1‘.
a .
.v..
o.
..o.
o
A... . ..
.. I
‘
. a. .
_ ~ t
\ G
.« in. .
. 3.” . ..x .1.
C. O ‘ .5 o.
. .. a I .
Mi‘. . \ .0. n a '9‘
.o I. . F 04‘
I. u . A ~... . .. fix... h. 1%
Q . c . n. .. .0.
I . ‘
‘ M. .s i ... a "Q . .- ...-9.
u I § ..v .o no
I .\ . . fun
' .0 u ." A . . ‘3
.. : . . I.
It .' a c
k a \n l .u .fl . ..'.§
J n. o . c U c s
a .
u... . a H c o k J
I u . . . . cu .
n. . I \
a o 0- v. '0 . a.
. C
n. . .-.“ ...... . .1. ...r
g r. a. . . .. . I... {-
ao. . o. : v a...“ . a . .
t c . . .
o a n ..t . I B .w u ‘J
n . t. A a . n . w o Q-
. . . - .0 I. . ~ .
tn...» .. ~. . . .... .. r. .~ ...
. .. . ... .3. f. i
a . ..r s . . A .. J
c o ~00 o x
c n ".... A c. & «... .. 4..» 43 .
D
.. . . ac . . .1 .
.l. t o\ n . n f. .‘ I\
q ‘r. O F 3. .Ii.‘
. o. u . §
. . 'I . o .
Q. ‘Q a. a i .. J34
1.. ... ... . . . r.‘
. . ¢ v . .. , ¢.
n c. g. Q \ o o u n n ‘
.. . - :3 u
n. . 9". u a. J 9-.. .
K . 0.. u...
I n ‘ ‘4
t a. .‘ a .I O . c ft. 1
'~ ‘ .1 - \o no G .I O o
v . .. n :5 ... o . .. a 5“
..~ . _ . . ... a. . .
z" .. . .. .x P.
¢ . s q . uv ... .Q a:
O. to I . Q. o
. 1.. ... . .3 o . .9 l.-.\
J , C .
.s .. a .-
w . D .
\
.. w L . .
. . .4...
a x
. n K
c
...
Ir a
A

_:__:_;:_\_:___:_§_\___E_:.‘_E=:_S_:_E:

f

 

THESIS

CHARACTERISTICS AND TRAITS OF AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

STUDENTS WHO DO NOT TEACH

By

Cassius NOrton Davison

A THESIS

Submitted to the College of Education of Michigan State
University of Agriculture and.Applied Science
in partial fulfillment of the requirement
for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

Department of Vocational Education

1956

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The author wishes to express his appreciation to Dr. H. P.
Sweany who directed this study, and to Dr. R. M. Clark, and Dr. G. E.

Timmons for their helpful suggestions and criticisms.

C. N. D.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER PAGE
I. THE PROBLEM AND DEFINITIONS OF TERI-IS USED . . . . . . . . .
TheProblem .......................
Statementoftheproblem................
Importanceofthestucw ................

Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Methodofresearch...................
DefinitionsofTermsUsed ................
Prospective teachers of vocational agriculture . . . . .

Home agricultural situations . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Gradepointaverage ..................

ttrtrwmeI-JH

Areasoffarmexperience................
Profile of prospective teachers of vocational
agriculture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Scholarship ......................
Professional characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Qualificationsinfarming ...............
Mechanicalindexrating ....... .........
Reading comprehensionjtest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

ACE Intelligence teSt o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

0‘ O\ 0\ Ch \R \n \fl \n

Honor—pointratio ...................

Five b38108 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0

-q

BaSiC EngliSh o o o o o o o o o o o o o o cacao o o o o 7

iv

CHAPTER PAGE
Psychology 201 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Education 202 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Education 207 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
EducationBOS..................... 8
Interests of a teacher, interests of a farmer, and

teaching satisfaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Average mark in "100-200“ agricultural courses . . . . . 9

InSthtorS' COMPOSite rating 000. 00.000000 9
II.PRESENTATIONOmeooooooooooooooooooco 10

Classification of Students . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ll

E‘-

SChOIErShiPooooooooooooooooooooooo

I;

Mfllfly .. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .
ACEintelligencetest................ 11:
Reading comprehension test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Mechanicalindexrating............... l7

Achievement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l7
Honor-point ratio first year . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Honor-point ratio second.year . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Honor-point ratio third year . . . . . . . . . . . . . l8
Honor-point ratio for five basics . . . . . . . . . . 18
Honor-point ratio for basic English . . . . . . . . . 20

Professional Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Achievement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

PSyChO lo a 201 O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O 0 2O

CHAPTER
Education 202 . . . . . . . .
Education 207 . . . . . . . .
Education 305 . . . . . . . .

Interests ._..........

Teaching satisfaction . . . . . . . . .

Vocational agricultural teacher interest

Instructor's composite rating .
Qualifications in Farming . . . .
Farm eXperience . . . . . . . .
Amount............
Coverage...........
Typeandsizeoffarm . . . . .
Home agricultural situation . .
F.F.A. experience . . . . . . .

High school agriculture . . . .

WCImenlberShipoooooooooo

- Average mark in "100-200" agricultural

Interestsofafarmer . .......

Age When Entering College . . . . . . .

Size of High School . . . . . . . .,. .

III. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

SWU................

COHClUSionSoooooooooooooo

Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . .

PACE
2].
21
21
21
23
23
23
25
25
26
27
32
33
3h
35
35
36
37
37

f3

AS

vi

CHAPTER PAGE
BIBLIOGRAPI-IY O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ’47

APPENDIX 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C O O O O O O O O O O I O O '49

TABLE

I.

II.

III.

V.

VI.

LIST OF TABLES
PAGE

Mbvement of Students During Their Four Years in the

.Agricultural Education Curriculum in the Classes of

1952, 1953, and l95h . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
A Comparison of the Iecile Ranks on the ACE and Reading

Comprehension Test, and Mechanical Index Rating of

Agricultural Education Students in the Classes of 1952,

1953, and l95h by groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
A Comparison of the Honor-point Ratios for the First,

Second, and Third Years, The Five Basics, and Basic

English of Agricultural Education Students in the Classes

of 1952, 1953, and l95h by Classified Groups . . . . . . 19
A Comparison of Grades Received in Psychology 201,

Education 202, 207, and 305 by Agricultural Education

Students in the Classes of 1952, 1953, and 19Sh by

Classified Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
A Comparison of the Ratings Received on the Teachers

Satisfaction and Vocational Agricultural Teachers

Interest Portions of Strong's Interest Inventory by

Agricultural Education Students in the Classes of 1952,

1953, and l95h by Classified Groups . . . . . . . . . . . 2h
The Instructor's Composite Rating for Agricultural

Education Students in the Classes of 1952, 1953, and

l95h by Classified Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

viii
TABLE PAGE
VII. Number of Months of Farm.Experience for Agricultural
Education Students by Groups in the Classes of 1952,
1953, and l95h . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . 27
VIII. Grades Received in Farm Coverage for Agricultural Education
Students in the Classes of 1952, 1953, and l95h by
ClassifiedGroups.................... 28
IX. Comparison of the Levels of Experience in Various Farm
Areas of Agricultural Education Students in the Classes
of 1952, 1953, and 195A by Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
X. Size of Farms in Tillable Acres for Agricultural Education
Students in the Classes of 1952, 1953, and l95h by
ClassifiedGroups.................... 32
XI.. Type of Farm for Agricultural Education Students in the
Classes of 1952, 1953, and l95h by Classified Groups . . 33
III. Home Agricultural Situation for Agricultural Education
Students in the Classes of 1952, 1953, and l95h by
Classified Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3h
XIII. Agricultural Education Students That Did or Did Not Have
F.F.A. Experience in Classes of 1952, 1953, and 195h
by Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3h
XIV. A Comparison of the Number of Years in High School
Agriculture of Agricultural Education Students in Classes

of 1952, 1953, and 1951; by. Classified Groups . . . . . . 35

TABLE PAGE
XV. A Comparison of the Number of Years as a AH Club Member
of Agricultural Education Students in the Classes of
1952, 1953, and l9Sh by Classified Groups . . . . . . . . 36
XVI. .A Comparison of the Average Grades in "100-200"
.Agricultural Courses of Vocational Agricultural Education
Students in the Classes of 1952, 1953, and 195h by
Classified Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
XVII. .A Comparison of the Scores Received on the Interest of a
Farmer Portion of Strong's Interest Inventory by
Agricultural Education Students in the Classes of 1952,
1953, and 195h by Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
XVIII. A Comparison of The Ages at Matriculation of Agricultural
Education Students in the Classes of 1952, 1953, and
195A by Classified Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
XIX. A Comparison of the Size of High Schools of Agricultural
Education Students in the Classes of 1952, 1953, and

l95hbyGr0up3ooooooooooooooooooooo 140

CHAPTER I
THE PROBLEM AND IEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED

For several years, educators in vocational agriculture in the
state of Michigan have been concerned with the number of students who
have not entered the teaching profession after having enrolled in agri-
cultural education at Michigan State University. While some experimen-
tal data concerning the attributes of a good teacher of vocational
agriculture is available, very little scientific research has been done
with respect to the traits and characteristics which might preclude a

student from.becoming a teacher of vocational agriculture.

I. THE PROBLEM

Statement of the problem. It was the purpose of this study
(1) to determine what the prospective teachers of vocational agricul-
ture, who did not enter the teaching profession, did after dropping
from.the curriculum; (2) to determine what per cent of prospective
teachers of vocational agriculture did not enter the teaching profes-
sion; (3) to determine the characteristics and traits of prospective
teachers of vocational agriculture who did not enter the teaching pro-
fession; (h) to determine if the individual's records maintained in the
Agricultural Education Office at Michigan State University are adequate

to predict if he will not teach.

