119 391 _THS A STUDY OF THE EFFECTS OF fiNCREASED COUNTY 4-H MEMBERSHW ON CERTMN VITALITY FACTORS lN OREGON AND MlCHIGAN Thesisforfhobmoch.S. MlCHIGAH STATE UNIVERSITY H. 109 Myers “3960 AWNMMNW WHWNOMAIIMPW nmmnmw 3. 30011011 A“. Institute for m We]. Dunlap.» 1960 mom me advice and assistance given by Dr. George H. Axinn, Director of the Institute for Extension Personnel Development of Iichigan ltate University, has been lost helpful throughout this study. Similarly the author is indebted to Dr. meldon Lowery, Associate Professor in Sociology md Anthropology, for his counsel and advice. The conittee agreeing to review the thesis consisted of Dr. Alina; Dr. Lowery; Dr. Raleigh Barlowe, Professor in Resource Develepnent; Dr. Russell 0. Iasby, Assistant Director Extension, 4-H Club Dark; and Iilfred L. Veenendaal, Assistant Prctlssor in Audio-Visuals. Dr. Ellis- D. Baten, kperilent static: Statisticia, lichigan Agriculture kperisent dteticn, provided tunable advice on statistical procedures suitable for this study. _ The policy of Oregon State College relative to Sabbatical leave has lads it possible for the writer, an Oregon County Inten- sion Agent (4-H), to work toward a Iaster's Degree at lichigu ltate University. The greatest debt is owed to sy wire and children, Barbara, Jo Anne and Daniel. Their wfllingness to set aside persona plans and pleasures have nade this year possible. A STUD! N an PM W mom 000M! H mm 0! 0mm YEN-11'! FACING II ORNN AND HMO“ by H. :0. ”It. Iuhitted to the college of Agriculture of liehigan Otate miversity of Agriculture and Applied leience in partial twill-ant of the require-ants for the degree of Institute for Extension Personnel Develop-ant 1960 Approved M)” 4/, 4/4" no :0. m. One of the significant questions being raised by those who work with the youth progra- (4—H Club Cork) of the Cooperative ktusion Service is how can the resources of the Cooperative Extension lervice be sore effectively used to serve the increasing nusberctyouthlivingontherarasandinrural ad suburban areas. Beconising the wide range of 4-3 aesbers mrelled per ecmty this study atteapts to deter-ins it a sililarly wide rage exists in the nunher of 4-H aenhars per agent dc devoted to 4-H. Finding sucharangetat thenisthe effectsneertainothervital- ity factors (i.e. average age of 4-H sesbers, average tenure of 4-H seabership, percentage of ecspletinn, ad percentage of rearcllsent) . Data were taken tron the 1958 and 1959 annual statistical reports, 13-21, for all comties in liehigan and Oregon. lea values were deter-1nd for counties in the first and fourth quarules, what counties with one or acre cents designated as county extension agate (lo-l) wererankcrderedaceordingtonunherctnsnbersper agent dc devoted to 4-8. lea values were also deterahed for all counties and for counties having one or acre county musics agents (4-3). lean values vsre cospared vith ; tests. Coefficients of correlations were run using data tron all comties to deter-ins what correlations currently exist between each of the vitality factors. The factors chosen are not to be interpreted as direct seasuru of quality or success in a ‘4 club prograa. they say, hoe- ever, be indicators of progress and or indirect neasures of success. iv 3. Joe lyers labor of aenbere enrolled and nuaber cf nenbers per agent day devoted to 4-8 were tvice as large in the first quartile as in the fourth. All other factors were slightly larger in the fourth quartile. The results were sisilar for both states, except for per— centage cospletion. Oregon shoved a higher percentage eospletion in the first quartile thm in the fourth. Data froa all counties in liohigan showed no significant correlation between nunber of seabers per agent day devoted to 4-! ad average age, average tenure, percentage cospletion, or percent- age renrollnmt . Oregon showed significant negative correlation between masher of seabers per agent day devoted to 4-3, average tenure of 4-H senbership, and percentage of reenrcllaent. Individually the factors produce a statistically significant difference indicating longer temre, higher cospletion, and greater reurollnent could be expected in counties with saaller enroll-ante. lhen considered in cosbination the larger enrollments produce a significantly larger 'erposure factor". me study indicates that nunber of aesbers per agent day devoted to 4-3 and nuabor cf aenbers enrelled per county can be increased vithout serious sacrifice of average age of 4-H seaber, average tenure of 4-H seabership, percent- age of eoapletion or percentage of reenrollaent. his study provides statistical indications. Further investigaticn and field study is needed to deternine the cause and effect of the differences revealed before definite conclusions or reconendations can be dram. 1n rmoroorrms II'BGJUCTIN........... Hypothesis........... WNLM....... mommzorsrm....... WAT!“ AID AIALIBIO a» DATA Iiehigas............ mmeeeeoeeeee Cinilarityofl‘indings. . Apfiicatimofflndingeto lypothotioll emu, e e e e e WADONCLUSIO’B ..... Mdrml....oo mamm.eeeeeeeeee 'mImMOOOOOOOOOOO mun Tables........ H ”Jo 338% B 88:35‘88 LIST a? TABLES Table Page 1 Coefficient of correlation hates. Bertain vitality factors for all www.crm‘eeeeeeeeeeeeee a 2 kposure factors for the first and fourth M..OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO a 3 Coefficient of correlation betweu certain vitality factors for all “t1..°:°r.‘meeeeeeeeeeeeeee31 4 Exposure factors for the first and fourth mm.. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 36 5 dunnaryofccrralationbetweenvitality tatOrOIOrommeeeeeeeeeeeeeee u 6 Canary of correlation between vitality factorsforllichigss.............. 43 uwnumwmneumumun Iayefthefreecountrieseftheworld,hassalerspidandcon- sendaue progress. hofessienal workers ad volunteer leaders associated eith this significat youth pograa of the Cooperative Intensiadervieehavejustcausetcbepreudoftheiraccoalieh- sente. Atthesastiae,however,thequestiaisbeisgaaedas tehestherescmeecftheoooperativelrtensionlervieecabe “mmnuwnmmwmmamu liviagafarssandinruraladsuhurbaareasll Itistewardfieabsvequestienadeneother,'llatie thedesirahlewcrklcadefthecoutyextasiaarherdoingyeuth cox-nil? um on. ma.- directed. Four-lauhworkiseonduetedinavarietyofwaysad utilises'amatercfergaisationalprccedures. Mallet thesevarieussethcde, hcwaver,thereiscneccasonthreed. thin eaehceuntyertasionstaffthereareeneoracrepecpleprofee- sienally responsible for the 4-H club progrsl. This responsibility saybeealyaeofsasyhaldbyagentssorkisginegricnltureer hose eccnaies, it night he the sole responsibility of one indivi- dan,tveerserepecpleaudevotefulltinete4-lelubwork,er therewbeaco‘instioncfthefl. ___- 1“Report of lational ‘4 Evaluation Coalittee', January, 19”, Po 10 . . :22: DJ»- 2 latever the aethod of staffing, one con-en daoaiaater is them-berefagatdays‘devotedteuclubwork} Hence,thie whethenajerfccinsedthlmtthism. For over twaty years, various 'ltatistical leasurensnts «Haunt-‘mmnanmmmdumnub, eeaty, ad state H psugrass. 'Altheugh seasureaente of partici- patiuaremtvalidinevaluatingtheedncammaflngthey say be indicatera of progress), Ierereeentlyl.I.Aiton,Direster,‘-!Cluhadnl Program, Federal Iatasia derviee, C.I.D.A. idatified tat he chceeteeall'ntalityl‘ecters'.6 Theeevitalityfaetersare definedaselenatserfeatln‘eecflxtaeioslrlfllabpregras aiderepoeitivdyralatedtetheaehieveneatefreeognised objectives ad purposes of ‘4 club vert.’ “talisteatotdofninefaeterscfaiohsdxwi'llbe consideredinthisstady. Thethreethatareaotbeinineluded deald.th(l)pereentofpoteatialruralyeutth-lzeervedby H, (2) percent of potatial 14-» year old. name by“, ad 3mm;- a m. - alumna 44 Club Progru, 1955', Itate ‘4 Club Office, College of Agriculture, University of usoasin, ladison, Ii-sconsin, pp. 16-17 as appears in m .. " - '1 OM" “ - ' _- 3D ‘1 11341;.“ in ~- ~bertO - - Iayl955. lfies-nerd C. Joy, dtatistical asurenats Cl Cooperativehtensien'ork in Agriculture endless loaoaies, Extension lerviee Circular, 270, October 1937. bier-2- ‘e. v. Aiton, WadDesignfersltllychitality Factors in ‘4! Club Progrese', Th.D. Dissertation, lduoation, thiver- 22.59. 3 (3) percatoanenberaipthatisllr-myearscld. Mend two deal with potatial youth, a figure that is defined different]: bystatesandevenbycountiesvdthinthesanestate. Cseofeensus figuressouldhaverequiredusingfiguresnineyeareeldadno leageraceurate. Theaficrdoesnotfeelthattesayauyeufief Haearepotauallv-Iaenbersisrealistic. Certainyoufiaay nothaveneedfor,ncrdesiretcbelosgte4-Iclahs. Iilea valuable faster is local situations, pereat of potential did not eerveauseMpn'poseinthiestdy3haoe,thedeeisienteeliai- utethatafutersdedinguthpercatcfpotaual. hiestudy iscaoerneduththetetalaa-berefaabersarelledpereeunty adsincethisinclalestheM-myeareldsitsassotdeeaed desirouetefeeusattentionononespeeislaegrcep. Thesinfaetorstcbeeasideredaree 1. WW9: W. uneeavorkyearisnotaveryeaplicit'ters,“ ”decidedtoasesahersperagentdqdevetedtcl-I. Thisisa sereenaetfigureadiscbtunahledireotlyfreathemualreports emu-atly prepared by all extension agate, the Lida-21.8 2. WW. mfiamfllvmn- ahlefigareadrqresatsmmsherofflfferentbeyeadgirls inefficiauyenrellinL-lclubwork. 3- W. Mummen.w agesaytadtcflattenoutandbesoaeaatunsafisfaetoryasas uncut-«vanity? It isoolputedbysultiplying mterof staual Report of County htaaion Agate, Cooperative ktasicn Fork in Agriculture ad lone Iooncnics, federal Extension Cervice, Iaahington, D. C. 9Alton, M” p. 11?. l. Hsabereineachagebythatage, totallingthereseltsad dividingtheashthetetdnuberoflp-fisabers. 1.. Ame me of 4-3 nenhership. This is conputed by suiti- plyingthsnunhsryearscfnenhershithhennnbercfnenbersin each ale-year experience bracket, totalling the result,ad dividing byfietctalsusberofblnenbersarelled. 5. W. - Aiten suggests that this is perhaps the nest signific‘at of the sine factors used.1°~lt can be cosputed for any two successive years. Iron the 1959 arollsent subtract the nusberof first yearnenbers. The renainder isdividedby eitherthe 1953 enrellnest or the 1953 conpletion figures. lines a nenber is netgiva oreditfortheyear'swcrknslesshecr as satisfactorily eenpletes, the writer chose the 1958 conpletia figures. be re- sultat it the poo-outage of 1953 nenbers tho conpleted projects, Indie rennrelledforuwrkh1959. 