A SWEY Q'F VALQES AS A EEEFE'EERJENTEAL CHARACTERISTEC C}? MQRE EFFECWVE ANQ- LESS EFFECTIVE CQUNTY EXTENSEQA‘ AGEN‘FS Thesis for ”no Degree of M. 5. MCKIGM STATE UIQI‘Z’EIESLTY 3702113. Curtis- Swain —- AAA-gnu E‘J LIBRARY . Michigan Stats 1.! University . k A STUDY OF VALUES AS A DIFFERENTIAL CHARACTERISTIC OF MORE EFFECTIVE AND LESS EFFECTIVE COUNT Y EXTENSION AGENTS BY JOHN CURTIS SWAN A THESIS Submitted to the College of Agriculture of Michigan State University of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Institute for Extension Personnel Development 1960 ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to express my gratitude to Dr. George H. Axinn, my major professor for his encouragement and helpful assistance in connection with this study. The assistance given by Dr. Edward O. Moe, Dr. Irvin J. Lehmann and Dr. David K. Berlo is also appreciated. I am indebted to the district extension directors in Michigan, the state leaders of county agricultural agents in New York and to the agents in both states for their participation in the study. I am especially grateful to my wife, Mary and our four daughters for their encouragement and patience during this period of graduate study. A STUDY OF VALUES AS A DIFFERENTIAL CHARACTERISTIC OF MORE EFFECTIVE AND LESS EFFECTIVE COUNTY EXTENSION AGENTS By JOHN CURTIS SWAN AN ABSTRACT Submitted to the College of Agriculture of Michigan State University of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Institute for Extension Personnel Development 1960 7; Approved /%\<{ A/ 68sz " J / iv John C. Swan ABSTRACT This study was an attempt to determine if values are a differential characteristic of more effective and less effective county extension agents. A difference in the values of the two groups would be evidence that a pencil and paper test of values would be useful in selecting new agents. Agents were ranked in order of their over-all effectiveness, and the top one third were chosen as the more effective group, and the bottom one-third as the less effective group. The Differential-Values Inventorywas completed by agents in each of the two groups, and the responses were analyzed for evidence to supporttthe following hypotheses. 1. More effective county extension agents have significantly different value patterns than less effective county extension agents. 2. More effective agents place significantly more value on sociability than do agents who are less effective. 3. More effective agents place significantly more value on conformity than do less effective agents. 4. The value patterns of supervisors of county extension agents are significantly less traditional than the value patterns of the agents they supervise. V Abstract John C. Swan The data did not fully support any of the hypotheses. It did indicate that the values of agent supervisors differ significantly from the values of some of the agent groups, but the difference did not hold in all cases. A significant difference between the values of Michigan agents and the values of New York agents was noted. It was concluded that this study does not validate the Differential-Values Inventory for differentiating between more effective and less effective extension agents. TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .................................. LIST OF TAB LES ....................................... INTRODUCTION ....................................... Chapter I. THE PROBLEM ............................... The General Problem The Study Problem Values Defined Specific Values Measured II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE ..................... III. HYPOTHESES .................................. IV. METHOD OF STUDY ............................ The D-V Inventory Administration of the D-V Inventory Criterion ' More Effective and Less Effective Agents V. FINDINGS ..................................... Statistical Hypotheses Comparisons between States VI. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ................. APPENDIX ............................................ BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................ vi Page ii vii N \lU'lerN 10 20 25 26 27 28 31 33 34 37 4O 43 57 Table LIST OF TABLES Mean traditional scores of groups of more effective and less effective New York county extension agents - . . Mean traditional scores of groups of more effective and less effective Michigan county extension agents - - . - Mean sociability and conformity value scores of groups of more effective and less effective agents ........... Mean traditional value scores of extension supervisors and groups of county extension agents in New York and Michigan ......................................... Mean D-V inventory scores of supervisors and selected groups of agents in Michigan and New York .......... vii Page 35 35 36 38 39 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this study is to determine whether more effective county extension workers have different value patterns than less effective workers. Certain values of all of the county extension workers in Michigan and the county agricultural agents in New York were measured with the Differential-Values Inventory. This inventory was developed by Prince1 for measuring traditional and emergent value patterns. Scores from the inventory indicate the extent to which an individual is traditional in his value orientations. The more effective and less effective agents were determined by choosing the top one-third and bottom one-third from rank-order lists supplied by agent supervisors. The mean traditional scores of the two groups were compared to determine if there is a significant difference in their value pattern orientations. The mean sociability and conformity value scores of the two groups were also compared. It was reasoned that if a significant difference was found in the value scores of the two groups of agents, then the D-V Inventory would be a useful instrument in selection of new county extension workers. 1 Richard Prince, "A Study of the Relationships between Individual Values and Administrative Effectiveness in the School Situation, " (unpublished Ph. D. thesis, University of Chicago, 1957). CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM The General Problem A responsibility of the Cooperative Extension Service Administration is the selection of new county extension agents. This administrative responsibility becomes continually more important as county extension staffs increase in size to work more intensively with individual farm families, to serve new and larger audiences, and to work in new program areas. These increasing demands on Extension, in addition to requiring more agents, require agents who are able to function skillfully as teachers, leaders and counselors. They must be able to perform successfully in many different roles. Thus the extension administrator who does the selecting is faced with the problem of choosing those individuals who can perform, or possess ability to learn how to perform, successfully as agents. At the present time in Michigan and New York, selection of new agents is made largely on the basis of certain objective data obtained on an application blank and college transcript, and information gained from references. The application blank reveals prior work and educational experience, special interests, and military service, in addition to certain face data. The transcript, in addition to indicating college grades, provides a picture of the applicant's academic curriculum. Letters of reference are heavily discounted, but telephone or personal contact with references sometimes provides pertinent information about the applicant. Information obtained from these sources is largely historical in nature, giving a rough indication of past experiences and successes. They are not likely to reveal undesirable experiences of the applicant or failures which he may have had. The exception may be the transcript of college grades, but research to date has failed to reveal a significant positive relationship between college grades and success as an extension agent. However, the general policy is to employ only those applicants who have at least a 2. 0 college grade point average. One reason for this is the difficulty agents experience in obtaining admittance to a graduate school, with a low undergraduate grade point average. When selecting agents, it appears that extension adminis- trators in these two states rely heavily on impressions they gain from a personal interview. They undoubtedly have some degree of accuracy in selecting individuals who will become successful agents. That is, they have a general understanding of the type of person who will do well in extension work. However, the writer has failed to find anything in the literature that would indicate other than a low validity for the personal interview as a selection tool. The Study Problem This study is concerned with the improvement of selection practices used by extension administrators in employing county extension agents. Research findings and the writer's opservations indicate that certain characteristics 0r traits of an individual have a bearing on his ability to adjust to and perform effectively in the roles peculiar to county extension worker positions. The specific trait that has been chosen for the study is value patterns. The study is designed to: (1) measure specific values of county extension workers, (2) . determine if value patterns of the more effective agents are different from value patterns of the less effective agents, when agents are ranked in order of over-all effectiveness by their super- visors. If value patterns between the two groups of agents are found to be significantly different, then this will be some evidence that values can be used as a variable in predicting success in county extension work. In discussing procedure for better selection of workers Northcott states: This problem has two aspects, that of the job for which the selection is being made and that of the individual capacities and aptitudes which will enable a person to fill it satisfactorily. The job and the worker have each their own characteristics which are related in that the capacities of the worker must fit in with the require- ments of the job. Knowledge of the job will guide in the search for a suitable worker; discovery of the capacities of the applicant will assist in forming a more reliable judgment on his suitability.1 _V 1C. H. Northcott, Personnel Management (New York: Philosophical Library, Inc., 1956), p. 288. Values Defined There is a difference in the concept of and meaning of values as expressed by different writers. According to Florence Kluckholm: The premises and assumptions which we make about our- selves, about our fellow men, indeed about the nature of man in general seem to guide our actions in dealing with ourselves, our fellow men, and men in general. Specific patterns of behavior insofar as they are influenced by cultural factors (and few are not so influenced) are the concrete expressions reflecting generalized meanings of values. And to the extent that the individual personality is a product of training in a particular cultural tradition it is also at the generalized value level that one finds the most significant differences. 