2

In characterizing the prospective teacher of vocational agricul-
ture who does not teach, questions which arise are: (1) At what point
in the college career did he drop out?, (2) Can the home agricultural
situation in which an individual lives, aid in determining if he will
not teach?, (3) Does his grade point average when leaving agricultural
education have any bearing on whether he transfers to another curricu-
lum.or drops out of school entirelyT, (h) Are some areas of farm exper-
ience more valuable than others in predicting if he will not teach?,
(5) Do the student profile factors in the areas of scholarship, profes-
sional characteristics, and qualifications in farming, as used in the

Profile of Prospective Teachers of Vocational Agriculture, aid in iden-

tifying him?

Importance 2£.E§2 study. One of the primary purposes of the

 

Department of Vocational Education is to train teachers of vocational
agriculture. If students who enter this curriculum fail to teach, the
time and effort spent by the department on these students is fruitless
as far as the fulfillment of this objective is concerned. If these
students could be detected prior to their enrollment in agricultural
education, it would not only benefit the students by allowing then.to
take other courses which might prove more beneficial to them, but would
also enhance the contributions of the department to the agricultural
education field. Perhaps Sledge, an agricultural teacher educator at
the University of Wisconsin, realized some of these implications when

he stated that a study should be conducted on the profile data of

3
teachers who drop-out from or never enter teaching vocational agricul-
ture.1

.§222§° This study was based on the prospective agricultural
education teachers enrolled at Michigan State University in the classes
of 1953, 195h: and 1955. As some records for freshmen and sophomore
students were not available prior to 1951, it was necessary to substi-
tute for the freshmen and sophomores in the class of 1953 and the
freshmen in the class of 195h. The freshmen and sophomore students in
the class of 1956 were substituted for the class of 1953, and the
freshmen for the class of 1957 were substituted for the class of l95h.

For these classes, each student's file located in the Agricul-
tural Education Office was utilized.

W 93 Research. The names of the agricultural education
students used in this study were obtained from the College of Agricul-
ture's "Term Roster".2 This was also the source used.for detecting
those students who dropped out prior to graduation.

After obtaining the names of the students, their records, loca-
ted in the Agricultural Educational Office, were surveyed and analysed
with respect to factors which might indicate whether or not a student

would teach. The factors taken from the group who did not enter the

A

1George‘W'. Sledge, "Relationship Between Some Pre-teaching
Characteristics and Subsequent Performance of Teachers of Vocational
Agriculture" unpublished Doctor's thesis, Michigan State University,
East Lansing, 195h, p. 258.

2"College of Agriculture's Term.Roster' East Lansing: College
of Agriculture, Michigan State University, 19h9-55: (Mimeographed.)

14
teaching profession were compared with the factors of the group who did
enter the teaching profession.

The records were also surveyed to obtain the number of students
who entered the teaching profession; the number of students who grad-
uated but did not teach, and what occupation they entered; and the
number of students who dropped out and their activities after dropping

out.
II. DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED

Prospective teachers of vocational agriculture. A prospective

 

teacher of vocational agriculture is any person who has enrolled in the

curriculum of agricultural education.

 

£1213 Egr_icultura1 situations. The home situations in which the
student lived prior to entering Michigan State University were roughly
classified into two groups. They were, (1) non-commercial, and (2)
comrcial farms.

93392 mini average. The grade point average is the average
number of grade points earned per credit and is computed by allowing
four points for an A, three points for a B, two points for a C, one
point for a D, zero points for an F, finding the sum, and dividing by
the number of credits earned. I

Areas 9f farm gperience. Areas of farm eacperience were class-

 

ified in the following groups: (1) dairy, (2) swine, (3) poultry,
(h) horticulture, (5) crops, (6) soils, (7) farm mechanics, and (8)

far. management.

5

Profile of prospective teachers of vocational agriculture. This

 

was a composite representation of agricultural education student's
scores and achievements of measurable characteristics, accumulated dur-
ing the training period at Michigan State University. These scores and
achievements are grouped into three areas as follows: (1) scholarship,
(2) professional characteristics, and (3) qualifications in farming.

Scholarship. The measures were determined.by the decile rank.of

 

a student in mechanical aptitude, reading comprehension, the ACE Intel-
ligence test, and by his honor-point ratio in the freshman, sophomore,
and Junior classes, the five basics, and.basic English.

Professional characteristics. The characteristics are shown by
letter grades received by a student in Psychology 201, Education 202,
Education 207, and Education 305, his decile ratings on "Interests of a
Teacher"3 and "Teaching Satisfaction"h; and the instructor's composite
rating in terms of superior, excellent, acceptable, doubtful, and un-
acceptable.

Qualificationskin.farming. This area included a student's amount

 

of farm experience in years, a letter grade assigned to the scope and
variety of farm experience, the number of years as a member in the
Future Farmers of America, as a student of high school agriculture, as

a member of hH Club, his honor-point ratio in first and second year

 

3E. X. Strong, Jr., "Vocational Interest Blank for Men (Revised)
Form MP (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1938).

14K. G. Nelson, “The Interests of Teachers of Vocational Agricul-
ture as Related to Vocational Satisfaction” unpublished Doctor's thesis,
The University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, 1952, p. 263.

6

agricultural courses, and a decile rating on “Interests of a Farmer.”5

Mechanical Index Rating. This was a measure of mechanical in-

 

terest and ability established through the cooperation of the Depart-
ment of Agricultural Engineering and the Department of Agricultural

Education. Scores are derived from.a checklist of traits observed by
an instructor in.Agricultural Engineering and are recorded.by deciles.6

Reading Comprehension Test. This was one examination in a bat-

 

tery of examinations given to entering freshman at Michigan State Univ-
ersity. It is a measure of reading comprehension.from 'The Michigan
State College EUniversityJ Reading Test."7

ACE intelligence test. This was an intelligence test of the

 

[American Council en Education Psychological Examination. All students
entering Michigan State University for the first time as undergraduates
are required to take this examination. It 18::

. . . a group test of scholastic ability, standardized.on
entering college freshman [sic]. ACE scores are given in
terms of deciles. Moms az-E'Baseg upon Michigan State Col-
lege CUniversityJ fresm Iii-£3.

Honorbpoint ratio. It is:

. . . a ratio between honor points and credits earned. Honorb
point ratios for the first, second, and third years in college
are recorded on.the student profile. Honor-point ratios are
computed on the basis of a mark in courses of an "A" equal to

 

SStrong, 3.32. 533;.
681edge, 32. 313., p. 21.
7333., p. 20.

8M.

four points, "B" equal to 3 points, ”C" equal to 2 points,
”D" equal to 1 point, and “F” equal to zero points. Approx-
imately hS credits of course work are included in the honor-
point ratio for the first year; 90 for the second.year; and
th for the third year.9

Five basics. All undergraduate students were required to take

 

five of the seven courses offered in Basic College. The seven Basic
College courses were‘Written.and Spoken.English, Physical Science, Bio-
logical Science, Social Science, Effective Living, Literature and Fine
Arts, and History of Civilization. The same method, as used in.the
honor-point ratio, was used to provide the score for the five basics.

Basic English. This was one of the five required Basic College

 

courses. The scores listed.for this factor represent an.average honor-
point ratio of courses in basic English.

Psycholggy 201. This is an introductory course in Psychology.

 

It is:

.An introduction to the scientific study and interpretation
of human behavior. Consideration of such topics as learning,
motivation, emotion, intelligence, perception, personality,
and inter-personal relationships. Basic psychological prin-
ciples with the practical application of these principles to
everyday living. 0 »

Education 202. This course is known as "Principles of Education”

 

and has a prerequisite of sophomore standing. It is:

An introductory course for all who wish to prepare for
high school teaching. It is a resume of the educational
philosophy of the public school system with specific emphasis

 

9Ibid., p. 21.

 

10Michigan State Colle e Catalo l9h6-l9h8 (East Lansing: Mich-
igan State College, 19kg), p. h

on that of Michigan. Attention is given to the work of the
classroom teacher and to available means for evaluating
teaching in the light of the philosophy developed. In con-
nection with the course, opportunity is given the student to
counsel with the instructor regarding his fitness and qual-
ifications for teaching. The course serves also as a basis
for more specialized courses which follow.

Education 291. The prerequisites for this course are Education
202, and.Psychology 201. The course name is "Educational Psychology."

It is:

A study of those principles of psychology related to the
problems of education. Habits, memory, motives, individual
differences and the laws of learning will be given special
attention.1é

Education 22g. The prerequisites for this course are Education
207 and junior standing, and the name was "Introduction to Agricultural
Education." It is:

. . . designed to develop an understanding of the objectives
and basic elements of a complete program of vocational edu-
cation in agriculture and to prepare students for student-
teaching experiences and study of methods of teaching voca-
tional agriculture.13

satisfaction. These scores were derived from the "Vocational Interest

 

Blank for Men (Revised) Form M.'lh Appropriate methods of scoring were

used to derive the score of interests of a teacher of vocational

111b1d., p. 255
12Ibid.
13Ibid., p. 256

11‘Strong, Egg. git.

9

agriculture, interests of a farmer, and teaching satisfaction. Scores

on teaching satisfaction were based upon a scoring device developed by

Nelson.15
Average mark i2 "100-200" agricultural courses. It is:

 

The average mark in series 100 and 200 technical agricul-

tural courses is computed as the honor-point ratio. Courses
are represented from such areas as: agricultural engineering,

agricultural economics, soils, animal husbandry, poultry, et
ceteraolé

Instructors' rating (composite). This was a student profile

factor which had:

. . . five degrees of quality: superior, excellent, accep-
table, doubtful, and unacceptable. The rating is an averaged
or composite score of the trainee in terms of judgment of the
over-all potential qualities of the man preceding student
teaching by teacher educators familiar with the trainee.17

 

15Nelson, 122. git.
16Sledge, gp.‘git., p. 25.

17Ibid., p. 2h.