6. W. In ccnpstededividiu thenusberof nesbersoospletisgbythenusberefnesbers enrelleddIn-isgayone mm 7011'- The sisvitalityfactorelistedabevewillbeertrenely useful. as indicators or evidences of vitality in state, ceaty, or localln-flprcgrans. Mercantedueaticnalend-prodsetsinthen- selves. The objectives ad goals of Extension youth ark are the edvaees in kncsledge, skills, ad attitudes that any result fro- lt-H progress. but one of the practical problens of Istasicn leaders is to find identifiable factors ad sysptose aioh are associated 16atom, 92, cit., p. us. nth 4-H progress that bring about desirable educational achieve- sent.....It is believed that the factors listed will be of consider- able assistace in the process of identifying and later studying intasively, county and local 4-3 prograns with high vitality.”- nth an ever-increasing'nunber of youth to he served there appear to be tvo approaches to extending the pcgrsn, (1) additional county extension personnel, (2) isproved nethods of worldng eith voluntary leaders.” This study assusu that isproved sethods are the nest logical aproaoh. ‘ nun.- the H club progras of any state there are wide variations in the nunber of club nesbers arolled per giva county. 1111999 theragewasfrosao toB,256for Iidiiga counties and free 129 to 2,266 for Oregon counties. 1 Since such a side range is fond within the counties of thesetwo states this study vnl attespt to detersine if there is aequallywiderageinmberofcentdaysdevotedtotheAt-B progras and if any relationships can be deternined between these two factors and the other four factors sentiened earlier. Thisstudyisintendedtobeenplorstoryinnatureadas such will be liaited to the sin 'Vitality Factors“ previously idatified. In no w is it intended to isply that these factors arethe onlyonesthet sight be we. lor is the seleotlonof these six factors a indication that they, in thenselvu, are a neesure of quality or success of 4-3 club work. Hovever, for over nnm, 22‘ “to, Po 1190 12!. T. lartin, The 4-3 eader's Handbook Harper and Brothers, low Tork l6, lew Iork, 1956, p. . twatyyearstheyhave boa considered as sethods of seasuring the relative men of 4-3 Leaders,” and menu: are considered anongthe'rectorstcconeiderinaalymthocountyA-Hclub prop-.9“ It is felt that these factors will give inforsetion to indicate ifnore detailed researchinthis areesouldbeprof- itahle. Data was secm‘ed fron two states, Oregon and Iichiga. Ceparate statistics vere then prepared for eah state. m thenseof twowidelyseparated statesitishopedthattheresults naybencreneaningfuladusefulthaifcnlyonestatevereused. Ceneef thequestionstoaichanswersareseughtfcllcwe Asthesusberofclubsenbersperagentdqdevotedtoclubvork rises, diet happens to the other fivesvitality factors! Is there anyreletionbetwsathenusberofnenbersaronedinsoomtyand the other factors? dines all of the factors are generally, if not alsa‘ys, considered as being itens .to increase, are they positively correlated one with the other! Insdditiatousingdatefronanofthscemtiesinesch state, it is felt desirable to enasine separately those coaties in aichcneornoreagenteare amoyedacearrythetitbeechmty Extension Agent (Ir-B). lore we are attespting to deter-ins if there is ay differace betveen each of the six vitality factors for those oomties in the first ad fem‘th quartiles based upon-nusber of club I ”Aug“; 4-3 mwgneaderehipinatggesrenoe com , In lurk, Bert J. Rogers, Extension Service Circular 31 , Amst, 1939. l‘liseograph ago, 1pm 1953, Agricultural lrtensien Cerviee, University of Iinnesota, 1953. nenbers per agent day devoted to H club sork. It is readily adsitted that total popflation, geographic distace, and say other variables night be at vork in any given situation; however, for purposesef this studywe are onlyinterestedin attemting to deter-inc the interrelations betst the six vitality factors. It is reelised first the accuracy of agents reporting of daysdmtedtcL-flsightbequestioned. Hereitnustbe assuned that agats' sensuatiously report to the best of their knee- ledgeadthatawerrorswou‘ldbefairlyconstantfroscoatytc ccaty. lo sore accurate data could be secured vithcut establish- ingsons specidforscfreporting. Cuohprocedurewcfldrcquire atleest afnlcelendaryeertodo, andresultswouldbe still subject to question. This procedure use considered beyond the scope of this study. Hypothesi- Thenajorhypothsmofthisetudyisthatasthesuberof nesberspergentdaydevotedtok-fidubscrkinoressesthereiss corresponding increaseinthetotdnusbercfclnbsesbersarolled. Thetthereieno significatshiftorlcssisthecthsrfourvital- ity factors, (i.e., average age of sabers, averae taure of nesbers, WW0 conviction. and percentage reenmllnent) . Conversely, thelarger thenusberof nesbers arefledper countytheaallertheaneuntofextensdonagattisedevotedper Hasbsenber. Asthenusbercfnenbers enrelledincreseeethere is no significat change in the four vitality factors of aversge age of nesbers, average tenure of nesbers, percentage conpletion and percentage reenrollnat. Acceptaceofthishypothedssflltendtoconfirnthe preposition thst statistically these vitality factors will not necessarily change ass a County ‘4 progres increases in sacri- cal sine, with or without additional extension staff. be above prepositioniesupportedwtheoontatiathatudsecfprogras increases the escat of involvensnt of lay people becones greater. Likewise, the nusber of differat opportunities for a individual nenber increases,“ hence,the chances of his having a entity-lag experience is increased. lsthsearlyetgesofthestudy, theauthorccndncteda rather extensive search of the available literature. The follcv- ing review of literature is presated is a effort to aid the readerinbetteraderstandingthebasisfcrthisstudy. 'WOFW A Although studies of extension activities have been con- ducted for nearly forty years]; for investigate the relationaips hetseen egent load or else of comty progres ad other vitality factors or indiees of success ad efficiency. Ia: C. Crady2 indicates in his study that 'changes in the percentage ad total anount of ccmty worker' a tine devoted to ‘ 11-3 club toe-k had no neesurable influence on the percent of projects cospleted'. I I - , . Bernard D. Joy, Agriculturist Extension Mays and Reports Cectia, o. s. o. A. has on several occasions sade etoiiee of enrolJnat per extension agent. He indicates that ”a neesure of thevoluaochlubarkiethereleuonofsesberaiptcthe extension budget or personnel. Its purpose is to picture the scope of the nor: in terns of available peid leadership"? It is a sore satisfactory neesure cf volnse tha total enroll-at because it sakes allowance for the differences in the sins of counties or states, adthenaherofpeopleentbeeatension staff. bothers 1-; Ctudy of the Doctors in the Efficiency in Boys ad Girls Clubs“, I. I. Charter, ad Janos I. Greene, Cchcol Science 54 W Vol. 210 335.341, It. Iorrie, Illinois, 1921. an: o. Crandy, Statistical innings of 4-: Club Iork in 9_c1orsdo, B646, Colorado ture College Mansion, p. typesritten, Fort Collins, 1 , p. 32, quoted in Review of Inten- sion Ctudiee, “1946-47, Extension Service Circular “9, C.C.D.A., larch 1948. ‘ . 3W art-men Cervice Circular 27-, October 1931. 10 pcrtia of each agent's tine or the full tins of specific gents isdsvctedtolo-Sclubwcrktheenrollnentpercountyextension agent is a neesure of the nusber of boys and girls reached per unit of extasion tine or ncney.‘ 'ith increased sins of staff, aidinnayinstsnceshasledto specialisation, thousscf nesbereperegentdaydevotcdtolr-i seenstoreinforceandrefine Joy'eressoningfortheuseofarcnsentperextendonegentis his study. Ilile Aitcn chose to call the six itens "itality factors” nest ofthenhaveheausedindividnallyorinvarious ccnbdnstione foranusbercf years. nanostreceat studyrefersto ccnpletion, rearellnent,and sesber taure as neasures of 'stetisticel perfor- uneeI.‘ Isrlier veet Virginie retention Service had referred to these case itens as 'neasures of perforsacel" to ccnpere one type of club usinst the other. ‘ no average percentage of cospletions by club nesbers and the average percentage of reenrollnents of club nesbers are used by Sort legers in attespting to deterllse the relative success- of leaders.8 tie s is ub Icr mosaics Service Circular 7, 193 . 5am, an. cite Gino Le ences Icuth O WM [est 7 Cost Virginia University, ficulturel Experinent Station Bulletin 427, hey 1959, 1:. It. 7992arisonscf School maawigflgm ig'egt Agricultural Extension Service, est Virginie hiversity, lies. Publication lo. ll, Jauery 1952. WI. mm, - b e W mmm. maul-r . mim. ll Pill 3. Dim, is ems thesis at the University of Iaryiad’, studied several peeeihie sethcde of evalnsting the effect- ivaees of 4-! local leaders. Of those studied, he arrived at three lstbds that he felt vere practical Dd lid a definite 1'01st to hedegrectoaiehchlubleedervassuccesefulinguiding 4-H club nesbere tcvard the objectives of 4-H club work. Of these three, ta are being used in this study, nanely, percentage of senbera oospleting ad percentage of reenrollnent. Club enrellnat (nusber of nesbere) and percentage of nesbers conpletdngtheirp'ojcotsarelistedbyiillnaaesoneof theme of neasuring achievenent in a 4-1! not.” Sisilar studies for ergaisations other than 4-! appear to be virtually non—existent, however, theDcySocutsofisericelist anongna'thodaofseasurisg results” such itens ass (1) percentage of boys in each rank, (2) percentage of scouts lost, (3) anual cost per scout - exclusive of per-anest, can site, etcetere.11 Thatcerteincfthescfectorsarebeixcurrentlyusedis ehoaintheprecedurefcr countyaalysisasoutlinedby'thedtate 4-3 Club Office, University of sinneeete, at. m1, Minuet...)-2 9am J. Dixon, 'Dvnluation of Criteria for Effective Local Leadership', heater thesis, University of Ierylad, In 1939, quoted in IA-a (huh and Older tenth Sttdies, 1910-41", Intention service Circular 373, lovesber 1911 by Berna-d D. Joy. 1°11. A. Illssn, 4-H Had Constoch Publishing Associates, Ithaca, law Iork, 1952, p. ”Wk-.5132!» Dov Boosts or harlot, 200 5th ‘7“, 'O' ark, 1 , PPe 309-919. 12mmescts A-a Club reete ad Trends, 1959 Progras', State 4-H Club Office, Agriculture Extension Service, Institute of Agri- culture, University of finneeota, St. Paul, linnesots. 