1 Young and Mack say that: Values are assumptions, largely unconscious, of what is right and important. Some set of values form the core of every culture. The ethos, or fundamental characteristics of any culture, are a reflection of its basic values. 2 3 . Stuart Dodd defines a value as what a person chooses. He says the thing chosen has greater value to him at the moment than the alternative choices or than whatever he gives up in order to get 1Florence R. Kluckhohn, "Dominant and Variant Value Orientations, ” Personality in Nature, Society, and Culture, ed. Clyde Kluckhohn and Henry A. Murray (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 19 55), pp. 342-45. 2Kimball Young and Raymond W. Mack, Sociology and Social Life (New York: American Book Company, 1959), p. 70. 3 Stuart Carter Dodd, “How To Measure Values, ” Washing- ton Public Opinion Laboratory, University of Washington. (Mineographed. ) the thing he wants; we offer a person alternatives and his choice defines his relative values in that situation. Robin Williams says, ”Values are not the concrete goals of action, but rather the criteria by which goals are chosen. . . . . 1 . Values are important, not tr1v1al or of sl1ght concern. " This concept is also illustrated in Maslow's discussion of value theory, in con- nection with his thoughts about the single, ultimate value of man: . it looks as if there were a single ultimate value for mankind, a far goal toward which all men strive. . this amounts to realizing the potentialities of the person, that is to say, becoming fully human, every- thing that a person can become. . the human being has within him a pressure . toward unity of personality, toward spontaneous ex- pressiveness, toward full individuality and identity. If, as Maslow advocates, there is a "single, ultimate value" then it would follow that there are lesser values also serving as the motivating force for overt behavior. It also suggests that values are arranged in a hierarchy. A simple operational definition will serve to illustrate the concept of values discussed above. Agent A and B both attend an annual extension conference. A goes to enjoy himself being with other 1 Robin M. Williams, Jr. , American Society (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1957), p. 374. 2Abraham H. Maslow, ”Psychological Data and Value Theory, " New Knowledge in Human Values, ed. Abraham H. Maslow (New York: Harper 8: Bros. , 1959), p. 123. people, while B goes because he feels it is his duty to be loyal to his organization. If we assume that some value system is operating and affecting the choices made by A and B, then we can reason that A and B have different value orientations. It would seem that A places a higher value on something we can label as sociability, that is he has a strong desire to be with people and interact with them, and has a greater desire to attend the conference for this reason than for loyalty reasons. On the other hand B is more desirous of satisfying his feelings about loyalty than he is of going for social reasons. However, it is also reasonable to assume that in some situations involving a similar choice, A would behave more like B, or he would be motivated like B. That is, he would choose to do something because of loyalty to his organization. Such a situation might be when A perceived the organization to be threatened, and believes that his attendance at the extension conference would help reduce the threat. Thus, if the assumptions are correct, it would appear that there is a hierarchy of values operating to influence the behavior of A. Specific Values Measured The specific values measured in this study are those 1 described by Spindler. He argues that the core of social and cultural George Spindler, ”Education in a Transforming American Culture, " Harvard Educational Review, XXV, No. 3 (Summer, 1955), pp. 145-56. change can be conceived as a radical shift in core values. He sees culture as a goal oriented system, and says that: . . these goals are expressed, patterned, lived out by people in their behaviors and aspirations in the form of values--objects or possessions, conditions of existence, personality or characterological features, and states of mind, that are conceived as desirable, and act as motivating determinants of behaviors. . . . many conflicts between parents and teachers, school boards and educators, parents and children, and between the various personages and groups within the school system (teachers against teachers, administrators against teachers, and so on) can be understood as con- flicts that grow out of sharp differences in values that mirror social and cultural transformation of tremendous scope-—and for which none of the actors in the situation can be held personally accountable. Institutions and people are in a state of flux, contradictory views of life are held by different groups and persons within the society. Spindler labels the shift in value patterns as being from the traditional to emergent. The traditional values which he describes include: puritan morality, work success ethic, individualism, and future-time orientation. The emergent values include: sociability, relativistic moral attitudes, present—time orientation, and conformity. He briefly describes these values as follows: puritan morality-- respectability, thrift, self denial, sexual constraint; a puritan being someone who can have anything he wants, as long as he doesn't enjoy it; work-success ethic--successful people work hard to become so. Anyone can get to the top if he tries hard enough, so people who are 1Ibid., pp. 145-53. not successful are lazy, or stupid, or both; people must work desperately and continuously to convince themselves of their worth; individualism--the individual is sacred, and always more important than the group, the value sanctions independence and originality, sometimes disregard for other people‘s rights; future-time orientation-- the future, not the past or present, is important, time is valuable and cannot be wasted, present needs must be denied for satisfaction to be gained in the future. Emergent values: sociability--one should like people and get along well with them, suspicion of solitary activities is characteristic; relativistic moral attitude-—absolutes in right and wrong are questionable, morality is what the group thinks is right; shame, rather than guilt- oriented personality is appropriate; present-time orientation-~no one can tell what the future will hold, therefore one should enjoy the present-— but within the limits of the well-rounded, balanced personality and group; conformity-—implied in the other emergent values; everything is relative to the group; group harmony is the ultimate goal, leadership consists of group—machinery lubrication. 10 CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE The writer reviewed all of the literature directly related to the problem of selecting county extension agents, which was available to him in a limited period of time. In addition, an attempt was made to review studies of a similar nature, in related fields. In general, no studies revealed a measurable predictor variable that can be used with a high degree of confidence in prediction of success in county extension work. One of the more promising studies was conducted by Nye. He tested the hypothesis that success in county extension work can be predicted from a combination of known factors about an individual’s background, training, intelligence level, vocational interests, attitudes, and other personality characteristics. His findings revealed that college grades may have some association with agent success, but he concluded: ". . . it is clear that a knowledge of an individualis background and training leaves a great deal unknown concerning his potential effectiveness as an agent. " With respect to the comparative contribution of four variables measured in an inventory which he devised, he estimated that vocational interests contribute about eleven percent, personality--twenty-eight percent, attitudes--nine percent, 1 Ivan Nye, The Relationship of Certain Factors to County Agent Success, University of Missouri Research Bulletin 498 (Columbia, Missouri, 1952). 11 and background and training--fifteen percent to variability in agent effectiveness. He found that an unweighted total inventory score was a better predictor of the dependent variable rated against effectiveness than any one of the four variables which comprise it. It accounted for about sixty-three percent of the difference between most effective and least effective agents. Nye's inventory has merited further study, and it is currently being studied by extension administration in New York State and in Michigan. Posz1 conducted a study to determine the relationship between the academic status and backgrounds of the county agricultural agents and 4—H Club agents in Michigan and two criteria of work adjustment—-work effectiveness and job satisfaction. The five aspects of academic background selected for study were: scores on the American Council on Education Psychological Examination, all- college grade point averages, number of hours of technical agriculture, technical agriculture grade point averages, and college majors. For both the agricultural agents and 4-H Club agents there were no significant differences between the variable work effectiveness groups with respect to A. C. E. scores, mean all-college grade point averages, mean technical grade point averages, or mean number of hours of agriculture. There were no significant differences in the success 1A. Conrad Posz, ”The Academic Backgrounds of Agricultural Extension Workers as Related to Selected Aspects of Work Adjustment” (unpublished Ed. D. thesis, Michigan State College, 1952). 12 ratings of the agents who majored in various fields of emphasis, or between the variable satisfaction groups and the variables listed above. A study conducted by the writer1 failed to account for any difference between relative work effectiveness groups of New York county agricultural agents when undergraduate college grade point average was used as a predictor variable. A study to discover any possible basic differences in method of operation between high ranking agents and other agents in Michigan was conducted by Curry. 