The Journal of Extension -

December 2011 // Volume 49 // Number 6 // Commentary // 6COM1

Commentaries conform to JOE submission standards and provide an opportunity for Extension professionals to exchange perspectives and ideas.

Extension Is Unpopular—On the Internet

The first Extension-authored link in Google Search (2011a) for "how to garden" was ranked an abysmal 82nd. Worse, Internet users selected the top-ranked site significantly more often than they selected the second-ranked one, and they rarely selected any site ranked lower than #10 (Granka, Joachims, & Gay, 2004). An Extension-commissioned poll in Alaska found only 16% of the "Net Generation" had even heard of Extension, compared with 73% of those 60 years or older (Dittman Research & Communications Corporation, 2010). Extension's websites are so unpopular, those who seek research-based, unbiased information will likely not find it. This article proposes solutions.

Heidi B. Rader
Tribes Extension Program Director
Assistant Professor
University of Alaska Cooperative Extension Service
Fairbanks, Alaska

The Nation Is Growing Online—Is Extension?

From 1997 to 2003, the number of U.S. households with an Internet connection increased from 19% to 55% (U.S. Department of Commerce, 2004). In 2003, 77% of those Internet users searched for product or service information, and 36% for information about government services or agencies. A University of Alaska Fairbanks Cooperative Extension Service (UAF CES) commissioned poll found that 88% of Alaskans used the Internet and that the Internet was the most preferred method of getting information from Extension (Dittman Research & Communications Corporation, 2010). Nearly 15 years ago Tennessen, PonTell, Romine, and Motheral (1997) suggested that the Internet and computers could usurp the County Extension car in importance. Based on the poor ranking of Extension-authored sites in Google Search results (2011a, 2011b) and personal observations, Extension has placed little import on the Internet as an outreach vehicle.

Searching for Extension

As a service institution tasked with providing research-based information to the public, Extension should author websites with information that is easy to find, research based, and is not ad driven. Morville and Callender (2010) elucidated the sadness and joys of searching on the Internet:

Every increase in search costs diminishes our quality of life. . . . Often we surrender. We simply fail to search. We live uninformed without seeing what we miss, for the cost of the unsearched is an unseen drag on commerce and culture, as invisible as it is incalculable. . . . It doesn't have to be this way. When we design with our users in mind, search can be an engine of inspiration and joy. We find what we want. We discover what we need. (p. 19)

In the U.S., between 2004 and 2010, searches for "extension service" declined, while searches for "how to garden" increased every year (Figure 1, Google Trends, 2011). In April 2010, "how to garden" was searched more than five times as frequently as "extension service." Overall, searches for "extension service" have declined by more than 50% from 2004 to 2010. Now more than ever, Extension needs to focus on searchable content rather than on "Extension."

Figure 1.
Search Volume of "How to Garden" Compared with "Extension Service"1

Search Volume Index

1 Relative search volume of "how to garden" (light grey) is compared with "extension service" (dark grey) in the United States from 2004 to 2010. The scale is based on the average traffic of "extension service" and is a relative, not fixed volume (Google Trends, 2011).


The solution to this confusing maze, created by 986 Extension sites, could have been eXtension <>, but it's not. I searched "how to garden in Alaska" within extension, and the top search result was a directory for Master Gardener Coordinators; seven out of 10 links advertised events that occurred in the past. The only relevance to Alaska was the time zone. Browsing eXtension was equally unrewarding. After four clicks I found a general gardening article that lacked specificity to Alaska. For a website with information about everything, everywhere, eXtension should have an impeccable search function and information worth searching for.