12 In this publicatia national and state figures for (1) average tenure of club nesbers, (2) nedia age of club nesbers, (3) percentage of reenrollnat are provided together with blank spaces acre ccsputed figures for a county say be recorded for cosparetive purposes. Along other factors to be considered in aalysiu the county 4-H club progres are percentage of nesbers conpleting, sins of enroll- nent,and number of club nesbers per agat year of ties spent a 4—H club work. Ilile, as nestiaed above, no studies were located that dealt specifically with all of the factors listed in this study. There were several. that showed relationships between two or we of the factors. Probably, in terns of this study, the lost signif- icant was Joy's ststenent that 'Stetes that have a low 4-H club enrclJnent per agent sonetises use as justification that larger nusbcrofnaberswculdseenelower quelityofwork. If percen- tage of cospletions ad percentage of reenrcllsent are used as neesures of the quality of 4-H club sork, the data for 1938 would indicate the opposite to be true. he sixteen states with lowest enrollnent per county extension agent have a lower average percen- tage of cospletion and a lower percentage of reenrodlnent than states with larger enroll-ant per county. It does indicate that states have developed large enroll-ants sithout a loss in the qualityoflv-dclubworkbeingdoneasscesuredbythepercatage of oospletion and the percentage of reenrollsatda‘3 he goes on to indicate that four statistical neesures of 4-H club work that V 13Bernard D. Joy, ve Ieers of ub gs of Statigicg 32;, Extension Service Circular 312, 1939, p. 9. 13 are best indicators of its scope, Qpeel, and influence are. 1. hell-ent per county agmt. 2. farcentage of eligible young people reached. 3. Perentage of aenbers to reem‘oll. 4. Percentage of nowhere to couplets their projects. lore recent studies by labrosky indicate that usually con- pleticn in closely related to regarding-1t.“ In a study of tin: year wenbers it was indicated that there is a correlation between age and ooaplstion of project work...the older the first year Icebersare, the saallertheproportdonefthestecoepletes pros-ct.” In the Ieet Virginia stuiy nsntioned earlier, it was found that 'the age of club seabere was not significantly related to individual lam-experience scores, but length of club Inher- ship ”.116 (in individual learning experience is defined as a setofectsperforasdinrelationtosowed-Hclnbgcslorastate ofkncfledge, mmbeentheresultefspecificphasssofths club mere-I.) Icgers Ill Joy both indicate a relationship exists between coupletiai and reenrolling .17’18 “Laura K. lahroshy, D ta Bale to Indivi U.B.D.i. Intusion Service, October 1950, p. 11. . e ernW-Lu: 313;'1fl_-- 1.; 1'» roll. Extensim Service, U.l.D.l., pril 1950, p. 17. 16(Isst Virginia 3mm: ‘27), 92. an, p. 7. 1"(Extension Circular 314, lagers), m” p. 22. ”(Mansion Circular 25?, Joy), gp,cit., p. 10. 14 latiually, the average length of aesbsrship (tenure) is approxilstely two and two—thirds yam.” a. an educational orgmit- satien the desirability of tenure is borne out in studies such as claw-2° and sham-.21 once found that various 1eve1s of 4-: experience showed a significant relationfiip to adoption of isproved fern wactiees. Further, that this relationdzip showed a definite increase as the amber of yeers of participation in the 4-H club progres increased. minn concldee that if the greatest values are tobederivedfroelo-lelub training adupudenee the chellengeto thoeerespcnsihlsforteformlstionmdexecutionoftheL-flclub progres is to emert the greatest effort to secure reenrolleent for as say years after the first as it is possible. msubjutnettertrainingismimortmtpertofthe Helubprcgraatheinvelvenentofpeopleinallphesesofthepro- gru is equally W. In lew England it was found '...that clubsenjoyinglougtemeofsesbershiparethoseinmehprograss are planed Jointly up the nesbers and the leaders'.22 linoelr-Beleb workisavoluntaryyouthprogrsn andassuch is dependent upon voluntary local club leaders for the operetien of 19:.»- n. Oopp, Robert 0. Clark, m Associated with t in ubs Research Bulletin no. 195, Agriculture hperinent Station, University of nsconsin, 1956. P. 40. 20Kenneth s. Olson, "the Relation of Selected rm. 4-: Experience to Their Adoption of leproved hrs Practices,“ Gunnery of 15.3. thesis, mitersity of Iisoonsin, 1959, p. 4. 11m 3.5m, s fat} 0 fig Eggs in 1.; States, ktension Circular , leptenber l . 221.401mede SchoolIouth ew Ooo ative Meier Publication, issued 3!; the Extension Service, Iassachusetts State College, lay l 7, p. 7. 15 thelocal club, the agents conceptefhisrolewillhave agreat dealtodowithhiscrherebilityto conductaneffective progres serving a large umber of aesbers. liaffsr indicates that axe of the lain tails of workers in this field is to organise and coordin- ate the efforts of adult volunteers to carry on the progrsu of their agency. bus, the professional in youth work is M since in lost cases he works with adults instead of working directly with 79W P3011. 023 is the sheer sise of enroll-snt increases those respon— sible for the progrsa in the comty extension office Iill tend to see their role acre as an organiser, stinulator.and educator of the group which employs hie. It is not his function to atteapt to act as group leader; insofar as he does so, he prevents the best social organisation of the group with inch he is entrusted.“ Lindeaan ”arises the role of the professional a he says, "to the extent that the professional leader rescuises his role and plays his part as a leader of leaders 111 he be successful. inbuildingapstmggrouplifeandwillheleavsitapersenent legacy, for inch his senory will. be blessed.'25 Iile readily admitting that statistical names, in then- selves m not be direct asasures of the success or quality of an 23netert n. Buffer, messicnal meaning in 33%;; {outh “in; Ognisatdggs, 'estern Personnel Institute, 30 . Bey-end Avenue, Pasadena, California, 1949, p. 5. “night landerson and Robert A. Polson, W W John Iiley and Sons, Inc., law Iork, 1939, P. 380. 25s. o. Linda-an, W1, Associated Press, law rent, 19a. p. 190. 16 educational progres, it appears that asple evidence is available that the various factors being used in this study are generally accepted as lindicators of progress' .26 26(kteneicn Service Oircular 210), on, cd.t., p. 2. WEI WWW The asJor hypothesis of this study is that as the nuaber of neabers per gent day devoted to 4-H club work increases there is a corresponding increase in the total umber of club seabers «trolled. That there is no significant shift or loss in the other four vital- ity factors (i.e., average age of nesbers, averge tenure of nesbers, percentage eonpletion, ad percentage reenrollnent) . Serving as tests of this ”pothesis are the following statistical hypotheses: 1. The nulber of aenbers enrolled per county is positively correlated with the nunber of aenbers per cent day devoted to 4-3. 2. Huber of neabers per agent dc devoted to 4-8 is positively correlated with, or will show insignificmt correlation with a. iverage age of 4-H neabers. b. Average tenure of 4—H aenberehip. c. Percentage of coupletion. d. Percentage of reenrollnent. 3. lunber of senbers enrolled per county is positively corre- lated or will show insignificant correlation with: a. Average age of 4-H nesbers. b. Average tenure of 4-H aenbership. c. Percentage of ooupletion. d. Percentage of reenrollnent. 5. 9. 18 Average age of 4-H seabers is correlated with: a. Average tenure of 4-H nesberabip. b. Percentage of oonpleticn. e. Percentage of remmllnent. iverege tenure of seabership is correlated with a. Percentage of coapletion. b. Percentage of reenrollnent. Percentage of coapletion is correlated with psnentage of reenreunent. ' lien counties with one or nore agents dosimeted as County Extension Agents (4-3) are divided into quartiles by umber cf nesbers per agent dq devoted to 4-H there are signifi- cant differences in: a. be nusber of nenbsrs enrolled per county. b. merofwewbersperagutdqdevotedtelo-E. In counties with one or acre gents designated as County utension Agents (4-!) we divided into quartiles by nunber efsubersperagentdeydevctedtolt-lthere arenosigni- ficaat differences in: a. Average age of 4—H nesbers. b. Average tenure of 4-H aasbership. c. Percentage of oospletion. d. Percentage of reenrollnent. Ihen counties with one or acre agents designated as County Extension Agents (At-H) are divided into quarflles by nuwber cf wenbsrs per sent dc devoted to 4-! those counties in the 19 first quartile have a significantly higher exposure factor1 than those in the fourth quartile. To test these hypotheses original data were secured free the annual reports (PJJ.-2l) for each county in lichigan and Oregon. In Inchigan there are four situations here to counties are served free one extension office. In these cases the two counties were treated as one identity. This gave seventy-nine sets of data for Iiehigan. 'lhe City of Portland, Oregon operates as a separate entity for purposes of 4-H club work; therefore, Oregon supplied thirty- seven sets of data. the original r.r.s.-21 reports contain the data desired in the following ferns: 1. Total days devoted to 4-H club work. 2. Total nesbers enrelled. 3. nusber of assbers strolled for each year of ssnber age. 4. luberofnenbersenrolledforeachyearofprierclub experience satisfactorily ccupleted. 5. luber of nesbers coaplsting. Data for lichigm were processed on ID! cards. Following the procedures included in the definitions of terns reported earlier, page 3, the desired factors were conputed electronically for Michigan. Oregon data were nachine ccsputed and the final results punched into Ill cards. The resultat interaction is listed in Appendix 1, Tables I ad II. 2Lllkposure Factor - Runber of nowhere enrolled nultiplied by the average tenureof club neabers. 20 In consultation with Dr. Williaa n. Baten,2 coefficient of correlation3 was selected as the test for the first six hypo- thesesandiserpresscd as: ‘ 2 (f) éxy" (“XL 3 fl x5 3 t/ZzX1_{_fy_>c_)/1][gfiz- (3%? ‘ lcrerkyis thsrhocoefficimt, xendythetwo setsofdatabeiug coapered, and I the nusber of itens in the seaple. I1.111s procedure sakes it possible for us to sensors the tend- ency of variables to change or not to change their values together. It is realised, however, that to establish that two things tend to charge or occur together is not to establish that they are related directly or even indirectly by a cause-effect relationship.‘ Use of this coefficient of correlation will allow inferences to be node as to tether or not there is a statistically significant correlation and the direction of such correlation. A total of fifteen correlations were run asking it possible to arrive at all feasible correlations of the six factors under study. To test hypotheses seven through nine it was necessary to rank order counties with one or acre agents designated as County ktmsion Agents (4-H) according to the nusber of seabers per agent dq devoted to 4-3. For Oregon this was thirty—one counties and for lichigan fifty-for. 'eoaplete data for counties in the first and zfllliu I). listen, kperinsnt statistician, lichigm Agri- cultural Wt station. 3Jaaes E. lert, Charles lisidt, .1. Stanley Ahamn, dgtis- tical lethods in Educational and Pfghological Research, ipfleton— Century—Croft, Inc., New Iork, 1 , p. 83. ‘ansceu L. ickoff, The hem of social Research, ihc University of Chicago Press, 1953, p. . 