Traditional agent in-service formats involving in-person group training are resource intensive requiring travel time and travel costs for agents in addition to actual program session attendance. For large states in particular, this could be a burden both for agents and county budgets as well as require agents to be selective in determining in-service attendance for any given year.
This session will be a panel presentation addressing three alternative formats for agents in-service: (1) Mail correspondence self-study, both electronic and traditional hard copy formats, (2) List Serve Format with Scheduled Content Postings, and (3) Agent/Specialist Conference Through Video. All three methods have been used and demonstrated to not only be effective, but also acceptable and preferred by agents as alternatives to traditional in-service formats.
Two formats of mail correspondence self-study were used. Both were similar but used different delivery methods: traditional mail and electronic mail. A current subject matter reference was placed in participating counties to help agents become more familiar with it as well as how it might be used in responding to consumer phone inquiries. Two mailings of five case studies each were prepared with agents to respond using the reference provided. Evaluations indicated that some agents might not have attended a traditional in-service on the topic, but found the self-study approach preferable and convenient, plus their county reference library was upgraded in the process.
The second approach consisted of a quasi in-service electronic mail chat group activated prior to and during county fair season to handle 4-H clothing project guidelines, questions and clarifications. Each week, one project was addressed in depth with specific requirements shared. Agents were given a weekly schedule identifying the project for the week. Questions or issues that surfaced on a regular basis that related to each project were discussed with some explanation to help county agents understand the philosophical base for the response or guideline. Agents submitted questions to the list serve/mail chat group or any clothing project/program question at any time. All agents on the list serve received all questions and all responses from the state level clothing specialist and extension associates. Agents who had solved or successfully dealt with issues posted shared their experiences and information with others.
The final in-service alternative involved a "video conference" designed to help familiarize agent with a specialized topic focusing on points to emphasize with clientele, materials available from the state office on loan, how they might be requested as well as incorporated into county programming. The video was carefully designed so that it could not be shown to clientele groups in place of agent presentations.