CHAPTER II
PRESENTATION OF DATA

For the purposes of this study the agricultural education stus
dents in the classes of 1952, 1953: and l95h, at Michigan State Univer-
sity were divided into four groups. They were: (1) graduates of the
agricultural education curriculum who taught vocational agriculture,

(2) graduates of the agricultural education curriculum who did not teach
vocational agriculture, (3) students who transferred to other curricula,
and (h) students who were enrolled in the agricultural education curri-
culum and dropped out of Michigan State University entirely. For
simplicity, the four groups were called teachers, non-teachers, trans-
fers, and drop-outs, respectively, for the study.

Students that entered military service after graduating from.the
agricultural education curriculum were not included in either the teach-
er or non-teacher groups.

Each of these four groups were compared, as closely as the comp
pleteness of their records would allow, with respect to (l) scholastic
ability and achievement, (2) professional achievement and interest, (3)
qualifications in farming, (h) age when entering college, (5) size of
high school from which they graduated, and (6) prior college training,
if any. Size and type of farm and home agricultural situation in the
qualifications in farming area, age when entering college, size of high

school from which they graduated, and prior college training, if any,

11
were not part of the "Profile of Prospective Teachers of Vocational Ag-
riculture".

As certain records for freshmen of l9h9-1950 and 1950-1951 were
not available, the records for freshmen of 1952-1953 and 1953-195h were
substituted. Also, certain records for sophomores of 1950-1951 were
not available, therefore, records for sophomores of 1953-195h were sub-

Stitutedo
I. CLASSIFICATION OF STUDENTS

The drop-outs were tabulated as dropping out of school as fresh-
men, sophomores, juniors, or seniors. A student was considered a
freshman when he had less than hS term hour credits, a sophomore when
he had h5 to 90 term hour credits, a junior when he had 90 to lh5
term hour credits, and a senior when he had 1h5 or more term hour cred?
its.

Agricultural education students who did not graduate from the
agricultural education curriculum were classified as drop-outs or trans-
ferbouts, while those who entered the agricultural education curriculum
after having been enrolled in some other curriculum or college were
designated as transfer-ins.

There were 82 students who transferred into the agricultural
education curriculum. Of these 82 students, to transferred-in from
other institutions, the majority of whom entered as third term soph-

omores or first term juniors. Only 5 of these ho students did not

12
graduate from the agricultural education curriculum. Of these 5 students,
h transferred to other curricula, and l dropped-out of school.' Of the
35 students who transferred-in from other institutions and graduated,

26 taught vocational agriculture, 6 entered other occupations, and 3
were in military service at the time of the study.

In addition to the to students who transferred-in from other
institutions, h2 transferredein from other curricula within the univer-
sity, making a total of 82 students in the transfer-in group. As there
were h2 students transferring-in from other curricula and bl students
transferring—out to other curricula, all within the university, these
two groups nearly balanced in numbers, as shown in Table I.

Of the h2 transferring-in from.other curricula within the univer-
sity, 20 students were in the classes used to supplement the freshmen and
sophomore classes of the class of 1952, and the freshmen of the class
of 1953. Of the remaining 22, 32 per cent graduated and entered the
service, lb per cent graduated and taught vocational agriculture, and 5h
per cent dropped-out of school or transferred to other curricula.

There were 35 students in the drop-out group. Of this group,

30 students dropped as either freshmen or sophomores with about equal
drops occurring in each class. It should be noted, however, that the
sophomore class group was smaller than the freshmen class group, thus
percentage wise, the drop-outs were higher in the 50phomore year than
in the freshmen year. This, in part, is due to the fact that sophomore
students are eliminated by the university if their grade average is

below a C. As there were 35 drop-out students and to students who

13

transferred-in from other institutions, the one group about cancels the

 

 

 

other out.
TABLE I
MOVEMENT OF STUDENTS DURING THEIR FOUR YEARS IN THE
AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION CURRICULUM IN THE
CLASSES or 1952, 1953. AND 1951;

Students inVIw Classes
Ag} Ed. Curr. Fresh. SOph. Juniors Seniors Total
Beginning

enrollment 87 65 7O 93 315
Trans-in 18 25 39 0 82
Dropped 1h 16 2 3 35
Trans-out ‘15 [lg 1g; _12 _J£E
Ending

enrollment 76 62 93 90 321

 

 

The sum of the beginning enrollment of the four classes is 315,

while the sum of the ending enrollment for the four classes is 321, as

shown in Table I. By comparing the two figures, it can be concluded

that, on the average, about the same number of students will graduate

from.the agricultural education curriculum.as enter the curriculum as

first term freshmen. It was estimated that less than one-fourth of

those freshmen would graduate from that curriculum.

Of the hl students who transferredeout, 9 transferred to other

colleges within the university, and the remaining 32 transferred to

other curricula within the College of Agriculture.

Seven of these 32

students, the largest group, transferred to the agricultural economics

curriculum. The remaining 25 students were quite equally distributed

among the other curricula in the College of Agriculture.
II. SCHOLARSHIP

The area of scholarship was divided into two general categories,
ability and achievement. .Ability refers to the capacity of a student
to produce, and achievement refers to the accomplishment of the student
in his school work.

Ability

The ability of a student was determined by the decile rank re-
ceived on the ACE intelligence test, reading comprehension test, and
the mechanical index rating. All students when entering Michigan State
University are required to take the ACE intelligence test and reading
comprehension test. .As shown in Table II, the decile rank received.for
these two tests by the students in each of the four groups, transfers,
drop-outs, teachers, and nonpteachers, were compared to the decile
ranks of other university students.

The mechanical index rating is made on agricultural education
students in the university when they enroll for the beginning agricul-
tural engineering courses. The decile ranks, computed.from.the mechan-
ical index rating, for the students in each of the four groups were
compared. The Chi Square method was used to determine if the differ-
ence between the groups was significant.

ACE intelligence test. The ACE intelligence test showed that

 

all four groups of students were lower in ability than other students

in the university. The difference was significant at the .01 level.

15
In the drop-out group 69 per cent of the students had scores between
the first and third deciles and the remaining 31 per cent had scores
between the fourth and seventh deciles. There were no scores between
the eighth and tenth deciles for this group. The other three groups,
transfers, teachers, and non-teachers were very similar. In the trans-
fer group 31 per cent of the students were between the first and third
deciles, while the teacher and nonpteacher groups had 3h and 23 per
cent of the students, respectively, in this range. In the non-teacher
group 77 per cent of the students were between the fourth and seventh
deciles while 62 per cent and.55 per cent of the students in the trans-
fer and teacher groups, respectively, were between these deciles. Be-
tween the eighth and tenth deciles the transfer, teacher, and non-
teacher groups had 8, 11, and 0 per cent of the students, respectively.
By comparing the drop-out group with the other three groups, the sta-
tistics showed that group to be inferior to the others. The difference
was significant at the .01 level.

Reading comprehension test. In the reading comprehension test,
the drop-out, teacher, and transfer groups were significantly lower
than other university students. The difference was significant at the
.05 level. There was no significant difference between the non-teacher
group and other university students.

The drop-out group, as might be expected, had 63 per cent of the
students between the first and third deciles, 3h per cent between the
fourth and seventh deciles, and only 3 per cent in the eighth decile or

above. The teacher group which was next to the lowest group had 37,

TABLE II

16

A COMPARISON OF THE DECILE RANKS ON THR.ACE INTELLIGENCE AND
READING COMPREHENSION TESTS, AND MECHANICAL INDEX RATING

OF AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION STUDENTS IN THE CLASSES
OF 1952, 1953, AND 195h BY GROUPS

 

 

Dacile Ranks

 

Measures Groups 1-3 h-7 8-10 Chi SQ,
ACE
Transfer 12 2h 3 10.998**
Teacher 18 29 6 9.31 **
Non-teacher h 13 0 10.99 **
Reading Comp.
Transfer 11 22 5 6.6hh*
Drop-out 22 12 1 21.h7 **
Teacher 19 28 5 10.33 **
Non-teacher 7 7 3 1.578
MEch. Index
Toacher~ ll 16 20
Nonpteacher 0 8 8
3.790

 

 

**Significant at the .01 level.
*Significant at the .05 level.

17
5b, and 10 per cent of the students between the first and third, fourth
and seventh, and eighth and tenth deciles, respectively. It is inter-
esting to note that for this group the percentages are almost identical
with those in the ACE intelligence test. The transfer group was
slightly superior to the teaching group having 29, 58, and 13 per cent
of the students in the three groupings of deciles, respectively. The
non-teacher group was the highest group and as previously mentioned
there was no significant difference between it and other university
students for the reading comprehension test. Of the nonpteacher group,
hl per cent were between the first and third decile, bl per cent be-
tween the fourth and seventh decile, and 18 per cent between the eighth
and tenth decile.

Mechanical index rating. Mechanical index rating is not usually

 

made until late in the sophomore year or in the junior year, therefore,
the number of students on whom it was given in the transfer and drop-
out groups was so small that these two groups had to be eliminated for
this criterion. A comparison of the teacher and non-teacher groups are
shown in Table II. There was no significant difference between the two
groups.

Achievement

 

The area of achieVement includes the honor-point ratio for the
forst, second, and third years, the five basics, and basic English for
the four groups. To determine if the difference was significant, the
Chi Square method.was used. In order to compare the four groups, the

average was computed.for each of the groups.

18

Honorepoint ratio first year. From.Tab1e III, it can be seen

 

that the transfer and non-teacher groups are nearly equal. The drop-
out group is very mmch lower and the teacher group is slightly lower
than the transfer and non-teacher groups. As the drOp-out group was so
low, it contributed the greatest to the significant difference at the
.05 level.

Honopzpoint ratio second.year. The honor-point ratio forthe

 

second year is about the same as that for the first year. The drop-out
group was still very low. The teacher and non-teacher groups' point
average increased .h, but the non-teacher group was still the highest.
The difference was significant at the .05 level, with the drop-out
group contributing the most and the non-teacher group contributing to

a lesser degree.

Honorepoint ratio third.year. The honorbpoint ratio had grad-

 

ually increased for all groups, but the groups were separated more.