2 He observed that high ranking agents organized more groups; as consultants they were able to attract more people, due to their efficiency plus their intensity of interaction and positive knowledge of farm practice. Curry found that high ranking agents were oriented toward the expectations, needs and desires of the local people more than other agents. The latter were more oriented toward the desires of extension administration. He concluded that characteristics of agents appeared to be fully as effective as methods of doing the job in achieving desired goals. He says the desire on the part of agents 1John C. Swan, ”Objective Selection of County Agricultural Agents, ” Study conducted at the Institute for Extension Personnel Development, IVIichigan State University, 1959. (Mimeographed.) 2 Donald G. Curry, "A Comparative Study of the Way in Which Selected County Agricultural Agents Perform Their Role" (unpublished Master's thesis, Michigan State College, 1951). 13 to be of service to people is a fundamental factor for success; the intensity of interaction of county agents appeared to be positively identified with success in the counties visited. Preiss, in his study, “The Functions of Relevant Power and Authority Groups in the Evaluation of County Agent Performance, " concluded that administrative ratings of agents seemed to hinge upon the following evaluative points. 1. An agent who was a ”doer, " or who at least showed considerable activity, was thought of more favorably than one who was passive or less energetic. 2. The differences among agents were ascribed largely to what might be called psychological or personality variables which were inherent in the person rather than in the external situation in which he was functioning. None of the administrators, for example, compared the four counties socially and politically in attempting to account for differences in agent performance. 3. Other than general references to ”accomplishments" and to such things as ”X factors" and "spark, " the administrators did not mention any definite or con- sistent criteria by which agent performance was rated. Preiss concluded that his investigations indicated that administrators may be unaware of actual accomplishments of the agents or may be unsure themselves as to what they mean by ”accomplishments, " or that their notion of "accomplishments" may reflect factors not included in his study. When profiles obtained from his administration 1Jack J. Preiss, ”The Functions of Relevant Power and Authority Groups in the Evaluation of County Agent Performance" (unpublished Ph. D. thesis, Michigan State College, 1954), p. 396. 14 of a Modified Iviinnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory were analyzed he concluded that administratively rated success is probably not coincident with profiles resulting from the MMPI. He says that administrators have come to use ”psychological make-up, " including such things as ”spark” and "drive, " in too general a fashion. He interpreted his observations as suggesting that the key differential in performance might be due more to variations in the structure and the behavior patterns of county groups than to personality variations among the agents as individuals. In his study neither objective per- formance criteria nor a standard psychological analysis of personality characteristics were able to account for rated differences among the four agents studied. Frutchey1 summarized nine studies relating to differential characteristics of the more effective and less effective teachers. Included was "Studies on the Effectiveness of Teaching. "2 The criteria of teacher effectiveness were determined by judgments of school principals, special observers of the teachers, and the teachers' students. Five characteristics of teachers which promote harmonious classroom relationships were studied as predictors of teaching 1Fred P. Frutchey, Differential Characteristics of the More Effective and Less Effective Teachers, A Summary Report of Nine Studies (Washington: Federal Extension Service, U. S. Depart- ment of Agriculture, 1953). 2 Ibid., p. 5. 15 effectiveness--teachers' attitudes toward pupils, personality of teachers, and their primary social motives, anxiety, hostility and affection. Seventy-seven grade school teachers of these school systems completed the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory. The anxiety, affection, and hostility feelings of forty-two grade school teachers were measured with the Rorschach Content Test. In summarizing the study Frutchey indicates: In terms of the accuracy that practice desires in a pre- dictor, all the devices used were like other predictors, very low. But in terms of the accuracy of predictors found in other studies, the MTAI and modified MMPI (T-E) ranked favorably . . . . The multiple R of the MTAI and the modified MMPI (T—E scale) with the com- posite criterion was . 65, which compares favorably with predictive studies. Anxiety and hostility feelings and the combination of both as measured by the Rorschach Content Test gave no indication of teacher effectiveness. . Z . . Aiken‘s study was an attempt to identify procedures that were associated with effectiveness of New York county extension agents. Judgments of supervisors and specialists were used as the criterion of teaching effectiveness of the agents. One of the findings was that the most effective agents tend to cooperate with their co- workers by meeting together regularly for the purpose of keeping each other informed, coordinating the schedule, and for help and advice in planning their teaching. 11bid., pp. 5-6. 2'Ibid., p. 7. 16 A study similar to Aiken's was conducted by Benn; using the same criterion of teacher effectiveness of New York agents, he identified certain attitudes and values associated with teaching effectiveness. He constructed The New York State Extension Teaching Opinionaire and administered it to one hundred county extension agents. In contrast to the least effective agents, the most effective agents: 1. Considered teaching people the value of an organized approach to the solution of their problems and devel- oping efficiency of group action as highly important. 2. Considered increase in extent and effectiveness of group action and number of improved practices adopted by the extension audience as significant measures of teaching effectiveness. 3. Were vocationally better adjusted, liked their job better and preferred it to other jobs. 4. Had more advanced college training since graduation from college. In discussing the Aiken and Benn studies Frutchey indicates that: A promising hypothesis for further study . . . is that values and attitudes of agents are more discriminating in deter- mining the more and less effective agents than are the pro- cedures used by the agents. The differentiation may be caused more by how well the procedures are used or with 2 what attitude they are used than by what procedures are used. 1 Harold W. Benn, "Identification of Attitudes and Values Associated with the Teaching Effectiveness of New York County Extension Agents" (unpublished Ph. D. thesis, Cornell, 1952). 2 Frutchey, op. cit., p. 6. l7 Pierson1 studied vocational interests of agents as related to selected aspects of work adjustment. Ratings of county extension agents by supervisors and the expressions of job satisfaction by the agents were used as criteria. Scores on the Strong Vocational Interest Blank of the more effective agents (upper one-fourth) were compared with scores of the less effective agents (lower one-fourth). Comparison of the scores of the more satisfied agents (upper half) with those of the less satisfied agents (lower half) was also made. Few statistically significant differences between groups of agents were found. Mathews compared ratings of county extension agents with several variables and found the following relationships. Quality of college record, r = . 23 Classroom teaching experience, r = . 19 Graduate courses completed, r = . l5 Tenure in extension, r = . 56 2 General psychology courses taken, r = . 71 3 Axinn administered the Strong Vocational Interest Blank, Bernreuter Personality Inventory, and the Otis Self-Administering Rowland Ray Pierson, "Vocational Interests of Agricul- tural Extension Workers as Related to Selected Aspects of Work Adjustment" (unpublished Ph. D. thesis, Division of Education, Michigan State College, 1951). ZFrutchey, op. cit., p. 12. 3George H. Axinn, ”Personnel Testing for the lviichigan Cooperative Extension Service, " Study conducted at Michigan State University, June, 1957. (Mimeographed. ) 18 Test of Mental Ability to Michigan County extension agents, and compared the scores of different effectiveness groups. His study did not validate the tests for use in selecting prospective county extension per sonnel. A summary of studies of factors that differentiate between the more effective and less effective county agricultural agents lists the following as factors that did not differentiate between these groups. 3. Age. The younger agents were equally as effective as the older agents. College grade point average for all courses. College grade point average for technical courses. Number of hours of technical agriculture in college. College majors or fields of emphasis in college. 1 College aptitude. 2 Other findings reported in the summary showed some positive relationships between various factors and agent effectiveness. These included the following; 1. Tenure in extension was not a factor in one study. In another study it differentiated to some extent. Agents who had had general psychology courses were more effective. Federal Extension Service, U. S. Department of Agricul— ture, Administrative Organization and Management Characteristics of Successful Agents, Research Summary No. 8 (Washington, April, 1956), pp. 1-2. 21bid., pp° 2-5. 10. 11. 12. 13. 19 The more effective agents had more advanced college training since graduation from college. The vocational interests of the more effective agents were more like those of personnel directors and social science teachers. The vocational interests of the less effective agents were more like those of farmers and carpenters. The more effective agents liked their extension job better, preferred it to other jobs, and employed better vocational adjustment. The more effective agents assumed positive leader- ship in county program planning, having a more widespread formal planning group with membership from all segments of the population. The more effective agents made a greater effort to reach rural people personally. The rural people made more effort to seek information from the more effective agents than they did from the less effective agents. As a supervisor and organizer of events the more effective agents used local leaders to perform this role more often than the less effective agents. As an organizer of groups, the more effective agents organized and worked with more groups than the less effective agents. As a ”salesman” of information and ideas, the more effective agents spent more time in the performance of this role and showed evidence of more initiative and originality in convincing persons that they should use the service. The more effective agents had closer working relation- ship with their own staff members and with other agency representatives. The more effective agents showed greater intensity of interaction--greater depth and frequency of contact with people. 