_ mm” m. . _ M. , m a . . . . - E .. . uf L I- . . . _ P Y. . a G. .h. _. - . . T . . c . . :F. N . n . W . .D. .0. N. A A .n 5. . -D N . hwy _ . E .0 a. H. .r‘ W O L . m R A - m _ P W m ..A , . 0 . I . . .. on . t .. Q . . . ‘ .‘ Ir‘ -l'Il' ill-IJ 11‘ O I .‘Q .. This is to certify that the thesis entitled A Proposed Method of Performance Evaluation for County Extension Agents presented by George E. Whitham has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for M.S. degree inAAgriCUlt‘ural ExtenSion /%2 Major professor Date May 16, 1955 0-169 MSU LIBRARIES .——. ‘— RETURNING MATERIALS: Place in book drop to remove this checkout from your record. FINES will be charged if book is returned after the date stamped below. #WTS 'ié’eg fix»! A PROPOSED METHOD 0F PERFOhMANCE EVALUATION FOR COUNTY EXTENSION AGENTS By George Erwin Uhitham Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of.Michigan State College of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE School of Agriculture 1955 AC KN O'fLEDGviENT Sincere thanks is due Dr. John T. Stone, whose unfailing interest in the Cooperative Extension Service and the county extension worker stimulated this exploration of the subject of evaluating agent performance. His broad experience and astute understanding has been a constant challenge and source of inspiration. Appreciation is felt for the many helpful suggestions of Mr. Bohn E. Musgrave and the use of his personal files on the subject of program‘planning and evaluation. The graduate students and members of the Michigan Agri- cultural Extension Service who gave so freely of their time in discussing various phases of this paper deserve a special mention for their patience and wise counselling. Finally, full credit should be given my wife, Helen Rogers ' Whitham, for her encouragement, inspiration, and uncounted hours of clerical assistance in the preparation of the manu- script. ii (p p. *1 .h-jfltf' -- s - - w . l‘ A "'1 ~‘ :4 " .2. .Q ‘3 ‘d'k.’ 1* fl . -“' ABSTRACT In this study the problem involved is developing a method for the evaluation of performance of county extension agents. To better understand the organization with which the evaluation is to be used there is a statement on the Extension Service and the job of the county extension agent. This points out the objective of the Extension Service of helping people to see, analyze, and solve their own problems. It also points out the conflict position of the county agent with the many pressures being brought to bear upon him from the adminis- tration and the peOple with whom work is being done. A review of the literature and survey of extension directors shows the lack of uniformity as to what an evaluation system Should contain and how it should be used. One school of thought holds that it should be used to determine rewards and penalties while another feels it is best used to establish rapport between supervisors and workers. Among the various state extension services evaluation is either on personal characteristics or a combination of these characteristics with program, administration, teaching techniques and skills, professional improvement, accomplishments, and relationships. The method proposed was built upon the hypothesis that a sound evaluation program should be based upon accomplishments towards program Objectives rather than on personality factors. It has as its main objective the strengthening of the entire extension program through furnishing a basis for a training and guidance program, an opportunity iii for self-analysis, and focusing attention on over-all items of strength and weakness in the pragrams. The system further Specifies that the objectives of a county program need to be known and the evaluation conducted in relation to these ob- jectives. a proposal is made as to the recommended type of program planning organization to have in a county. This organization will be one that fits the way peOple are organized locally and is representative of different interests, kinds of peeple, and types and size of farms. It is also one that takes advantage of local leaders and c00perates with other community and county organizations. Criteria have been deve10ped for an evaluation program. In addition to a sound program planning procedure they include: 1. based on facts which will show changes in behavior, 2. performances which show results on the job instead of personal qualities which might cause results, 3. a continuous process, h. the COOperative responsibility of local peOple, county, workers, and the administration, 5. serving as a guide to establishing programs in the direction of the over-all objective of extension. Also deve10ped and applied to a case county is an evaluation sheet covering problem analysis, deve10pment of the program, execution of the program, accomplishments of the program and use of the evaluation, relationship with others, and office organization. For administrative agents there is a Special section dealing with this phase of county office organization. iv Use to be made of the evaluation is discussed mainly from the standpoint of the guidance it will give in strengthening an extension prOgram. For those who need it to detenmine merit for advancement there is a section on the evaluation's application in this respect. This evaluation system will meet the main objective of evaluation of strengthening the over-all extension program by showing where the pragram is, how far plans have progressed, whether or not changes have taken place in the behavior of peOple, locating strong and weak points, and indicating the direction the program should move if positive improvement is to be made. 'T'ABLE CF COZ'ITEHTS Cl-LPT .411 Page I INTRODUCTIONIOOOO0.00.0000.0000000000000...00000000000000. l The Extension Service.............. ....... ............. 3 The Job of the County Extension igent.................. 6 II PhfiiSOE-H-JEL EV3LUSLTION AND PHO‘GRE’I PL.-‘.I’€NII‘JG IN TIE.» LEIEI.11ED Sri‘l‘fis...’...0.0.00.0.0....O...‘O...........OO.. 10 State Extension Service Evaluation Programs............ 16 Furtller Pleed for waluationooooooooo00000000000000.0000 22 Program Planning....................................... 23 III Crgl'TEIiI a FOL; AN EV LLU LTICN PRCGE.£-I. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 SpeCj-fic criteriaoo ..... 00.000000000000000000-000000000 36 ~33 Proposed S;VStem Of Eval ationOOOOOOOOOOOOIOOOOO0.0... 2-10 IV A COUNTY CASE STUDY TO USE. IN .lPPLYID-JG THE :LViLhiTICT-I I'iarrmDoooo000.000.0000..00000000000000.000000000000000. 53 51countyOperatingPlano0.0000000000000000000000ooooooo S9 iccomplishments of tie Program......................... 63 The Forage Program.................................. 0‘ The Poultry Marketing Program....................... 66 V APPLICATION OF THE; EV LLU..TIOI‘~I I‘ii‘I‘HOD...................... 72 Facilitating the Evaluation............................ 77 Use for the Evaluation................................. 82 Determining Merit for Advancement...................... 86 ConclusionS............................................ t9 SULifl'i'mYo-oooo-ooooooooocoo-000.00.000.00.0.0000000000000000000000 92 BIBLIOWEIOOOOOOOOOOOOO.0......OOOOOOOOOOOOOO...OOOOOOOOOOOIOOO lCC' LIST OF TABLES mats. Page I Evaluation Form for County Extension Agent Performance...... 50 II Windham County Plan of VOrk................................. 00 III Completed Evaluation Form for County Extension agent Performance on.Forage Program............................... 73 IV Completed Evaluation Form for County Eatension Agent Perfomince on Po‘fl-trz)’ 31wketing Progrmooooooooo‘ooooooooooo 75 V Numerical Ratings for County Extension Personnel............ 87 vii LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE Tie Conflict Position of the County Extension Agent..,..... Organizational Chart for a County Agricultural Advisory Council........... Direction of Movement to Evaluate Performance...... Organization for Program Planning in Windham County........ viii Page 27 CHAPTER I 1TRODUCTION Extension Administrators are constantly looking for tools to aid them in strengthening extension programs, This study is being undertaken to determine a method that may be used by extension administrators as a guide in evaluating agents. It will be based upon the hypothesis that a sound evaluation program should be based on accomplishments toward the prOgram objectives and not primarily on personality factors-~the method most commonly in use today. Agents will be evaluated, not to rank them in order of abili- ties or importance, but to strengthen the entire extension prOgram, providing a positive direction in which to move. Properly conceived and executed an evaluation system will give this needed direction and stimuli to the extension program by reducing some of the conflicts which lead to a feeling of frustration on the part of an extension agent. To add strength to the extension program an evaluation program should be used to: 1. furnish a basis for pre—service and in-service training and guidance; 3) for new agents, b) for experienced agents, 0) as a counselling guide for professional improvement, d) to encourage the establishment of county objectives and develOpment of strong programs and effective methods of extension teaching, e) to encourage integration of the over-all extension program; 2. furnish an Opportunity for self-analysis by the individual a) to remove pressures working on the agent, b) to give security to the agent, 0) to objectively look at the work load being carried; 3. help determine merit for advancement; h. focus attention on over-all items of strength and weakness in state and county programs. is this study prOgresses an analysis will be made of the work that has been done to the present time in this area. Particular attention will be given to the status of county agent evaluation as being conducted ' in selected parts of the country. Criteria for an evaluation program to be used with county agents will be deve10ped. An ideal method will be deve10ped as to the best form for an evaluation system. This form will be tested on models taken from actual extension experience. A final step in the deveIOpment of this system will be a recommenda- tion on how it may be used. Rec0gnition will be made of the types of information.which will be needed to carry on the work. There will also be a brief discussion on the weaknesses requiring future testing and research before universal adoption can be recommended. The writer feels qualified to undertake the deveIOpment of an evalu- ation system because of ten years experience with the Extension Service. During this ten year period he has been an assistant county agricultural agent, a county agricultural agent, county administrator and at the present time is County Agent Leader with the Connecticut Extension Service. The Extension Service The Cooperative Extension Service is an out—of—school educational system which received formal status with the passage of the Smith-Lever Act in 1911;.1 The most significant feature of this law was to be carried on cooperatively by the land-grant colleges and the United States Department of Agriculture. Local peOple, acting through their state colleges initiated the plan of work to be followed. Extension work in the language of the act was ...to aid in diffusing among the peOple of the United States useful and practical information on subjects relating to agriculture and home economics, and to en- courage the application of the same. . One provision of the act required financial participation by appro- priating a basic amount of $l0,000 with additional grants to be prorated in pr0portion to rural pOpulation. These additional funds were avail- able only when matched by state or local funds raised or contributed within the state. To a large extent this provision may explain the high degree of cooperation which has existed between the county, state, and federal governments. This act set up the legal machinery for an educational program that encompassed the whole farm family.. It recognized the basic importance of agriculture, of its practitioners and their families to the nation. The philOSOphy and previsions as set forth have stood the test of time with very little modification. 1 Brunner, E. deS and E. A. Yang, Rural America and the Extention Service, Columbia University, New York, l9h9, p. 1h. In l9h8 the Joint Committee Report on Extension Programs,_Policies and Goals2 took time to look at some of the accomplishments of the Cooperative Extension Service since its inception in l9lh. Many of the basic achievements of extension are not subject to quantitative measure- ment although many accomplishments have through the years been recorded in state and national annual reports. The more fundamental contribu- tions, however, may best be stated in qualitative terms. Among them are: l. The application of the findings of research through various techniques such as demonstrations, farm visits, group meet- ings and the printed page. 2. Solving problems through group action has helped rural peOple learn the value of an organized approach to com- munity problems. 3. Understanding economic and social factors has encouraged interest, not only in individual and family affairs, but also in matters of state, national, and international living. h. Improving family diets and other functions of the home- maker. . Work with rural youth. 5 6. Counselling on farm problems. 7. Mobilizing rural peOple to meet emergencies. 8. Contributing to the science of government and education. 9. Aiding esthetic and cultural growth of farm people. ‘ lO. Contributing to Urban Life. 11. DevelOping Rural Leadership. 