The number of students in the drop-out group had become noticeably
smaller due in part to failures, and the difference between this group
and the other groups had widened. It is also noticeable that the dif-
ference between the non-teacher group and the other groups had grown
larger. The transfer and teacher groups remained quite similar. .Again
the drop-out group and the nonpteacher group contributed the most to
the Chi Square which is significant at the .05 level.

‘ Honorspoint ratio £35 five basics. The honor-point ratio for

 

the five basics substantiate the trends established by the honor-point

ratio for the first, second, and third years. The drop-outs were

19
TABLE III

A COMPARISON OF THE HONOR-POINT RATIOS FOR THE FIRST, SECOND
AND THIRD YEARS, THE FIVE BASICS, AND BASIC ENGLISH OF
AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION STUDENTS IN THE CLASSES OF
1952, 1953, AND 19Sh BY CLASSIFIED GROUPS

-,__~H~;ll

 

 

 

 

 

Honor- Ave. Honor-point ratio
point 2.1& 2.6 a
ratio Groups below 2.2-2.5 above Ave. Chi Sq.
lst yr. Transfer 12 13 12 2.2
Drop-out 20 5 O 1.3
Teacher 21 ll 11 2.0
’ Non-teacher h 6 3 2.2
', 120 7149*
{a 2nd yrs
3 Transfer 13 11 12 2.2
3 Drop-out 13 3 1 1.h
Teacher 13 15 15 2.h
Non-teacher 0 9 h 2.6
1h.730*
3rd yrs
Transfer 9 8 9 2.3
Teacher 12 23 20 2.h
Non-teacher O 5 10 3.0
13.253*
5 Basics
Transfer 15 8 13 2.2
Drop-out 18 2 O 1.2
Teacher 16 9 13 2.2
NCn-teacher h 5 8 2.5
19.075*
Basic Eng.
Transfer 8 15 13 2.3
Drop-out 16 8 l l.h
Teacher 3 26 8 2.1
Men-teacher 0 10 2 2.3
36.109**

 

 

*mSignificant at the .01 level.
*Significant at the .05 level.

20
extremely low and the nonsteacher group was the highest. Again these
two groups contributed the greatest amount to the significant differ-
ence at the .05 level. '

Honorgpoint ratio for basic English. The honorbpoint ratio for

 

basic English is based on three grades for each student. The signifi-
cant difference, however, was at the .01 level and as the drop-out

group was extremely low, that group contributed the most to the differ-
ence. The other three groups were quite close together with the trans-
fer and non-teacher groups slightly higher than the teacher group. The
honorbpoint ratio for basic English easily identified the drop-out stu-

dents as did the other honorbpoint ratios.
III. PROFESSIONAL CHARACTERISTICS

Professional characteristics were divided into the three sab-
divisions of (l) achievement, (2) interests, and (3) instructor's come
posits rating.

Achievement

 

The achievement area of professional characteristics included
Paychology 201, Education 202, Education 207, and Education 305. The
Chi Square method was employed to determine if there was a significant
difference between the four groups for the four courses.

Psychology 201. There was no significant difference between the

 

four groups in Psychology 201. If a higher trend cOuld be indicated,
it would be in favor of the non-teacher group as 67 per cent of the

students in this group received and A or B grade. The next closest

21
group was the teacher group with 28 per cent falling in this same
grouping-

Education 292. The difference between the four groups in Educa-
tion 202 was not significant. As the Chi Square figure in Table IV
indicates, the difference is less significant than for Psychology'201.
No conclusions could be drawn from these data.

Education 221. In Education 207 there was again no significant
difference between the four groups, but it was noted that the number of
students in the transfer and drop-out groups was considerably less.
This indicated.that a large portion of students either drop out or
transfer prior to taking this course. As there were so few students in
the transfer and drop-out groups, no attempt was made to compare them
with the other groups. It was noted that the teacher and non-teacher
groups were very similar.

Education 3_5. In.Education 305 only two groups, the teacher
and non-teacher groups, were compared as the number of students in the
transfer and drop-out groups were so small that the results would have
been questionable. Results of these two groups in this area are shown
in Table IV. The teacher and non-teacher groups were very similar and
there was no significant difference. It should be pointed.out that
Education 305 is a junior course and nearly all of the drop-outs and
transfers occurred prior to this time.

Interests
The interests of the students in the four groups were determined

by Strong's Interest Inventory. Nelson developed two scoring keys to

TABLE IV

22

A COMPARISON OF GRAIES RECEIVED IN PSYCHOLOGY 201, EDUCATION 202,

207, AND 305 HT AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION STUDENTS IN THE
CLASSES OF 1952, 1953, AND l9Sh BY CLASSIFIED

GROUPS

 

 

Letter Grades

 

Courses Groups A B C D F Chi Sq.
EEK. 201
Transfer 1 A 1h 1 0
Drop-out 0 1 6 5 0
Teacher h 13 25 h 0
Non-teacher 3 7 5 0 0
lho315
Educ. 202
Transfer 1 5 9 O O
Drop-out 2 2 7 2 0
Teacher 6 26 19 3 0
Men-teacher 1 10 h 0 0
9.130
Educ o 207
Transfer 0 3 2 2 O
Drop-out 0 O 6 0 1
Teacher 7 20 23 l O
Non-teacher 2 8 5 0 0
9.183
Educ. 305
Teacher 16 28 ll 0 O
Non-teacher 6 7, 0 0

.hSO

 

 

23

Strong's Interest Inventory which were used to determine the teaching
satisfaction rating and the vocational agricultural teacher interest
rating for each student. Strong's Interest Inventory is usually admin-
istered in the freshman or sophomore year, thus a high percentage of
drop-out and transfer students took the test. Results for this tabula-
tion are shown in Table V.

The Chi Square method was employed to determine if there was a
significant difference between the groups. Table V shows the results of
the four groups in this area.

Teachigg satisfaction. There was no significant difference be-

 

tween the four groups with respect to the teacher satisfaction rating.
The drop-out, teacher, and non-teacher groups were quite similar but
the transfer group was lower in the rating scale than the other groups.
This, perhaps would indicate a trend for the transfer group.

Vocational agricultural teacher interest. In the vocational ag-

 

ricultural teacher interest inventory the transfer, drop-out, teacher,
and non-teacher groups were all very similar. There was no significant
difference and no trend was indicated.
Instructor's Composite figtigg

The instructor's rating is not given until late in the junior
year, thus most of the students in the drop-out and transfer groups did
not receive this rating. As a result, only the teacher and non-teacher
groups could be compared by the instructor's composite rating. The re-
sults of this tabulation are shown in Table VI.

Although there was no significant difference between the teacher

2h

TABLE V

A COMPARISON OF THE RATINGS RECEIVED ON THE TEACHERS SATISFACTION
AND VOCATIONAL AGRICULTURAL TEACHERS INTEREST PORTIONS OF
STRONG'S INTEREST INVENTORY, BY AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION
STUDENTS IN THE CLASSES OF 1952, 1953. AND 1951: SI

CLASSIFIED GROUPS

 

 

Interest Ratings

 

 

 

Groups h.8&below h.9-6.0 6.1&above Chi Sq.
Teachers Satisfaction
Transfer 8 6 l
Drop-out 3 6 2
Teacher 15 2h 12
Non-teacher 3 10 h
11.1311:
Vo-Ag. Teachers Int.
PITTansfer 6 7 2
Drop-out h 5 2
Teacher 12 27 12
Non-teacher h 11 2

2.185

 

 

25
and nonpteacher groups, the non-teacher group had a slightly higher

rating.

TABLE VI

THE INSTRUCTOR'S COMPOSITE RATING FOR.AGRICULTURAL EIMCATION
STUDENTS IN THE CLASSES OF 1952, 1953, AND 195h
BI CLASSIFIED GROUPS

 

 

Super- Excel- Accep- Doubt- Unaccept-

 

Groups ior lent table ful able Chi Sq.
Teacher 0 16 3h h o
Non-teacher O 8 8 0 O
2.053

 

 

IV. QUALIFICATIONS IN FARMING

This is a very broad area which included farm experience, number
of years as an F.F.A. member, years of high school agriculture, number
of years as a AH Club member, average mark in ”100-200” agricultural
courses, and interests of a farmer as determined by Strong's Interest
Inventory. The Chi Square method.was used to determine the significant
difference between the transfer, drop-out, teacher, and non-teacher
groups. These data for this area were very complete as most of the
students' qualifications in farming took place prior to their entering
the university and the data, for the most part, was recorded at the
time of, or shortly after, their entry.

Farm Experience

A student's farm experience was divided into four categories as

26
follows: (1) amount, in terms of the number of months employed.full
.time on a farm, (2) coverage - referred to a letter grade assigned by
a staff member with respect to the amount and quality of farm.exper-
ience a student has had, and the experience 8 student has had in the
different areas of farming as determined by the farm.experience inven-
tory, (3) the type and size of farm on which the student received his
farm training, and (h) the home agricultural situation of the student.
The latter two were not included in the "Profile of Prospective Teach-
ers of Vocational Agriculture."

Amgggt. The difference between the transfer, drop-out, teacher,
and non-teacher groups, with respect to the number of months employed
full time on a farm, was significant at the .01 level. The average
amount of farm.experience for the four groups fell into two distinct
categories as shown in Table VII. The first and low category contained
the drop-out and transfer groups, while the second, and high category,
contained the teacher and non-teadher groups. The transfer and drop-
out groups, composing the low category, were very similar and the aver-
age amount of farm.eXperience was almost identical. Of the two groups
in the high category, the non-teacher group was slightly superior to
the teacher group, and the average amount of farm experience was two

months more for the non-teacher group.

One of the requirements for graduation from the agricultural

education curriculum is that a student must have at least 2h months of

farm experience. Over half of the students in the transfer and drop-

27

out groups did not have this experience.