20 CHAPTER III HYPOTHESIS Previous studies of factors that differentiate between the more effective and less effective agents offer some evidence that the value patterns described by Spindler may be different for the two groups of agents. Curry1 concluded that characteristics of agents appeared to be fully as effective as methods of doing the job in achieving desired goals. His observations indicated that the desire on the part of agents to be of service to people is a fundamental factor for success, and that the intensity of interaction and social system of obligations applied by county agents appeared to be positively identified with success in the counties he studied. He concluded that the ability of agents to be flexible in the development of their programs was of primary importance. He says this flexibility includes the ability to develop new ideas and concepts of their jobs as the needs of people change with changing economic and social conditions. Comparing these characteristics and behaviors of more effective agents with Spindler‘s2 traditional and emergent value theory, it would appear that they are more oriented to a sociability value than are the less Curry, loc . cit. ZSpindler, loc . cit. 21 effective agents. The ability to be flexible in changing conditions would suggest that the more effective agents are oriented toward an emergent value pattern in general. Other evidence that would indicate different value orientations of more and less effective agents is suggested by Preiss'1 findings. His study of a limited number of agents revealed that those agents who were actively supported by the power group leader- ship in their counties were more likely to be rated successful than those who were not. In other words those agents who were able to interact successfully with and accept the values of the power groups and thus gain their support would be rated more effective than those agents who did not gain the favor of the power groups. While these findings may not be evidence that more effective agents have more emergent values than less effective agents, they would indicate that the value orientations of the two groups are different. This is based on the assumption that the power groups‘ values do not vary from county to county, because several of the groups mentioned by Preiss have state-wide affiliation. It is also based on the assumption that those agents who gain the approval of power groups will share the groups' values. Simona states that an individual acts as a member of a group when he applies the same general scale of values to his 1 Preiss, loc. cit. Herbert A. Simon, Administrative Behavior (New York: Macmillan Company, 1958). 22 choices as do other members of the group, and when his expectations of the behavior of other members influence his own decisions. 1 . Benn‘s study revealed that in contrast to the least effective agents, the most effective agents placed higher importance on teaching people the value of an organized approach to the solution of their problems and developing efficiency of group action. They believed that teaching effectiveness could be measured by the extent and effectiveness of group action, and by the extent of adoption of new practices by the people. The similar study carried out by . Z . . . Aiken revealed that the most effective agents have more interaction with their co-workers in keeping each other informed, coordinating work and sharing help and advice. These studies reveal evidence that the more effective agents are more motivated by both sociability . . . 3 and conformity values as described by Spindler than are the less effective agents. Other factors which studies have shown to differentiate between the agent effectiveness groups include: 1. A greater effort by the more effective agents to reach rural people personally. 2. More effort extended by rural people to seek information from the more effective agents. Benn, loc. cit. 2 . . Aiken, loc. Cit. 3Spindler, loc . cit. 23 3. Use of more local leaders to carry out the extension program by the more effective agents. 4. Greater intensity of interaction--greater depth and ' frequency of contact with people was characteristic of the more effective agents. 1 . . . Wall's study of attitude differences among educational specialists, administrators and teachers offers a lead to a definite relationship between extension administrators“ value orientations and agent value orientations. One of his findings was that the teachers appeared to be more authoritarian, conservative and traditional than either the administrators or the specialists. Since extension supervisors are generally chosen from the ranks of the most effective agents, it would be expected that their value patterns would be more like the more effective agents than like the less effective agents. Wall's study indicates that the supervisor's values may be less traditional than the values of the agents he supervises. The preceding evidence offers support for the following theoretical hypotheses, when county extension agents are ranked in order of over-all effectiveness by their supervisors. 1. More effective county extension agents have significantly different traditional value patterns than less effective county extension agents . 2. More effective agents place significantly more value on sociability than do agents who are less effective. 1Bartholomew D. Wall, "Some Attitudinal Differences among Educational Specialists, Administrators and Teachers, ” Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 53, No. 3 (November, 1959), pp. 115-17. F 24 More effective agents place significantly more value on conformity than do less effective agents. The value patterns of supervisors of county extension agents are significantly less traditional than the value patterns of the agents they supervise. 25 CHAPTER IV METHOD OF STUDY It has already been indicated that values are the dependent variable of this study. Two instruments for measuring values were examined--the Allport - Vernon- Lindzey Study of Values,1 and Prince‘s Differential-Values Inventory. The former is the oldest and most widely used of any values test. It was originally published in 1931, and aims to measure the relative prominence of six basic interests or motives in personality. These include: the theoretical, economic, aesthetic, social, political, and religious. The classification is 3 based on Eduard Spranger's Types of Men. The Differential-Value Inventory was devised by Prince for measuring value patterns based on traditional and emergent value . . . 4 . . . categories outlined by Spindler. The traditional areas are puritan morality, individualism, work success ethic, and future-time orientation; the emergent areas are sociability, conformity, relati- vistic moral attitudes, and present-time orientation. 1Gordon W. Allport, Philip E. Vernon and Gardner Lindzey, Study of Values (Cambridge: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1960). 2 Prince, loc . cit. 3Eduard Spranger, ijes of Men (New York: Stechert- Hafner, Inc., 1928). 4 Spindler, loc . cit. 26 The Differential-Value Inventory was chosen as the instrument for the study. Its relative simplicity for the subjects to respond to and the relative ease of scoring made it more suitable for the limited time available for the study. The D -V Inventor y In this study the Differential-Value Inventory was called the D-V Inventory. The D-V Inventory scale consists of sixty-four forced-choice pairs of items. Each pair of items has a traditional value statement ”pitted against" an emergent value statement. The subject chooses either the traditionally-oriented item or the emergent- value item in each of the sixty-four pairs of items. The instrument is scored to give one point for each traditional item chosen. Thus a high score indicates a traditional value orientation. In addition to obtaining a traditional score from zero to sixty-four, it is possible to obtain eight subscores--one for each of the values measured. The subscores can range from zero to sixteen. In a study conducted by Lehmann and Ikenberry,1 the following reliabilities of the D-V Inventory were determined. l Irvin J. Lehmann and Stanley O. Ikenberry, Critical Thinking, Attitudes, and Values in Higher Education, A preliminary report of research, Michigan State University, 1959. Traditional Future — Time Individualism Puritan Morality Work-Succes s Sociability Conformity Relativism Pre s ent- Time Administration of the D-V Inventory 27 .75 .60 .41 .51 .59 .48 .48 .54 .57 The D-V Inventory was administered to two hundred and sixty-four county extension agents in Michigan and one hundred and fifty-six county agricultural agents in New York. The breakdown by agent position in the two states is as follows: Michigan County extension directors County extension agents, agriculture County extension agents, 4-H Club County extension agents, home economics Miscellaneous county extension workers New York County agricultural agents Associate county agricultural agents Assistant county agricultural agents 78 46 58* 69 13 56 46 54 The inventory was administered by mail in both states. The writer was interested in testing the hypothesis that more agents would return the D—V Inventory at. the request of one of their adminis- trators than at the request. of a graduate student. Therefore arrangements were made for the agents in half of the Michigan counties Five female 4-H Club agents were not used in the analysis of the data, in order to control the sex variable. 