21 fourth quartiles are in Tables III and IV, Appendix A. Since there was a tie for eighth place in the nusber of acnbers per agent day devoted to club work in Oregon nine counties were included in the first quartile and eight in the fourth. For lichiga thirteen com- ties were included in the first and fourth quartiles. Hypotheses seven through nine were tested using two fans of 35-—SZL _ 02». sea of saaple one, x;- sea of sanple two soda”.- the standard _t_tests. Inthecasecftwosaaplest= wasussdwhere71== error of difference between uncorrelated asans. lien testing a saaple and a population, 3 = £2.gz-ZfLas used where l '3 nusber of cases in the sanple; 8 = standard deviation of the salp1e37' seen of the sasple; and/a: sea of the population. Iith two sasples degrees of freedoa were deterained with the forsulaM+Nf2 :J; . tor the sanple and population I - 1 was used to deteraine degrees‘of freedoa. To test the stated hypothesis only the first ad fourth quartiles needed to be tested. However, to obtain acre couplets inforastion ad to enable including the entire state in any conclu- sions, t tests were run between the individual sanples, counties with County Extension Agents (4-H), and all counties of the state. This procedure provides a scans of deteraining if there is any significant difference between each of the six factors for counties in the first and fourth quartiles ad between these counties and counties with County Extension Agent (4-8), and all counties of the state. Throughout all of the tests a significance level of .05 was adhered to. damn PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS er DATA Date froa CreGon ad Iichiga were andlysed in this study. Two types of tests, coefficient of correlation ad 3 tests, were applied to the data froa each state. Results of these tests are reported separately for each state.1 It is not the purpose of this study to nake statistical coaparisons between the ta states; how- ever, siailaritiss of restate have been noted at the concludes of of this chapter. mohigan Table I, page 23 gives the results of the correlations for Iichigan. Hmthelil (1) thet WW count; is maitiggly correlated with the nusber of seabers E sent La: devoted t9 1—3 is upperted with a positive rho of 531.3. Hypotheses (2-a,b,c,d) that mber of washers m mt 5g devoted to 4-H is pgsitiLcly g g1; 99w Mica“ co_r_re*latigg with (a) averge go of H aenbers, (b) average tenure of 4-H aeg- bar c rcen e co etion and d rc eof W are supported since no significant correlations were found between nusber of aeabers per gent day devoted to 4-H and any of the other itens. 1lea values, with 3 scores, are reported in Tables 7 and VI, Appeal: 1. 23 TABLE! coefficient of Correlation Betweu Certain Vitality Factors for all Ocmties of Michigan actors luber or Ienbers per Agent Day Devoted to H W Inlberotlo-fllelbers hrclledperOonnty+.343 Average Age of 4-H lie-bars Average Tenure of 4-H Isnbership Percentage of Oowpletion Percentage of neuron-ant labor of Ieabers Enrolled per county Average Age of 4-8 lesbers Average Tenure of 4-H lubership Percentage of Oowpletion Percentage of neuron-ant Average Age of 4-H Isabers Average inure of 4-H leaberehip Percentage of Oonpletion Pemtage ct neuron-ant Average Isms of 4-H labership Percentage of Oclpletlcn Percentage of Moll-Int Percentage of Oospleucn Percentage of leenrollsent *A rho or t0.1’2‘? or larger indicates aignifienioe at 51 level. zIert, pp, cd.t., Table 1:, p. 421.. 4.003 +3.30 +.103 +.O93 4-.698 “ea-6 +384 -,091. +.631 -e326 icant Ies 2A The study revealed significant positive correlation between nusber or sesbers enrolled per county and average age of 4-8 seubers. lo significant correlation was found between number or seabars enrolled per county, average tenure of 4-H sesbership, percentage of reenrcllaent, or percentage of completion. Therefore, hypotheses (3—a,b,c,d) that nusber or senbers enrolled pgr count: is positivgl correlated or will show inmate“ correlation with is} average age of 4-H nesbers, (b) averge tenure of 4-H nesbership, (diamant- ge 9g aggletion, and (d) greentgge of reenrollmt are supported. Average age of 4-H senbers was significantly correlated with average tenure of 4-H sesbership and with percentage of reenrollsent. It was not significantly correlated with percentage of cospletion, but dist correlation there was gave indications of a negative taidancy. The hypotheses (4a and 4c) that garage ge of 4-H seabers is cor- fitted with averge tenure of 4-H senbersbip, g percentgga of re- M are supported. me hypothesis (4b) that averga go of 4-H senbers is aorr__:elated with MW is rejected. la aipificant correlation was found between average tenure of 4-H membership and percentage of cospletion, asking it imossible to accept the hypothesis (5a) that avarggg tenure of 4-H senbership is correlated with mentgg of aoggetien. A high degree of cor- relation was found between average tenure of 4-3 aesbersbip and percentage at reendlsent supporting the hypothesis (5b) that sum tenure of 4-H seabership is correlated with momma ct reenr t. A significant negative correlation was found between par- eentage of cospletion and percentage of reenrcllsent. This sub- 25 stantisted the hypothesis (6) that miss of menu is correlagg with manage of reenrcllsent. Differences in lean Values of certain Vitality Factors , Between First m Fourth Qurtile Those counties with‘ene or rare agents designated as acuity Extension Agents (4-!) were arraiged in rank order according to the nusberdsabersperagantdaydevotedtoé-ldubwork. Pres this ranking counties constituting the first and fourth quartiles were selected as aaaples one and two. Iith data free these counties 3 tests were rm to deteraine if there were differences in the vitality factors based upon nusber of nesbers per agent day devoted to 4-3. Throughout the Iliehigau data the sise sasple was I 3 13 requiring a _t_ of $2.06 or larger for two sasples and g 2.18 or larger for sasple and population to be significantly diffarait at the 51 level using a two tailed test.3 lypotheses seven and eight include the wording, 'iiai comties with one or acre agents designated as County Extension Agents (lo-H) are divided into quartiles by nusber of subers per egeut deg devoted to Irena. In the discussion to follow, each hypotheusisreferredtcbyuusberudtheaboveworddngssaused rather that repeated. Future referuces to first ad fourth quar- tile identify that group of counties selected tree the rank ordering of all counties with one or sore agate designated as County Inten- sien Agents (H) according to usher of sesbars per agent day devoted to 4-3 club work. M, 22. 01te, Table. '1, Do me 26 lea lusber of Ila-bars Enrolled per Comty m“ Mfl‘eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee1’655085 m M‘eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee @038 Bounties dth Aguit (4—H)..........1,156.37 m oomti....0.000....00000000900. m.” Velma for t of 57.85 .betwea the first and fourth quartiles, 28.88 betwea first quartile ad counties with County Mansion Agata (H), and 44.24 betwsa first quartile ad all counties indicated a“ significant difference between easples and between the saalas ad populatias. A .t_ of «64.07 was obtained between the fourth quartile ad all counties. m hypothesis (7a) that m are t diffs c the Wii supported- laalunberofleabersparAgent Day Devoted talk-E m“ W'eeeeeeeeeeeeeeaeeeeee 50m rm M.oeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeo 20°35 counties with Agent (H)......... 3.5!. m comm.0000000000003.0.0000... 3.55 ha difference between first ad fourth quartiles produced _t_ of over 1m. linilar results were obtained aen ecnparisons were ssde with counties having County Extension Agents (4-3) and all coaties. In all instaces the first quartile reduced positive value for g and the foul-d1 quartile negative values. the hypotheti- (M. “at W ee the of nesber r ant ted to is WMe lea Average Age of 4-H Isabers m“ M....O.‘.OOOOOOOOOOOOOO 120a tom W.OOOOOOOOOCOOOCOOOCOO 120% Counties with Agent (4-H).......... 12.38? m comm...OOOOOOIOOOOOOO0.00... 12.” 27 The hypothesis (Be), that ,2... there are no sngieat differences in average 3a of 4-H sesbars not be rejected. In all tests a significant negative 3 was secured. Between first and fourth quartiles t was -6.51. First quartile and counties with Coaty Extension Agents (4-H) produced a t of 4.2.8, tile all counties hadgof -2?.50. Ihen the fourth quartile was used as a ssnple ad all counties as the population 3 was -9.l9. This result suggests that although the higher average age of 4-H sasbars tends to appear is those counties with the lower nusber of sasbers par (at day devoted to 4-3 this is not necessarily true. The fourth quartile, having the least senbers par agat day devoted to 4-H, also produced a negative 5. This affirss the earlier finding that a significant correlation does not exist between seabers per agent day devoted to 4-3 ad average age of 4-H scsbers. he an Average Tenure of 4-H nesbership First Quartile......................... 2.40 Fourth Quartile........................ 2.53 Counties nth Agent (4-H).............. 2.59 All Counties........................... 2. lien the first quartile was cospared to the fourth quartile a g of 4.9.14 was obtained, indicating a significat difference in favor of the lower washer par agent day situation. This is further borne out aen the fourth quartile was tested against all counties ad a _t_ of 6.545 obtained. Using the first quartile gainst counties with County Extension Agents (4-3) and all counties negative 31's of -22.30 ad -l9.38 respectively were obtained, indicating a signifi- cant loss in average sesbar tenure in counties with a large nusber cf sesbars par agent day devoted to 4-H. lo significant difference was found ten the fourth quartile was cospared with counties having 3 County ktension Agents (4-H) (_t_ = 0.1636). m with this one instance of no difference, previous evidence is such that hypothesis (8b) that “u, there are no 5213mm differences in avgge ten- ure of 4-H aeaberahip, must be rejected. lea Percentage of Completion First We...................... 89.09 Fourth Mme..................... 91.9? Counties Iith Agents (4-3)....m... 90.1.6 All Oounties........................ 