TABLE VII

NUMBER OF mourns OF FARM EXPERIENCE FOR.AGRICULTURAL
ELMCATION STUDENTS BY GROURS IN THE CLASSES
OF 1952, 1953, AND 19Sh

 

 

No. of Months
Groups 21mo.&below 22-26mo. 27mo.&above Ave. amt. Chi Sq.

Transfer 19 6 7 21.3
Drop-out 1h 9 5 21.7
Teacher 0 31 2h 29.9
NOnpteacher C 7 10 31.9

39.213**

 

 

«*Significant at the .01 level.

~Coveragg. The first portion of farm.experience coverage was
devoted to the letter grades assigned by an agricultural education staff
member to the farm experience inventory completed by each student. .A
breakdown of the four groups by the letter grade received is shown in
Table VIII. There were two distinct categories in this area. The
transfer and drop-out groups were similar in all respects and the aver-
age grade, received by both groups, was identical. These two groups
again composed the low category and the teacher and non-teacher groups
composed the high category. This was the same condition which existed
when the amount of farm experience was considered. The two groups in
the high category were also very similar and likewise had the same
average grade .

The second portion of farm experience coverage was concerned

TABLE VIII

28

GRADES RECEIVED IN FARM COVERAGE FOR.AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

STUDENTS IN THE CLASSES OF 1952, 1953. AND 1951;
BY CLASSIFIED GROUPS

 

 

 

Letter Grades Ave.'
Groups A(h.0) B(3.0) C(2.0) D(1.0)§ F(O) Grade Chi 33:
Transfer 0 S 15 10 0 1.8
Dropnout O 6 10 9 l 1.8
Teacher 6 19 28 . 2 0 2.5
Non—teacher l 7 8 l 0 2.5
21.052*

 

 

*Significant at the .05 level.

29
with the level of ability on the farm.experience inventory. If a stu-
dent could perform the skill, he placed two check marks in front of the
item, if he had performed the skill but was not capable of doing so at
the present time, he placed one check mark in front of the item. The
skills were arranged in the areas of (1) dairy, (2) swine, (3) poultry,
(h) horticulture, (5) soils, (6) crops, (7) farm mechanics, and (8)
farm management. The check marks were weighted so that the double
checks received two points and the single checks received one point.
The results of the tabulation are shown in Table II.

The areas of swine and farm management showed no significant
difference between the four groups. Poultry and crops showed a sig-
nificant difference at the .05 level. The transfer and drop-out groups
were considerably lower than the other two groups in both areas. The

transfer group, however, was superior to the drop-out group in both

areas. The teacher and non-teacher groups were similar in the crepe
area.and.both had the same average number. In the poultry area the

teacher group was slightly higher than the nonpteacher group.

The areas of dairy, horticulture, soils, and farm mechanics all
had a significant difference at the .01 level. In all of these areas
the teacher group had the highest average. This group was closely
followed by the nonsteacher group. A large difference then existed be-
tween the non-teacher group and the other two groups. Of these latter
two groups, the transfer group was superior except in the area of farm

mechanics where they were about equal.

TABLE IX

30

COMPARISON OF THE LEVELS OF EXPERIENCE IN VARIOUS FARM AREAS OF

AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION STUDENTS IN THE CLASSES OF

1952, 1953, AND 1951 BY GROUPS

 

 

weighted Points

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Title Groups 0-18 19-37 38-56 Ave. Chi Sq.
Dairy Transfer 15 ll 7 23.0
Drop-out 12 1h ‘ 3 22 . 1
Teacher 2 36 17 33.2
Non-teacher 3 10 h 29.1
29.13h**
0-12 13-25 26-38 Ave.
Swine
Transfer 20 6 7 13.9
Teacher 20 23 12 17.1
Nonrteacher 8 7 2 1h.h
9.782
0-25 26-51 52-77 Ave.
Pbultgz
Transfer 20 9 h 26.h
DrOp-out 19 9 1 22.8
Teacher 17 26 12 36.6
.Non-teacher S 10 2 3h.h
' 15 e 802*
0-16 17-33 3h-So Ave.
Horticulture
Transfer 23 9 1 13.6
Drop-out 23 h 2 12.6
Teacher 23 20 12 21.6
Non-teacher 7 8 2 20.6
17.13h**
0-16 17-33 3h-So Ave.
Soils
Transfer 18 9 6 12.0
Teacher 15 23 17 16.
anpteacher 3 ll 3 16.0

21.252“

TABLE II CONT'D

 

31

 

 

 

 

 

Title Groups 0-19 20—39 h0-h8 Ave. Chi Sq:
Crops
Transfer l6 l2 5 23.3
Teacher 12 31 12 30.0
Non-teacher 3 ll 3 30.0
13.1h3*
0-29 30-59 60-79 Ave.
Farm Mech; '
Transfer 23 10 0 2h.1
Teacher 12 3h 9 h3.7
Men-teacher h 11 2 hl.S
31.662**
0-5 6-11 12-18 Ave.
Farm Manag.
Transfer 21 7 5 5.8
Drop-out 20 8 1 5.1
Teacher 32 13 10 6.6
Non-teacher 10 3 h 6.9
3.269

 

 

**Significant at the .01 level.
*Significant at the .05 level.

32
mmaeaasa
To determine if there was a significant difference between the
four groups with reSpect to the size of farms, in terms of tillable
acres, the number of tillable acres were divided into three intervals
as shown in Table I. The farms in this category were those on which
the students received their farm experience. The Chi Square method was

used to determine if the difference was significant.

TABLE I

SIZE OF EARNS IN TILLABLE ACRES FOR AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION STUDENTS
IN THE GLASSES OF 1952, 1953. AND 195k BI
CLASSIFIED GROUPS

 

Tillable Acres

 

Groups 0-59 60-110 1111 a up Chi Sq.
Transfer 2 16 15
Drop-out h 1h 11
Teacher 5 31 19
Non-teacher 1 ~ 9 7
1.11113

 

 

There was no significant difference between the four groups with
respect to the size of farms in tillable acres.

The types of farms on which the students received their farm ex-
perience were divided into specialized_and general. The results of the
tabulations and the Chi Square for the four groups are shown in Table
III.

Although there was no significant difference between the groups,

a trend for the transfer group to come primarily from specialized.farms,

33
and the drop-out group to come primarily from general farms was noted.
The other two groups had a few more students coming from general farms

than from specialized farms.

TABLE II

TYPE OF FARM FOR AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION STUDENTS
IN THE CLASSES OF 1952, 1953..AND 195A
BI CLASSIFIED GROUPS

 

Type of Farm
Groups Specialized General Chi Sq,
Transfer 18 15
Drop-out 8 21
Teacher 22 33
Non-teacher 7 10

1.7a

 

 

Home Agricultural Situation

 

The home agricultural situation was determined as being either
conunercial or non-commercial. If a student lived in town or on a farm
on which the farm operator pursued another occupation, the student was
placed in the non-commercial category. If a student lived on a farm
operated full time and if the farm was the primary source of income for

the family, he was placed in the commercial category.
The results of the tabulation by groups and the Chi Square are
shown in Table III.

There was no significant difference between the groups and no

3h

trend was indicated.

TABLE III

HOME AGRICULTURAL SITUATION FOR AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION
STUDENTS IN THE CLASSES OF 1952, 1953. AND
19Sh BY CLASSIFIED GROUPS

 

 

Groups Commercial Non-Commercial Chi Sq.

Transfer 25 7
DI‘Op-O'ut 20 9
Teacher 38 ' l7
Non-teacher 12 5
.972

F .F .A . Expe rience

 

Students who had been members of the F .F .A. and students who had
not been F.F.A. members constituted the two groups in regard to exper-
ience in Future Farmer activities. The difference between the groups

is shown in Table XIII.

TABLE XIII

AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION STUDENTS THAT DID OR DID NOT
HAVE F.F.A. EXPERIENCE IN CLASSES OF
1952, 1953. AND 19Sh BY GROURS

 

 

———_
_‘:‘

 

 

 

Groups Non-members Members Chi Sq.
Transfer 8 9
Drop-out 7 11:
Teacher 25 30
Non-teacher 11 6
3 . 687

 

 

Although there is no significant difference between the groups,

35
it should be pointed out that 65 per cent of the students in the non-
teacher group were never F.F.A. members, while in the teacher group it
was only us per cent.

High School Agriculture

 

The amount of high school agriculture‘which the student had.was
broken into three groups: (1) no high school agriculture, (2) 192 years
of high school agriculture, and (3) 3-h years of high school agriculture.

The four groups were compared in Table XIV on this basis.

TABLE XIV

A COMPARISON OF THE NUMBER OF YEARS IN RIcm SCHOOL AGRICULTURE
OF AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION STUDENTS IN CLASSES OF 1952,
1953. AND 1951; SI GROUPS

 

 

 

Groups 0 Years 1-2 Years 3-h Years Chi Sq.
Transfer 6 h 7
Drop-out 6 h 12
Teacher 18 1h 23
Non-teacher 9 5 3
5.660

‘::-:
_.—_—

A

There was no significant difference between the groups.
E§.9$ER Mambership

The students in the four groups were divided into three areas,
with respect to the number of years they had been members of the AH
Club. These three areas were (1) students who had never been a AH Club
member, (2) students with 1 through 5 years of membership, and (3) stu-
dents with 6 through 10 years of membership. Table IV shows the tabu-

lation.

36
There was no significant difference between the groups and no

generalisation could be made.

TABLE XV

A COMPARISON OF THE NUMBER OF IEARS AS A NR CLUB MEMBER
OF AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION STUIENTS IN THE CLASSES
OF 1952, 1953. AND 1951. BI CLASSIFIED GROUPS

 

Groups 0 Years 1-5 Years 6-10 Years Chi Sq,
Transfer 6 7 h
Drop-out 13 7 2
Teacher 22 22 11
Nonsteacher 9 7 1
3.806

 

Average §E£§.$§ "100-200" Agricultural Courses

The average mark for all agricultural courses in the 100 and 200
series were averaged for each student in each of the four groups. The
four groups were then compared by the Chi Square method and the signif-
icant difference determined. The results of the tabulation are shown
in Table XVI. .