It's a Popularity Contest

In Alaska, 73% of those 60 and older had heard of Extension, compared with only 16% of survey participants 18 to 29 years old (Dittman Research & Communications Corporation, 2010). As a member of the latter demographic, this explains why, at a dinner party with my peers, at least eight out of 10 people I meet will get a 15-minute monologue on the Land Grant Mission in response to the question: "What do you do?" Because targeted searches for Extension have decreased and because of a lack of awareness of Extension, Extension must drive traffic to their sites by being popular. And by the way, in my opinion, this won't happen by branding the tripartite mission as Abrams, Meyers, Irani, and Baker (2010) recently proposed. Not only is the idea dated (the majority of Abrams et al. citations were at least 10 years old), but "tripartite" is also unlikely to become a popular search term anytime soon.

A study showed that people using an Internet Search Engine visually fixated on links ranked one and two, and they clicked substantially more often on link number one compared with number two (Granka, Joachims, & Gay, 2004). Visual fixation declined more with links ranked three and below and even more with links ranked 10 and below (the next page of search results). I Google searched "how to garden," and the first Extension-authored site was ranked number 82. From the perspective of an Internet searcher, with such a poor ranking, the site may as well not exist. Extension-authored sites are overshadowed by more popular, ad-driven, garden websites such as The Helpful Gardener <> and Garden Guides <>. It's a popularity contest, and Extension is the most nerdish kid in school.

How Do You Design a Website About Everything, Everywhere?

For an organization that is everywhere (in the U.S.) and provides information on just about everything, building a navigable website is a challenge. A small, simple website is "infinitely better" than a "giant contraption with old content and broken links (Lynch & Horton, 2009, Chapter 1). According to Google Custom Extension Search <>, there are 986 Cooperative Extension Sites. That's nearly 20 websites for each state. Cram (2011) blames a lack of funding, political infighting, and a decentralized operating model for subpar, higher-education websites. Extension websites should try hard not to mimic the complexity of their organizational structure. Web-style dictates that design should be simple and help users find important and relevant information easily (Lynch & Horton, 2009, Chapter 2). Building an internal and an external site can help simplify the public persona of Extension. When clients search for information on gardening, canning, or energy, they won't have to wade through information on strategic plans, annual report forms, or internal policies.

Master Gardeners Can Help

When I Google searched (2011b) "gardening in Alaska," a link authored by Garden Guides was ranked third (2011b). I clicked on it and instantly had over 10 relevant articles about gardening in Alaska. Then I clicked on "When to Start Planting a Garden in Alaska." This particular article was written by a woman from Ohio who was a travel agent and cruise school instructor (Mitchell, 2011). Based on a 300-word essay and a résumé, Garden Guides <> hires freelance writers for $15 an article (Demand Media Studios, 2011). They are capitalizing on the dearth of easily accessible gardening information online—and making a tidy profit by selling targeted online advertising through Demand Media.™ Extension could use the army of Master Gardener volunteers it's educated (17,269 between in 1998 and 1999, according to McAleer, 2005) to build high-quality, current, research-based, gardening content for the Internet.

Evaluation of Impact on the Internet

Extension is accounts for public funding by documenting its impact on the public. The June 2009 issue of the Journal of Extension (nearly 30 articles) was dedicated to evaluation methods (Hoelscher, 2009), for example: the 360-degree, tri-fold, qualitative, PRKC, and ServSafe™ methods (Boyer, Benson, Boyd, Forrester, Franz, Gerht, Pelland, & Roan, 2009).

A simpler way of documenting program impact, at least for Internet programs, is Google Analytics (2011). Google Analytics tracks the number of unique visits, page visits, percent new visits, and geographic location of visits. This information is invaluable for program evaluation and planning. Extension should make Google Analytics available to administrators, faculty, and staff for reporting purposes. If administrators and funders value this type of impact, it will motivate Extension faculty to develop high-quality content for the Internet.