2 Joint Committee Report on Extension, Program Policies and Goals, United States Department of Agriculture and Association ofiland Grant Colleges and Universities, ‘zJashington, 19148, p. 3. In short the accomplishments through the years have been a more specific breakdown of the general Objective of extension of "aid in diffusing among the pe0ple of the United States useful and practical information on subjects relating to agriculture and home economics, and to encourage the application of the same." The 19h8 joint committee report reiterates the basic objectives of extension work as being that of helping peOple learn to help themselves. It is pointed out however, that extension's early emphasis was on immediate problems of the farm and home. Improved practices which could be measured by increased incomes or better living were extremely grati- fying to local people and extension workers. Extension should always recognize this as basic and not lose sight of the broad function of helping people learn how to solve their own prdblems. In addition, extension has a growing responsibility to help peOple understand the complex social and economic problems confronting them as they go about their daily duties. The work of the Cooperative Extension Service might best be summer- ized by a statement of Smith and Wilson in their book The Agricultural 3 Extension System in the United States: Extension work in its deeper significance is designed to deve10p the man....to draw him out through his taking part in worthwhile enterprises, through explaining his work to his neighbors, through making reports of accomplishments, through consulting with others on matters of common interest, through study with the Extension Agent his own farm and home problems and those of the county, state, and nation, to perfect his technique, to enlarge his vision..., to see that man grows. 3 Smith, C. B. and M. C. hilson, The Agricultural Extension System in the United States, John Wiley 8c Company, New York, 1930, p. 6. The Job of the County Extension Agent In most states the county extension agents are staff members of the land-grant college. They are also c00perative employees of the United States Department of Agriculture. As such, they are representa- tives of these two levels of government, housed in their respective counties. They also are representative of a third level, the county, where they work with peOple toward the broad over-all objective of the Extension Service of helping peOple discover and solve their own problems. As a result of this the responsibilities of the county extension agents are many and varied. They are in a position to study the county in which they work, so as to know the resources, prOblems, and possibilities of the county. With the assistance of the peeple in the counties, they deve10p extension pragrams based upon the needs and problems of the people. Once these problems have been determined, the extension agent is active in promoting educational programs which will assist peOple to make the best possible decisions for their particular situation. In this process of determining needs and implementing programs the extension agent is bringing to the peOple in their counties, facts and procedures concerning state and national programs which affect their welfare. Extension agents also have a responsibility to keep professionally abreast of the social and economic changes which affect the farms and homes of their reSpective counties. This will be done, not only by being close to their people, but also by having a close working relation- ship with the various departments at the land-grant institution with which they are affiliated. If the relationships are close, the agent can be in a position, not only to pass on the experimental work of the various departments to the peOple, but also in a position to suggest areas of research for the departments. With all of these responsibilities extension agents have a tre- mendous job. They must make the day-to-day objectives of their county program an integral part of the over-all, broad objective of the entire extension service. These objectives will be the program adopted to achieve changes that will be reflected by peOple who are healthy, happy, and conscious of the obligations of leadership which they are asked to assume. Stone, has made an exhaustive study of the County Agent's job. One phase was concerned with the roles county agents played.4 Summarized this showed the following roles and time spent on each: Role Percentage of Time Consultant 2h.3 Salesman of Information and Ideas l?.h Public PrOgram Administrator '23.5 Organizer and Supervisor of Events 15.? Organizer of Groups 7.2 Facilitator and Expeditor 5.1 Student 6 8 s The same study also determined the amount of time devoted to different lines of work by the county agents studied as follows: 4 Stone, J. T., in Analysis of the County Agent's Job, C00perative Extension Service, Michigan State College, East Lansing, Michigan, 1951, p. 256. 6 E. 93120, ppo 183-186. Line of Tbrk Percentage of Time Cooperative Agricultural Planning 17.98 Crop Production 20.93 Livestock Production 20.06 Marketing and Distribution 3.hh Housing, Farmstead Improvement, and Equipment 5.35 Conservation of Natural Resources 11.87 Farm Management S.h8 General Economic Problems h.l9 Nutrition and Health .92 Clothing, Family Economics, and Community Life 6 ,oh Miscellaneous 3.7h Time was found to be divided fairly evenly between working directly with individuals, working directly with groups, and doing other things such as office administration and routine assignments.6 McNelly,7 made a descriptive classification of the daily activities of the county agent which showed many different activities engaged in during a day. They are: Classification Percentage of Time Office calls Evening meetings Other meetings Farm visits Demonstrations Publicity Radio Study and preparation Mail and dictation Reports and records Conferences With co-workers In-service training Service organizations Achievement days and fairs Semi-personal ban: WW 0 l-‘ OHHONWWUINHUJOCD Oxvicrkbxntnxniatalairiararaxo ° 92. 933., p. 212. 7 McNelly, C. L., A Study of the County Agent workiPattern, agricultural Extension Service, University of Minnesota, 1939. These figures are cited to illustrate the size and complexity of the county agent's job. Extension agents are leaders--as such, through these various activities, they are influencing peOple to 000perate with each other to achieve a goal because they want to see accomplishments made. CHAPTEh II PERSONNEL EVALUATION AND PROGRSM PLANNING IN THE UNITED STATES Since the start of the Cooperative Extension Service more than fifty years ago many changes have taken place. Not the least of these has been the growth of staffs which have added to the responsibilities of administrators and created a condition whereby fewer contacts are made with agents. This has made it increasingly difficult to accurately measure agents according to their value to the county, to the Extension Service, or as to the progress they are making. There are different schools of thought1 as to what an evaluation system should be used for. One idea holds that it is to be used as a basis for salary increases, promotions, dismissals, or other forms of rewards or penalties. This has had a tendency to make evaluation an automatic precedure which, because of pressures within the organization, will put many people near the top of the evaluation scale. Opposed to this idea is one that evaluation is best used to establish rapport between supervisor and worker. This is based on the fact there is thera- peutic value in evaluation as a device for develOping, motivating, and stimulating workers. The theory behind this is a worker will develop a feeling of belonging to the organization when he and the supervisor 1 Pfiffner, J. M. and R. v, Presthus, Public Administration, The Ronald Press 00., New York, 1953, p. 275? can talk things over. it the same time the worker is getting a "mental lift" from belonging, the supervisor is encouraged to do a better job of evaluation and motivation. Pfiffer and Presthus,2 who advanced the ideas on the value to the “worker, have also expressed the idea evaluation might be looked at en- tirely from the standpoint of what it would do for the supervisor. Their feeling was supervisors would be induced to discuss strong and ‘weak points with each worker. This would lead to a definite plan of action for helping to strengthen those who needed help. The principle objective of an evaluation plan as visualized to stimulate supervisors would be to minimize personality bias by emphasizing accomplishments and the value of planning for future action. It would also help the super- visors overcome any preconceived ideas that they might have as to the evaluation score which a particular worker should be given. it an Evaluation workshop held in 19h6,3 h. L. Wilson, formerly director of the Federal Extension Service, expressed the feeling that a well planned evaluation program provided for representation of all the people involved in the program. This did not necessarily mean every . last person in a given county would get in on the evaluation of the ‘extension agent in the county. Rather it meant that if one considered the objectives and goals of a county program as being important in the 3 Ibid. 3 Nilson, M. L., Report of Extension Evaluation Nbrkshop, United States Department of Agriculture, l9h5. l2 evaluation process, to the extent local peeple helped with the formu- lation of these goals they would be represented. J. P. Leagans4 at the same workshop advanced the idea that a scientific basis is needed for an effective personnel training program. He felt that a well organized program of evaluating programs and personnel would contribute important values to administrative effort. Pr0per1y organized an evaluation program would be an integral part of extension planning, teaching, supervision, and administration. Above all else such a program if properly executed, would provide a certain psychological security and self confidence to extension personnel. Speaking before the Personnel Institute at Ohio State'University, L. Appleyl5 mentioned that any evaluation program deve10ped should have a simple method of comparing present performance with.desired results. This enables each individual to know exactly where he stands with the administration. It also shows the individual clearly what he personally must do to improve himself. It develops a closeness between peeple and builds a mutual confidence. The tendency in measurement, is not so much adding up a score, as a look at the profile. Evaluation indicates the apparent degree of performance in various areas. Decisions, when made, should be based upon concrete evidence and considerate judgment. The person doing the 4 Leagans, J. P., Suggestions for Setting;Up an Evaluation Pregram, Report of Extension Evaluation workshop, U. S. D. A., 1955, p. 32. 5 . Appley, L., Proceedings of First Personnel Institute, Ohio State University Publication, 1938, p. 27. l3 evaluation must guard against rationalizing. Facts should be obtained, used, and faced up to. An evaluation scale calls for the evaluating of performance rather than native ability. Persons doing the evaluation must have worked with the individual to be evaluated and must be familiar with the program, the methods, and the results.6 The Commission on Teacher Evaluation has listed llQualities of Cooperative Evaluation.‘7 By c00perative evaluation is meant one which is explored, understood, used continuously, freely, and creatively by all concerned. This is Opposed to an authoritarian evaluation which guides individuals into unquestioning obedience and submisiveness to the person in a superior status. The qualities as listed by the commission were: 1. evaluation is a continuous process which is an integral part of the teaching-learning situation--it is not an end product but rather part of the whole, 2. evaluation is the c00perative responsibility of all concerned, 3. evaluation is part of a process which works toward changes in behavior, ' h. behavioral changes Should be in the direction of objectives of the group, S. c00perative evaluation involves intelligent selection and use of techniques in gaining evidence of behavioral changes. In setting up an evaluation system for industry Dooher and MarquisB 6 Professional and Program Evaluation, Agricultural Extension Service, Ohio State University, 1951. 7 Better Than Rating, Association for Supervision and Curriculum DeveIOpment, dashington, D. 0., 1950, pp. 61—63. 8 Dooher, M. J. and V. Marquis, Hating Employer and Supervisory Performance, American Management Association, New York, 1950, pp. 21-25. 1b encountered problems which had to be resolved before a successful evalu- ation system could be established. These problems included: 1. What are the aims and purposes of evaluation? 2. Will the peOple be told how they ranked? 3. Who will do the evaluating? h. How often should the evaluating be done? 5. Will there be an adequate amount of time for the evaluators to carry out the aims and purposes of the program? These writers in establishing their basic principles for evaluation 9 took these questions into account. Their basic principles are: 1. have a single purpose of helping supervisors deal with peOple, 2. keep the evaluating form simple, 3. have a definite job definition of the work to be evaluated, h. observe the work of the employee in relation to the job, 5. explain the evaluation to the employee. The appraisal or evaluating system being used by Chrysler Corpora- tionlo‘has been analyzed and some observations have been made from this analysis. A few of the observations are: t. The objectives of the appraisal system: 1. To improve the performance of peeple in their present jobs—- to be a basis for counseling and coaching subordinates. 2. To make possible the most effective use of individual abilities--depends on a systematic collection of information on strengths and weaknesses. 3. To aid in long-rangze planning--provides a sound basis for selection, training, and promotion. B. In evaluating performance it is important to: 1. Base it on facts. 2 . Evaluate results on the job, not personal qualities which cause the results--describe the job. 9 Ibid., p. 71. 