90.18 negative E's of -7.Sl, 4.1.57, ad «9.218 were obtained when the first quartile was coapared with (l) the fourth quartile, (2) counties with County ktensia Agents (4-H), and (3) all counties. Values for t of 30.74 ad 25.93 were obtained when the fourth quartile was cospared with counties having Oomty ktasicn Agents (4-8) and 13 all counties. his evidence Justifies rejec- tiea ef hypothesis (Be) that “I“ there are 3 saggicant differ- ences in mentge of coggetien, and indicates that in those comties with fewer seabers per agent day devoted to 4-3 the expected percentage of coapletion would be higher. lean Percentage of Reenrollsent First Quartile..................... 66.95 fourth Qiartile.................... 87.55 counties with igents (lo-E)......... 70.05 All Counties....................... 67.84 A statistically significant difference was found between the first quartile ad the fourth quartile (g = 4.47). A g of 41.35 resulted froa the first quartile and counties with County htaeioa Agate (4-H), aile the first quartile and all counties produced a 3 of -3.25. This required rejection of hypothesis (8:!) there are no icant differences in 29 W. The fourth quartile produced no significant differ- ence betwea the saaple ad all counties of the state (3' 0.98). Ooapared with counties having County Extension Agents (4-H) a _t_'or 4.5 was obtained. ‘ Iith the results froa all five tests it was necessary to reject the hypothooia of no difference. But with first and fourth quartiles producing negative 53 s it was not possible to predict a trend for percentage rearollnent based upon nusber of nesbers per agent day devoted to 4-8. This is further evidence to substantiate the earlier finding of no signifieat correlation between umber of aesbers per agent day devoted to 4-3 ad percatage of rearollnent. Exposure Factor A decisively significant difference was found betwea the exposure factors of the first ad fourth quartiles. Table 2 Exposure Factors for the First and Fourth Quartile lumber of ' Average hposure labors Tenure Factor First Qiartdle 1,655.85 2.Ao $60.04 Fourth Quartile 6a.” 2.58 1&0 .58 Ouch a significant difference dictates acceptance of hypothesis (9) that E counties with one or acre gags dogmted as 029.2 figsion Agents (4-8) are digided into Me: 2; mr of seabegg per gent dg devoted'tg 4-H those counties in the fat We have a Micatlz m mare factor than those in the £923; Mule. 30 Oregon he sane tests were applied to the Oregon data as to Iichiga. The results of the correlations for Oregon are ahoa in Table 3, page 31. a highly ngnificat correlation H.706) was obtained 1.... tween nusber of aenbers enrolled per comty ad‘nunber of aenbers peragentdaydevotedted-B. luchahighcorrelationstrongly supports hypothesis (1) that nunber of seabers gagged g; cm is pgsitigl; correlated with the nusber g Isabsrs 22 mt m devoted to H. luaber of seabers per agent dc devoted to 4—H was found to be negatively correlated with average tenure of 4—H seabed-ship ad percentage of reem'ollnent. has, rejection of hypotheses (2band2d) thatmnberofaesberspggggentggdevctedtolr-fi is sitive crreated r in is tcorrel eith {b} average tenure of 4—H nesbership ad {d} 2292111532 9_f W was required. No significat correlation, either positive or negative, was found for 2a or 2c providing evidence for acceptance of the hypotheses that mber of amber; per gent El devoted to 4-3 is pggtigg]; mad or $2: ”w M- ieant lat withaavere e Lanes rs re We of «motion. ' 31 TABLE 3 Coefficient of Correlatia Between Certain Vitality Factors for all Counties of Oregon F_____act°r- 9141* We luaber of leabere per Agent Day Devoted to 4—H lusber of lesbers broiled per County +.706 yes Average Age of 4-3 Heabers -.331 no Average Tenure of 4-H llenberahip -.57'I yes Percatage of Coapletien +.213 no Percentage of Rearollnent -.467 yes luaber of leabers hrolled per Coaty Average Age of 4-3 Ieabers ' -.288 no Average Tenure of 4-H lesberaip -.638 yes Percentage of Coaplfldon {5018 no Percentage of hearollaat -.584 ‘ yes Average Age of 4-! nesbers Average Tenure of 4-8 Ileabership -.015 no Percatage of Cospletion -.3?5 yes Percatage of hearollnent +.Cll no Average Tenure of 4-3 Iabership Percentage of Coepletion +400 no Percentage of Bearollsat +.821 yes Percentage of Conpletion Percentage of Resurollsent -.022 no “Rho of 11.334 or larger is necessary to be siaificat at 51 level.3 3'ert, 221.21.?» Table II, p. 424. 32 Hypotheses 3b ad 3d, nusber of nesbe_r3_s_enrolled mg count: is msitivg; correlated or will show insiflficant correlations withbaveretenureof/t—Haeaberehi add ercent eof reenrollaent, lust be rejected since highly significat correlations sere found. hypotheses 3a ad 3c, nuaber of sesbers enrolled a; count; is msitivelz correlated or 3;; show 25%th cog-Ega- tionwitha e eof aenbersando cent eofcon- m are'supported as insignificat correlations were found in both cases. Average age of 4—H seabers fdled to produce significant correlation with percentage of rearollsent or average tam-e of 4-H seabership causing rejection of hypotheses (4a ad 4c) that eof4-hsesbersis tedvithaav etaur of 4-3 neabarahip g {e} Mags of Rmflfit. A significant correlation, -.315, was'found between average age of 4-H Isabers ad percatage of coaletion. This confirss the hypothesis (4b) that me se of 4—3 senbers is correlated 3th Ecatgge agglem. Hypothesis (5a) that average tenure of 4-H seabergp is flagged with pggcaQe of Mafia, was rejected due to in- significat correlation. gergge taure d 4-! nesbergp is waisted nth pmtse W producing a rho of +.821 ad aooeptace of hypothe- sis (519). Thehypothesis (6), ercen e c t i ted W is rejected since no signifieat correlation was obtained. 33 Differences in lea Values of Certain Vitality Factors Between First ad Fourth Quartiles The aethcd of sample procureaent ad testing procedures for Oregon data was identical. to those described on pas 25. ForOregondetathevalueeflt, tobesignificat atthe 51 level, was 12.13 or larger for ta suples and 23.36 or larger for a seaple and the population. Ilsa Husber of leabers Enrolled per County rirat quart£1.eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee 1’39301 row W.OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ”.0 00min“ filth “at (44)....000000 ”on memu..0000000000.00.0000...O. 8&0‘ dignificat differences, 53s of 37.00, 19.99, ad 25.82, were found in the nusber of seabers enrolled per county aen coa- paring first quartile to fourth quartile, eomties with Comty Extension Agents (4-H), ad all coaties. Ouch evidence supports the lupothesis (7a) that "u there are Micat differences in the nusber of seabers arolled m countz. lean labor of Ila-bars per Agent Day Devoted to 4-3 m“ W.OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0.00.0... 30m For“ mm.00000000000000000...... 1.“ count1.‘ Ilth ‘8‘flt 0‘43)eeeeeeeeeeeee 2518 ‘11 count1.'eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee 3055 hypothesis (7b) that there are sleigicgt differences in the ngber of seabers pg gent m devoted to 4-1 was statistically supported by 3's of 43.8, 34.87, ad 39.07 dun first quartile was coapared to fourth quartile, counties with County Extension Agents (4-8), and all counties. i 8‘ 34 lean Average Age of 4—H Members m“ mil-.0000.000ssooosooooseseo 1-1082 ROW martneosssssssessssessssoss. Rea? OMtie' filth “at (M)sseseeessees 12e83 m Countie.......................... Rel-5 A qualified rejection of the hypothesis (8a) ,,., there are What differences in average age of 4-H aenbers was neces- sary. Ooaparison of first and fourth quartiles produced a _t_ of -22.17. lien first quartile was ooaparsd to counties with County Mansion Agent (4-H) and all counties even greater indications of differences {-92.66 and -30.28) were obtained. In rejecting the hypothesis a plausible inference would be that average age will increase as nunber of nesbers per dq devoted to 4-H increases. This is not a correct inference for two reasons. First, no signi- ficant correlation either positive or negative ass obtained in earlier tests between nuaber of aenbers per agent day devoted to 4—1! and average age of 4-H aesbers. Second, when fourth quartile is used as a saaple and compared to counties-with County Extension Agents (4-8) a _t_ of -ZJ.5 is obtained. ’ lean Average li‘enure of 4-H Henbership first martile 2.32 fourth mums........................ 2.66 Counties with Agent (4-H).............. 2.54 All Counties........................... 2.60 Rejection of hypothesis (8b) that 3:... there are @- ficsnt differences in average tamre of 4-H nonbership, is required since 3's of -22.8, 44.8, and -lB.18 were obtained men comparing the first quartile with the fourth quartile, counties with County Musion Agata (4-H) ad all counties. i t of 5.14 for the fourth quartile and all counties further substantiates the earlier finding 35 of negative correlation between nusber of seabers per agent day devoted to lr-E and average tenure of 4-H aesbership. lea Percentage of Coupletion First Quartile...................... 85.5 Fourth We..................... 83.0 Counties with agent (4-H)........... 80.4 m Oomtiea......................o. 800$ Hypothesis (8c) that “u there are no what differ- ihdes in watgge of ooggletion Inst be rejected. dignificat _t_‘s were fond using both first and fourth quartiles as saaples. Since all 1's sere positive it was iapossible to sake inferences as to direction of the differences. lean Percentage of lsenroilnent First We..................... 60.9 Fourth We.................... 73.3 Qomties with Agent (La).......... 70.54 All Counties"..................... 71.8 Earlier tests dancing negative correlation bstvsen nusber of aesberspsr agent daydsvoted oak-a adpercentageof reenroll- aent were confirned by the t tests using first ad fourth quartiles against each other and also the populations. First quartile pro- duced negatirs _t_'s ad the fourth quartile positive. Ouch evidence isplies that the hypothesis (8d) that where are no si icant Memes in ageing: of mt be rejected. ‘ ' Exposure Factor A decisively significant differace was found betwea the exposure factors of the first and fourth quartiles. 36 TABLE]. Exposure Factors for the First and Fourth Wes luaber of Average Exposure leabers Tenure ' Factor m't mm. 1,33 e1 2e32 3231s” Fourth Quartile 546.0 2.66 1552.36 Therefore, the hypothesis (9) when counties with one or acre gents desiggted as County Extension _A_gents (lo-E) are divided into Meg by ngbsr of seam per gent dg devoted 2 4-3 those counties in the first e ican r , mare factor than those in the fourth mg}: is supported. disilsrity of Findings Both I1chigan and Oregon showed a high degree correlation betweenthenuaberofneabers enrolledpercomtyadthenuaberof aenbers per agent day devoted to 4-3. Percentage of rearollaent was found to correlate aith average temrs of 4-H nesbership in both states. Even greater sililarities (see Tables V and VI in Appendix A) were found in the _t, test results where all findings were sidlar except for: 1. Average age of 4-H asabers. Oregon's fourth quartile is significatly older than rest of state ails Iichi- gan' s is significantly yomger. 