Top 10 Ways Extension Can Have More Impact on the Internet

  1. Structure public websites based on stakeholder needs, not on the organizational structure of Extension itself.

  2. Develop internal websites for Extension staff and faculty.

  3. Collaborate statewide on websites to limit inter-county competition.

  4. Fund development and maintenance of websites.

  5. Hire new Extension faculty and staff with expertise in Web-based media and technology.

  6. Make Google Analytics available to faculty and staff so they can document their own impact on the Internet.

  7. Encourage staff, faculty, and volunteers to write fewer articles, and ones of higher quality, that reflect current interests of clients. Use Google Trends to identify what clients are looking for.

  8. Write content for the Web in Web-style, not print-style. Include more color photos and bullet points, and use a Web-style guide such as:

  9. Strategically use key words, links to other sites, and content to improve rank in Google Search.

  10. Help users find relevant and important information within Extension sites by design and by improving search functions.


Before the Internet, a decentralized model worked well for Extension; now a centralized model could improve efficiency, quality, and searchability of Extension websites. The value of hands-on Extension workshops is inarguable, but not so for individual consultations. Only 8% of survey respondents in Alaska chose individual consultations as one of two preferred ways of getting information from Extension (Dittman Research & Communications Corporation, 2010), but it is likely the most costly outreach method for Extension.

In order for Extension to remain relevant to an online public, it should allocate people, time, and money to developing and maintaining Internet content. The public needs and wants relevant, unbiased, research-based information online. Surely a publicly-funded institution (nearly 5 billion in 2007 from NIFA alone; USDA, 2008) such as Extension can compete with websites that lack public funding and are known to be inaccurate, biased, and profit driven.


Abrams, K., Meyers, C., Irani, T., & Baker, L. (2010). Branding the Land Grant University: Stakeholders' awareness and perceptions of the tripartite mission. Journal of Extension [On-line], 48(6) Article 6FEA9. Available at:

Boyer, R., Benson, M., Boyd, H., Forrester, M., Franz, N., Gerht, P., Pelland, P., & Roan, K. (2009. Enhancing accountability: ServSafe™ impact template delivers. Journal of Extension [On-line] 47(3) Article 3TOT5. Available at:

Cram, J. (2010, October 12). Why are colleges flunking Web Strategy 101? [Web log post]. Retrieved from:

Demand Media Studios. (2011). Let's get your application started [Online form]. Retrieved from:

Dittman Research & Communications Corporation. (2010). Public awareness, opinion, and perceptions of UAF Cooperative Extension Service. Retrieved from:

Google. (2010). The 1000 most-visited sites on the Web. Doubleclick ad Planner. Retrieved from:

Google Analytics. (2011). Retrieved from:

Google Search. (2011a). Search term: how to garden. Retrieved from:

Google Search. (2011b). Search term: gardening in Alaska. Retrieved from

Google Trends (2011). Search Terms: how to garden, extension service (ranked by how to garden); United States, All regions, All years. master gardener, Filter: Web search, united states, all subregions, Retrieved from:

Granka, L. A., Joachims, T., & Gay, G. (2004). Eye tracking analysis of user behavior in WWW search. Retrieved from:

Hoelscher, L. (Ed.). (2009). June JOE. Journal of Extension, 47(4). Available at:

Kluchinski, D., Kinsey, J., Komar, S.J., & McDonnell, J. (2010). Use of Web 2.0 technologies by Agricultural and Natural Resource Management Extension Professionals in New Jersey. Journal of NACAA. 3(1). Retrieved from:

Lynch, P. J., & Horton, S. (2009). Chapter 1: Process, general advice about running Web projects, Small is good (para. 3). In Web Style Guide 3rd edition. Retrieved from:

Lynch, P. J., & Horton, S. (2009). Chapter 2: Universal usability, Sidebar: The development cycle, Principle three: Simple and intuitive use (para. 4). In Web Style Guide 3rd edition. Retrieved from:

McAleer, P. (2005). A National Survey of Master Gardener Volunteer Programs. Retrieved from:

Mitchell, S. (2011). Re: When to Start Planting a Garden in Alaska. Retrieved from:

Morville, P., & Callender, J. (2010). Search patterns. Sebastopol,Canada: O'reilly Meidia, Inc. Media.