28 to receive the inventory from the Associate Extension Director; the agents in the other counties to receive it from the writer. The counties for each sender were selected from an alphabetical listing, on an odd-even basis. The request was made by the Associate Director with a cover letter over his signature, on his official stationary. The writer used a similar cover letter, but on plain paper, and over his signature. Samples of both the original and follow-up letters are displayed in the appendix. Each sent a follow-up letter about two weeks later. Arrangements were made with the New York State County Agricultural Agent Leaders‘ office at Cornell University to mail the inventory to the county agricultural agents, associates and assistants in that state. Included was a cover letter from the writer, and one from the State Leader ofCounty AgriculturalAgents, urging the agents“ response. Criterion Before psychological tests can be validly used for employment purposes they must, themselves be tested by comparing, in a typical group of workers, efficiency in the tests with efficiency in the job. This implies two measures for each person on whom the tests are standardized--his test score and some figure that repre- sents his occupational efficiency. This latter-~the thing by which the tests are actually evaluated and the thing which it is desired ultimately to be able to predict--is technically called the criterion.1 1Harold E. Burtt, Principles of Employment Psychology (New York: Harper 8: Bros., Publishers, 1942), p. 171. 29 The criterion, or independent variable selected for this study is effectiveness groups of county extension agents, obtained from rankings of agents in order of their over-all effectiveness. The rankings for the county extension agents in Michigan were made by the five district directors; and for the New York agents by the six state leaders of county agricultural agents. These administrators in the two states serve as supervisors of agents. In determining the procedure for obtaining the basis for the criterion, the writer reviewed other methods. One was a combined judgment of farmers, specialists and supervisors on a subjective ranking of agents from more effective to less effective; another was a ranking resulting from combining subjective judgments on a variety of traits and role performances, by these same groups. The idea of seeking judgments from farmers was abandoned because no one farmer or group of farmers have an opportunity to observe more than one or a very limited number of agents in any one group of agents. Since most specialists are likewise not in a position to observe equally well the activities of all of the agents in any one group, it would be difficult to combine their ratings with those of supervisors. Specialists are "staff” in contrast to "line” personnel in the extension organization, and the writer questions if, in this position, they should be involved directly in rating agents. Dooher and Marguis have this to say about the rank- order method of rating. 30 A . . . general procedure of making merit ratings is the so-called rank-order method. With this method, the supervisor places all employees under him in order from best to poorest . This method, while laborious and subject to certain other practical limitations, is probably the most accurate method of rating . The major objection to the method is that if a super- visor has a great many men to rate or rank, the process of ranking becomes unwieldy. Around twenty-five men is as many as one should ordinarily try to rate by the rank-order method. Another objection to this method is that rankings are obviously not comparable in the case of two men from groups of different size. For example, if one man comes out with a rank of ten among a crew of twelve, he is clearly quite close to the bottom of his group, whereas a man with a rank of ten who is a member of a crew of thirty is closer to the top than to the bottom of his group . Everything considered, if the groups to be rated by various supervisors are reasonably small, serious consideration should be given to the use of the rank- order method as the basic merit rating scheme. To obtain the rankings of agents for use in the study the writer asked each supervisor to rank-order those agents he directly supervises. This includes the agents in his supervisory district. In Michigan each district director supervises four types of agents: county directors; county extension agents, agriculture; county extension agents, 4-H club work; and county extension agents, home economics. In New York the state leaders of county agricultural agents supervise county agricultural agents, associate county agricul— tural agents, and assistant county agricultural agents. 1M. Joseph Dooher and Vivienne Marquis, Rating Employee and Supervisory Performance (New York: American Management. Assoc. , 1950), p. 17. 31 The rankings were requested in groups according to title positions, as described above. This was an effort to partially control age and sex variables. The Michigan county directors are generally older than the other male agents. The county extension agents, home economics are female workers. A small number of 4-H club agents are female, but their scores were not included in analysis of data. Allport, Vernon and Lindzey report that there are significant differences between values held by males and females. In New York the county agricultural agents are those who have come up through the ranks, including assistant and associate agent positions. The assistants are those who have approximately three years or less of service, and the associates generally are some- where in between the age and tenure of assistants and full agents. The rankings were made of county agents in both states about the time the D-V Inventory was mailed to them. At the same time a D-V Inventory was completed by each of the supervisors. More Effective and Less Effective Agents Each Michigan supervisor submitted rank-order lists of county directors; county extension agents, agriculture; county extension agents, 4-H club work; county extension agents, home economics. 1Gordon W. Allport, Philip E. Vernon, and Gardner Lindzey, Study of Values: A Scale for Measuring the Dominant Interests in Personality, Manual of Instructions (Houghton Mifflin Company, 1960). 32 Thus there were five lists of each of the four positions. The top one-third of the agents in each list was chosen as the more effective agents and the bottom one-third as the less effective agents. The more effective county extension directors from each district were combined to make a single list of more effective county directors. One list of the less effective county directors was developed in the same manner. Also single lists for the other agent positions were developed. A similar procedure was followed to obtain lists of more effective and less effective New York county agricultural agents, associates and assistants. It should be mentioned that “less successful” does not imply that an agent or group of agents are considered to be unsuccess- ful, or poor agents. The division of agents into the two groups, more effective and less effective, is made on the assumption that in any group of workers there is likely to be some who are more effective than other 3 . 33 CHAPTER V FINDINGS As indicated in Chapter IV, the Associate Director of Extension in Michigan requested D-V Inventory returns from the agents in one-half of the counties, and the writer from the remaining half. Each requested returns from one hundred and thirty—two agents. One hundred and thirty-two, or one hundred percent of the agents responded to the Associate Director‘s request; and one hundred and twenty-eight, or ninety-seven percent to the writer's request. A few of the inventories were returned incomplete, resulting in one hundred and thirty—one usable returns to the Associate Director, and one hundred and sixteen to the writer. Comparing the number of usable inventories received and the number requested, the Associate Director obtained a significantly greater (P < . 01) response than the writer. The supervisor's rankings did not include all of the two hundred and sixty-four agents. The tenure of some was too short to allow for accurate judgment, and a few are employed on a district basis, making it impossible to include them in one of the four groups. The total number ranked was two hundred and forty-two. The one hundred and fifty-six New York agents who were ranked by their supervisors were requested to complete a D-V Inventory. Two associate agents and two assistant agents did not return one. 34 Statistical Hypothe s e s The theoretical hypotheses were stated in statistical form for testing, as follows: 1. There is no significant difference between the mean D-V Inventory traditional value scores of the more effective agents and of the less effective agents. 2. There is no significant difference between the mean D-V Inventory sociability value scores of more effective agents and of less effective agents. 3. There is no significant difference between the mean D-V Inventory conformity value scores of more effective agents and of less effective agents. 4. There is no significant difference between the mean D-V Inventory traditional value scores of supervisors and of county extension agents. All hypotheses were tested at the five percent (two tailed) level of significanc e . Hypothesis 1 Comparison of the mean traditional scores of the more effective and less effective agents (with a t-test) revealed no significant differences. The means and t scores are recorded in Tables 1 and 2. 35 TABLE 1. --Mean traditional scores of groups of more effective and less effective New York county extension agents Agent groups X t* County Agricultural Agents More effective (N = 18) 33. 7 1 71 Less effective (N = 18) 36. 8 ' Associate County Agricultural Agents More effective (N = 13) 33. 8 1 98 Less effective (N = 13) 29. 0 ° Assistant County Agricultural Agents More effective (N = 17) 30. 4 75 Less effective (N = 17) 32. 0 ' a: t score needed for significance at . 05 level of conficence: (N = 18) - 2. 04 (N = 13) - 2. 06 (N = 17) - 2. 04 TABLE 2. --Mean traditional scores of groups of more effective and less effective Michigan County Extension Agents Agent groups X t* County Extension Director 3 More effective (N = 25) 29. 4 88 Less effective (N = 25) 30. 6 ° CountLExtension Agents, Agriculture More effective (N = 12) 30. 7 1 16 Less effective (N = 12) 28.1 ° County Extension Agents, 4-H Club Work More effective (N = 15) 30. 3 1 21 Less effective (N = 15) 27. 6 ' County Extension Aggnts, Home Economics More effective (N = 20) 27. 4 92 Less effective (N = 20) 29. 0 ' :5: t score needed for significance at . 05 level of confidence: (N=25)-2.02 (N215)-2.05 (N=12)-2.07 (N=20)-2.04 36 Hypotheses 2. and 3 When the mean sociability and conformity value scores of the more effective and less effective agents were compared, no significant differences were found. Mean and t scores appear in Table 3. TABLE 3. --Mean sociability and conformity value scores of groups of more effective and less effective agents Sociability Conformity Agent groups X t* X t* County Agricultural Agents More effective (N = 18) 9. 6 4. 8 O 1. Less effective (N = 18) 8 2 Z 00 59 Associate County Agricultural Agents More effective (N = 13) Less effective (N = 13) 10. oo F—‘U'I U'IU'I NO Assistant County Agricultural Agents More effective (N = 15) 9. 