The drop-out group had by far the lowest average and 80 per cent
of the students in this group fell in the 2.3 and below interval. The
average for the transfer and teacher groups was nearly equal, but in the
transfer group the students were congregated at either end of the scale.
This would indicate that there were two distinct groups within this
group. One of these groups received high grades for the "100-200" ag-

ricultural courses, while the other received low grades. The non-teadaer

37
group had the highest average (2.9) of the four groups which was .h of
a point higher than the teacher group. 0f the nonsteacher group, 76
per cent had grades averaging 2.9 or above. The difference between

groups was significant at the .01 level.

TABLE XVI

ACONPARISON OF THE AVERAGE GRADES IN "100-200" AGRICULTURAL COURSES
‘ OF AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION STUDENTS IN THE CLASSES OF 1952,
1953. AND 195A BI CLASSIFIED GROUPS

 

 

 

Groups 2.3&below 2.h-2.8 2.9&above Ave. Chi Sq.
Transfer 13 9 l7 2.h
Drop-out 20 5 0 1.5
Teacher 1h 17 21 2.5 -
Nonpteacher 3 1 13 2.9

_ 29.998**

 

**Significant at the .01 level.

Interests 9_f_‘ a Farmer .
A student's interest of a farmer, was derived from Strong's Int-
erest Inventory at the same time the teacher satisfaction, and interests

of a vocational agricultural teacher rating was made. The student's
ratings in the four groups were separated into three intervals as shown

in Table XVII. There was no significant difference between the groups.

V. AGE WHEN ENTERING COLLEGE

As has been the procedure in the past, the population of this
study was arranged into transfer, drop-out, teacher, and non-teacher

groups. These four groups were divided into two intervals, the first

TABLE XVII

38

A COMPARISON OF THE SCORES RECEIVED ON THE INTEREST OF A FARMER

PORTION OF STRONG'S INTEREST INVENTORY BY.AGRICULTURAL
EDUCATION STUDENTS IN THE CLASSES OF 1952, 1953,

AND 195h BI GROUPS

 

 

 

Groups 2.h&below 2.h-2.8 2.9&above Chi Sq.
Transfer 6 5 h
Drop-out 3 6 2
Teacher 12 26 13
Non-teacher 7 9 1

3.566

 

 

39

interval being composed of those students from 17 through 22 years of
age, and the second interval composed of students 23 years of age and
over. The ages of the students were determined at the time of matricu-
lation. The results of the tabulation are shown in Table XVIII. This
area was not included in the "Profile of Prospective Teachers of Voca-

tional Agriculture" .

TABLE XVIII '

A COMPARISON OF THE AGES AT NATRICULATION OF AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION
STUDENTS IN THE CLASSES OF 1952, 1953. AND 1951;
BI CLASSIFIED GROUPS

 

 

 

Ages
Groups 17-22 23&over Ave. Chi Sq.
Transfer 39 2 19.9
Drop-out 35 0 19.3
Teacher 7 3h 21 22.7
' Non-teacher 9 8 23.5

33.h7l**

 

 

r

*fiSignificant at the .01 level.
One hundred per cent of the drop-out group and 95 per cent of
the transfer group were composed of students 22 years of age or less.
The average age of students in these two groups was 19.3 and 19.9 respec-
tively. In the teacher and non-teacher groups there were only 62 and
53 per cent respectively which were 22 years of age or less when enter-
ing college. The average age for the teacher group was 22.7 and.for
the nonpteacher group 23.5.~ The teacher and non-teacher groups are
quite similar. The difference was significant at the .01 level as shown

in Table XVIII.

ho

VI. SIZE OF HIGH SCHOOL

The size of the high school from which a student came was desig-
nated as being a class A, B, C, or D high school. A class A high .
School has an enrollment of 900 students or more, a class B, 375 to 899
students, a.class C, 175 to 37h students, and a class D, 175 students
or less. The students in the four groups were‘tabulated as to the size
of the high school from which they graduated as shown in Table XII.
This area was not included in the "Profile of Prospective Teachers of
Vocational Agriculture".

The Chi Square method was used to determine if the difference

between the groups was significant.

TABLE XIX

A COMPARISON OF THE SIZE OF HIGH SCHOOLS OF AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION
STUDENTS IN THE CLASSES OF 1952, 1953. AND 195A
BI GROUPS

 

J L
If

Size of High School

 

Groups A or B C or D ' Chi Sq.
Transfer 9 2h
_ Drop-out 9 26
Teacher 9 39
Non-teacher 5 12
2.326

 

 

 

 

 

 

—— I

The four groups were very similar and there was no significant

difference between them.

CHAPTER III

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOI‘T-TENDATIONS

I. SUMMARY

The purpose of the study was (1) to determine what the prospec-
tive teachers of vocational agriculture, who did not enter the teaching
profession, did after dropping from the curriculum; (2) to determine
what per cent of prospective teachers of vocational agriculture did not
enter the teaching profession; (3) to determine the characteristics and
traits of prospective teachers of vocational agriculture who did not
enter the teaching profession; and (h) to determine if the individual's
records maintained in the Agricultural Education Office at Michigan
State University are adequate to predict if he will not teach.

The study revealed that nearly the same number of students grad-
uated from the curriculum as entered as first term freshmen. The num-
ber of students leaving the agricultural education curriculum was high-
est in the sophomore year, followed very closely by the freshman year.
In the junior year the number of students leaving had dropped to about

half of that for the sophomore year. By the end of the junior year
most of the students who left the curriculum had gone.

For the students leaving the agricultural education curriculum
in the freshman and sophomore years, the number which dropped out was
about equal to the number which transferred to other curricula. After
the sophomore year the number of students which transferred out, how-

ever, remained constant until the latter part of the junior year, after

L2
which the enrollment remained nearly constant.

Of the students who transferred to other curricula, over three-
quarters remained in the College of Agriculture, while the remaining
transferred to other colleges within the university.

Approximately 60 per cent of the students who graduated entered
the teaching profession while 20 per cent entered the military service.
The other 20 per cent entered other occupations.

The data for the characteristics and traits of the students in
the study were divided into four classified groups with respect to the
outcome of the students. If a student dropped out of school entirely,
the data for that student were entered in the drop-out group, or if he
transferred to another curricula, the data were entered in the transfer
group. The data for a student who graduated.from the curriculum were
separated into two groups depending on whether the individual taught
vocational agriculture or entered another occupation. The two groups
were teacher and non-teacher respectively. The transfer, drop-out,
teacher, and nonpteacher groups showed varying degrees of difference
in the areas selected for this study.

In the area of scholarship, significant differences were noted
for (l) ACE intelligence test, (2) reading comprehension test, (3)
honor-point ratio first year, (A) honor-point ratio second.year, (5)
honor-point ratio third year, (6) honor-point ratio in five basics, and
(7) honor-point ratio for basic English. For all of these scholastic
measures the drop-out group was by far the lowest. The transfer and

teacher groups were quite similar, while the non-teacher group in

A3
general was slightly superior.

The four groups in the area of qualifications in farming were
significantly'different in (1) number of months of farm experience, (2)
letter grade given by instructor for.farm skills, (3) level of ability
in a) dairy, b) poultry,c) horticulture, d) soils, e) crops, and.f)
farm.mechanics, and (h) average mark in "100-200“ agricultural courses.
For all these qualifications in farming measures the drop-out group was
low. The transfer group was slightly superior to the drop-out group

for levels of ability in various farm enterprises, and very much higher
in the average grades received in the “100-200“ agricultural courses.
The teacher and non-teacher groups were very similar in all aspects and
very much superior to the other two groups in all aspects except in the
average grade of the "100-200" agricultural courses where the transfer
group was about equal to the teacher and nonsteacher group.

The last area in which a significant difference between the four
groups was noted was 'age when entering college“. The drop-out group
had the youngest average age, while the transfer group's average age
was slightly higher. The average age of the students in the teacher
and non-teacher was about the same, but considerably higher than for
the other two groups.

measures used inishis study which showed no significant differ-
ence between the four groups were (1) mechanical index rating, (2)

grades in Education courses and Psychology 201, (3) interest ratings
for.farmers, teaching satisfaction, and vocational agricultural teach-

ers, (h) instructor's composite rating of the students, (5) levels of

Lb,
abilities in swine and farm.management, (6) types or sizes of farm on
which the students received their farm experience, (7) home agricultural
situations (commercial or non-commercial), (8) number of years as an
F.F.A. member, (9) number of years of high school agriculture, (10).num-
ber of years as a hH Club member, and (11) size of high schools atten-

ded.
II. CONCLUSIONS

The conclusions based on this study are as follows:

1. The number of students who will graduate from the agricultural
education curriculum is approximately equal to the number of students
entering the curriculum.as first term freshmen. Upon graduation approx-
imately 60 per cent will teach, 20 percent will enter service, and 20
per cent will enter other occupations.

2. The number of students transferring into the curriculum is
approximately equal to the combined number of students that transfer-
out and drop-out. Nearly all of the students transferring in from
other institutions graduate from the agricultural education curriculum.
Data were not available to determine the number of students graduating
from.the agricultural education curriculum, who transferred in from
other curricula within the university. Most of the students who trans-
fer in or out, or drop from the curriculum do so in the freshman and
sophomore years, and the majority of those transferring will remain in
the College of Agriculture.

3. The characteristics and traits of students in the areas of

1:5
scholarship, qualifications in farming, and age when entering college
are the most valid for determining if a student will drop-out, trans-
fer to another curriculum, graduate from the agricultural education
curriculum and teach, or graduate from the agricultural education curr-
iculum.and not teach. A student must have a 2.0 honor-point ratio to
remain in the university beyond the sophomore year, and have at least
2h months of farm experience to teach vocational agriculture.