2. Percentage of eoaplstion. Oregon's first quartile was significantly larger than rest of state ails Inchigan's Ias lover. 3? 3. Percentage of reenroilnsnt. Oregon' a fourth quartile was significantly larger than rest of the state while flichigsn's showed no significat difference. In neither state was there a significat correlation be- twsac 1. Isnbersperagentdsydevotedtoln-fl andsverags ageof4-B seabsrs. 2. fleabsrs per agent in devoted to 4-8 and percentage of con-- plstion. A 3. Huber of seabsrs arelled per county ad percentage of coupletion. 4. Avsras tenure of 441 seaberaip ad percentage of couple- tion. 38 Application of Findings to Hypothetical (Bounty he study indicates a significant loss in average age, averae tenure, percentage coapletion, and percentage reenrollaent. however, aen these are considered in scabination with number of ssabers arolled ad masher of seabers per agent day devoted to 4-H the results raise doubts as to the true significance of such losses. For maple, ilichiga counties in the first quartile average five seabers for every agat dq devoted to 4-8. These asabers rill stq 2.4 years, 89.09! sill coaplets and 66.95! 1111 reenroll. In the fourth quctile for every agent dc devoted to Henly2.04aeaberswillbelongto4-fi. Theyflll stq0.180f a year longer, 1.881 sore will couplets, ad 0.6 of 11 sore will rearoll. Using 280 working days as a hypothetical year, the first quartile counties will have 1,400 nesbers enrolled per agent year devoted to 4-8. or these, 1,247.26 111 couplets and 835.04 will reenroll. hr the seas mount of extension gent tine, forth quartile counties will have 469.8 Isabers of ass 432.(B will coa- plete ad 291.87 will rearell. GARRY M! AND OOIOLUBIOM ‘l'his an explordtory study to deteraine if certain vital- ity factors in county 4-H programs are related to the nunber of asabers enrolled per oomty. Initially several basic assertions vars aade. ' 1. that statistical neesurenents, in an educational progres, are only indicators of progrese. 2. mile these six vitality factors were chosen for study it 'isinnovayinpliedthatthsssarethealyfaotorsthat night have been used. 3. lo atteapt is node in this studyto define or identify qualityof4-lworkdoneadthefaotors chosensrenot tobsconsdderedasdirectasasuresofquality. Data for the study sere seem-ed froa the 1958 ad 1959 anual statistical reports for each county ertasion office in Igohigan ad Oregon. These tan states were chosen because of (l) the dissiai- larity in local 4-! club organisational. procedures,'(2) the differ- ence in density of population and come of ineoae, and (3) the author' a participation in the Institute for Extension Personnel Develop-ant at Michigan State University and personal interest in Oregon where he is eaployed as a County Extension Agent (H). Bunaryof Findings In both states there was a very positive correlation be- tween nusber of seabers enrolled per county and amber of seabers peragentdqdevotedtolr-fi. Asmaryof thecorrelations between all six vitality factors is shoa in Tables 5 and 6, pages 4n: ad 42. Free a statistical point of view there as a very signi- ficat difference in every factor a. coaparing the first quartile against the fourth quartile, those counties with county Extension Agents (4-3), or all counties of the state. he results were principally the ease for both states. Oregon showed a significant difference in percentage coupletion in favor of the larger enroll- sent and greater aenbsrs per agent dc devoted to 4-8, Ihils lichigan shoved a significantly lower percentage coapletdon in counties with large enroll-ant and greater nusber of aeabsrs per agent day devoted to 4-8. Iahls 5 of Correlation Betveen Vitality Factors for Oregon lesbers per Agent Day luaber of Icabers ' Average Age + Average Tenure "inmates coupletion — -.. o + o‘ bmtasowt wfi m '+ Dignificent positive correlation - dignifisat negative correlation 0 lo significant correlation fable 6 knew of Correlation Between Vitality Factors for lichigan leabers per Agent Day Huber of Harbors Averge Age Average Tenure Farcentage Coapleticn Percentage Beenrollnent m + Cigaificant positive correlation - 8191f icat negative correlation 0 lo significant correlation 43 The cosparison of seas of first ad fourth quartiles, wha counties having one or sore agents designated as County ktasicn Agent (4-3) vere ranked according to the nusber of neabers per agent day, and of these quartiles with counties having agents (4-3) and all counties can be suaaarised as follows: ’ 92:99. Faber of aesbers enrolled per county: 1. let quartile has significantly sore aesbsrs enrolled per county that 4th quartile, counties with Comty Extension Agents (4-3), or all counties. 2. 4th quartile has significatly less nesbers enrolled per county then all comties. lusber of seabers per agent day devoted to 44: 1. 1st quartile has significantly acre seabers per agent day devoted to 4-8 tha 4th quartile, counties with County Br- tenaion Agents (44!), or all counties. 2. 4a quartile has significatly less asabsrs per agat day devoted to 4-8 tha all comties. Average age of 4-3 seahorse 1. 1st quartile has significantly younger seabsrs than 4th quartile, counties with County Extension Agate (4-8), or all counties. 2. 4th quartile seabsrs are significantly older than in all counties. Average toms of 4-8 nesberaipa 1. 1st quartile has simificantly less tenure than 4th quartile, counties aith County Extension Agents (4—3), or all counties. 2. 4th quartile has significantly lager tenure th- all counties. Phrcent of coupletions 1. 1st quartile has significantly larger percentage ccspleting than 4th quartile, counties with County ktension Agents 4-8), or all counties. 2. th quartile has significantly larger percentage coaletisg than all counties. Percent of ”enroll-ate 1. 1st quartile has significatly snallsr percentage reenrollaent 1.4 than the 4th quartile, counties with County Extension Agata (Ir-B), or all comities. 2. 4th quartile has significantly larger percentage rearoll- gr. sent than for all counties. Aliyah [unber of nenbers arolled per county: 1. 1st quartile has significantly sore members enrolled per county than 4th quartile, counties with Comty Extension Agents (4—8), or all counties. 2. 4th quartile has significantly less aenbers enrolled per county then all counties. lunber of nesbers per agent day devoted to 4—He 12. 1st quartile has significantly acre nesbers per agent day devoted to 4—8 than 4th quartile, counties eith County Extension Agents (4—8), or all counties. 2. 4th quartile has significatly less neabers per agent day devoted to 4—3 than all counties. Average age of 4—8 nembersc 1. 1st quartile has significantly younger nesbers than 4th quartile, counties with County Extension Agata (lo-H), or all comties. 2. 4th quartile neabers are significatly yomger than all counties. Average Tenure of 4-8 nesbership: 1. 1st quartile has significantly less tenure than Au quartile, counties with County htasion Agents (4—8), or all counties. 2. 4th quartile has significantly longer team's than all comties. - Percent of conpletiona 1. 1st quartile has significantly analler percentage couplet- ing tha 4th quartile,counties sith County Extension Agate 4-8), or all counties. ' 2. th quartile has significatly larger percentage cospleting than all counties. Percent of reenrollnsntt 1. 1st quartile has significantly saaller percentage rearoll- sent tha the 4th quartile, counties aith County Extension Agate (4-H), or all counties. 2. 4th quartile shows no significant difference in percentage rearollnent froa all counties. Conclusions Fron a statistical standpoint the najor hypothesis that as the number of neabers per agent day devoted to 4—3 increases, there is a corresponding increase in the total nusber of club neabers enrolled ca be supported. But, that portion which states there is no significat shift or loss in the other four vitality factors (i.e. average age of 4-E nesbers, average tenure of 4—H neabership, percentage of completion, and percentage of rearollaent) Inst be rejected. However, aen all six factors are considered as they interact upon one aother it appears that counties with larger enroll-ant per county ad aith sore aesbers per agent day devoted to 4-8 have a larger nusber of seabers couplets ad reenroll than do counties with scalar enroll-ant and fewer aenbers per agent day devoted to 44. Although extenuating circunstances will be encountered in every county situation, the results of this study indicate that the nunber of seabers enrolled per county and nusber of ssnbers per agent day devoted to 4-8 can be increased without serious sacrifice of average age of nesbers, average tenure of nesbers, percentage coupletion or percentage reenrcllaent. BIBLIOGRAPH! 47 U—‘—-~-— w.‘flfll 9"", k -MHLVwau... ...~ ‘ . a )‘QQ ‘Il‘ . A- a .n .a ‘ _r—DC“ h“--.-- v” ~|.f" ‘3 ‘. A'.‘ ‘.- F ~‘ .4- fl ,,‘-‘ '34- \ - I ‘- -. .v -4- ' 2‘ "-I 4.1.1 . - .s‘ ',x G ‘ 'vCJ-LJ’ U ... - ace, \v.1._.4-a-, .Ma — -' U. - o'e- ... a -. Ax~.—‘ I — 4%--..” ---—-—~— w 1. 2 __'_' H ”1. .._ 2,. A. .-. s.-. -- _. w. _ , -.. ~. \ '- - D ‘-- I a. Ur... ... . U o . u ~ - a. -- - -- U V- II b e: \- '- A n | —L.A Q “ - Lt. \* s ‘- 4 ._ ' .‘ L I I? .a "V )6." ‘1. _~.."*. 1.9, ~ -- r 14 u.-_ b...- - U 4... .5.» ‘- u.» a,» --~L _L,’, 4.,1 .. . . “v- a.” T..- .- - N-w‘!‘ .1..- . _f 0 ~ 21.. ..°., r ,. ..":‘-...L.9-.3 “”1" T- u U—ALV-A , ‘ - \A— U . _a——- . '..- - ‘u - v-- -. ~ .- - ~— '-— .' “v 5 N- - .‘ — ' N3 . 4.19.. .4. 1 1’ " ‘" ‘ - -" .1: "-. Ju 1.42,.” H - -4 ' ..C. \ .- & :_‘.~\, ~ ' .- Ch.- - _. . .... V ._ 4.. .- u . b. '. . | mr-O-‘r- Q " . ‘ I 4‘, e e ‘1. 1 ‘0'“ - e L- ‘ . . . - _ ' ‘ " _‘ "- f‘ , “II " rx‘v“ '- ~ -. — , \J .n- H... -'x . _ *"-. U~ . I .5. Uu-- \ —--- - J '.- ’ “ .1 - -- v... .‘p/ '1-5.’ I . . ‘a.". L‘ - x ' ~— ,- + '- 9 qv- . LO. - 9‘ . fi- .‘C‘ (\‘A.f:- " A ’- ‘1 . --e.-_uu‘ v-e~ - ‘ a.‘ ‘ NJ‘ a-a‘ a Ir _' .a"\’ 4.1/1, C '7‘ *V‘n" _«< + q“ "_- A.» _ ""1.“ _‘ \ mun-1ifi .9 n a; q 0“,“, °, _‘4, "fi _ ~3 '.‘n f f: A 'a \v‘ux . \ “AL . . a- _-o o...»-—-. 4‘ «4.. -. k'—~ U I. - v -4' "'- - -A. L an ' .. - <—- r.« v u . _ A”. -‘.-‘ .‘+---. 3.,- ." ‘J ‘1”)- '57,-fi‘, _. "_ _ ~- ’. f N a . ‘e . I" w... .-J U ‘.a~e- K gr: . .. .. A. a a” _ .-~, .L’ ‘1]. U ouu- o.”-., fat—I .L .L, ,9. C Q ,. f'e' \ . ~‘ x‘,- ".I- flu.-. —. Y. . ‘4 T .‘- -\ Q .1..- g‘J-‘I—I I " 5" T1 -.-.I ’- 1 V V . ' -4"; . Q. .~ ab a. V*-- ”4 -- - ca -‘_-— U\ '—V—- .- , ~ A, A} A.» _LL£.—--- KL UUL . ..Le.