6 4. 7 . . . 1 Less effective (N = 15) 9. 2 57 4. 6 6 Couniy Extension Directors More effective (N = 25) 9. 3 32 5. 4 65 Less effective (N = 25) 9. 4 ° 5. 2 ' County Extension Agents, Agriculture More effective (N = 12) 10. 0 67 4. 9 53 Less effective (N = 12) 10. 7 ' 5. 4 ' County_Extension Agents, 4-H Club Work More effective (N = 15) 10.0 11 4. 8 1 56 Less effective (N = 15) 10.1 ' 6. O ' County Extension Agents, Home Economics More effective (N = 20) 9. 8 00 5. 9 63 Less effective (N = 20) 9. 8 ' 5. 5 ' .5: t score needed for significance at . 05 level of confidence; (N=18)-2.04 (N=25)-2.02 (N=l3)-2.06 (N=lZ)-2.07 (N215)—2.05 (N=20)—2.04 37 Hypothesis 4 Mean traditional scores of supervisors are compared with the mean traditional scores of groups of agents they supervise, in Table 4 Significant differences exist between New York supervisors2 scores and the scores of New York county agricultural agents and more effective associate agents. No differences were observed between supervisors? scores and the scores of other groups of New York agents, or between the scores of Michigan supervisors and groups of Michigan agents. Comparisons between States The following comparisons were made between the D-V Inventory scores of selected groups of Michigan and New York extension personnel. 1. Between Michigan supervisors and New York supervisors. 2. Between more effective Michigan county directors and more effective New York county agricultural agents. 3. Between less effective Michigan county directors and less effective New York county agricultural agents. There were no significant differences between the scores of the Michigan supervisors and the New York supervisors. However, when the scores of the Michigan more effective county directors were compared with the scores of the New York more effective county agri- cultural agents, significant differences were found. Differences were even more pronounced when the scores of the less effective workers of these two groups were compared. This is revealed in Table 5. TABLE 4. --Mean traditional value scores of extension supervisors and groups of county extension agents in New York and Michigan X New York Supervisors 28. 61 M. E. County Agricultural Agents 33. 7 2. 383 L. E. County Agricultural Agents 36. 8 4. 394 M. E. Associate Agents 33.8 2.113 L. E. Associate Agents 29. 0 . 19 M. E. Assistant Agents 30. 4 . 94 L. E. Assistant Agents 32. 0 l. 43 Michigan Supervisors 33. 42 M. E. County Directors 29. 4 1.16 L. E. County Directors 30. 6 . 80 M. E. Agents, Agriculture 30. 7 . 64 L. E. Agents, Agriculture 28. 1 1. 69 M. E. Agents, 4—H Club Work _ 30. 3 . 82 L. E. Agents, 4-H Club Work 27. 6 l. 61 M. E. Agents, Home Economics 27. 4 l. 70 L. E. Agents, Home Economics 29. 0 1. 22 Compared with the mean score of each of the following groups of New York Agents. -2 Compared with the mean score of each of the following groups of Michigan agents. Significant at or beyond the . 05 level of confidence. 4Significant beyond the . 001 level of confidence. 38 39 .oocopflcoo mo Hos/ma mo . pco>on ”280$?me .. "w .1: .N N .N N .0 mp. o .N s .N pm. w .s N .s marinate *3 .N a .o N .w *2. .s m. .S s .s 3. N .S o .2 032.63% is .N N .m m .N pm .2 s .m N .s so .N N .N p .s sssEsousoo *NN .N a. .s N .N pm. N .o p .o NN. N .N N .3 323208 *3 .N N .s m .o *3 .N N .N. m .o S .2 s .o m .s $82.... is? *2. .N o .s N .N is .N N .p p .N. 3. p .s o N 3:208 amass E. N .N w .o ms. N .w a. .N . om 4 N .N N .s EmzsspsZpsH *pN .s N .s m .o No. v .s o .s NN. N .N. N .p manipasm 1.34. s .3 w .pm *2. .N s .oN N. .3 cm .2 s .3 p .NN 1283625 s M M s M M s M M can??? mucowm mucowm F8363: mnouoouflo mnouoouap Hmudfidofinwm . Hmudfidofiuwm myOmgnomdm mHOmmN/uomdm 5:350 .H in . . wacdoo .m .2 . . cmwa 6 .Ho 26 5.363 m A ssNEsuz m 2 .s 62 x w z . v30? 362 6:0? 302 Mao? 302 was defifloflz Ga 326?... m0 masonw pouooHow pad muOmTeHomdm mo mouoom F8362: >nQ cmoEun.m ”Ham/«H. 40 CHAPTER VI SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Analysis of the data revealed that no significant differences in traditional, sociability and conformity value patterns were found between the work-effectiveness groups of the county extension workers in Michigan and New York. Therefore, the statistical hypotheses relative to such differences could not be rejected. Thus it is concluded that the data gathered in the study do not support the hypotheses that differences do exist between the value patterns of the work-effectiveness groups of agents. The data do reveal that traditional value patterns of New York supervisors differ from traditional value patterns of the more effective and less effective county agricultural agents and the more effective associate agents. It appears that the supervisors have signi- ficantly less traditional values than these agents. This partially supports the theoretical hypothesis that the supervisors are less traditional than the agents they supervise. However, differences were not observed between supervisors and the other agent groups in New York, or between supervisors and any agent group in Michigan. Therefore the statistical hypothesis, that no difference exists, cannot be rejected. No hypotheses were stated relative to relationship of value patterns between extension personnel in Michigan and extension 41 personnel in New York. However, when some comparisons were made it was noted that differences do apparently exist between Michigan and New York agents. The two groups of New York agents are significantly more traditional in their value orientations than the Michigan agents. The subcores in Table 5 indicate that New York agents have stronger puritan moralitgr values than the Michigan agents. The New York agents are also more work-success centered than the Michigan agents. Since most agents are natives of the state they are now working in, one explanation for the difference might be a geographic variable in value patterns of individuals. Other variables which were not controlled, but which might account for the value differences between the agents in the two states include religion, age, socio-economic background, and tenure in extension work. However, a conflicting factor is the lack of difference between the value scores of Michigan and New York supervisors. The hypothesis that more agents would return the D-V Inventory at the request of one of their administrators than at the request of a graduate student was supported by the data. Conclusions The findings of the study do not validate value patterns, measured by the D-V Inventory, as a differential characteristic of more effective and less effective agents in New York and Michigan. It is concluded that this study does not validate the D-V Inventory for pre- dicting success in county extension work. 42 Suggestions for Further Research One of the questions which is prompted by the use of judgment of supervisors in ranking extension agents according to over-all effectiveness is, what influence do the power groups in the counties have on the supervisors‘ rankings. Research has disclosed evidence that they have a strong influence. Thus it would seem that a study comparing agents3 values with the values of the people com- posing the power groups in the counties might reveal some interesting and useful information. Another study that would be worthwhile would involve the use of another instrument for measuring values, such as the flatly of Values,1 in comparing values of effectiveness groups of agents. An improvement in methods of conducting such a study, in contrast to the methods employed in this study, would be the administration of the instrument at an annual extension conference or other time when the agents are all together. More complete instructions and explanation could be given and would help reduce the threat felt by agents when completing a test of this nature. A more objective method of determining the relative work-effectiveness of county extension workers is needed. A study designed to measure the behavior changes which occur in the extension audience, as a result of the extension program, is needed. lAllport, Vernon and Lindzey, loc. cit. APPENDIX D-V Inventory and Letters of Request 43 44 D-V INVENTORY Instructions: This questionnaire consists of a number of statements about things which you may think you ought or ought not do and feel. These statements are arranged in pairs as in the example below. 1. A. Be reliable B. Be friendly You are to choose between A or B. You do not use Column "C, ” “D“ or "E" on the answer sheet for this questionnaire--choose A or B. Here is another example: 2. A. Work on a project with others. B. Work on a project alone. To help you make the required choice, when reading the item to your— self, precede each statement with the phrase, "I ought to . . . . " That is, in the example given, you choose the item which is most desirable for you. If you feel that you ought to work on a project with others, you should mark A on the separate answer sheet, thus: 2 A B C D E If you feel more strongly about B than A, mark B, thus: 2. A B C D E Be sure to blacken the space between the two dotted lines under the letter you choose. If you must erase, do so completely. This is not a test. There are no right or wrong answers. Your choices I should be a description of how you think you ought to act or feel. Do not skip any items. Write only on the answer sheet. Choose A or B. Mark your choices on the answer sheet. Precede each statement with the phrase, "I ought to . . . . " ' l. A. Work harder than most of my fellow workers B. Work at least as hard as most of my fellow workers 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. F”? P“? F”? P“? P"? P”? P”? F”? P”? P”? P”? P”? P“? 45 Do things which most other people do. Do things which are out-of—the-ordinary. Have my own ideas about politics and religion. Try to agree with others on these matters. Enjoy myself doing things with others. Enjoy myself doing many things alone. Attain a higher position than my father or mother attained. Enjoy more of the good things of life than my father and mother enjoyed. Feel that the future is uncertain and unpredictable. Feel that the future is full of opportunities for me. Feel that happiness is the most important thing in life to me. Feel that enduring suffering and pain is important for me in the long run. Rely on the advice of others in making decisions. Be independent of others in making decisions. Feel it is my duty to save as much money as I can. Feel that saving is good but not to the extent that I must deprive myself of all present enjoyment. Put ten dollars in the bank. Spend five of the ten dollars enjoying myself with my friends. Spend enough on clothes to dress as well as my friends. Spend less on clothes in order to save for future needs. Put in long hours of work without distraction. Feel that I can‘t work long hours without distraction but 1211 get the job done anyway. Feel that it is most important to live for the future. Feel that today is important and I should live each day to the fullest. Feel that ”right" and "wrong" are relative terms. Feel that I should have strong convictions about what is right or wrong. Work hard to do most things better than others. Work hard at some things and leave others to those who are more qualified than I. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. F”? P”? F”? P”? P”? P”? P”? P“? P”? 46 Feel that everybody misbehaves once in a while but the important thing is not to make the same mistake over again. Feel that the most important think in life is to strive for peace with God. Feel that work is important, fun is not important. Feel that all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. Feel that what others think about right and wrong should influence my thinking. Feel that my convictions about right and wrong are most important. Defend my ideas about right and wrong. Be willing to be convinced on matters of right and wrong because l'right" and ”wrong" have different meanings for different people. Make as many social contacts as possible. Be willing to sacrifice myself for the sake of a better world. Get all my work done on my own. Get my work done with the help of others if I am allowed to and this saves time. Wear clothes similar to those of my friends. Dress modestly even though this makes me different than my friends. Work hard only if I am paid accordingly. Work hard at doing something original regardless of pay. Get a job which will allow me to enjoy some of the luxuries of life. Get a job which will make me a success in life. Be able to‘solve difficult problems and puzzles. Feel that difficult problems and puzzles are good for some people but are not for everybody. Feel that style is more important than quality in clothes. Feel that quality is more important than style in clothes. Say what I think is right about things. Think of the effect on others before I speak. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. F”? P”? P”? P”? P”? 47 Feel comfortable getting the same grades as most of the people in my class, if I were in school. Feel comfortable near the head of the class, if I were in school. Have my own firm ideas about correct behavior. Look to others for the kind of behavior which is approved by the group. Feel that discipline in the modern school is not as strict as it should be. Feel that the change from strict discipline in the modern school is a good one. Feel that the most important thing in school is to gain knowledge useful to me in the future. Feel that the most important thing in school is to learn to get along well with people. Do things without regard to what others may think. Do things which allow me to have fun and be happy. Register for a course in school which is very interesting to me, whether or not it will do me some good later on. Register for a course which is uninteresting to me but which will do me some good later on. Go to an extension affair to enjoy myself being with people. Go to an extension affair because it is my duty to be loyal to my organization. Feel it is right to spend less for clothes in order to save for the future. Feel that whether one wants to spend more for clothes and save less or vice versa is a matter of opinion. Do things which very few others can do. Do things cooperatively with others. Use the same expressions my friends use so that they wonit think Iim odd. Speak in the most proper way. Feel that it is right to save for the future. Feel that whether or not it is right to save for the future is up to the individual. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. P“? P”? F“? P 48 Choose a job with plenty of opportunities for advancement even though the pay isn't as high as I would like it to be. Choose a job in which I can work with many interesting people. Mix in a little pleasure with my work so that I don't get bored. Keep at a job until it is finished. Get as much pleasure as I can out of life now. Stand by my convictions. Feel that everybody misbehaves once in a while but the important thing is not to make the same mistake over again. Feel guilty when I misbehave and expect to be punished. Have less freedom in my work. Have more freedom in my work. Be very ambitious. Be very sociable. Choose a job in which I‘ll earn as much as most of my friends. Choose a job with plenty of opportunities for advancement even though the pay isn't as high as my friends receive. Get the kind of job which will bring me in contact with many interesting people. Get the kind (of job which will make me a success in life. Feel that whether or not it is right to plan and save for the future is a matter of opinion. Feel that it is right to plan and save for the future. Be willing to sacrifice myself for the sake of a better world. Feel it is important to behave like most other people do. Deny myself enjoyment for the present for better things in the future. Have fun attending parties and being with people. Be satisfied to do as well in life as my father did. Attain a higher position in life than my father attained. Feel that it will be good for me later if I endure some unpleasant things now. Feel that whether or not I should be willing to endure unpleasant things now because it will be good for me later is a matter of opinion. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. P”? P“? P”? F”? F”? P”? P“? P“? P”? P”? 49 Be able to have most of the things my friends have. Be able to have enough money to lay away for future needs. Feel that happiness is the most important thing in life. Feel that being respected is the most important thing in life. Feel that more "old—fashioned whippings” are needed today. Feel that “old-fashioned whippings" do the child more harm than good. Exert every effort to be more successful this year than I was last year. Be content with a reasonable amount of success and live longer. Try very hard to overcome my emotions. Get as much pleasure as I can out of life now. Feel it is important to be more successful this year than I was last year. Feel it is important to get along well with others. Feel that children are born good. Feel that children are born sinful. Spend as much time as I can in working independently. Spend as much time as I can in having fun. Deny myself enjoyment for the present for better things in the future. Be able to have as much enjoyment as my friends have. Feel that it is right to be very ambitions. Feel that it may or may not be right to be very ambitious depending on the individual. Choose to work with people I like in a job I donit like. Choose to work with people I don"t like in a job which I like. Work as hard as I can in order to be successful. Work as hard as I can in order to enjoy some of the luxuries of life. Strive to be an expert in something. Do many things quite well but not be an expert in anything. 50 February 19. 1960 To: County Extension Workers 50m: John C. Swan "We think it's worth the risk, but you'll probably get your hide nailed to the wall for asking county workers to take time out of their busy schedule to do it." This was your District Director's reaction to the favor which I am asking you to do for me. I am asking your cooperation on a research study for a thesis project which I am conducting in the Institute for Extension Personnel Develop- ment at Michigan State University. It will require from twenty to thirty minutes of your time. The study involves the determination of value patterns of county extension workers and district directors in Michigan and New York. The purpose of the study is an attempt to validate the enclosed inventory as a useful instrument in predicting success among new applicant! for county extension worker positions. I will appreciate it if you will complete the enclosed inventory by recording your answers on the separate answer sheet. and return both the questions and the answer sheet in the enclosed envelop within the next few days. Please read the instruction carefully, work rapidly and independently without discussing the questions with anyone else, and answer all questions. Prlnt your name on the answer sheet. Your reply will be kept in the strictest confidence. ' Thank you. Sincerely yours, f/W Co; M John C. Swan Graduate Student Institute for Extension Personnel Development J CS:emr 51 COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SERVICE MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY ° EAST LANSING Office of the Director AND U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE COOPERATING February 19. 1960 To: County Extension Workers From: George H. Axinn "We think it's worth the risk. but you'll probably get your hide nailed to the wall for asking county workers to take time out of their busy schedule to do it. " This was your district director‘s reaction to the favor which I am asking you to do for me. I am asking your cooperation on a research study for a thesis project which is being conducted in the Institute for Extension Personnel Development at' Michigan State University It will require from twenty to thirty minutes of your time. The study involves the determination of value patterns of county extension workers and district directors in Michigan and New York. The purpose of the study is an attempt to validate the enclosed inventory as a useful instrument in predicting success among new applicants for county extension worker positions. I will appreciate it if you will complete the enclosed inventory by recording your answers on the separate answer sheet, and return both the questions and the answer. sheet in the enclosed envelope within the next few days. Please read the instructions carefully, work rapidly and independently without discussing the questions with anyone else, and answer _a_l_l questions. Print your name on the answer sheet. Your reply will be kept in the strictest confidence. Thank you. Sincerely yours , George H. Axinn Associate Director. GHAzemr cFFiCE :ZUNTY . NEW YORK STATE COLLEGES OF AGRICULTURE AND HOME ECONOMICS UNITS OF THE STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK 5 THE COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SERVICE 2 ROBERTS HALL. CORNELL UNIVERSITY ITHACA. N. Y. OFFICE or STATE LEADERS or COUNTY AGRICULTURAL AGENTS February 21+ 1960 I # 26 To: County Agricultural Agents, Associates, Assistants From: John C. Swan I'll probably get my hide nailed to the barn door for asking you to take time out of your busy schedule to do me a favor, but here goes ....... I am.asking your cooperation on a research study for a thesis project which I am conducting at Michigan State university. It will require from