Tennessen, D. J., PonTell, S., Romine, V., & Motheral, S. W. (1997). Opportunities for Cooperative Extension and local communities in the Information Age. Journal of Extension [On-line], 35(5) Article 5COM1. Available at:

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Cooperative State Research Education and Extension Service, Office of Planning and Accountability. (2008). State accomplishments for the Formula Grants 2007 Annual Report. Retrieved from:

U.S. Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration, National Telecommunications and Information Administration. (2004). A Nation Online: Entering the Broadband Age. Retrieved from:


Commentary Discussion

Views expressed in this Commentary and the accompanying discussion forum do not necessarily reflect those of the Extension Journal Inc. board of directors or the Journal of Extension editor. Journal of Extension Commentary discussion forums remain open through two issues of the journal. Anonymous comments are not permitted. All comments are screened before publication for derogatory content—disagreement is acceptable, but comments should reflect a respectful exchange about the relevant issue(s).

I got a different result when I put terms into Google Trends. Also, "Cooperative Extension" is more common than "Extension Service" in some places.

"how to garden" is such a vague search that I expect more people are searching for something more specific, e.g., I used "how to grow tomatoes". I'm sure the sum of all those gardening queries is bigger than searching for extension but that's comparing a search for an organization with a content search.

When I type
how to garden Alaska
into, Alaska Master Gardeners is the second search result.

Alaska Master Gardeners is the top result for
gardening in Alaska
Submitted On: 12/19/2011
Redid the Google Trends without quotation marks and I see that makes a big difference in the results.
Submitted On: 12/19/2011

Well Written and Relevant

Jeff Gillman
We just don't do a good job of marketing ourselves.

My question is, why can't we use the publishers and marketing people who are already out there and doing a great job for the for-profit organizations?

Maybe it's time that we started concentrating our efforts into getting our work published in already existing magazines, newspapers, etc. and then including the word "extension" in our byline instead of publishing in extension-only locations where our information is likely to get overlooked.

Or maybe we need to advertise. Why don't we take out full page ads in gardening magazines or newspapers? If we don't call attention to ourselves no-one else will do it for us.
Submitted On: 12/19/2011

Extension...Lost or Found

Roger Merchant
As an early-boomer adapting new media, this article challenged me to rethink how I provide - what I provde. Really, how public-consumer-customer oriented am I, are we? The eExtension example surely capstones some mistaken presumptions about "Extension being with it in the info-intensive 21st Century". How we love to extoll cherished new/old program concepts-labels, as we blithely market to the public via our stogey public-research institution mission. Indeed we need to be found, we offer value. Yet being so lost and wrapped up in our Extension mystique, we will never be found by the new changing base of customers with changed customs about finding what they want that will fullfill their needs.

And don't get me started on diversions brought on by our new, lofty academic-centricity where first priority faculty questions are more often around "how will this action impact my performance and tenure profile", and any questions about "how our actions will bear up as beneficial impacts for our external customers, the public(s) we serve"; well, it is my observation and opinion that consideration to Extension's public consumer base appears to be disappearing in the rear view mirror.

Wasn't it our job to understand people, the public(s), we are working with; to interact and probe to grasp what they need as well as what tools might work best for them to fullfill those needs; to then work with them to facilitate and help them access the needed information and learning that addresses their customs and realities?