‘L'LVC. ”mm-" d ‘ '--”-m‘-'-- ' '~ - v — Q A fi 1. -? ‘_ . ‘. . A J. . .I ' : . .. 5 ' . J ‘n -‘ ~ -.+.- .‘ . . ..' _,-,.. ., . h...” . . ..-..- a ~ _..\. ---, Je»e...~u. VJ \- . U4— -.-m.;.o U-.. x, ’ A I‘ ~ —. .k',‘ ‘r‘4-+.‘ -L.\4-.- q a" ;- 1 . ‘. 5 - . - \. '. ' a' v--‘- — O I -. g . H, .n. a, ~ ‘. - ‘LHLQ an? ,0 ' ,- .-._- -, :s a fin .. -' “a. «he .,,,‘.3_‘. , ‘ A - C ‘0‘ 4.. U. \- . .-. .- .._ I ‘u - 1 o . . I 5 *-— 9 -'.~ v‘v’ v C ’ _ A H“.._-‘“ " I —- - _ - _ e .— Q A ‘v '. .50 1,— ,I e. ‘I ~ - 5" - — n. t-- a. ‘4‘ w ._ . _- I . ~.,. Uvfida. ~ -~'v 8h -. .a— .r k..- - a... .- V» -.. ‘ v s ‘ -- a . . g L \JJ ; ———-a-_._ I - I U L I ’ ' A I — q -— - - - a . -‘ De ‘ 'v’ r~ / IN 4.. ‘r . u’y‘ .- -. . _ *- ~ I .- . - . .‘I-av‘v- n». "‘ . ‘4 ‘- ~ r " ud...——.a...-, .L./t . \ ~ ta-\-‘_-s --\-s A.-. “‘4 ‘ -~ - . UV. -.... U- ‘vg... - lT/J " ‘ "‘ . " - 0 c 4.- .-.°--- wanna-p. “AW-“'0 ‘. s- . by .u . a. n ’ be — - .... .. U- H—— ._ a-.. I! ve'»-.- v» a. "3 ’ ' "' s I . ' .. . .‘ . ,‘ka 3" s 1 a l- “L, .1—2 -‘ p“ ‘ ~A .n‘ qvmg r. ‘ 5‘ fin}‘.‘I-\’q r- . ~- . ....—." ~ <~“\ O. ‘3‘ U ‘ ‘3 , M - ’ \- U . ~ ~ ~ ea- _‘. - v -—- ' w-a - .4- \ I‘~ -- -$ ‘4 «no—awn“ d——--<-—'-a--.-—n-o-o-c.—--_’ ...-1.u _ --,. ‘ - . - .L -~’~»- .. 1 - "4.. P v. ‘~'.. ‘ --_ . __ . .-. .._. a- - a .— _ e . on...» o-.. a.‘ . --—... . y'... .... . W-“_‘J‘- ( __ _ I A, H - ‘ . Wei. , ‘ '0 0. L4 - -- t ’ Q . - I T--. r “at“? ". 64.,1.» ..L.‘ "'7 ' am. .u -. t. Le -..~ ” “in.-. .1 . 'm- U I! , a. ‘- 4 v. d. but .. ._ «V .l. . . . u; . . v- " -— V.“ Ila - -r a i.‘ a " .. -_.............._....4.._....... _e- " ,,'- .11 '7‘ o ..‘ “an J-\ '1 -~/ ff r - a "“ .4.“ .3_. _‘ “”0 .. “-0,.“ _- a.“ e- w" - a... a... a: 'e .h.’ ., my Ugoouoaho a4.. . .. - due- V . .A..~. .. v.-~.'. 24—1.. .5. -¢ -" ~“‘ .‘.--- “now”.— An ”L w_ ‘ - A Ar, M, U, 9‘ w. - ...,', e .a f? I ? ‘v _. ~L“- P. .3 V‘ m- . “Luv 5. V’> ' (.1.‘ - A w' . ,‘n U a“ , H . - ya U 0 . A .— _— .L ~- _ - o. _. L .-n \r-M‘ u-L 1.. L. " f-u mix ~ I s L1 ' ‘0 .—,‘ V" i “ _‘ J» R -u -~ A ,1\ -.- Av S I U - v .. - - \vv . he - \. -.- ~~ .5 - - ~ 4' .—/' I O U 0!. 9nd Go‘s. __ s ffi J- .'-' 2 s» ‘. "‘v _. j ‘12“ - _I' “1‘ A‘ A -. flflflh. L4.- -e. -_. - we. ~ . vu ._... - /.~— :- +,,,-a _ I ,- t " ”2"" - , JLI. ‘v’ 7‘ ~‘.. q ~e1-\ - .r‘ - fir: ' ark . ev- ~L ». 1-~ '.a-“‘\ H" .v . o. L. g». \ U 0 A; - v— Y A. U-.. -- _- U -- -‘ _. b e .‘ - v - L' ‘ M..- '-— .9 -~. --—.¢ - ’7..- L fi— a ~.L-- ’ ' - Qv - l - I ‘ - ‘- . 9.9 a< . ,\ “~ ~ . ‘ 'a' -. e . Afi my“ - 1 5t . L -~e .b/ .. s V eUa— o--. a..- s _..z w - --‘- \--‘ -- - Vt - (-— ‘t-‘u‘M—L- ‘ . .l- ' ’ ~. ‘9 $-- , o I _ 3""fl. \V . v "'V‘ — “'Lfi “ w '.4_. ~ L - 'f' ‘ 94”! 1_-'-f _ "' N‘! _ L‘ ‘- O _ L - . his ,-. t. .5. u u . *~ ~ . ' c- U._ A a ' . ‘ .' ‘ u ”urn-- .ue h -o--. —J“---_ ’7‘. . - - .,..\. $- . .. ~ ~ r - .1- v“ 2* ‘ 4. ~ — " , ...-9 . - -.; _.._ . ‘- ._,- . a 5—. vow eat .41.. H..- --- -...... U-- - -», ~..—-.-~.—e-‘ A V '5 ‘ 4 _J. .\‘ ‘ .- v x, . 4.], a O a . - . . I ., . ". ‘-‘_ a ‘- _. Q. s .‘4' fi.. ‘0. n ‘I "V‘~" _ n fl .’ .wfi :-_‘_. V. .1. “IT 4 “1_ 1“ - —, H --‘-—¢---, LIA «‘4. .- 0 5. . \._Ia a 5-0 - v A' n s' , ~ 1" U-~ ...\ . A. w u..- bug-r’n‘M’n-‘o #‘d-tco -——-—_-———o¢..‘o—-o-_ -' q ‘. —----‘ H F‘- ,- 1 '- '- Q. q . + mg— - . -- . .‘.._ q ' . a ‘a (H I , .A \h ' . . _ «a. u..- — . .a V - ~J. V ado-l nah. ~-~. - J-- U ,4. ‘~ U a» '> .a. .- a4. ..-.o 3.- "-2" .31.. 'q-.“ 4.. -v ‘ e.-.,..- .0 -. _, . . | , t |.\ - I*.- ~— , V "’ d h V ’ 0*‘J - *‘ ' w “a- o... -....-.- H -- fl 3 UV 'E-J:‘::.~J.v:o:) -. n I -. . Q “ v ' k ,~‘ .. V‘ 6 at‘ ~‘, q 'Y NW “\ j. . V5 . ' ‘ + .V. ‘\' t . , G; 5" ea r "\u o . - ‘ . ' --| ‘ ',.~‘- . M - ..... — . s! a.’~ . . .... . Va~a . .- l. . ~I.~ J . _. ... . .L.’ .,y,. e-— .c-. - l-. . ~ ‘9‘.-- --‘ -.—-- s - ~o---— g...- - ~ .' v— ._.—.—-...4- . .M_. _t_. #‘ ”_A——I~“.- .u- ‘ _—~—.. H4.‘-~ C'. Q . I- ‘,v ' ‘3‘1 '.1r4" '13, _ '1 w .‘e n a-‘\ . ‘J - -. - . '1 -k'a‘. .I.’ . .‘NL . - ’ 9 v9 0 -I . . 4. wide-29}, .q_.=-_.y.,~.94.... (fray. 4.....,._~. 11., -wqfl,-h4. TUNA-flan any“ I. ' ' ’ fi- - ‘ -‘~ V - 1 3 - - ’ ‘fl dow- ‘ a. " .-~ uni-n ‘.I--. J: A “.4. ’v -- .I \r' . - w \J -, . I a: . l ‘ ' ——.— ‘-“ Y“ ~ - Ire: ‘~ -. -‘ - f- Vr-‘Lk "none-'0 _ s- ‘ 4" ~:~!~- r P I T? N“ ~1La .4. . . 1a..“ - y - ' . v 4. ‘a' _- V 3 - ho' \ A .. 'U,- ._ I _ ‘ ha—‘I H .—-‘3— oni“ ‘0 c» -.- r-~.—..- '--‘ oh;- o~ — v . - > ‘It.*—.-." - c L»- rs- - o . ph-.—-——..-~'~—. K ... v—. Q o a — - . .' r yIL‘r‘I* .‘fl 1" ~-'v va rv" - 5 ~-. v2 ‘ r. n 3-. “I '{4‘ v. P F? r-‘v :' ... .8 —~.§>. a. - - “ ~-- . ._ ...._.~ J~vod ’v on , ”. ~-w-~ - ‘J -c. c- .- -~‘4-~-e ‘ -' U I . .-~ ~ .“_.~ — ‘ a .- , -- ”* q 0‘ - r . s- I...’.on .-._ fin rm-.‘ “,2", n ‘. -_ ,., '3 ,....\. «1. ‘,..,..-.‘-|. man fikgfi,_ A.‘ V; - ’ A-w. -_ -.._. - y L _. \. ~J\_.. - - . o u —. . -. .a. 5. .-. _ ‘ "-0.- -’-—. a-..o—--.—_----- r‘g‘ ’ t..—.— ‘85." " U v-n 1 ”A ”vs ~- ,‘ - . . t x a 5 ’ J... - I . -~1-.-3 .,;..9 ,,. A, a L. e, _, 1:": -4._ v. . a 'u a, --,,.3. 9. ‘. Heuriwc.‘ -w ”raga. .g . v A .-— ..- -u’ u- ~o- 4.. ‘.--~,‘. ‘ . g.- -t t ' ".4. '..‘e » - . . . u v - . 4.1,— ! *o-«u . h-~.—~H-h--—- —-m-o—.h‘wu-~..—C-W a e- o s -. a —— - 1 M . \- +--.\~\ *w '1‘“ r1 __ 1 ‘ {a y ‘ i.“ P ‘A ‘ . 1“ 9 ‘ 'L 3- + "x as -. ‘— ..§ . .- . -. . .-a,/ .. ‘4 w - - . — .—. . V fly’. V . V U ‘ 'L- m‘-'-->h"—-—.fi~‘ - ~--.§--“. ‘ - —-_t—.~~‘~.---~I~‘—_.“~"‘ ' " - __\“.". L‘ " - ._‘- q. - P”. Va 4.: \- u 4- ‘0' , U o...» 4‘ */1 / . ‘0 - Fv'v 's' ‘J‘h KP 1' ’1‘. a!" “firsm-n‘ Lv" F ~ *7 '- v-fS- y. .153 N. ~ KS "' ‘ ‘H ' “\J herA‘ n. V- o J..-s.\-. . \ .—. 1.4 ' .A- .-~'. .9 4 .st~..: Adv f".—l Le :- I.” \w. .fl A _ 3.4.1“ V V ‘,‘94.2..fi W-xv"./_z by; a J. \. ..-. A ’ .3.) ’ eaa -- t ‘ t. n -- -.;3--’ .a.., - l h‘... .... “a; N. a.,.1.‘.-71_-., n-,-.,..-'...,.+: ,‘ "(112’ ~.~-v A ,L‘ H o '7... a“, s‘ > , . I..Jv— - - vga' - - b ‘ I—- . no, sin, I . \v' x .- \J . - .l * . a ._._..e . . . —.» - -_-—.._H .- - ._---..--_- n..---..+ 3 ‘4. L1. - an“). '. ,.-v "-.,...... n 4.1.. "AL! .-. '< . . ”A, § a. . . , - Q. q . v . . . W, \. *‘f_. n” b - .— no... ‘- I .“ 0V ~A - .- ‘ ~_ -_. -w- - 'v—v--* --. - _- ..- h‘ -< - “w- - u - .— ~| ‘- - ‘ - . -u‘ . \q 3,-‘ — ‘ ~ 1“ ' . ~ .' -‘ ‘Q' .‘A_. ’- ... . -UI V'euw'z. + ‘V ‘15:“ t' - - - .ro ( ‘v -- 4 < _. ' v Q .a n'u- » . \- \‘a— - - - - , x. -‘-- - 4 ~~ ‘ - - , .- , d' . “- ‘ _t_». h- .—~“ 1 “ .V- 7"“ ‘+"1fl.'m - ’.'~ ~‘F ‘1.«—--‘.-,—.-.L»-e '0 7. --~ V ‘ r‘Lg -- ,.. P» .w' ~‘I". men‘“ -. . v . .a - . Q . - o y - - -- ~~- -- - -... < . ~ fie t- *~—-.. v —....-e.- ’ \'l .u- - -.*—~- ‘ -«n‘ u a- - n - n H- H—Q—aw‘. u—a—nO-c “ .. '5 Q ~~ - I ‘ '.‘I-O u-Va r‘ ‘ ‘a y- H H'\ - .. .v . ‘ sv . a .h.‘ e 0 . It ’.-.‘|. ,l‘, 'f ‘C W . we .F ‘ ‘1._ aqu' "-.1~". I.“""’. “35*”: “V“.fiy 1,1,4“ hoe‘ -‘ 9 H. v. . JI‘ : ~--- .. .e *b' b». A‘ — \ ‘ ¢ ' H- I - A- , -a--_. ---h. I A ‘ e-‘Dev . F“ -'Lfi '- ' ‘YT .‘f‘ -‘A v . 4—; \'-' p. T, p,v\"e' 1-‘ ~ ‘- " fi'st ‘.’l ‘5‘ . T ”'1‘ ‘__"~ ‘ '?, an. .a 3---, .. g .5. .. (P. ‘3‘. “w . ‘ nx . -'- ‘\“‘—.~- $I - ‘-/~ a-‘ ‘5 L-‘xé- V. - “m-~~d “nn+HAra ~::/ yr y‘ 'J4 -- _ 3 4., J a. Q ‘ ' on”: -,.,_.,_‘ a .2 *1“; mi a,” U“ r“: ".0. ~--.,_.....os... 7“,. Yr.“ ., 3.”.-.,‘I..‘.1_- VCJ$A\.ov.—VA», .v.... . - a » - . - --. 1e e-—-|‘ ‘~4~ ‘0 .. ‘-V~‘ ‘vj ' *‘on- e- s -—-— w”- .- r—Q— .~--»-_V.., .. —--——‘-—‘ 4 o A. a «fix- V‘f‘ca .. C’,‘ In" " ' a. . . . _A v L; .'. ’ J..,‘ \‘v. :‘ , ,- 3 . .1” _. v- “ ..,. ~‘AJ. “ .1 .A’. . T 1... e-‘.‘. ' "v “A” ~ he s .ca ‘ J-QF r‘xlnflpr" r. \L-. an L'\......' - _H... “"4. . . , .~'—’ 4‘4, abv ‘-- J .‘eeh -- - ~— 5» ~- 4»- . -.. I v ’ w -_‘-- k -A - .._-.-... ‘z' - -- - ‘x’ -.’ T ‘fi‘ofi L'. ‘ ‘ -' P 7 , w .- q "’5 -- I. .‘ ‘.a... : Dg- .-'- ¢l~~ ‘. .' ”x 'v‘, .5'./_ Q . Q U k, 1‘ a a" 0 ~ '1‘ .: — ‘1‘ ‘~ (5‘- 1? “<4 .. p - (- ~._.. .-.-- on- I‘, \ ‘-“L' ‘0. ’ ‘- , ' r. . eA {\L a at 6-. ‘r ‘ -¥ N . .__ ., , __ ,l , _ .~ ,. L. I~ ... . A. -. . _.- . - --- -~ . ‘ ~ . : Abs; 0 . ‘ -—'_-_ -. - _.-. ‘ - _.___ .- ..“ ..¢...-.—c..—.o-——-~~4 - . we van a " 13.», ~ -- P31. ~r~ . ’ - J‘ . " “- ’~.. a ~ -‘ .~. ~j.v n N .‘ 'n 14—* - n \n-F \- V"‘ .,- - 1\,-- v-wn 'fl 5'. .~ _- U ‘. _ . ‘ l a. a, J ~- -- x -— -»- : ‘9 ‘-' -,\.-)‘~\-J. _p—. o. .__b ... “a..- db «cc-Owe- Hv-w" ' I ’ ffia . JD: J—u-L“ " .— s’Qv — us 1 .V'.'-V‘.‘;.’ 1 'f‘l‘ ‘ , " .L ’ ', _J‘J a Q As ‘ —a.- ‘s .L— ‘ 941‘» , uL, '/ . u C. V V A "r ._-1¢‘ 'LT'n"V‘" ‘ ~_ .—‘—L --- '_‘-" ,“A‘.«,- ,3,» 8-,... '7— a ,-'\y\-~.'-~‘;t4— ‘\Pr. - 9. I. 4, ‘ ¢ .— '- L.§ ‘3. v ~- ---‘h -_V . ~ . Q .- vs *VLA~ .1. -— vs. s.» U, - ‘1. “VI, . A, v ' a"‘- '5’ ~‘~ ‘. .... - - , . '- ‘ "n V r\ ‘. .Q ’1‘- ”L‘ p \a’ r I kx- l‘)‘ T -7 ‘— .~‘r.“ L.- or 6‘- (3+). .L s . I‘q ‘ . I‘ . . Il._,.. U U .. ' u., as _......-.-.t, »L.L_L,_~, ‘L ... U g ‘ ~‘-_A_s.~ . - \....‘h.-...~:.__ - e n Iv 7'- 'v . ‘LL- .. .‘ .. 3,. 73...“.-4»! -‘mp‘ A“ ‘ D,‘1 ‘k -1 _..- f-"x 10 D_f\r~,-fi".’\ ‘1“ ' ' . P .. r . \. _n.-.. .h. . .l. 'l. ' . ... _l. '. .- . - _1_,_\.', ~‘-' s~ K ‘ -’ I " ' -> t' ‘ -- - .-- -_.. A -s-‘_r—_s— p"..— w,“ ~ - - e. u..- .. m—fi.‘ — I. w ‘- '- ~ ‘ ' .I .~ +’., ‘ -' - ‘> L “.-, .— “0‘“;- h -‘ ‘ niJiJm‘ x; 'u (L ' .- ._; u- .L up, a. v0, 4.,/ 10 ‘ . - Q 7‘ 0 0 091-1. ,1... v n m1”. ’ '7 7',“ '1- , . " . V. .‘,v _r“(-_ -«L,--.. ~ (“J-l“. (.11; -,.- a.-—._....Ao u-’ .-. it. - 4. '1'_'_- - . _..n-o an-" .Lajo-A.‘ VV - x v-.- & .._n_.~.a_4~.o.... V “m- -—~-._~ rau-«s»+.¢ n~c .3. . 9L '— L 4 Q uh, ’1‘ . 7' . ‘ " I _1- 3 "..J. _- 9 ,W --.V » .‘d- : . . Q. A. _- ~ 9;... R - gQ-\_._',..-_.. .\ '3 “-3 —‘- A-“ 5 v. ,. “4....3... n "-1.“? 34..., v, ‘4_, -..- {.J - ~--a- . H. I. . - ...\f_. 5 - L. - u =— ~ a ‘ 1 ex ~ - ‘ ‘4'. b *4. p L x A a- a O_ I Q. «a q —.“l _‘ ..- _ .k vol.‘ ‘ 1“- _e ‘m‘ fl “-1~ 4" - e _' .."_I_L2 \- -— ‘I -- V... . -’\, _1. h." v . _...a—-a —.‘~ ‘. g..- -~-~.--l- .. -- —..,,..3 -. .-""' W-‘r M L-v f n '.t\ rA"- r\‘ ‘- '2 f‘a ”,1 gs. . .. r '~ v... on or ~ d... .. an: a ’ - Q “q 1 u “ q ‘k - 33‘ N 'fi I". ‘— Q‘ !: fl N . f‘,’, ‘- “.-J g r "’ \‘ ~ a w-a _‘n-a'f" 1‘- . -. — v J- r-“A f' 2 . ., v__ - .., .LK, v- . v . , L.- _. Va . w . . . _ is a.~ ""‘“.. \ w-- _J- - - a4... . .. vs.- -- f v M ”a ,. .3 mm “-«L - H H, -- v, 1. .‘ - ~ - ~~ ll, < .~ -- V... _.- - - .Loc.ll ‘ ‘ o .e. . ...‘...‘ ~— J .~_ - , “a d .L/ , ' . ' 4. . 'r -_o_ \ r_. - ‘- F. a - ~ y'. “I‘D. or .‘ I‘- ’ " ’ {-3} ‘ y'v. ’.| ."_“ n '14- a‘ N L ‘ ‘V V! ah . 1 1 ’ x eu..A.. - V ' -’. n ‘ - a-_ L; -a- ,_ .. H. - - - . ~ . Q R >4 ‘4 Vxl ,‘ - u- I . ,- '.~ rfi .u'- v“ a L‘s-yr ~- -~\A1—-v U ~‘ ~-1—\ , ~a.- raysn - q ' . ' v- 1"1-‘r‘ ‘q A.’ ~ ‘ ‘ ‘h — ‘ b ‘ u I ' ‘\;va Cl ‘ ' - ‘ 0‘ v .-~ - .. \— V * U“ o 4— "A . , Ix' v , "mustn‘t-.1... ..:‘ ' Landfill... '..‘“9“ 1"?" \ ~‘—. , - i ‘ vi .5.