10Management DeveIOpment, Chrysler Corporation, l9Sh. 3. Judge reSponsibilities separately. h. Judge performance for the period of the appraisal only. C. In recommending action: 1. Make recommendations specific. 2. Set goals that are obtainable. 3. Concentrate on correcting one or two important weaknesses at a time. Gallup and Sabrosky,ll discussed evaluation for specialists in the Hashington office of the Extension Service. To them a test of the value of appraisal was the degree to which the appraisal gave results con- sistent with other evidences regarding behavior and the extent to which in practice the device could be used. Extension workers find evaluation of Special value in improving the quality of their own teaching and the teaching of those whom they help to supervise. It helps in the teach- ing job by limiting the Objective to what can actually be accomplished. At the same time evaluation increases confidence in the programs by eliminating uncertainties and by improving the program increases the confidence of peeple in extension. These writers also made some observations on using the narrative report in the process of evaluation. The narrative report had one serious defect as a vehicle of evaluation in that it provided no place for a statement of objectives. It can be used only as a vehicle for the description of activities and the enumeration of changes in attitudes. 8 Collings,1 stated that there was a need to help Extension workers 11 Gallup, G. and L. K. Sabrosky, How the Federalgpecialist Can Evaluate His work, Extension Service Circularhhh, washington, 1937. 12 Collings, M. L., Use of Annual Reports as a Means of Evaluating Extension Zfork, Extension Service, ~dashington, D. C., 19149. 16 make better observations and to develop devices which they could use to collect and record evidence of changes in behavior of peOple. Although the narrative report enumerates changes in attitudes, unless peOple are taught what to look for and how to make observations it may be valueless. Some difficulties in using narrative reports were also listed by Collings.13 They were: 1. Do not list objectives-~evaluation from reports does not have the objectives clearly in mind of what it should evaluate. 2. Evidence of accomplishment is in terms of secondary level of evaluation--opportunities to change behavior rather than actual changes may“be evaluated. 3. Standards as now conceived are not flexible enough to be based on and adopted to the local situation. State Extension Service Evaluation Pregrams In this study Extension directors selected at random, were surveyed to determine the status of county agent evaluation around the country. Twenty-two replies have been read on the subject of evaluation. Every letter supports the need for an evaluation system. The difficulty appears in what the various states feel should be included in an evalu- ation system. In some states the evaluation of extension work is largely in terms of the personal characteristics of agents. Other states have attempted a combination evaluation of program, administration, teaching techniques and skills, professional improvement, accomplishments, 13 Collings, H. L., 92. git. 17 relationships, and personal qualifications. Variation has also been found in how the various facts are weighted. These weights have ranged from assigning percentages to the various points being evaluated to a system of indicating a matter of degree such as unsatisfactory, satis- factory, or outstanding. In some cases this degree has been made even finer going to as many as ten categories. The wide variation between states can best be shown by what has been written from these states. C.‘H. Smithl‘ of Oregon writes: ...to date we have never put on paper our evaluation program for county Extension agents. It goes without saying, however, that we must and do rate the agents from time to time. Like many of the other states we get the supervisory staff together with state leaders and other members of the state administrative staff periodically to discuss the county programs, the atti- tudes of the agents, how they are getting along, etc. From Maine, R. C. Dolloff15 writes: As to the question of rating agents, we fall back on the same technique of what we hear and see, plus the evidence that is recorded in the county agent's weekly and annual reports. Now, don't ask me how we analyze this evidence as it is probably an impression rather than a real analysis. It can be seen from these two states that formal evaluation of county agents is a problem to be wrestled with. On the other side of the pendulum swing is Ohio. In this state according to w; B. Wood,16 a form has been deve10ped which has as its 1‘ Smith, C. w;, personal communication, Corvallis, Oregon, 1955. 15 Dolloff, R. 0., personal communication, Orono, Maine, 1955. 16 Whoa, W. B., personal communication, Columbus, Ohio, 1955' 18 purpose the measuring of personality qualifications and professional performance, the measuring of the program for which the staff member is responsible, and to provide a basis for the improvement of the staff member and the county extension program. It is also used as one of the three factors considered in promotions and salary adjustments for staff members. J. B. Fawcett17 writes from New Jersey that they are not using a formal evaluation.program. In this state they made a major effort to develOp an effective evaluation.pr0gram but let it drOp. While in effect it Operated on,a voluntary basis. This program was patterned quite closely after the system being used in Ohio. In his letter Fawcett pointed out that he felt the New Jersey system was not more successful because of psychological blocks, although these were not specified. It was further pointed out that good will and staff moral are very important. A system of evaluation, as developed, must keep this in mind. If Operating successfully'morale would be promoted rather than torn down. In.Michigan at the present time there is no formal system of evalu- ating agent performance although there has been a committee appointed to develOp a method. Prior to this time there was a system in use which depended heavily upon the Specialists for the actual rating of county agricultural agent programs.18 Although not now in use this system is 17 Fawoett, J. 8., personal communication, New Brunswich, N. J. 1955. 18 Pierson, R. R., Vocational Interests of Agricultural_§xtension workers as Related to Selected ASpects of work Adjustment, Michigan State College, 1951, p. 12D. l9 worth looking at as one in which a great deal of thought has been put. There was a feeling that the extension specialists and the administrators of the extension program knew the county extension agents intimately and were able to appraise the agent's effectiveness and observe the public acceptance of their phase of the over-all county extension program. Ratings of A, B, C and D were used corresponding to Superior, Good, Fair and foor. All specialists evaluations were recorded on a master sheet for each county. To determine a single county evaluation from the many individual ranks the projects in the various counties were graded accord- ing to whether they were of major, average, minor or no importance to a well rounded prOgram in a particular county. Differential weights were assigned the specialists evaluations based on the importance of each project to a sound extension program for a given county. These differential weights were set up to remove the bias which might creep in because a particular commodity, of no importance in the county, was not pushed. Criticisms of this system included the facts that agents did not receive information on their evaluations or suggestions on how to improve, specialists didn't like to evaluate county agents and county agents felt they should have an Opportunity to evaluate specialists, and finally it was felt that once an evaluation was made it was rather difficult to get it changed. In Hisconsin19 a supervisor-agent check sheet has been deve10ped. This sheet is used by supervisors in conference with individual agents. 19 Pollock, J., personal communication, Madison, fiisconsin, 1935. 20 The main accomplishment of this sheet is that it gives the supervisor an Opportunity to record the date of the conference and the main subject discussed. These records and comments made by the supervisor for his own use allow him to be more Objective when discussing the accomplish— ments of agents. Massachusetts20 has been trying out a method for the past year. Their scale deals entirely with personality attributes. GeOrgia21 has deve10ped a preliminary guide for evaluating county personnel. It covers such areas as training, length of service, work load, program of work, accomplishments, and working relationships. The basis for this evaluation is the agent's annual report. C. A. Svinth22 of Washington states that the evaluation form used in that state is used as a basis for discussing personally with each agent his effectiveness in carrying on Extension work. This evaluation check sheet looks for accomplishments, organization, teaching skill, administrative and leadership capabilities, effectiveness of COOperation, and personal characteristics. Indiana, according to H. S. Heckard,23 is using an evaluation sheet as a training schedule for Assistant County Agents. This evaluation is made by the county agent after the assistant agent has been in training for one year in the county. 20 Vaughan, H. 3., personal communication, Amherst, Mass., 1955. 21 O'Kelley, C. R., personal communication, Athens, Ga., 1955. 33 Svinth, C. 3., personal communication, Pullman, thh., 1955. 23 Heckard, H. 8., personal communication, Lafayette, Ind., 1955. 21 J. U. Morris24 of Missouri described a county Personnel Evaluation Form which looked for personal qualities and abilities of extension workers. This form is used by supervisors in helping them to evaluate county personnel, especially new Extension workers. The supervisors have the help of county agents and home agents in evaluating new personnel in the counties where they are trained. T. G. Stewart26 of Colorado indicates that an evaluation has been deve10ped annually. Kine peOple in the state office rank the agents. These nine peOple are members of the administrative or supervisory staffs. after these rankings are made they are discussed by the group until a final rank is determined. This rank determines eligibility for promotion and salary adjustment. It also serves as a basis for study by the agent and supervisor in supervisory visits. In wyoming an evaluation method has been deve10ped. w; T. Kirk26 writes, ...it is my feeling, after making a survey and a rather wide one throughout the United States, that evaluation is important to us-that any kind of evaluation carried on regu- larly for all personnel is fairer than the kind that is used periodically or on the spur of the moment. In fact, I am of the opinion that we are Continuously evaluating personnel. 'we do it each time we have a change in salary or a change in county position. For that reason any planned, organized method should be worthwhile. Although there is considerable variation in the type of evaluation forms being used as well as the content, there are some items in common 34 Morris, J. U., personal communication, Columbia, Mo., 1955. 25 Stewart, T. G., personal communication, Fort Collins, 0010., 1955. 26 Kirk,'w. T., personal communication, Laramie, wy0., 1955. 22 where evaluation is being done on a formal basis. These are program, administration, teaching techniques and skills, professional improvement, accomplishments, personal qualifications, public relations, and the use and participation of local people. Every director felt personnel evaluation was important to the ex- tension program. The only difficulty was "how‘ should evaluation be carried on so as to strengthen the extension program and aid in the development of the county agent being evaluated. Further Need For Evaluation Bakerp‘.7 in her book The County Agent, mentions that an Objective evaluation program is needed because in some states supervisors are more aware of discontent among influential farmers and county officials than of the real quality of the county agent's work. Still other supervisors are prone to count the number of demonstrations held and number of farm visits made rather than evaluating directly the quality of the county agent's work. The Cooperative Extension Service has been a partnership between federal, state, and county units of government and local people. Loomis and Beegle28 indicate the part played by local peOple. They say, ...the more locally responsible the agent is for his original appointment and for the support of his program, the fewer are the typically bureaucratic features of the organi- zation. 27 Baker, G., The County_igent, University of Chicago Press, 1939, p. 126. 26 Loomis, C. P. and A. J. Beegle, Rural Social Systems, Prentice- Hall Inc., New York, 1950, p. 660. 23 These writers go further than this when they say, ...the agent would have more solidarity, personal, and traditionally controlled relationships than he would if he were reSponsible only to a state, regional or federal director or other official. The growth and develOpment of local peOple has been fostered by the Extension Service. County agents are no less aware of this than are any other members of an extension staff. is a consequence they have looked to local peOple for guidance and counselling-even, in many cases, the evaluating of county agent programs and performance has been by local peOple. In a study conducted byPreiss29 concerning the Michigan Extension Service some interesting ideas have been uncovered in regards to the place county agents look for authority. The internal bureaucratic structure of the Federal Extension Service has been kept small and simple by delegating responsi— bility to the state. This has been responsible, in part, for an attitude of conflict avoidance and passivity in group interaction. The high autonomy of local county units has rendered it vulnerable to external influences. With a pattern of delegation of authority being followed by the Extension Service there has been built up a great dependence upon local people--not only by county agents but all the way up the line of the administrative hierarchy. This continually puts county agents in a position where they encounter problems of choice between the desires of the local peOple and the desires of the administration. Often the choice will carry obligation: which Ire completely incompatible. Stressful dilemmas can always be expected in the behavior of county agents who are in an exposed condition between.the functional outlook of the supervisors and the wishes, desires, and expressed needs of the people with whom they work. 29 Preiss, J. J., The Functions of Relevant Power and Authority Groups in the Evaluation of County Agent Performance, unpublished Ph. D. Thesis, Michigan State College, 1953. 