participants to remind them of programs  Answered questions in school settings, etc.
  33. 33. Challenges and Barriers identified by educators  Language skills  Building Trust  Changes in personnel, first person hired wasn’t always the best fit for the program  Scheduling with participants – need for calls & reminders  Transportation issues  Community distrust (police officer targeting Hispanic drivers)  Better planning and evaluation early on would lead to stronger evaluation & results at later stages of the project
  34. 34. Challenges and barriers identified by program partners  Building trust – identified in all programs  This process was alleviated over time  Partners identified the sincere work of Extension personnel  Programs were held in safe environments (schools, libraries, churches)  Childcare was provided in some cases  Adult programs were held in conjunction with youth programs  Transportation was offered
  35. 35. Greatest successes identified by educators  Connections and relationships built in the cultural communities  Building recognition of value of UW-Extension in this work  Positive mentoring opportunities  Impacting people’s lives by building skills and confidence  Strengthening relationships with partners (schools, coalitions, etc.)  Raising the status of the cultural community within the greater community (empty bowls, county fair, etc.)
  36. 36. Greatest successes identified by partners  An opportunity to allow the Hispanic families to be seen in a positive light in the community – no longer “invisible” (Marathon – Latino)  Increase in parental participation in these and other school activities (Racine)  Youth are eager to participate and enjoy the programs (several programs)  New skills learned by youth – including community service opportunities (several programs)  Attachment to a community organization (Marathon)
  37. 37. Promising practices identified by educators  #1 answer was incorporating bi-lingual/bi-cultural person (volunteer or staff) into the process  Constant respectful conversation and problem solving to improve program – listening comes first!  Identifying staff whose main focus was this one project  Patience and polite persistence
  38. 38. Promising practices identified by partners  Trust and relationship building that the program fostered  Inviting all kids to participate (not just the cultural community kids in afterschool – Waushara and Marathon Hmong programs)  Strong support for programs coming from school personnel and afterschool coordinators  Allowing persons within the cultural community to assume leadership and responsibility for leading the program.
  39. 39. In the future, what would you do differently (educators)  Include in the plan a person whose main focus was this single program  Take a longer view of the time it will take to reach goals  Relish smaller successes…they are really BIG accomplishments!
  40. 40. What would you do differently – partner’s responses  Expand the program to higher grade levels so this safety net continues as youth move on to other buildings (Racine)  Continue the funding so that the program was sustainable (Marathon Hmong)  Include teens to participate as program planners and partners in program delivery
  41. 41. What do these preliminary findings mean for the expansion of this study? What can they mean for the future of Extension work in Wisconsin?
  42. 42. We need your input to have as complete of a document as possible Are you working on an Extension program that reaches out to diverse audiences? Can you take 30 to 40 minutes to talk to one of our research team members – or can you complete a survey form Do you have a partner or several partners from the targeted community that could also contribute?
  43. 43. Does this resonate with your work?  What can you take from today to improve your opportunities for successful programming in the future?  What are we missing? Should we be looking for additional information?  What is the best way to share this information with you in the future?
  44. 44. To access this information  Web based access to power point slides, research citations, and the tools currently being used by the DMU team are available following the conference
  45. 45. Jean T. Berger Marathon County 4-H Youth Development Agent 715-261-1243