—-Aa- .— I\. ‘ Q 211‘" ——h .L,/. Q . 7 . -~' (— & "I ~ -- o .4 \‘r + 9‘ y-v ax .— 1. -' . ' ‘ *‘V—-. v I: '!‘ . .1'sa- - . J— h ’ VT ~1 1“ ~—‘ 1‘ A4. w‘ aI-A..a~ - C y\--‘ .4 ‘ y...‘ - u ~ -.-—..... ~~b e--w\ . . .e- ~-.; " . \J.‘ . a. new: m...\-‘ ~. -,.- vu. “H. u "9.. \, -...,. u fana- 1,." ~‘- ~.. finned"? _ _ a...» ’ .5" X ‘ g. L .. .-...- I.--‘ L‘. a, - -- U—- ,v’ U .. ~.. 3 ",.9-- ”-34...- -o v-Ov“-t..4.fi v t “‘- \JJ- a-~‘—- .A \-~ ~ . - I - r w .-. _ w 7/ \Y‘“.‘ 4.1,. f urn)“ (~- F: “. _. .L 0 , v. ) {K CH3". ”1 .. w. “.0" A "If 3“,. ,- ‘,3 “‘. u. 5 V‘s d. , .L-V. .a- . - “Q .—~' .v' 4... -.-\.¢.. \JJ. 5)-... _ -_v-- r -wh --‘».o.e— Y .. H‘hLJ‘- .‘x. n Ht. ,. - .,. - J, .L° “ :- -'e. v if-.. 5 fr,.-..._ 73,1",3... m. r. 91 "e. ”1..“ ° ...1. 2 ”-1.. - ‘I A. . A I} - J. n' - _- v.» a. L.“ v- - u- « Q I‘- ~‘. ey‘ -‘ .J—J—n‘ o‘ ‘ 'gu 1" a ..-.\,4..-L- ..... "pH—w... Mu. —-" "‘9 ¢:'-"-.-x~’f‘.“" ‘1ch a. -_- . a. ‘ ‘ ,." b n. .-_. .A s .. J. N..- I! . '- y‘a- «A t, *' ' '. . h a I‘ll-Q. at. ,— p A~“fi+-, 'Ipn: :“v " ~.- -.‘...V\ ‘ "I"' fir .. .$1 r-q ”,7"qu JOIN “I ~- ‘s-.'.+v" ’ 2: U 1.4.1. 9‘-) - .e ~ .' _ . K. .4 a -‘ . . .aK/o - ~ - '~ ~- I .‘a 4.. fan—Jn’. J \- UV'..-.-. ‘1‘: a. - -v N‘ -a 1“ V. -'\":\""'b “I” " ‘. ; ‘P.‘~Yto "tfi B' .r- ‘ "“1 ‘1 1\“"l\ «I: 1 “"‘I‘ A. (1“!) ._. v A . ‘ 1.x... . _,._ AA- V; ‘ ‘ —’ be - 1“ V‘Jxx V ‘ V“I——-.— ‘ l V ' - Q -.,.° ’, W ";/.r'_ “~15 _-_A.. ., nan/ \Al. I -— tgn "‘. x" )5 Pxp ‘? 34'? av“ a k . V'n 'Vfi+~ r‘fi .fi —I’r 1 wr-A+ 'q'uvwr 1t+ ~ " -I-xfi f .11? .u- ‘-'~...-a. .‘ . J....\,.. ,. t" .. L ,, A 1 av - ‘uxrr ’ v - .. ,. g .4 -r~1 , fl ‘1 _h/-4. _1 O .. ._ .. Hy --.- e a; P f)+f‘7- "'9‘. 1 ‘9 f-vw “I “1”“ rm? 7" fiv- L "4- 0", ("4"- w’. AV. 1 .a (11*: r." NY“ t”“-" 'v" I'st'fiq‘ 4.; event, “Wan ..; U0, LL-“ ~- --\ .,_J U ~'L-- (..~.«..._..., .ulu uni-J -L a.b-...~-.a._- an. :1. ”lama“:— Culuvn t .. V “\‘. » an... .. J v‘:l V. vay. APPENDIX A TABLIS 51 TABLII OGDUTED DATA rm IIOHIOAI W Imber of lumber of Average Average Percentage Percentage *Invcetigaticn indicates correct based on available data. lenbere lenbcre Age of Tenure of of of For Agent trolled labors labor. Coupleticn neuron- ”: m 2.1; m 10.50 210 11.87 2.00 89.05 44.1 8.00 200 11.88 2.38 94.00 60.5 5.85 1,105 13.04 2.97 88.15 74.7 5.70 1,573 12.21 2.15 90.53 66.3 5.66 317 12.64 2.12 86.76 61.5 5.54 537 13.06 3.18 77.66 126.8» 5.46 2,891 12.02 1.78 84.02 35.5 5.27 1,053 11.84 2.06 93.83 77.2 5.12 1,665 12.52 2.78 84.57 82.4 5.09 1,701 1.1.98 2.42 94.24 63.0 5.09 1,450 12.39 2.53 89.52 76.5 4.90 1,329 12.30 2.53 98.20 64.9 4.84 1,679 11.78 2.37 94.11 62.4 4.80 734 12.11 2.40 83.38 66.3 4.74 3,256 12.37 2.25 82.22 59.2 4.71 1,221 12.69 3.04 91.00 66.1 4.70 1,562 12.18 2.42 90.21 66.7 4.66 1,412 12.40 2.71 82.37 83.8 4.62 965 11.90 ' 1.98 88.92 60.5 4.50 2,239 13.14 3.10 90.05 92.4 4.49 1,207 12.60 3.21 92.47 77.0 52 TABLE I, continued luber of Ember of Average Average Percentage Percentage Ienbere lelbere Age of Tenure cf cf of Pcr 13m Ina-811.6 Ienbere labere mam neuron- 27.21::- m; m 4.43 1,276 12.52 3.15 89.11 83.8 4.28 419 12.56 2.83 96.50 73.0 4.27 105 11.65 2.07 95.90 64.0 4.18 1,462 12.73 i 2.95 93.85 72.5 4.09 1,197 13.30 2.97 81.96 76.2 4.08 1,683 12.27 2.24 83.25 70.7 4.3 1.442 12.36 2.72 91.13 . 70.4 3.99 1,098 12.35 3.05 93.27 76.3 3.89 105 11.35 2.07 96.20 50.5 3.70 1,296 12.38 2.72 77.56 75.9 3.69 1,092 12.83 2.50 91.21 52.6 3.68 873 12.85 3.05 95.31 66.6 3.63 908 11.59 2.04 95.16 55.4 3.62} 2.101 11.90 2.29 88.34 70.8 3.53 438 12.23 2.77 85.16 79.5 3.46 1,093 12.74 3.23 86.56 77.5 3.3 272 12.60 2.92 79.05 92.4 3.27 858 13.13 2.30 91.85 12.1 3.22 1,246 12.62 2.31 98.32 46.3 3.18 83 12.40 2.72 87.57 69.6 3.17 1,089 12.64 2.82 85.40 71.0 3.15 984 12.55 2.78 90.45 74.2 53 run I, Dentinned .h...~ -— ‘ 2:: ‘ 2:: Per Agent broiled labere Ienbere Completion neuron.- 3m 83‘, .2 3.14 937 11.75 2.64 91.89 86.9 3.07 1,096 12.70 3.16 97.08 80.2 3.00 186 11.77 1.85 93.55 62.9 2.95 902 11.90 ’ 2.15 96.57 51.4 2.95 1,25 13.64 3.18 88.40 70.7 2.94 803 12.44 2.69 94.15 75.6 2.91 784 12.47 3.03 94.90 65.9 2.87 1,054 12.10 2.59 88.05 69.0 2.86 266 12.16 2.41 85.34 64.0 2.75 302 11.85 2.33 88.75 59.8 2.70 488 12.62 2.58 95.29 63.4 296’. 356 12.01 1.99 83.15 65.7 2.60 745 12.53 2.50 91.01 68.7 2.58 727 12.36 2.x 92.71 73.4 2.52 307 12.08 1.88 92.19 49.3 2.51 351 11.69 2.05 94.31 54.6 2.45 326 13.04 2.41 87.12 54.1 2.39 993 11.90 2.51 85.30 83.3 2.30 737 12.05 2.45 89.83 64.8 2.29 406 12.28 2.57 94.34 61.3 2.27 900 13.03 3.15 92.12 75.4 2.26 351 12.05 2.18 78.64 62.6 54 TABLE 1:, Continued Imber c: tuber 8: Average Average Percentage Percentage of Ieabere Icebera Age of Mare 01’ hr Agent Enrolled lab-re Ileabere Coupletiu M17011- Day Devot- in the ant ed to 44 County 2m 88 1.1.72 2.22 96.60 62.2 2.12 268 12.60 3.07 89.18 5.2 2.02 66 12.46 2.66 89.75 71.6 1.96 536 12.53 2.2 94.22 73.1 1.92 594 12.15 2.37 89.74 &.6 1.88 197 11.61 2.38 91.38 60.4 1.83 423 12.37 2.81 98.11 1.0 1.80 907 12.28 2.30 89.42 56.0 1.80 300 12.01 2.40 91.01 71.5 1.72 505 12.31 2.80 96.04 60.2 1.62 223 12.11 1.98 96.42 54.8 1.61 269 12.06 2.82 92.57 95.7 1.59 164 12.11 2.89 87.20 53.5 1.54 460 12.25 2.52 91.53 44.4 55 TAKIII mnmroammoacoumre luber of labor of Average Average l’ercentage Percentage leabere leebere Age er ‘rumre cf cf of Per Agent mrolled Ieabere leebere couple“ Re-rclllr- lay Devot- in he neat ed to H Ocmty 4.05 2,266 11.73 2.29 83.05 68.4 3.64 902 11.83 2.2 91.2 72.6 3.63 1,867 11.54 ' 2.12 92.12 56.0 2.89 1,346 11.97 1.95 84.62 45.0 2.79 872 11139 2.63 90.94 54.1 2.75 1,62 12.39 2.31 80.07 65.1 2.62 1,410 11.92 2.82 82.90 72.1 2.52 825 11.72 2.45 89.69 66.2 2.52 2,089 11.88 1.69 75.01 48.5 2.50 81.1 12.52 2.29 88.3 66.4 2.40 764 11175 2.33 89.00 78.1 2.39 2,065 11.52 2.23 59.97 60.5 2.19 304 11.64 2.75 79.27 73.5 2.18 292 12.58 2.74 85.2 78.9 2.15 1,627 12.76 2.06 69.40 57.1 2.13 555 12.65 2.82 87.02 72.6 2.09 651 13.41 2.87 90.01 67.3 2.01 978 13.29 2.46% 67.28 81.0 1.99 620 11.54 3.71 81.2 103.78 1.94 790 11.71 2.41 82.02 2.2 *Inveetigation indicatee ccrect based on available data. 56 TABLE II, Centimed Imber cf luber of Average Average Percentage Percaltage lenbere Ienhere Age of Tenure 0! ct Per Agent broiled leabere lubere Ocepletden leenrcll- 2m- 8.3. m 1.89 244 13.43 2.49 77.86 75.8 1.87 584 12.34 2.83 81.33 78.6 1.85 1,109 11.08 2.72 84.94 79.0 1.83 20 11.26 ' 2.62 89.50 2.5 1.76 498 11.71 2.84 74.09 94.3 1.74 1,131 11.67 2.66 92.74 70.9 1.70 548 11.69 2.37 83.57 69.8 1.68 590 12.46 2.46 84.23 69.0 1.47 880 13.09 2.69 83.75 72.0 1.45 509 12.42 2.38 78.78 70.9 1.38 355 12.75 2.43 88.16 73.6 1.30 314 11.83 2.91 13.50 84.5 1.29 472 12.69 2.93 82.41 73.5 1.27 700 12.05 2.95 89.71 73.6 1.17 267 12.21 3.25 81.27 90.9 0.99 22 11.87 3.28 93.53 77.1 0.96 m 13.12 2.85 75 .19 74.5 57 run III Data for Iiohigu Countlee inlet. A 4th. Qaartaleefi W tuber e! [nebu- et Average Average Permtege Pereentage Ieebere lubere Age of Il'gmre cf cf of 2221223 “3- m- mm "-239 66 to 4; (but: let. Me 5.70 1,573 12.21 2.15 90.53 66.3 5.45 2,891 12.02 1.78 84.02 35.5 5.27 1,053 11.84 2.06 93.82 77.2 5.12 1,665 12.52 2.78 84.57 82.4 5.09 1,701 11.98 2.24 94.24 60.0 5.09 1,450 12.39 2.53 89.52 76.5 4.90 1,329 12.30 2.53 98.20 64.9 4.84 1,679 11.78 2.37 94.11 62.4 4.80 734 12.11 2.40 83.38 66.3 4.74 3,256 12.37 2.25 82.22 59.2 4.71 1,272. 12.69 3.04 91.00 66.1 4.70 1,562 12.18 2.42 90.21 66.7 4.66 1,412 12.40 2.71 82.37 83.8 4&1. “tile 2.59 727 12.36 2.58 92.71 73.4 2.51 351 11.69 2.05 94.31 54.6 2.39 993 11.90 2.51 85.30 83.3 2.30 737 12.05 2.45 89.83 64.8 2.27 900 . 13.03 3.15 92.12 75.4 58 TABLE III, Oontimed Data for Ma Oomtiee in let. E 4th. Quartile. labor or labor ot Average Average Percotege Peromtage lubere Icahere Age of remre of of 0! Per Agent brolled Ieebere leebere Coupletion Dacron-'- Dc Devot- in the neat ed to H Donut: ‘ 4th. Quartile, Continued 2.02 669 12.46 . 2.66 89.75 71.6 1.96 536 12.53 2.58 94.22 73.1 1.92 594 12.15 2.37 89.74 2.6 1.83 423 12.37 2.2 ”.11 2.0 1.80 907 12.28 2.30 89.42 56.0 1.72 505 12.31 2.80 96.04 68.2 1.61. 269 12.06 2.82 92.57 95.7 1.54 460 12.25 2.52 90.53 44.4 * (a) beeednpcnmberctneebereperqentdaydevoted tolr-Idlebnrk. (17) only eeentiee 1th one or core agate dedgneted ae . “Gout: btenden Agut H' are included. 59 w 1' Date for Oregon Countiee in let. A 4th Quartileel' later of labor of Average Average Percentage Percentage Ieebere Icebere Age 0!. Tune of 0! Per Agent brolled lechere leebere Coapleuen tequil- h’.“&“ 2.3:; "" et. We 4.05 2,266 11.73 2.29 83.05 2.4 3.64 902 11.83 2.2 91.01 72.6 3.63 1,167 11.54 2.12 92.12 56.0 2.89 1,346 11.97 1.95 84.62 45.0 2.79 872 11.39 2.63 90.94 54.1 2.75 1,661 12.39 2.31 80.07 65.1 2.62 1,410 11.92 2.82 82.90 72.0 2.52 83 11.72 2.45 89.69 66.2 2.52 2,089 11.88 1.69 75.01 48.5 4th. Qua-tale 1.70 548 11.69 2.37 83.57 69.8 1.68 590 12.46 2.64 84.23 69.0 1.47 880 13.09 2.69 83.75 72.0 1.45 509 12.42 2.38 78.78 70.9 1.38 355 12.75 2.43 88.16 73.5 1.30 314 11.83 2.90. 73.50 84.5 1.29 472 12.69 2.93 82.41 73.5 1.27 700 12.05 2.95 89.71 73.6 6‘. *(a) haeedepoaaneberoteeehere (b)onlycomtaeev1thoneer per ueetdaydevoted te4-I _ acre agente deeignetedae Club vork. 'Comty bteneion Agut Ware included. and 3.3 3.8 8.... 8.3 8.82 8.4“ a 8.8 7 8.8». .868 x 3.6 .. 28.69. 2.87 28 8.3 8.8 8.2 3.3 38 7 8.~ n 82.3 3.8 .14. 8.8 , $.82 RA a 88 .. 28.8 I 8.3.. 8.8.... «n83. 3.81 on. 8.8 8.8 Stu Nana , 8.83 8.“ « [In-Ill... 8.2. 3.8 and 8.3, 8.8.: «fin o 847 2.8.3.. _ 8.8.. 8.37 88.88. 8.84 28 8.8 8.8 8....“ 48.3 8.83 8.“ 4 8.6 8.8 8:6. 8.3, «68 8.2. m §.~ .. $1.3. .. 3.87 3.8 .. 52.1.8. 868‘. 3.. 8.3 8.82 3.2 8.3”: 3.83 8.“ 4 a 8.: » 0:... a is. a 86: _ a 08a a .8»: 95:30.2 580.330 83.8: e835 he.— I as: . 8 a .8 .8 .888. no .3 2.3.8.. .82 6.88.8: . 8.3-8 euevcooaom eueageouom e305 cage: «0 hen-2n no heal.- Nc 2:“ 3.258 a: .81; .53 385.5 H.280 Bu. 85.80 6.5248 .83. .3958 .8: 8.. «3.80848. 5.8V .4033 g .abdh a has." 335.3 a a 31.3 3.83 3.33 had—So 9 3.3.88 5.88 - n 4 oak-8 05 at: 0.8 . 8.“ 3.3 *.88 8.N a 2.0... x 396 x gm ‘— nfia \. and? 3.3.. 3 «5. 9.8 $.« 8.x" 9.3% 3.." - 82E. 0.8 3.N an." 1.30 8.N a 3.8.. 8.3. 3.3.. 8.8... 8.8x 8.3. an. 8.8 «.3 “a.“ 3:5” dam? .B.n < «$2. «.8 .8.“ 8&a 6.08 «.3 o] 8...? «.3. A 8.3.. 3.81 8.3. 5.3. 3. «.3 «do «8N 8 Not—H fins .B.n 4 n5. 9.8 $.w 8.3 1 33.... $2.” a «a8: 3. x 8.8.. 5.8.. 8.3. was. 3. 5.8 «do «QN NOS—H damn." .3.n 4 v 9.0! a. 80‘ v ‘03 ¢ 808 $ 3 n. fluo- pg god's Peon-o: anon-ox “a I «33 .3 u. go .399 a. .2 £38: 2 83..- :3...- 3328 canon-Pu: ouch->4 nacho: no hon—I.- uo hon-u. no OAR. I! g§.ASV§B§§BH-i§.§ fiqifiafiaiafis «3.80. m. 9.8V 5 do.— uflbaap a Mpg “WIITHFH'HIITIIM“1inIHMFWIFS 31293101728230