2h Preiss,30 in the same study also commented upon present evaluating processes as affected by the direction agents did or did not look for guidance. The evaluating process itself constitutes an informal psychological procedure, in that it is based upon cultural stereotypes and ideological preconceptions rather than a scientifically objective inventory. This approach has the effect of social or situational factors being limited or ignored as significant variables in the evaluation which is on an informal basis. This may lead to the distinct possibility of conflict developing involving the extent of the agents autonomy of and loyalty to the administrative superior. The main component of many administrative evaluations has been the consensus of judgement and opinion which administrators have obtained from private groups and individuals in various counties. An evaluation made on this basis has a tendency to be self- perpetuating because it will be based on the judgement of the same peOple from year-to-year. This type of evaluation has en- couraged agents to utilize local support to the "nth" degree. It implies that the administration has directed its allegiance against itself. This conflict situation the county agent is in continually points up the need for an objective evaluation system. An evaluation of county agents which is not Objective will cause agents to turn in the direction of the administration. More self- contained behavioral patterns will be developed which will tend to make county workers less sensitive to outside influence and domination and lead towards a more bureaucratic structuring of the extension service. This leads into some of the writings on bureaucracy which also point up a need for an objective evaluation system as it affects agent-local people relationships and agent-supervisor relations. Some of the most so Preiss, J. J., ibid. 25 complete writings on the subject have been byifeber.31 According to his viewpoint bureaucratic administration is from a formal technical point of view, the most rational type. For the needs of mass adminis- tration today, it is completely indiSpensible. To Heber, bureaucratic administration meant fundamentally the exercise of control on.the basis of knowledge. The question never is will there be control but rather who will control the administration. This carries with it the power of appointment which.makes for the purest form of bureaucratic authority. Advisory boards may be used in a bureaucratic organization. Such boards do not necessarily involve a weakening of the power of the autocratic chief but may well lead to a tempering of the exercise of authority in the direction of rationalization. In other writings, H'eber,32 expressed other viewpoints to consider such as the ...theory of modern public administration assumes that the authority to order certain matters by decree does not intitle the bureau to regulate the matter abstractly. The idea has also been advanced that the decisive reason for the advance of bureaucratic organization has been its purely technical superiority over any other form of organization. Precision, Speed, continuity, and discretion are raised to the Optimum point in the strictly bureaucratic administration. 31 weber, M., Theory of Social and Economic Organization, Oxford University Press, New York, l9h7, p. 337. 32 weber, M., Essays in Sociolog', Oxford University Press, New York, 191:6, p. 198. 26 Weber also stated33 ...that work organized by collegiate bodies causes friction and delay and requires compromises between colliding interests and views. Administration of this type runs less precisely, is more independent of superiors, is less unified and certainly slower. Bureaucracy strives to level those powers that stand in its way and in those areas, that, in individual cases, it seeks to occupy. Democracy as we usually think of it is Opposed to the rule of bureaucracy, in spite and perhaps because of its un- avoidable yet unintentional promotion of bureaucratization. It would appear from these writings that the most efficient form of Extension Administration would go straight down the line for bureau- cracy. This is contrary to the established patterns that have been built up since the inception of the Extension Service in l9lh. It under- lines the basic conflict of the extension agent's position. The agent must travel a path with which the interests of the local peOple and the agents interests in the needs and expressed desires of the people are maintained. it the same time the extension agent needs to be oriented to his responsibilities to the administration and the administration's responsibility to the peOple and the agent. a prOperly conceived and oriented evaluation system will take the agent out of this conflict situation. (See Figure 1) Another need for an evaluation system is found in what makes an organization and what are the functions of some of the peOple in the organization. Barnard,34 has the concept of an organization as being 3" Weber, M., 93. 933., p. 2124. 34 Barnard, O. I., The Functions of the Executive, Harvard Univer- sity Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1951, p. 73. 27 mpcmwa downempxm huesoo we» do coapamoa soaamaoo see , eases camaoexm apesoo .H oeswfim 28 a group of persons, some or all of whose activities are coordinated. A useful concept for the analysis of a cooperative system of consciously coordinated activities of two or more persons. The vitality of an organization lies in the willingness of individuals to contribute, but this willingness requires the belief that the purpose can be carried out. An objective evaluation system will help to build the program of such an organization. Program Planning A formal organization, such as the Extension Service, consciously coordinates the activities of peOple. To do this a program of action must be developed for each county. A recommended county Extension program is one developed by peOple in cooperation with the extension agents. The program will set forth factual background information, describe the situation and problems and determine solutions for the problems described. It implies a long range consideration extending over a period during which the determining social and economic forces can be foreseen or predicted with reasonable accuracy. The program sets forth what is to be done. In brief the program should contain: 1. a description of resources, 2. an analysis of the present situation, 3. a list of basic problems, h. a statement of the objectives and goals which clearly sets forth the desires of the peOple concerned, 5. recommended solutions to the problems which make it possible to reach the objective, 6. a provision for revising the program. 29 Iatthews35 defines a county program ...as an understanding arrived at cooperatively by the local peOple and the county extension staff of the following conditions: 1. the situation in.which people are located 2. the problems that are a part of the local situation 3. the objectives of the local people in relation to these problems h. the recommendations to reach the objectives. Preparation of a program entails detailed study, committee work, and analyzing of local conditions. The objectives to be reached should be looked at from the standpoint of the farm, home, and community. Both long term and short term objectives should be considered. Musgrave36 feels that longtime objectives and goals are fundamental in program deve10pment. Egger'sa7 has stated that ...when looking at program deve10pment or execution one should review it for technical feasibility, formalize the projects into working objectives, and determine the methods and techniques to be used. A county program should deve10p and change with the securing of additional facts relative to the situation. husgrave38 has written that ...program planning is a continuous process of determining, develOping and executing programs. It calls for continuous observation by councils and committees, their real participation in planning and their active assistance in carrying out the programs. 35 Matthews, J. L., National Inventony of Extension hethods of Program Determination, Extension Service Circular No. L77, 1952, p. 2. 36 Mustrave, B. E., Extension Procram Planning, unpublished.h. S. Thesis, Michigan State College, 195B, p. 129. 37 Egger, R., Public Administration and Extension Ubrk, Extension Service Circular No. 1:51, 1913, p. 37. 351husgrave, B. E.,‘gp. cit., p. 13. 3O Throughout the process of building a program, extension agents should keep in mind that the peOple's program is being developed. Also to be remembered is the primary objective of the Extension Service of helping peOple develop a program that strikes directly at the problems 'with which they are faced and which both must work together with to solve. People are interested in a program based on their situation and needs as they see and understand them which they help to build. The Eyoming Extension Service39 has listed the characteristics which they like a county Extension program to have. They are: 1. based on over-all county agricultural and family life condi- tions as determined by local peOple, flexible enough to meet changing conditions, educational in character, and adaptable to all educational and age levels, emphasize the general welfare of the peOple, adapted to the resources of the available personnel, finances and leadership, coordinated with the work of other agencies, a program in which the family unit is strengthened, starts where peOple are, makes maximum use of local leaders in planning and carrying out prOgram, program is kept timely. Frequently evaluated and changed as needed. \OCJ‘NICN U1? WM 0 l-’ O 0 One job of the extension agent is to help plan and carry out an effective educational program-one that is functional and adapted to the needs of the people. This requires thought and effort being directed towards definite objectives to help penetrate the maze of details and demands on the agent's time and to organize programs and procedures that will produce the most satisfying results. 39 agricultural and Family Life Planning, College of Agriculture, Laramie, Wyo. 31 Many methods are being used at present by agents across the country to get the job done. Matthews, in The National Inventory of Extension Methods of Program Determination4O lists six ways most commonly found in the counties studied. These methods included: 1. a representative county committee planning a county program after the problems and needs have been discussed at community meetings, 2. discussion of problems and drafting of the program on the county level by selected representatives, . discussion by a committee not representative of geographic or other major interests in the county, 3 h. program planned by agents through personal consultation with leaders and well informed people, 5. agents do the planning after a mail survey, 6. programs determined by commodity or Special interest groups not formed into a county committee. Obviously there are many adaptations of these six forms of program determination as listed. waever, if prOgram planning is to furnish the basis for county agent evaluation, planning should be such that the administration can use it with confidence as the base. For this reason it is suggested that a representative committee be used. This will have the effect of involving local peOple in the program from a deve10p- ment and an execution standpoint. It will further give the agent assistance in the allocation of time, determining projects to emphasize, discovering needs, and pointing efforts towards definite objectives. Knaus41 in l9h8, concluded that as guides in our planning work there are a few principles that should be kept in mind. They are: 4° Matthews, J. L., 22, 223., p. 3. 41 Knaus, K., Notebook of Program Development, Extension Service Circular 855, washington, D. 0., 19L3, p. 6. 0040 \n 2' uMI—‘_ 32 program planning is a continuous process, program planning is a teaching process, establishing definite objectives is an essential part of the planning process, good programs will be based on and grow out of basic information, proper program planning procedures lead peOple to see beyond present felt needs to basic underlying problems, good program planning deve10ps leadership, a well-planned program will contain procedures for evaluation, the function of the extension staffs in program planning is to provide democratic leadership. These principles point the way towards a representative committee. Musgrave,42 in an unpublished thesis Extension Program Planning; Organi- zation and Process has reviewed the work of an Agricultural Advisory Council. He says: Organization is the key work in program planning. In Kecosta county the key organization is the Agricultural Advisory Council. This group has been willing to assume responsibility and leadership in the development and execution of extension programs, and the experience with it assists in deriving some conclusions. among the conclusions arrived at are: 1. 2. 