The difference in characteristics and traits of the graduates of
agricultural education who teach and those who do not teach is very
small. Students who have a low rating in the areas of scholarship,
and/or qualifications in.farming can be expected to leave the curriculum
unless their ratings in these areas are improved.

h. The characteristics and traits which are similar for all
groups of agricultural education students are in the areas of (1)
professional achievement and interests, (2) size of high school, and
(3) qualifications in farming dealing with skills in swine and.farm
management, home farm situations, youth training in agriculture in

high school, and interests of a farmer.
III. RECOI’IIVENDAT IONS

On the basis of this study the following recommendations are
made:

1. Although students who are low in all of the areas become
vocational agricultural teachers, students-with low ratings in the

areas of scholarship and/or farm experience should be encouraged to

1:6
improve in these areas if they expect to graduate from the agricultural
education curriculum.

2. ‘When determining if a student is a good prospect to become a
teacher of vocational agriculture, the measures which did not show a
significant difference between the four groups need not be considered.

3. More guidance and counseling should.be administered in the
freshman and sophomore years as the greatest number of drop-outs and
transfers occur in these years. Special attention should.be given to
students with characteristics and traits similar to those of the drop-
out and transfer groups.

h. Characteristics and traits which could differentiate stu-
dents who will graduate and teach, and those who will graduate and not

teach, should be derived.

BIBL IOGRAPHY

A8

A. PUBLICATIONS OF THE GOVERNMENT, LEARNED SOCIETIES,
.AND OTHER ORGANIZATIONS

Michigan State College Catalog l9h6-l9h8. East Lansing: Michigan State
College, 19h8.

Strong, E. K. Jr. ”Vocational Interest Blank for Men (Revised) Form M."
Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1938.

B. UNPUBLISHED MATERIALS

“College of Agriculture's Term Roster." East Lansing: College of
Agriculture, Michigan State University, 19h9-l955. (Mimeographed.)

Nelson, K. G. l'The Interests of Teachers of Vocational Agriculture as
Related to Vocational Satisfaction." Unpublished Doctor's thesis,
University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, 1952.

Sledge, George‘w. ”Relationship Between Some Pre-teaching Character-
istics and Subsequent Performance of Teachers of Vocational
Agriculture.“ Unpublished Doctor's thesis, Michigan State
University, East Lansing, l9Sh.

APPENDIX

Page 50

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“mucoaaoo

 

 

venompum ommaaoo

emecmpuw Hooeom emax
coHpmH50flaume mo memo

 

 

sauna a0 memo

 

m2¢z

mMHBH mac qamommmm

Am.mconpmv
OHoos$sssmoosbeeoWosonoeodeoOMOeoNsooHsso HQEHNM G M0 afimmoHOPCH

mwmhfioo
¢sssosoosomssscocoa-0000000.oonsosososenH ohm438NlOOH: CH Xhfla om>¢
OH.s¢seomoooFssoceeomssodsoeMsosNe‘oHOoso ”Hmmhv “03562 QSHD mIJ
..NsssoooosoMoesosoosoNsessssssoHessoascoco Amhw0hv m§£SOHHm< 0” .3
om<00000O.IEWOOCOO...“OOQOOOOCOMIHU...O..... Afigv .4 09m Com

Ahpaflam>

dOOOOOOO..mOOCOOOOOOOOOQOOOO.OQOOOOOOOOOm Us oucomv ”mgmpoo
fisssosssOOMOOOOOOQOoNoosossssoHsosoossosO Anhmmhv “CDOE<

cocofinoaxm seam

UZHEM¢m 2H mZOHedonanna

We.oeoeoooMossesoooo<osoeoeosogoosossoosp A V QQHMOQEOO
- mmcwpma m.aoposnpde

OHOOsmsssmessfissswssOMOooJossMsooNsosHsos Z COHPONMWHpM” mgfiomma

OHssswossmoospooso.ooMQOOJesomessNooeHoosAm-mCOHva whmnommy m<'o>
Amdfipcooaemv mpmoaoch

secessseomossssooosOeoossoosonosessseom mom COHpQOSUm

osssoseesmseoso00.90.000.000 sessossso FON COHPNOSfim

m

.Q
000...... ......OOOOOCOOOOOOOQOOCOOOOOO

b
How amoaoeoamm
00.000.000.00.sosooQoeosooseem NON COHPQOSB
pcaeo>mwno<

MOHemHmmaoamamo aazoemmmaoma

<<1<£<2

Jesse-osoon...easessNosoesssssHssssoseoeo :Qflflmé OHDNm
400000.000“...sees.stecoseeooHcsooeoesso ”OHmmm 0>fih
4.000.000.M000cocossNooosssossHssssosssso ocfih Gum £95m #fionw “CCU:
4N...so...om...oososeNsoooossssHososoeosso ooHah UCN Cfipflm pfiom .HOCOZ
.JssososOOOMOOQeoseestosecessoHsseooococo 0% pm.” OHPNM “CH0“ hocom
passabmano¢

OH. 0 owe o owe .- 0N... so. 0 one. saws com. o 0N0 s 0H. s o 065$...”de HGOHCflEOOfi
OHooomooomoooboooQo.oncoodoooMoooNooofioo. CQflmcvfithEOO MCHUmwm
OHsooaoeomsooFoooQooomoooJoooMoooNoooHoco #008 QOCQMHHHOPCH WO<
apaaana
. mHmmmjozom

mmDHHDOHmU¢ A<ZOHHMUO> mu mMManmB HbHHommmOMm mo MAHmomm

5.

FARM EXPERIENCE INVENTORY
for

Prospective Teachers of Vocational Agriculture

Division of Education, Michigan State College
(1945)

Name ...........0.......................Age (nearest birtde)...........

Farm experience prior to high-shcool graduation:
a. For how many years did you live on a farm prior to graduation
from high school?..............
b. At what age did this experience begin?.............
c. At what age did this experience end?...............
d. Size of farm in tillable acres...............Type of
famj-rg000000.000000000.

Farm experience while attending college:
a. For how many sumners have you worked on a farm since high
school graduation...............
b. Size of farm in tillable acres... .. ..Type of
farming.............

Full-time experience:

a. For how many months have you had full-time experience since
graduation from.high school and exclusive of summers reported
in No. 2?

b. Size of farm in tillable acres..............Type of
fanmimg.............

c. Indicate your farmdng status during this period by recording
the number of months of the above experience spent in each status.

Status Months each status
At home with allowance ............
Farm laborer with specific wages at home ............
Farm laborer away from home .....~.......
At home with income from one or more enterprises ............
Partner in farm business at home ............
Partner in farm business away from home ............
Renter and Operator of farm ............
Owner and operator of farm ............
otha. Status 000000000000

How many months have you worked on the college farm? Part-time while
attending college.........., full-time during summers, etc............. .

Other part-time employment on farms after finishing high school. No.
of months.............. Preportion of time spent on farm work..........

quperience in occupations closely related to agriculture:

Occupation No. months enployed.

l....................000 0.0.........
2.........00.0.000000000 ............

30.000000000000000000000 essesosssoso

Page 51

......

.2-

Page 52

FUNDAMENTAL FARM SKILLS

Which of the following jobs have you performed and feel qualified to demonstrate?
Make one check ..Uf..if you have performed the job and do not feel qualified to
perform.it now. make two checksJ(¥:.if you have performed the job and feel

qualified to perform.it at the present time.

Dairy’Cattle

1.....Operated a milking.machine
2.....Operated a cream separator
3.....Adjusted a cream separator
A.....Tested dairy products for butterfat
5.....Clipped cows for sanitary milk
production
6.....Treated teats of dairy cows for warts
7.....Removed rudimentary teats
8.....Treated cow with caked udder
9.....Made a calf box for raising calves
10.....Planned a.dairy bann
11.....Planned a milk house
12.....Teach.a calf to drink
13.....Took full charge of feeding dairy
herd
11+.....Kept records of production for dairy
cows
15.....Figured annual production averages of
dairy cows in terms of cow years
16.....Applied fastemilking technique

Beef Cattle

1......Took full charge of feeding beef
herd

2......Took full charge of feeding animals
for slaughter '

3......Butchered a beef animal

h......Cut up a beef carcass

5......Estimated weight of animals

6......Trained horns on young cattle

Horses

1. . . . ..Trained a colt

2......Detected common unsoundnesses of
horses

3......Determined age of horses by teeth

h......Trimmed hoofs

5......Adjusted a harness

6......Fitted collars

7......Took charge of feeding work horses

17....Used improved cleaning agents
for washing dairy equipment

18....Took samples of milk from in—
dividual cows for mastitis test

19....Made sediment test of milk

20....Made up lye solution for rubber
parts on milking machines

21....Made up lye solution and boiled
rubber parts on milking machines

22....Milked cows by hand

23....Dehorned calves

2A....Tap cows for bloat

25....Treated calves' navel cords with
iodine

26....Tattooed and ear-tagged calves

27....Treated cows for milk fever

28....Treated cows for mastitis

7.....Castrated bull calves, list
methods:.......................