If we are simply enamored with throwing all of our information and ppt's up on a website and that's it, then maybe we have become lodged in Naisbitt's critique in High Tech-High Touch where "technology becomes the Tin God of the 21st Century", because we have somehow forgotten the fundamental truth that what we, Extension, are about working with and understanding people, first and foremost.
Submitted On: 12/21/2011

It isn't aways as it seems

Dan Cotton
As I think about this I am reminded of the old saying “the world isn’t always as it seems.” Recently, I was working with a group wanting to include eXtension in a NIFA competitive grant program and when they questioned whether their content would be discoverable I suggested they search for topical information found at eXtension. The examples used were “pasture management” and “families and fitness.” They discovered eXtension content on the first page of search results in both cases and they found resources from member institutions, as well. While such results can’t be guaranteed every time the odds of being discovered increase when incorporating popular keywords in content, avoid duplicating content, incorporate links to related subject matter resources, and place links to the page on high traffic web sites, i.e., Wikipedia, other subject matter web sites (including member institution sites), social media…basically any high traffic areas where people go to find information. Of course, we will remain to some extent at the mercy and mystery of today’s search engines, but we should always try to increase our chances of being found. Still, the information has to be available or you certainly won’t be found, which is why we encourage people to join Communities of Practice and contribute. “Knowing your audience” is key and making sure to package content in formats people expect it, and engaging people through the use of social media will be key. There is great opportunity to make eXtension the way it needs to be if people join, get involved and exercise their voice.
Submitted On: 01/23/2012


Heidi Rader
I’m no expert on eXtension, but when I first heard of the initiative, I assumed that it would be a one stop shopping site where I could easily find research based information from Extension Services nationwide. From what I know now, I think the top priority is professional development—especially webinars. While professional development is meritorious, I feel that I have ample opportunity in the form of conferences and professional organizations for professional development. What I don’t have is one website where I can easily find the research based information that I’m looking for.

I made the point in this article that popularity matters. Also important, is that after you click on a website, you find the answer you were looking for. To evaluate this aspect of a website—you can look at the number of repeat visitors and the time they spend on the site. I already know about so I can navigate directly there if I think that it will have the answer I’m looking for. Often, I’m looking for information that is relevant to Alaska—even specific regions in Alaska. When I search for “Alaska + anything” on, what comes up is the time that a webinar will happen in Alaska. Would it be possible for eXtension to synthesize local information and nation-wide information? For instance, on one website, I would like to find information that is specific for my location, such as recommended vegetable and flower varieties, plus general information on starting seeds that would apply anywhere. This may be a big challenge for a national website, and I wonder if it’s better to have 50+ high quality state websites rather than one national website.

Here are my suggestions for

1. Design it for someone who has never heard of the Cooperative Extension Service.
2. Change the name. The Cooperative State Research Education and Extension Service changed theirs to the National Institute of Food and Agriculture—why can’t eXtenion be “ :everyday, everywhere” or something that has intrinsic meaning? That will speak more to those unfamiliar with Extension who may think that “extension” means the extra days you get on a deadline. In the About section of the website, or anywhere on the website, the Cooperative Extension Service can be explained.
3. Rather than generating more information, is there a way to use existing information already published by Extension Services across the U.S.? Could the copyright be shared? Extension already has so much information out there, but it’s hard to find and it’s often designed to be printed, not for the Internet. If eXtension could get permission from each land-grant institution to reformat, and redesign this information for the Web, I think that would be a great step. For instance, people searching on the Internet for fertilizer recommendations for Tomatoes don’t want to read a 4 page publication on Tomatoes, they want to go directly to the information that they’re looking for. Could eXtension reformat these existing publications and either shorten them or use keywords, hyperlinks, and inbound links to help people navigate through them? For example, the Wikipedia format, but the big difference would be that the information found on the site would be research-based and peer reviewed. But I’m not suggesting a wiki style site where anyone could add anything.
4. Authors should retain credit for their original publications, as should the institutions where they come from. Ideally, they should even get a detailed google analytics report of how their content was used. Then authors can report these numbers as well as use them in the pursuit of tenure. New content could be generated specifically for eXtension—and could be submitted as it would be for a peer reviewed journal? Then content would be vetted and peer reviewed and the best content would be accessible on eXtension.
But that's just my two cents.

Submitted On: 01/30/2012
Commenting on this article is now closed.