3. h. S. 6. To 43 planning group may best be organized for a definite purpose, members should understand the purpose, group may determine its own program and develop its own leadership, (with assistance of county agent), membership should be definite and elected by representative organizations and groups, rCSponsibility to peOple who elected them must be instilled in the members, responsibility to each other and to group as a whole must be felt by the members. arrive at these conclusions huSgrave kept complete records on all planning activities. This procedure was facilitated by the keeping 42 Musgrave, B. E., 22. cit., p. 118. 43 Ibid., p. 119. 33 of daily record sheets which accounted for such items as date, place, time spent, programs considered, groups, individuals, consultants, and local staff members involved in the planning process. Because of this-work and experience gained by the writer in extension program planning it is reiterated that objective program planning will make the base from which to build an objective county agent evaluation program. A representative county committee will help in conducting an objective job of program planning. It will help the Eatension Service fulfill one of its major responsibilities of helping people by training people44 in the counties to deve10p and examine information from which clear statements of major problems and recommended solutions to these problems may be made. in organization chart which may be considered by county agents in setting up a county agricultural planning committee may look like Figure 2. Such an organization, as suggested by Niederfrankés would allow for: 1. fitting the way peOple are organized locally, 2. representation of different interests, kinds of peOple, and types and size of farms, . peOple to know whom they represent, . integrating the over-all extension prOgram, . cooperation with existing community or county organizations and agencies, . . discovering the true needs and interests of the peOple, . representatives to speak for areas‘or organization rather than for themselves, . use of informal leaders. Jens, F. 0., Extension Looks at Program Planning, Extension Service Circular No. L73, Washington, D. C., 1952, p. 3. 45 Niederfrank, E. J., Main Types of County Extension Organization, Extension Service Circular hh8, Hashington, D. C., 1938, p. 30. 3h ..Snocsoo hwomwfis... Haggoflm... hpgoo .m you pmmzo Hmcogwngmwmo .m ousmfim .mOmMom _ _ onbnpga _ mmmohflm _ ommhom _ E 11:23 a mug .Jalmvumu _ _ mmmgéaoo a - , _ mosmfl _. m8 _ Ba . spasm .838 H5280 . .so 4&8 .20 3:8 has: , no I rematch anagom mangoes, me asap 35 This work is concerned primarily with the agricultural agent. The same principles of organization will apply to an over-all extension advisory council or to home economics and h-H advisory councils. Specific adaptations of this type of organization should be made in view of the local conditions under which it is to be used. CHKPTER III CRITERIA FOR AN EVALUATION SYSTEM To be able to evaluate county agent performance with confidence the objectives of the program need to be known. These are the objectives which the peOple have determined for the county extension program based upon their needs and problems. This is based upon a procedure describing the behavior of an individual is better than one which merely evaluates without being objective. The objectives may be either short-term or longbterm--or stated another way are objectives carrying over a period of time and set up to meet immediate needs and problems. They will be more Specific than the general objective of the Extension Service of helping people to see, analyze, and act on their problems. Also more specific than objective, such as "to help young peOple to develop into 1 mature adults." Specific Criteria In establishing the criteria for an evaluation program it should be kept in mind that an evaluation program should: 1. be in terms of objectives and goals, 2. measure progress and deve10pment of the agent: a) potential as well as present, b) in terms of starting point, 1 1955 Plan of work, COOperative Extension Service, University of Connecticut, Storrs, Conn., 1955, 37 c) in terms of condition of work; 3. be educational, a) to improve performance, b) to make best use of agent's abilities, c) to aid in long-range planning. A program planning procedure which establishes the goals and objectives of the county extension program is the first criteria for an evaluation program for county agents. By using the program planning procedure a base is established from which objective items can be measured. Standards are set-up against which the various behavioral situations can be measured. It allows for evaluation in terms of con- ditions to be found in a particular county eliminating the various differences between counties which lead to a feeling of frustration when one agent is compared with another agent, particularly when conditions of work are dissimilar. During the establislment of the base there is an opportunity for the coordination of the programs of the county and state, removing during the process of deve10pment, any area of conflict or misunderstanding which might deve10p. is background and source material is deve10ped for use by the county planning committees there will be an Opportunity to teach the objectives of the extension program-- not only the broad long term objectives of the Extension Service, but also the responsibility which they have in the deve10pment of objectives and goals to satisfy their needs and the needs of the peOple they represent. With the objectives spelled out in detail the evaluation can be based on tangible evidence when changes in performance, attitudes, and knowledge are to be measured. in evaluation should not be decided upon 38 first--then evidence looked for to support it. Rather all pertinent events should be considered before evaluating a county agent. Changes which are discovered from the evidence should be in the direction of the objectives determined before beginning. Performance which causes results on the job is the thing to be evaluated. Personal qualities which cause the results although in- directly affecting performance quickly remove one from an area of objectivity into an area of personal bias. Evaluating on performance and the results from it soon arrives at an answer to how goals are being reached. It will help to determine the effectiveness of the teaching skills and methods being employed by the county agent. in evaluation system should judge each reSponsibility separately not allowing failure in one undertaking to overshadow the good which might be done in several others. It should also be so arranged that a single incident is not overemphasized. This might apply to one which is a conspicuous failure or an outstanding success. It will also guard against the most recent incident being stressed too strongly. Evaluation is a continuous process which is an integral part of the county agent's activities. To minimize the influence of previous evaluations the system should be so constructed that an evaluation is made and decided upon without reference to past evaluations. After the decision is arrived at for the purpose of discussion with the agent all evaluations may be looked at to show patterns of prOgress or continued weakness. This would be a valuable tool in planning a helpful training program for either old or new agents. 39 Changes in behavior are brought about by evaluation. The system should measure individual progress and point the way for improvement. The measuring of accomplishments and results will be more effective in measuring success than will be the counting of numbers. The system of evaluation designed should also be a cooperative responsibility of all concerned. This will insure everyone knowing the basis on which the evaluation is being conducted and will furthermore be sound enough so that it may be defended if the need arises. 488 In summary the criteria for an evaluation system might be listed 1. a sound program planning procedure which enumerates the objectives and goals of the program to be evaluated and indicates the extent to which local peOple are involved and how these objectives and goals are in terms of the peOple's expressed needs and desires, be based on facts which will show changes in performance, attitudes, and knowledge, uses performance which show results on the job instead of personal qualities which might cause results, does not allow a single incident or responsibility to overshadow the entire job, is a continuous process taking into account changes which might occur as peOple's needs and desires change, is the c00perative reSponsibility of local peOple, county workers, and the administration, will serve as a guide to the establishing of programs which will aid the agents and the Extension Service to show con— tinued progress and deve10pment towards the over-all goals of extension of helping people to see, analyze, and act on their own problems. ho a PrOposed System for Evaluation A broad general framework for the evaluation of county extension agents has been deve10ped keeping in mind the criteria established for an evaluation prOgram. The first area of the framework to be discussed is establishing an objective base for the evaluation program. This base will incorporate the goals and objectives of the county program deve10ped during the program planning process. The area of work to be evaluated during a given period will be mutually agreed upon by extension agent and super- visor. In establishing this area it should be kept in mind that it should be so stated that it will represent what should be done, not what is being done, will contain only ratable items; use simple language; and recognize that there are other‘functions necessary for a successful extension performance. During the course of the discussion the supervisor will be in a position to determine the job of program planning being carried on in the county. Items the supervisor will look for will include how the local peOple function, the type of background material prepared for the peOple, and the role played by the agent in the deve10pment of the pro- gram. The burden of proof as to involvement of local peOple will rest with the county agent. If for any reason the supervisor is not satisfied local peOple are being involved in the establishment of goals and objectives for the program it becomes the responsibility of the super- visor to visit a planning meeting in the county to observe techniques. bl This method of using an agent—supervisor conference to establish a base and evaluate performance is shown in Figure 3. It will keep the agent oriented towards the people. At the same time it will allow the objectives of the administration to be made known to the county agent and through him to the planning committee of the county. The objectives of all levels; federal, state, county and local peOple; can be meshed without a conflict deveIOping when the conference approach is used to establish the objectives against which the evaluation system will be applied. This will insure meeting the criteria of an evaluation program of being based on a sound planning procedure which enumerates the ob- jectives and goals of the program as deve10ped by local peOple to meet heir expressed needs and desires. This also makes it the cooperative responsibility of local peOple, county worker, and supervisor by con- sidering the needs and desires of all when establishing the objectives and goals against which performance is to be measured. 'With an approach such as this for establishing the base for evalu- ation it is possible that in any given period only one phase of the agent's program will be used for a Specific evaluation program. This should not be objectionable. Michigan extension agents where asked2 the percentage of time Spent doing things required or Sponsored by the administration or specialist staff, doing things expected by local people, and doing those things considered as most important in meeting the needs and desires as determined by local peOple. The study 3 Stone, J. T., What Does a County Extension Agent Do? COOperative Extension Service, Michigan State College, p. 21. hz .oocmsuounom opdsampm on psoso>oz mo soapomnfin .m ohsmam - nausea hoe , v, aoapaeaesm » mocmEAOMAmm ompmzampm pofiamaoo o>oEom- ecu seam aehanepmm op neoconomooo nomw>poddmnpcomd seam ecu _ EMMMOhm smaHnmpmn xvi/IIIIIIII — Anomfi>od L3 indicated that about one-third of the time was spent on each of the items. This meant a county extension agent had only a third of his time free to plan needed programs. The rest of the time is taken up with traditional or routine assignments. This will encourage the extension agent to think in terms of the part of the county program which will most nearly meet the needs of the county. When explained beforehand to the planning committee their program is to be used in this manner they will help the agent prune some of the "dead wood" out of the county program. It is as important to de-emphasize parts of the program as to continually emphasize sections. Continued emphasis results in the county agent putting one job on top of another until the position becomes unbearable. Setting a sound basis for evaluation will by first, a conference between agent and people and secondly, a conference between agent and supervisor; relieve the agent of many of those jobs and reduce the number of areas in which conflicts may deveIOp. The establishment of a base will allow for Specific evaluation on facts which.will Show changes in performance, attitudes and knowledge. In establishing the base a 'benchmark' will be determined so the evalu- ation system, when viewing performance, will be able to demonstrate results of the job being done instead of showing personal qualities which might cause results. There will still be many routine assignments the county agent will be performing. Not all will be eliminated during the planning process. The reporting system now in use will show these activities and statistics as to what the patterns are in the area of ‘ these routine assignments such as office administration, farm visits, and telephone and office calls. It must constantly be kept in mind that program planning is a continuous process of determining, deveIOping, and executing programs. It calls for continuous observation by committees, their real partici- pation in planning and their active assistance in carrying out programs. This will mean the evaluation program must recognize this fact by being a continuous process taking into account changes which might occur as people's needs and desires change. Once the base has been established by mutual agreement it then becomes the extension agent's reSponsibility to deveIOp a plan and carry it towards the goals and objectives as specified. During the process of establishing the base the supervisor will be evaluating the county agent's program planning procedures. This will set the tone for the entire evaluation program in that it will lead the way for the evaluation to be carried on c00peratively between agent and supervisor. Once agree- ment has been reached on the program to be evaluated approval has been made that it is a significant program to carry in the extension program. The base will determine what is to be measured in relation to the goals and objectives of the extension program. Methods to use to measure performance should also be agreed upon.by agent and supervisor. Evidence as to changes in behavior which may take place as a result of the extension program will be difficult to obtain. Sabrosky3 has written, 3 Kelsey, L. D. and C. C. Hearne, Cooperative Extension werk, Comstock Publishing Associates, Ithaca, N. Y., 1955, pp. 220-221. 