8.....Kept records of gains of calves
of individual beef cows

9.....Used a pinching chute for catch-
ing and restraining beef cattle

8.....Fed a colt

9.....Directed feeding of idle horses
10.....Break to ride

ll.....Break to drive

12.....Treat for parasites

13. . . . .Decorate for show

lh.....Handle a stallion

15.....Care for a mare at foaling time

Swine

1....Treated pigs for worms

2....Took full charge of brood sows

3....Attended sows at farrowing time

A....Performed all steps in McLean
County'system

5....Butchered a hog

6....Cut up a hog carcass

7....Cured pork

8....Castrated boars

9....Kept records for identification

10....Kept records for farrowing

11....Kept records for weights of litters

12. . ..Fed pigs

13....Ear marked litters

lh....Estimated weights of hogs

15....Selected gilts for breeding herd

16....Selected boar for breeding herd

17....Clipped needle teeth of pigs

18....Nanaged sow-testing program, in—
cluding 56-day litter weights

19....Treated pigs for mange and lice

Page 53

Sheep

1....Drenched sheep for parasites
2....Docked lambs
3....Castrated lambs
A....Sheared sheep
5....Tied fleece
6....Dipped sheep
7....Butchered a lamb
8....Cut up carcass
9....Attended flock during lambing
season
lO....Tbok full charge of feeding a
breeding flock
11....Kept records for identification
12....Kept records for'lambing
13....Kept records for wool production
lh....Kept records.for'weight of lambs
per ewe
15....Culled inferior ewes
16. s s .Fed 1.31an
17....Determined age of sheep by teeth
18....Selected a ram.fcr breeding flock
19....Caught sheep by approved method
20....Flushed ewes
21....Used phenothiazine in salt to
control internal parasites
22....Sprayed sheep
23....Dusted sheep
2A....Tagged ewes before breeding and
lambing
25....Experience in judging sheep on
basis of type
26....EXperience in grading market
lambs ‘ '

Other Livestock Skills

1....Applied for registrations and transfers for one kind of livestock
2....Conducted a post mortem for one or>more kinds of livestock. List:

.....000......0.........0....0........0.0.........0.....0...........

.O..0.00.........0........0........0................................

3....Fitted and showed one or more kinds of livestock. List:.............

......OO000................................00.00......O...O....0....

4....Selected beef or dairy animals onla basis of“type and inheritance for pro-

duction

5....Removed mrns, list metmds:.............................O...........
6....Kept breeding records and.computed calving efficiency

7....Treated animals for warbles

8....Treated animals for lice

9....Placed ring in nose of bull
10....Trimned hoofs of animals
11....Attended animal at parturition

-h-

Page 5h

Other livestock Skills (continued)

12.. . .Treated navel of calf

13....Trained animal to lead

lh....Mixed minerals and feeds

15. . . .Drenc hed animal for bloat
16....Treated animal for foct rot
17....Developed a farm.flybcontrol program
18....Threw an animal by rope method

19....Compiled a pedigree (at least 3 generations)
20....Outlined a breeding program.to be followed fer several years.

Poultry

1....Culled a laying flock
2....Caponized cockerels
3....Candled eggs

h....Graded eggs

5....Operated an incubator
6....Operated a brooder

7....Mixed dry'mash

8....Treated poultry house for mites
9....TTeated hens for'lice
10....Took blood samples for test of

pullorum disease
11....Wing banded chicks
12....Took full charge of feeding a
layingnflock
13....Operated trap nests
14....Thoroughly cleaned a brooder house
15....Killed.and.dressedlfowls
.... a. Dry picked

b. Hard scalded
Slack scalded

000. c.

16....Selected pullets for laying house
l7....Identified several varieties of
poultry
18....Constructed suitable mash hoppers
for
.... a.

.0.. b.

0... C.

Young chicks
Growing stock
laying hens

Horticulture

1....Mixed Spray materials for orchard
2....Sprayed fruit trees. List types
or spmyers:.........0...0...0...

3....Repaired sprayers. List Kinds:

....................0..00.0000.00

I.-- _ -Pv'nnafl fruit trans- Ti 9+. Kinda:

19....Constructed wire stand for water
fountain
20....Made nests
a. Battery of
b. Community
21....Remodelled dropping boards to
dropping pits
22....Produced clean eggs
23....Cleaned eggs
2A....Drawn poultry*.
a. Broilers and fryers by
Splitting
b. Roaster'drawing turkey or
roasters
.... 'c. Cut up chicken
25....Vaccinated pullets for Pox.or
Newcastle
26....Diagnosed and corrected venti-
lation and insulation troubles.
How about skills or arts on
timing or seasonality of doing
these skills, such as;
a. marketing broilers in early
Spring
b. Buying chicks in February or
March
.... c. Heuse pullets in August
27....Debeaked pullets or fowl
28....Packaged poultry for home
freezers
29....Built range shelter fer pullets
or turkeys

0...

5....Pruned small fruits. list Kinds:
6....Made graft buddings. List Kinds:

7....Harvested fruit. List Kinds:

8- - - .Graded fruit

-5-

Page 55

Horticulture (c ontinued)

10....Planted fruit trees. List Kinds:
Ofiosoooooooooooooooooogoes...oso.

11....Planted small fruits and vegetables
List Kinds:.......................

12....Made cuttings. List:.............

13....Made a plan for a garden

1A....Made a plan for home-ground planting

15....Made a hotbed

16....Operated a hotbed

17....Thinned fruit

18....Applied fertilizer to plants. List
kinds of plants:...................

Crops

1....Sowed Brome grass seed
2....Sowed Reed canary seed
3....Sowed sudan grass seed
A....Filled a silo
5....Harvested sugar beets
6....Teated seed potatoes
7....Treated seed grain. State Method:
8....Inoculated legume seed
9....Operated and adjusted fanning.mill
10....Tested field crop seeds for gerb
mination
ll....Stored corn
12....Harvested corn
13....Used chemicals to eradicate weeds
lh....Selected and exhibited a sample of
grain ,
15....Performed all.steps in making hay
16....Identified plants of atleast twenty
common‘weeds
17....Identified seeds of at least twenty
common weeds.
18....Identified lO farnkcrop diseases
19....Identified plants and seeds of 20
Michigan farm crops
20....Harvested a seed crop of a Michigan
forage crop
21....Made a MCNaughton tall field bean
stack
22....Graded table-stock potatoes
23....Cut potato seed
24....Prepared and applied Spray for
potatoes
25....Rogued a potato seed field

19....Used proper control measures for
at least five insect pests of
vegetables

20....Operated a cold frame

21....Pruned shrubs

22....Identified common flowering
plants

23....Identified shrubs

2A....Sprayed a vegetable garden. List
crops:.........................

25....Applied fruit thinning or pre-
harvest drop sprays

26....Operated tillage implements in
garden and orchard

27....Applied mulching materials

28....Applied poison for mouse control

29....Applied chemicals for weed
control

Soils

1....Top-dressed soil with fertilizer:
nitrogen...., phOSphate......,
Potash......, complete.......

2....Tested soil for acidity

3....Tested soil for nitrogen,
phosphorous and potash

h....Identified soils as to texture
and structure

5....Applied lime or marl

6....Calculated soil productivity
balance of a rotation

7....Applied fertilizer to an alfalfa
stand

8....Planned crop rotations

9....Constructed a device to control
erosion

lO....Built a construction to control a
gully

11....Drained wet land

12....Tested plant tissues for nutrient
deficiencies

13....Identified nutrient deficiencies
by appearance of plants

lb....Deve10ped a plan for a soil im»
provement program for entire farm

15....Interpret soil map (Soil profile
identification).

16....Tumbler experiment for lime
requirements

17....Soil structure measurement

-6- Page 56

26....Identified at least twenty harmful insects

27....Graded grain according to market grades. List kinds..................
28....Obtained a stand of alfalfa

29....Calibrated planter, drill, seeder

30....Side dressed a crop

Farm Mechanics

1.....Operated and adjusted a gasoline engine
2.....Adjusted and repaired ignition....carburetion....cooling....and lubri-
cation....system.of a tractor
3.....Operated a feed grinder '
h.....0perated and adjusted fanm machinery, plow....pulverizer....planter....
drill....mower....binder....combise....baler....potato digger....
5.....0verhauled and repaired major items of farm.machinery, list...........,
oooooooooooooo,oooooooooo-oo,oo00000000090...o,oooooooooooooo,,00000000
6.....Painted a farm building, sprayed........or brushed..........
7.....Mixed paint
8.....Constructed a building. List.......... ............ .............
9.....Selected farm motors for specific needs
10.....Figured a bill of materials for a building
11.....Measured and cut rafters and steps
12.....Filed and set saws
13.....Sharpened hand tools
1h.....Cperated and.maintained powerehop equipment, drill press....power saw.....
grinder.....
15.....Operated a.level for'determining grade lines
16.....Figured materials for a concrete construction job
17.....Constructed a concrete job. List........... ............... .............
18.....Used solder for repairing metals. COpper....galvanized iron....brass.....
zinc....iron....steel....lead joints.....
19.....Identified kinds of iron and steel
20.....Did simple forge work. Bending....drawing....upsetting....annealing....
tempering.....
21.....Measured, cut and threaded pipe
22.....Installed and maintained water and sewage disposal systems
23.....Operated gas welder and cutter
2h.....0perated an arc welder
25.....Laid out and installed wiring in farm buildings for light and power
26.....Installed and operated farm coolers and refrigerators
27.....Laid out and constructed sheet-metal projects or jobs
28.....Deterudned lighting, ventilation and insulation of farm buildings
29.....Drew and sketched to scale some piece of farm equipment
30.....Figured pulley sizes and Speeds
31.....Figured gear ratios and Speeds (Spur, worm, Sprocket)
32.....Identified common types of nails, screws, bolts, hinges
33.....Measured, cut and puttied window panes
34.....Built and maintained fences
35.....Planned farmstead wiring
36.....Did extension wiring such as installing additional lights or service outlets.
37.....Repaired.and maintained electrical equipment. List.......... ...............

000000000000 00000000000000 00000000000... 0000000000000 000000000000 0000000

Farm Mechanics (continued)

38....Planned and installed an irrigation system
39....Planned and installed a tile drainage system
1.0....Built and maintained terraces

1.1....Planned and built a home farm shop
#2....Calibrate a fertilizer drill

Farm Hana gemen t

1....Kept accounts for entire farm

2....Kept a cost account for one farm enterprise
3....Made a complete farm inventory

A....Prepared a net worth statement

5....Borrowed money and gave note

6....Iv'ade an analysis of a farm business

7....Made out a father-and-son farm partnership agreement
8....Made out a farm lease agreement

9....Made out a farm income tax return

Page 57

Rom USE ONLY

 

 

 

 

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

3 1293 03070 9418