twenty to thirty minutes of your time. The study involves the determination of value patterns of county Extension agents and state leaders in New Ybrk and.Michigan. The purpose of the study is an attempt to validate the enclosed inventory as a useful instrument in predicting success among applicants for assistant county agricultural agent positions. I will appreciate it if’you will complete the enclosed inventory by recording your answers on the separate answer sheet, and return both the questions and the answer sheet in—the enclosed envelOpe within the next few days. Please read the instructions carefully, work rapidly and independently without discussing the questions with anyone else, and answer all_the questions. Print your name on the answer sheet. Of course your reply will be kept in the strictest confidence. Thank you. NEW YORK STATE COLLEGES OF AGRICULTURE AND HOME ECONOMICS UNITS OF THE STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK THE COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SERVICE 53 ROBERTS HALL. CORNELL UNIVERSITY ITHACA. N. Y. OFFICE OF STATE LEADERS OF COUNTY AGRICULTURAL AGENTS # 30 February 24, 1960 To: County Agricultural Agents, Associates, Assistants Subject: Study by John Swan John Swan's study at Michigan State has led him into an interesting and worth-while research project. Its results may be very helpful in the selection of candidates for County Agent work in the future as well as the total supervisory program. You will find enclosed a letter from John, a D-v Inventory with an I B M answer sheet and an envelope addressed to John at Michigan State. Will you complete the answer sheet and send it with the questions to John at your earliest convenience? Since this questionnaire involves no problem of being right or wrong, there should be no hesitation about participating. Let's support John's study with a good return from this state. C” A) 24714. 7‘7‘L’vu7.é7¢ C. R. Harrington State Leader of County Agricultural Agents 54 COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SERVICE MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY ° EAST LANSING Office of the Director AND U.S. DEPARTMENT OF'AGRICULTURE COOPERATING March 9. 1960 Dear More than half of the D-V Inventory answer sheets have been returned. I refer to the survey of extension worker value patterns, you were recently asked to participate in. In order to proceed with this research study we need a one hundred percent return. The refore, I will appreciate it if you can find time to complete and return the D-V Inventory answer sheet during the next day or two. If you have mislaid the questions and the answer sheet I will be glad to furnish you with' another set. Sincerely yours. George H. Axinn Associate Director. GHAzemr g cm ll “‘ ~- ’ gum . . ' ‘3 55 113 Agricultural Hall Michigan State University March 10, 1960 Dear More than half of the D-V Inventory answer sheets have been returned. I refer to the survey of extension worker value patterns. you were recently asked to participate in. In order to proceed with this research study I need a one hundred percent return. Therefore. I will appreciate it if you can find time to complete and return the D-V Inventory answer sheet during the next day or two. If you have mislaid the questions and the answer sheet I will be glad to furnish you wish another set. Sincerely yours, John C. Swan Graduate Student Institute for Extension Personnel Development. J CS:emr 56 113 Agricultural Hall Michigan State University March 10, 1960 Dear Replies to my D~V Inventory survey have been received from fifty-three New York counties and from about seventy-five percent of the agents. I need a one hundred percent return in order to complete my study. Since I have not received your reply. I hope you will take twenty to thirty minutes today and complete the answer sheet. I sure will appreciate it. If you have mislaid the questions and the answer sheet. I will gladly supply you with. another set. Sincerely yours, J ohn C. Swan Ass't. State Leader of County Agricultural Agents JSC:emr 57 BIBLIOGRAPHY Public Documents Federal Extension Service, U. S. Department of Agriculture. Adminis- trative Organization and Management Characteristics of Successful Agents. Research Summary No. 8, 1956. Frutchey, Fred P. Differential Characteristics of the More Effective and Less Effective Teachers: A Summary Report of Nine Studies. Federal Extension Service, U. S. Department of Agriculture, 1953. Nye, Ivan. The Relationship of Certain Factors to Countj Agent Success. University of Missouri Research Bulletin 498, Columbia, Missouri, 1952. Washington Agricultural Experiment Stations, State College of Washing- ton. A Technique for Measuring Values in Rural Life. Technical Bulletin 29, August, 1959. Books Allport, Gordon W., Vernon, Philip E., and Lindzey, Gardner. Study of Values. Cambridge: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1960. Barnard, Chester 1. The Functions of the Executive. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1956. Bingham, Walter Van Dyke, Moore, Bruce Victor, and Gustad, JohnW. How To Interview. New York: Harper 8: Bros. , 1959. Burtt, Harold E. Principles of Employment Psychology. New York: Harper 8: Bros. , 1942. Case, Harry L. Personnel Policy in a Public Agency. New York: Harper & Bros. , 1955. Davis, Keith, and Scott, William G. (editors). Readings in Human Relations. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co. , 1959. Goulder, Alvin W. Patterns of Industrial Bureaucracy. Glencoe: The Free Press, 1954. 58 Halsey, George D. Selecting and Inducting Employees. New York: Harper 8: Bros. , 1951. Hoslett, Dean (ed, ). Human Factors in Management. New York: Harper 8: Bros. , 1951. Hunter, Floyd. Community Power Structure. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1953. Kluckhohn, Florence R. "Dominant and Variant Value Orientations, ” Personality in Nature, Society, and Culture. ed. by Kluckhohn, Clyde and Murry, Henry A. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1955. Leavitt, Harold J. Managerial Psychology. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1959. Maslow, Abraham H. (ed. ). New Knowledge in Human Values. New York: Harper 8: Bros. , 1959. Northcott, C, H. Personnel Management. New York: Philosophical Library, 1956. Simon, Herbert A. Administrative Behavior. New York: V. Macmillan Company, 1958. Smith, Eugene R. , and Tyler, Ralph W. Appraising and Recording Student Progress. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co. , 1942. I Spranger, Eduard. Types of Men. Saale, Germany: Max Niemeyer Verlog, 1928. Thorndike, Edward L. Adult Interests. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1935. Thurstone, Louis Leon. The Measurement of Values. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1959. Tiffin, Joseph. ”Merit Rating: Its Validity and Techniques. ” Dooher, M. Joseph, and Marquis, Vivienne (ed. ). Rating Em- ployee and Supervisory Performance. New York: American Management Association, 1950. Warner, W. Lloyd and Martin, Norman H. Industrial Man. New York: Harper 8: Bros., , 1959. 59 Wheelis, Allen. The Quest for Identity. New York: W. W. Norton 8: Co., 1958. Williams, Robin M. Jr. American Society. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1957. Young, Kimball and Mack, Raymond W. Sociology and Social Life. New York: American Book Co. , 1959. Articles and Periodicals Battle, Haron J. ”Relation between Personal Values and Scholastic Achievement. " Journal of Experimental Education, Vol. 26 (September, 1957). Handy, D. T. and Latchow, M. "Value of Academic Grades in Estimating Student Teaching Success, " Research Quarterly, December, 1957. Johnson, Kermit K. “Company Interviewers Rate Job Applicants, ” Personnel Guidance Journal, Vol. XXXVI (February, 1958).. Kelly, E. L. and Fiske, D. W. "The Prediction of Success in the V. A. Training Program in Clinical Psychology, ” American Psychologist, Vol. 5, No. 8 (August, 1950). Peck, Robert F. ”Predicting Principals' Ratings of Teacher Per- formance from Personality Data, " The Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 50, No. 2 (April, 1959). Spindler, George. "Education in a Transforming American Culture, ” Harvard Educational Review, XXV, No. 3 (Summer, 1955). Wall, Bartholomew D. ”Some Attitudinal Differences among Educational Specialists, Administrators and Teachers, " Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 52, No. 3 (November, 1959). Unpublished Mate rial Axinn, George H. ”Personnel Testing for the Michigan Cooperative Extension Service. " Unpublished study, Michigan State University, 1957. (Mimeographed.) Axinn, George H. "Selecting Personnel for the Cooperative Extension Service of Michigan. ” Unpublished study, Michigan State University, 1957. 60 Benn, Garold W. "Identification of Attitudes and Values Associated with the Teaching Effectiveness of New York County Extension Agents. " Unpublished Ph. D. thesis, Cornell University, 1952. Curry, Donald G. "A Comparative Study of the Way in Which Selected County Agricultural Agents Perform Their Role. " Unpublished Master's thesis, Michigan State College, 1951. Dodd, Stuart Carter. ”How To Measure Values. ” Washington Public Opinion Laborabory, University of Washington. (Mimeographed.) Durfee, Arthur E. ”Expectations Held toward the Extension Supervisor’s Role. " Unpublished Ph. D. thesis, University of Chicago, 1956. Lehmann, Irvin J. and Ikenberry, Stanley 0. ”Critical Thinking, Attitudes, and Values in Higher Education. " A preliminary report of research, Michigan State University, 1959. Moe, Edward 0. ”Techniques in Personnel Evaluation. " Paper presented at the Seminar in Extension Supervision for Western Region, University of Nevada, September 9, 1958. Pierson, Rowland Ray. ”Vocational Interests of Agricultural Extension Workers as Related to Selected Aspects of Work Adjustment. " Unpublished Ph. D. thesis, Division of Education, Michigan State College, 1951. Posz, A. Conrad. ”The Academic Backgrounds of Agricultural Extension Workers as Related to Selected Aspects of Work Adjustment. ” Unpublished Ed. D. thesis, Michigan State College, 1952. Preiss, Jack J. “The Functions of Relevant Power and Authority Groups in the Evaluation of County Agent Performance. ” Unpublished Ph. D. thesis, Michigan State College, 1954. Prince, Richard. "A Study of the Relationships between Individual Values and Administrative Effectiveness in the School Situation. ” Unpublished Ph. D. thesis, University of Chicago, 19 57. Swan, John C. ”Objective Selection of County Agricultural Agents. ” Unpublished study, Institute for Extension Personnel Development, Michigan State University, 1959. (Mimeographed.) u I W.,] . “as“: {es-aw; (”1?! '- 413%} 13;, MCI CHIGAN STATE UNI IVERSITY LIB III III III IIIIIIIIIWI 62 II I