145 ...how can you tell that you have made progress or attained the goal toward which your objective was aimed? Education is successful when it has caused a change in the "right' direction —-—--The objective chosen for evaluation, as we have seen, must be in terms of behavior. behavior, when considered as the result of education, is usually not in terms of an immediate physical action. It may be in terms of an improvement in skills, a better understanding of a concept, an increased ability to solve problems, a changed attitude, an appreciation of different things, a shifting of values, a change of interests, an adoption of improved practices, an increase in knowledge. In order to select the types of behavior you will measure, a careful check must be made of the type of behavior which has been or will be brought about.-4We need to decide which types of behavior we want to measure-~only part of them or all of them. It is easier to measure changes of behavior which have tangible evidences of proof than it is to measure those which have in- tangible evidence.-------In order to determine the real results of extension teaching, we cannot ignore these intangible results just because they are hard to evaluate. ----- heasurement may take place at three points of attainment. First before any change occurs-~the peOple's behavior before extension has done any teaching. 3 second point would be at any step in the progress of the peOple toward the ultimate goal of the objective. The third point for evaluation would be to measure the attainment of the final goal-of the objective. ”Len you find out if few, some or all the peOple have reached that goal, you know whether to retain the objective in your plan of work or to substitute another one; you can find out whether certain teaching methods have been effective or not, and under what conditions. There are numerous devices which can be used to measure progress . . . , . ‘4 toward an educatlonal objective. They include: 1. value scales to determine the value peOple place on things and to determine what peOple think is important. . Attitude scales to show how people feel toward things. Opinion pools. Knowledge and comprehension tests. Interest checks to determine what people think is interesting. Skill or performance ratings to determine the amount of skills attained. . AdOption of practices. Case-history technique. Oxmt’w N CON 0 4 Kelsey, L. D. and C. C. hearne, 92, 322,, p. 222. To be completely effective anyone of the devices for measurement listed should be valid, reliable, objective, practical, and simple. For the purpose of this evaluation system, although recognizing the need for this complete measuring to be obtained by these devices, simple adaptations of them must be found to measure relative degrees of change which can be used as part of the observations being made by supervisor or county agent. In the preliminary plans the methods of measurement, and adapta- tions acceptable will be specified. This will have the added affect of establishing the rules for evaluation before it has begun. It will be another means of adding security to the county extension agent's position. Evaluation of performance is the next activity. The county agent is evaluated on the methods used to reach the objectives and goals es- tablished in the base. In evaluating in terms of success in meeting Specific responsibilities, emphasis is placed upon results and measure- able facts using the methods established at the beginning of the evalu- ation program. Generalities such as tact, coOperation, personality, initiative, judgment, ethics, social habits, and community life should be used only as they have a direct bearing on the results. There is no question that items such as these have an influence upon a county agent's success but for the purpose of this evaluation program they are diffi- cult to define and their direct bearing upon the success or failure of the program is not measureable at present. The person best qualified to make the evaluation is the supervisor. This will be done in terms of the specific goals and objectives as set is? up at the time the base is established. The supervisor may want to confirm with another person on the administrative staff his evaluation of the program as carried on by the county agent. During the evalua- tion of performance personality factors have been omitted. After the completion of the analysis of the job being done it would be well to look at the strong and weak points with the idea in mind of listing the characteristics which might cause a good or a poor performance. This may reduce some of the objectivity of the evaluation but will build prOgram if it is kept in mind that only characteristics that have a direct bearing on the results will be used. At the same time this is being done it would be well to list specific recommendations that will help to build the county agent and strengthen the extension program. When agreement is reached on the evaluation and suggested recom- mendations to be made the evaluation will be discussed with the county agent being evaluated. Prior to sitting down to discuss the evaluation with the county agent the supervisor will review what has been done to this point. This review will be made to orient in the supervisor's mind what the evaluation shows so that he may discuss it in an unbiased manner with the county agent, presenting it in a manner that will not emphasize one strength or weakness overlooking all others. All strong and weak points in the county agent's program will have been deve10ped and highlighted by the time the review is completed. From the point at which the county agent and supervisor sit down to confer on the evalu- ation will be the real beginning of the training program. The conference will be so arranged that the county agent will know not only what the evaluation is but will readily recognize the strengths and weaknesses. This will prevent being left with a feeling of uncertainty and anxiety. in agent-supervisor conference so arranged that it will give a feeling of confidence will have to be adapted to the agent in question. It is here that the supervisor may need to know some of the personal characteristics such as ability, ambition, and temperment. The super- visor should be certain before approaching this meeting that facts are at hand to verify the strength or weaknesses as they come up. During the conduct of the conference the supervisor will make every effort to put the county agent at ease, allow the agent to discover his own weak- nesses and encourage the agent to talk:and develop his own plan for self advancement and program strengthening. a detailed study has been made bin-Iorrow,6 on the personal interview, which is recommended to all interested in this follow through to an evaluation program. To facilitate the job of evaluation a check sheet has been developed _as a guide. This evaluation sheet will cover the main objective sub- jects to be evaluated with a partial weighing of each factor. It is shown in Table I. A scale from 1 through 10 will be used to indicate the degree of accomplishment under the various items on the evaluation sheet. This is being used because there is not a sharp break between one rank and another but rather it is a continuum which is relative. is a guide however the scale is broken down to mean as follows: 5 Morrow, E. R., The Personal Interview as a Method in Agricultural Extension Supervisigg, Agricultural Extension Service, University of Minnesota,‘l9§h. 19 1-2 Unsatisfactory -- performance which does not meet the requirements and shows no progress towards the goals and objectives. 3-b.Fair -- performance which lacks quality and can be improved greatly. 5-6 Good -- meets the normal requirements of the program and is showing prOgress towards accomplishing the goals and objectives established. Improvement can still be made. 7-8 Very good -- performance is of a high type. Improvement can be made in minor details. 9-10 Outstanding -- performance more than meets the requirements set up at the beginning. It is the type of performance which can'be used as an example of how to reach the goals and objectives in a clearcut manner. The important idea to be kept in mind when using this evaluation is that it is relative. Supervisors using it should be uniform in the performance required for points along the scale. This can best be worked out for a given state or area by the personnel doing the evaluating. JR!!¢-Nl.<. T1115 LE I EV {lLU 1T]: ON FORT“: FOR COUNTY EXT 1511251011 A GENT Pfiiiib‘Olh-L Iii/1.; 3 ." ,L . 1 1..., I n +80 M T w" A in“. 1151.1 es u #2 Jan - * Name: __ countj.w 1111 J L . * ' " " ' ‘*e "‘= '1“- ""?* e: (nae CI‘ irceiuuu and The purpose of this evaluation is to fu1nm11a guide to strongtlen the county 4t L . I 0 improve agent performance. ' - - e r-~« v.11 a~ a «*e a , gal ~«mawaeg fro develohment and The evaluation program will no in terms 01 oojectives and :.—pale, measuze pioh.os- a; _ , be educational to count; extension personnel. The progr ram to be evaluated is: PhOBLEM AND SITUITION:_fi .“inw_ll.,lmllllilllilwm_i-mmllllfl_ * n . . ._7.-w./~-r‘\vb CBJfiBTI BS (in terms for ihich program is planneez- ii. am— ' I ' 7 ' ’1' —« 0‘ J'-: fur-0‘ ID GOALS (in terms of anticipated adoption 01 UIdCuabéex- 1 - .-.ilm__ —-«~«~~—- w “W. -49“:— —- ../ . fl” 7‘_ J, K _v " KN \ .-. _ ,3- .1- f1 . n. ' '7 . 314,1. ‘f-q- ‘. . Q JOB DESCRIBTION (in terms of rtnnousibJL‘tlcs CU the county extension progla )0 4_ hnsatis- Cut~ ~‘~ = w “rw~~‘1 n “ mefl‘-- 's —¢-.+ r~e Item to be ovaluated factory flair docs Very woo, otapdluw U\}:O£ou_g. 1 2 3 11 fiw 7. 7 I] a 11; lmfllnflétthnl ”-5: aux...— u‘”'—‘.~ I. Problem lnalysis 1, Preparation of back- ground Material 1. Local people 2. County hxtention florker 3. extension Spe ccialist Use material to study over-all situation to determine interest, needs, problems, and objectives. C. Involvement of People I. Committees represent a. .reas of CCunty b. Income levels 0. Interest groups d. Ethnic groups 2. Leadership DeveIOpment 3. Leadership Particioation II. Program Development a. Objectives Defined B. Goals are: l. Obtainable 2 Measureable Jobs are outlined for: Local leaders County extension worker extension Specialist Other organizations FWPOHO D. Provides for: I. Leaders1r p deve10pment 2. acers1ip participation 3. COOperation of extension wor1mpm1xnoz some .a now condo ecosQfiSwm .m mmwpm Hdfiompopomm moose oopmo -3? his.“ 33” to: .m mxfia Immoqwmon mofipwpwuoom .H pcmsmmwsms moammo .Q maficowpocsm Hfioosoo mnemfi>o4 .m hpqsoo mo wmohoommp mcwpoowm acoo mpmsmmom pmmosm .H cosmnoexo new anomaom .u mam; ofizgmowQCmpm pmaopm .4 hasfimw soapficwooop mo>fiw .m :owposohn use hemawm no eases“ upcomopmmm .m mowpwawomu mpwnmood .H mmeEms human pmzpo mo enemama mMoCHmcoo .m anemone seemompxm mo manage an es Essa g .hano maopwppmfisfisod nuance pom .HH> cowpssam>m now uncomsm OH 0 mcwocmpm I950 m s coca muo> 0 1m 88 a m seem 1m H Anopomw oopssam>m an op EmpH Inflammca 52 In addition to the items checked comment should be made on: 1. Action to improve since last appraisal: 2. Characteristics contributing to success: j3. Characteristics hindering prOgram prOgress: 14. Recommended action to strengthen extension program and to build the county agent: CHAPTER.IV A COUNTY CASE STUDY TO USE IN.APPLYING THE EVALUATION MST HOD To test the evaluation method it will be applied to a specific county. This county program was selected because the writer is thoroughly familiar with the situation. One of the features of the method being proposed is that the person doing the evaluating must be familiar with the program being evaluated and conditions under which the program was developed. The program information as written up was obtained by interviewing agents in the county, studying annual narrative reports, and from the writer's knowledge of the situation. In this county program deve10pment was carried on through an advisory council. This council was composed of twenty-eight members. At the time of the deve10pment of the program to be used these 28 people included 21 men and 7 women. The chairman of the home economics, b-H Club, dairy, poultry, fruit and vegetable committees were included in the 28. The organization looks like Figure 3. They represented the 15 towns in the county. The majority were from farm families although four were not. This committee deve10ped and approved the program for the county extension service from recommendations made by commodity committees. Specific commodity committees made their recommendations after studying the situation in the county. These recommendations 5h .hpcsoo swznsfiz.zw wnficnmam swumosm pom sowpdufiqdmuo .3 mHSMflm _ step—fiat 2&2: NfiWmmT 4 m _ 8 o, moasocoom_ - mHnSwmg bps—us 38 m- ‘ g unease: oBfiEoo t“\\\\\\\\\\ m>HpaomL unease: mm AHozsoo HmamH>n4 55 included not only problems facing the peOple in the county, but also objectives, either long-term or short term, needing emphasis in the immediate future. The home economics and h-H Club committee met bi- monthly while agricultural commodity committees met as conditions warranted. The council also met bi-monthly. To act between regularly scheduled meetings there was an executive committee of seven members including the four officers and a representative from home economics, h-H Club work, and agriculture. Extension agents in the county were advisers to the committees. Excerpts from the program as developed in this county are as follows: 'Windham County is located in the northeast corner of Connecticut. In 1950 about 53 Percent or-32,529 of the 61,759 inhabitants were rural. In terms of density of population, the county ranks sixth with 150 peOple to the sduare mile. It is fourth in acreage in fanms, number of farms, and average size of farm. The percentage of rural population changed about 11 percent between l9h0 and 1950, which was the smallest change of any county during that period. In the county there are nine cities of more than one thousand peOple. There are fifteen towns and 516 square miles. Many changes have occurred since l9h5. The number of farmsghave decreased by about one-fifth. Among the farms there has been a shift in percentage according to major farming enterprises. The largest increase has been to 512 dairy farms, or 8 percent. 