This list presents some of
Gerber's articles on extension, organizations and change. A list of
disciplinary research articles are presented elsewhere.
Gerber, J.M. 1985. Extension
specialists: a self analysis. J. of Extension 23:8-11.
ABSTRACT: To document perceived changes in the role of the Extension specialist, a national survey of state horticulture specialists was conducted in 1983. The majority responding were faculty members within an academic department with more than 10 years experience. The role of the specialist is perceived to be changing dramatically. A majority were spending less time on personal visits, while more time was devoted to group teaching and training local extension staff and others. Specialists reported more time was being spent on research and training graduate students than 10 years earlier. Respondents expected private consultants and others to take on more of the responsibilities formerly carried out by publicity funded Extension in the future.
Gerber, J.M. 1989. Changing
roles within horticultural extension. HortScience 24:416- 418.
ABSTRACT: Change is such
an ingrained precept of extension doctrine that it rarely elicits a discussion.
Yet, the change we generally agree upon is change by others - our clientele or
target audience - not ourselves. This article is about change within a publicly
supported institution, the Cooperative Extension Service. It explores issues of
how technology is developed and transferred, how adults learn, government
service, and the appropriate role of a public learning system.
Gerber, J.M. 1992. Participatory
research and education: science in service to horticultural producers. HortTechnology
2(1):12-15.
ABSTRACT: There has been
a gradual weakening of the extension-research linkage within the U.S. land
grant university system. This article introduces a model for strengthening the
extension-research-producer linkage by focusing on the needs of both
horticultural producers and the general public. It offers an alternative to the
research and extension education paradigm in which knowledge is
"discovered" by university researchers, "transferred"
through extension education, and "put into practice" by producers.
The participatory research and education model changes the largely
unidirectional flow of information from researchers to practitioners, and
modifies current relationships among growers, extension educators, researchers,
agricultural industry representatives, and community leaders. It provides a
model for agricultural research and extension education based on a vision of
partnership that better accommodates the changing needs of individual knowledge
users and society.
Gerber, J.M. 1992. Farmer
participation in research: a model for adaptive research and education. American
Journal of Alternative Agriculture 7(3):21-24
ABSTRACT: Many farmers
view with skepticism the dominant agricultural research and extension education
model, in which new knowledge on farming practices is developed by researchers
and delivered through extension programs. The participatory research and
education model is designed to support a shared vision of research and
education as a learning process among partners working in community. The
participatory model is offered as a way to achieve better communication and
enhanced cooperation among farmers, researchers and extension educators.
Francis, C., J. Gerber, M. Liebman,
and J. Gardner. 1995. Compatibility of food production and protection of
the environment: an international agenda for research and education.
IN: Agriculture and Environment: Bridging Food Production and Environmental
Protection in Developing Countries. Amer. Soc. of Agronomy Special Publication
No. 60.
ABSTRACT:
Research and development programs in both
industrialized and developing countries are dealing with the challenges of
producing adequate food for a growing population while conserving natural
resources for the future. Priority research will focus on ecological approaches
to crop production, breeding crops for stress tolerance, efficient nutrient and
water cycling, crop/animal integration, biological pest management, and impacts
of technology on the environment and society. Classroom programs will
increasingly focus on agroecology and sustainable development. Extension will
pursue a broad, participatory agenda serving the needs of particular
marginalized communities and the public good. Experience will be legitimized
within the academic and policy making communities as an important source of
knowledge. The future organizational culture will encourage participatory
research and education using a wider range of people and resources than at
present, and the sharing of power will lead to greater integration of
activities among groups in agriculture and the larger society. Agricultural
universities and other organizations will need innovative and courageous
leaders to make the changes needed in future programs to benefit society and preserve
a livable environment.
Francis, C., Edwards, C., Gerber,
J., Harwood, R., Keeney, D., Liebhardt, W., Liebman, M. 1995. Impact of
Sustainable Agriculture Programs on U.S. Landgrant Universities. J. of
Sust. Agric. Vol. 5(4):19-33.
ABSTRACT: Emerging
societal concerns about resource use, environmental impact, food safety,
government support programs and economic equity in agriculture haveprompted
U.S. landgrant universities to reevaluate priorities and led to some new
initiatives in sustainable agriculture. Activities include modifications in
classroom curricula and extension program topics, as well as new research
directions. This article describes changes in detail at seven landgrant
universities.
Gerber, J.M. 1997. Rediscovering
the Public Mission of the Land Grant University Through Cooperative Extension.
IN: Visions of American Agriculture, edited by W. Lockeretz. To be published by
Iowa State University Press, Spring, 1997.
ABSTRACT: The land grant university was one of the great experiments of the late 19th and 20th centuries. Born during the turbulent days of the American Civil War, the public university system partially financed through grants of federal lands to the states, contributed to the rapid industrialization of American society and particularly to the development of modern agriculture. The "successes" of the system are legend: increases in production and productivity; increased labor efficiency; inexpensive and plentiful food; and all the rest. The "failures" began to be recognized only more recently: environmental degradation; resource depletion; the disruption of rural social systems; and the disconnection of humans from the sacredness of the earth. Today, the land grant agricultural institution is splintered. Two of its traditional functions, research and extension, are moving apart, fragmenting and dispersing as they attempt to serve separate masters without the vision, purpose, or common stories needed to maintain the wholeness of the organization. This chapter examines the disconnected nature of agricultural research and extension and proposes a renewed commitment to purpose, internal and external connectivity, and serving the public good through the emergence of a new learning organization.