56 The other increase was in the number of poultry farms to 676 or 3 percent. Fruit farms decreased until there are now only 10 in the county and vegetable farms decreased from 30 to 5. [In 1951 an extension effectiveness survey was run in county. This survey was used as a supplement to the situation presented in the program to give the council an idea about the county. These included facts about: 1. where peOple obtained their income 2. educational level of the peOple 3. change in age of extension clientele h. conveniences available in the home 5. attitudes towards extension 6. participation in extension 7. where peOple obtained information] Agricultural expansion continues in dairy and poultry. Not so much in the number of farms as in the size of farm units. Five more cows are found per dairy farm than in 19h0. Where poultry flocks had hOO layers they now have over 2000. Broilers have increased by 150 percent. The poultry industry is now three times the size of the dairy business with a gross income of about 9 million dollars. All concen- trates needed by both the dairy and poultry industries are imported, the dairy industry also imports about 5,000 tons of hay per year. Overhead on farms has doubled. it present, with a surplus of food resulting in reduced prices for farm products, but with prices for things that farmers buy staying high, agriculture is in a vulnerable 57 position particularly the poultry segment which must export the bulk of its product. The homemaking program has 26 groups with approximately 900 women. They are located in lb of the 15 towns in the county. More and more of the homemaking groups have been meeting in the evenings due to small children and women working. Many homemakers have already felt the cut back on industry. As a result they are anxious to do "make it your- self" projects to help the family income. At present, the h-HIClub program reaches boys and girls in lb of the 15 towns. Project work is strongest in dairy, poultry, clothing and foods. The over-all objective for Extension work in Windham County is better living for the family. This will mean the program should be geared as closely as possible to the desires and needs of the particu- lar families with which extension works. Specific objectives and their solution towards the broad over-all objective were: 1. Deve10ping peOple through group participation a) Committee chairmen aided to strengthen county program through better planning meetings. b) Leader training meetings on discussion methods. 0) Provide more effective junior leadership program. 2. Development of a sound farm and home planning program. a) Farm and home planning with family groups. b) Dairymen develOp a year-round forage program to meet their pasture and barn feeding needs. 0) Establishing young farmer clubs. 58 3. Marketing of eggs and poultry meat. a) Improving egg—holding, grading facilities, and marketing methods. b) Adeption of quality control measures and improved merchandizing of home dressed poultry products. c) Inform farmers of market reports available and how to use them. d) Marketing broilers at Optimum weight. e) Deve10ping marketing facilities for broilers. h. Making family living a worth-while experience. a) Encourage families to make their homes safe from fires. b) Encourage better understanding of teen-agers. c) Landscaping home grounds. d) Making housekeeping easier. e) Teaching care and construction of clothing. f) Help families plan for remodeling homes. g) Furniture renovation taught. These objectives are long-term. They are not the complete list as listed by the advisory council. They do, however, illustrate how one program planning committee develOpS objectives. At the time the commod- ity committees made their recommendations they also recommended to the advisory council certain solutions to the long-term objectives be con- sidered short term objectives and given emphasis during the ensuing year. Two of these short-term objectives selected for concentration and emphasis will be discussed as handled by the commodity committees involved. It might be said that from this point on the commodity committees deve10ped a plan of work which according to Matthews,1 is a statement of the activities to be undertaken by an individual, agency or group, within a definitely stated time, to carry out recommendations expressed in the program. 1 Matthews, J. L., National Inventory of Extension Methods of Program Determination, Extension Service Circular No. H77, Washington, D. 0., 1952, p. 2. S9 The two objectives to be deve10ped as needing emphasis are: l. Dairymen develOping a year-round forage program to meet their pasture and barn feeding requirements. 2. DevelOping additional marketing facilities for broilers. A sample county plan is shown in Table II. A County Operating Plan The need for emphasis being put upon the long-time objective of dairymen developing a yearJround forage program to meet their pasture and barn feeding requirements had first been suggested by the forage committee, an action unit of the county dairy committee. This recom- mendation had been made on the strength of the perennial shortage of forage, high level of concentrate feeding, and continued high prices of purchased items of production. 0n the strength of this recommendation the advisory council agreed_that the county agent emphasize this in the work plan. They also turned it back to the forage committee for imple- mentation. First the county forage committee determined that this objective could be reached by teaching how to: 1. estimate the forage production of present fields and pastures, 2. estimate the forage required by the present dairy herd during the pasture season and barn feeding period, 3. check the balance between the estimate of forage requirements and forage production, h. analyze adjustments which are possible to improve the forage program on the farm, ‘ TABLE II ZJII‘EDHHVIL' COUNTY PLi‘u‘i OF WORK Objective and Goal 1. Determining needs for year- round forage program to meet pasture and barn seeding requirements by teaching how to: a) Estimate present forage production b) Estimate forage require- ments for present con- ditions of herd size c) Check balance of re- quirements and pro~ duction d) Analyze adjustments possible to balance program e) Determine long range objectives for dairy enterprise This to be done with 100 dairymen 2. Improve marketing of eggs and poultry a) establish a Del-Mar-Va type broiler auction What to Do 1. F0 0 Lo f~..-o «- 0 VT 0\ Development of work book Conduct of workshOps a) Meetings arranged b) Dairymen invited mass dedia W b y 71?} 10m Specialists: farm manage- ment and agronomy Committee member assisted by: county agent soil conservation technician Lidti-Mxfles in- structor Specialists a) 5 management joggers b) hows articles c) radio d) twilight meetings (3) individual follow up a) discuss analysis b) observe results Discussion of situ— ation Trip to study Delehar—Va type auction Explain situation to county poultrymen: a) meeting b) neWSpaper 0) radio Establish committee to determine made of operation a) number of birds available b) number of birds needed Establish auction Evaluate results a) peOple involved (number and kind) b) successful auction 0) actions of poultry— men to support auction County agent When Dec.-Jan. Feb.~early liarclz Season changes Committee members ipr.-Oct. County agent Poultry committee, dressing Nov. plant operators, latchery men, feed dealers, poultry buyers, SpeCialists County agent, marketing Specialist, poultrymen Poultry committee county agent Poultrymen State poultry association (County agent and marketing specialist advisers) Poultrymen Poultry committee County agent Jan. bar. it each step. 61 5. determine long—term objectives for the dairy enterprise and to estimate how the forage program can help move toward these objectives. The committee felt that one hundred dairymen would be as many as could be worked with for any given period. To reach this number the committee decided to hold a series of eight workshOp type meetings with attendance limited to fifteen persons. Committee members were reSpons- ible for arranging meetings and inviting dairymen to attend. They were to be assisted at the meetings by the county agent, soil conservation technician, Smith-Hughes instructor, two farm management Specialist, dairy Specialist, agronomist, and county agent leader. all meetings were to be held on the same night with two meetings scheduled for each grOUp. These to be during February and early March. Material in the form of a workbook was to be prepared by the eitension specialists (farm management, and agronomy). Other jobs assigned to carry throughout the year included'mass media information to all dairymen in the county to be prepared by the county agent. These included a series of forage management releases, news articles, and radio broadcasts timed according to seasonal changes and twilight meetings in.May and June. The last responsibilities assigned were the follow up and the evaluation of the program. The county agent and committee members were to call on each dairyman who had participated in the workshop. Discuss- ing in detail what the workshop meant to the dairyman and observing whether or not the workshOp had caused any changes to take place in the dairyman's thoughts or action. 62 In the poultry phase of the prOgram one of the objectives had been to discuss and improve the marketing of eggs and poultry meat. As with the dairy segment of the over-all program this had a recommend- ation from the poultry committee that it was worthy of emphasis. It was turned back to them for implementation. The poultry committee determined that this objective could best be reached the first year by develOping one additional marketing facility for the use of broilermen. As outlined the plan called for: l. A meeting to discuss the situation between county poultry committee and interested parties such as dressing plant Operators, hatcherymen, feed dealers, poultry buyers, and extension Specialists. 2. Trip to study DeléMar-Va type auction by county agent,_ poultry marketing specialist, three poultrymen. 3. County poultry meeting called by county agent to present situation and discription of auction. h. Committee established to determine mode of operation. County agent and extension specialist to consult with committee; a) c00perate with state poultry association, b) establish number of birds for successful Operation, c) determine whether birds were available in the area, d) locate place and time for sale. 5. NeWSpaper and radio coverage by the county agent to keep people informed of situation. 6. Evaluation of results by: a) number of peOple involved, b) establishment of auction, c) actions of poultrymen to support the auction. 63 Accomplishments of the Program The results obtained are reported in relation to the action taken toward the objectives as listed in the plan of work. Evaluation sheets were applied only to that part of the program agreed upon as signifi- cant and worthy of major emphasis first by the extension agent and local peOple and finally by the agent and supervisor. Once the agent and supervisor have agreed this should only be changed as a base by mutual consent of all parties concerned. The programs to which the evaluation sheet have been applied were agreed worthy of evaluation. Information for the introductory sections of the evaluation sheet were obtained from the county program of work, plan of action, and agent conference. This included information on: 1. Problem and situation. 2. Objectives in terms of period for which program is planned. 3. Goals in terms of anticipated adoption of farm and home practices. h. Job description in terms of reSponsibility to the county extension program. The body of facts for the evaluation sheet have been obtained from reports, interviews, and observation. These may not at times be as objective as a formal study but if used with a realization of their limitations will strengthen the extension agent and the county extension program. Such a procedure turned up the following information for use in the evaluation. C\ I? The Forage Program is a basis for their recommendation that the forage program be emphasized the committee had considered background material on the dairy marketing situation, the effects of prices on the dairy situation, and the amount of purchased feed used. This was prepared and presented to them by the extension agent and Specialists. This study of the situation led to the recommendation and action discussed previously. The plan of action was immediately put into Operation with the deve10pment of a 2h page workbook by the farm management and agronomy specialists. Committee members arranged eight strategically located meetings and assumed the responsibility of inviting 15 neighbors to each meeting. These workshops were held on the same night so professional assistance for the committee member at each session was obtained from the county agent; soil conservation technician; Smith-Hug}es instructor; two farm management, agronomy, and dairy Specialists; and county agent leader. A total of 112 dairymen took part in the eight workshops and 16 sessions. In the plan the committee members had assigned to themselves the responsibility Of calling upon dairymen they had invited to the work- shOp. Thirty Of the 112 dairymen were called upon by committeemen. To complete the fourth objective of analyzing adjustments possible to balance forage needs and forage requirements a personal visit was necessary. The county agent assummed the responsibility of calling on he additional farmers. Seventy—one dairymen were visited by the county agent leaving 11 not contacted as individuals. 65 From the standpoint of the short-term Objective to be taught it was Observed at the workshOp that all 112 dairymen worked at estimating present forage needs, requirements for present herd size, and checking the balance of requirements and production. During the course of the visitations to dairymen it was asked how many had completed these three steps. Of the 101 visited 92 indicated they had completed this work and used it in considering adjustments possible to balance their forage program. Adjustments were Observed during visits. They ranged from changing rotations to complete renovation of fields. None of the dairy- men visited had made any attempt to determine the long range Objectives of the dairy enterprise and the place Of the forage program in these Objectives. One statement made to the county agent was of interest as to how the program affected peOple. a committee member asked the agent what he was doing with his time. When asked the reason for such an inquiry he stated, "my neighbors used to visit or call your office, now they come to me for information." This statement is one piece of evidence as to how the program helped to develop leadership. In regards to mass media the reports showed that the 5 management "jogger" cards were sent, 10 news articles were written, and h radio broadcasts made. Samples of these indicated that they were aimed at stimulating interest in knowing how to analyze the farm rather than towards Specific practices. Twilight meetings were held as planned to relate the workshop to an actual on-the-farm situation. 66 it the end of the program year the forage committee reviewed the program. They recommended as a result of the review that the program be continued with emphasis the next year on helping farmers learn how to set up their long term Objectives for the dairy enterprise, inte- grating the forage program with the over-all program of farm business. The Poultry Marketing Program The decision to estabaish a Del-Mar-Va type auction was based more upon enthusiasm for what had been read in trade journals than upon a detailed study as to whether or not there was a need for such an auction in the area. The advisory committee accepted the recommendation on the basis of knowing the poultry industry was expanding rapidly. It was given back to the poultry committee to develop and execute a plan of action. A meeting was called by the poultry committee of dressing plant Operators, hatcherymen, feed dealers,_pou1try buyers, and extension Specialists to discuss the Del-har-Va type auction. This group felt the need existed for additional facilities as they indicated the committee should go further. A trip was arranged to Selbyville, Delaware, to Observe an auction in action. This trip was made by the county agent, poultry marketing specialist, and three poultrymen. After the return of this group a county poultry meeting was called to explain the situation and Operation of such an auction. Seventy-five of the 676 poultrymen in the county attended the meeting. To acquaint more of the poultrymen with the project six news articles and four 67 radio broadcasts were made on the subject by the county agent explain- ing the actual functioning of the organization being proposed. After a time interval Of three weeks another county meeting was called. This one enlisted the aid of the state poultry association. The purpose of this meeting was to appoint a committee to determine whether or not to go ahead with the idea and the mode of Operation to follow for an auction type sale. From studying the experience of other auctions and with the counsel of the poultry marketing specialist the committee determined that 100,000 birds would be needed for a weekly auction. Next they surveyed the county to find out how many birds could be ex- pected per week for the auction. Although this was a committee affair some Of the members were not enthusiastic about the project so the county agent and one member of the committee did the farm-tO-farm canvassing of poultrymen. This canvass indicated there would only be 79,000 birds available per week. At the same time there were indications that opposition was developing to the program. However, the committee decided to proceed to establish the auction. Other organizations helped. in egg marketing OOOperative donated facilities, the Farm Bureau underwrote the initial mailings to Obtain pledges Of birds for the auction, the broiler market- ing committee Of the state poultry association helped to publicize the auction, an auctioneer donated time, and the local radio station broad- cast the proceedings Of the auction. When the committee sat down to evaluate the results of this program they.found that after limping along for five months the auction had 68 failed. Many different kinds of people had been involved in the program. Every phase of the poultry program was involved at the beginning. is plans progressed they were left out Of the planning. Meetings, radio, and newspaper were expected to inform peOple fully about the program. Subsequent action by the poultrymen indicated that these media were not being effective for this type of program. Poultry- men supporting the program were not the broilermen for whom the auction was established. It was the owners of laying flocks who were putting birds through the auction. Instead of the 100,000 birds needed for a weekly listing the number went as low as 30,000. When committee men and the county agent contacted poultrymen they said they didn't know enough about the program to determine whether to be "in or out." Being the type of program it was the committee, after appraising the situation, decided to drOp this phase of the marketing prOgram and to recommend that effort be placed on egg quality and understanding egg and broiler pricing procedures. The important thing is that the committee could, by the periodic review in the plan Of work, have picked up the trend and not been in the embarrassing position Of having a project fail. The evaluation sheet also calls for an Objective appraisal of exp tension agents general work habits. In the case of the administrative agent it provides for a measurement of administrative ability. 'At the time of the interviews to obtain facts on the program in the county some Observations were made on these areas. In the case of Agent "A“ 3 who worked with the forage program and was administrator of the county 69 program, it was observed that he was well liked by members of the county professional and secretarial staffs. He always let them know what was going on and was unbiased in actions. In working with other agencies the feeling prevailed that there was a part to be played by everyone--there was a team in the county to serve the people. Records were kept to indicate the point at which a project would be at any given time. Time was set aside daily for necessary correSpondence and other assignments of similar nature. As the administrator of the county program Agent "A' did not feel a need for regular staff conferences to familiarize agents with each others activities. Coffee breaks were a regular part of the office routine with this time being used for conference purpose. The work load in the county was well distributed there being one or more agents for each line of work. JFinancial records were complete as shown by an official audit. County finances were adequate and support for extension could have been shown by a 100% increase in the county apprOpriation. Other agents in the office felt the administrator was always fair to them, watching salary increases, giving credit for jobs well done, and having supplies with which to work. There was some feeling that the administrator may not have always been positive enough in actions. He was always available for counselling on the programs of the other agents. Regardless of the field it was in—-he had a sympathetic ear. a weakness indicated, however, during the interview was the agent did not assume responsibility for training and guiding the county extension staff. An example of this was in connection with the poultry marketing program. 70 From contacts made around the county and talking with the other agent it soon became obvious that there was a major weakness in the poultry program of not involving enough people in the decision making process. No attempt was made to discuss this with the agent reaponsible--or any other phase of the program except when asked for specific information. There was a tendency to do this with other programs also—~on the theory other agents could best learn by doing. Agent "5", the agent on the poultry marketing program, was found to keep to himself not letting other members of the staff know how the program was progressing. Reports to the advisory committee were not well handled with a reprimand being made at an advisory council meeting for the way they were presented. There was a conflict in his actions that while telling no one what was going on with his program at the same time he would go out of his way to help other agents and organiza- tions to have successful programs. Poultrymen, with whom he worked, liked his program very much as evidenced by their indignation after the reprimand over reports. Other peOple in the county did not know much about him. There was no system of records or reports being used. At the time of the program being discussed there had not been a report to the state office for twelve months. The facts as have been deve10ped will be applied to an evaluation sheet to demonstrate the application. In this case, as previously mentioned, these have been obtained by scanning reports, interviews, and from personal knowledge. For the purpose of supervision tlis is 71 probably as accurate as such facts can be without a formal survey with scientific sampling methods, developing a questionnaire, and pretest— ing. 'With the main idea for evaluation being the strengthening of the county extension program this will suffice as the evaluation sheets will demonstrate. CHAPTER V APPLICATION OF THE EVALUATION HdTHCD The model evaluation sheets developed have been applied to the county program discussed in the preceding chapter. The forage program is shown in Table III and the poultry marketing program in Table IV. Five agents are employed in the county. The evaluation sheet will be applied to the two agricultural agents. This is being done first because it is the phase of the county extension program with which the writer is most familiar and secondly if the evaluation system is to serve its primary purpose of strengthening a county extension agent's performance and building a county extention program the individual segments of the program must be examined and appraised before the over-all program can be evaluated. There has been a difference in application as the senior agricultural agent is administrator of the over-all county extension program. is such his reSponsibilities for program deve10pment are broader than the responsibilities of the other agents. after applying the model sheets the gathering of evidence will be discussed in more detail than in Chapter III with suggestions for the type of evidence necessary for the evaluation to serve its purpose of building a county extension program. K v.1. .SLC? CC ..rECCvTaQ kc CC T... TLQCCCC a I .'> I P-.\ .l?L \. Ffbc O a; 3...qu 4 -- Eli] > no.3 «ifl03h1g QEmhooueq m ~53 W®QH>CH 3G4... @0235“... 4334 an. ,‘ . —_~_ __.__ _ 73 Home? mason page? pwonopcw Sozm op pndposamp noncomp voom macaw paced handoh mpomhpcoo hapsmh umgpo can mQHo; some nuances ecogdmamu noomaumfimmow hanpnofiufin mpoms pmmodn menace Hepoe mo mm mmmmnocw mooa eyes mo mafia seem pom hpnpmpoom ucfigmmfi pomezp pm :oavom pmmdsp a“ mmcszo mHoop new mowaemsm m>eg mpcmmm I; 5 _Q0 QQQH>GH OCH: m COEMHGT 0.. K HHH mania muonsms «ween heave quHHmmqsoo can awcfiofinm awnficflmmp :« anaawnamcommon wesbmmd .m mvmaasoo cam mmwocoo mohoooh mowmmo .m mHHm>opm xmozemea .: how pmhdo pnmeaflfiwm .m “ween Hmwpepmpoom macaw empeooa Shea US$82 .N oxafimmocfimzn mmfimmpmnomm .H pcosmmacsa mofimmo .n mcw accepocsm Hfiocsoo mnemfl>o< .m Menace mo moopfionmp mad upopflmnoo opusmmom pomosm .H mafimcmexo pom enondbm .0 mac: oazdwhmocopm umaopm .4 hapfimm cofipfismooou mm>fio .m soaposopm one madden no hHuHem mpzommuam: .m mmfipfiaaomm ovMSmmow .H mumpsoa mumpm aozpo Mo mpMMHoz memoflmcoo .m I, P whmxnoz seemcmexe mo coapmpmmooo .m soapeawowpnnd Qflzmnmomoq .m 7b In addition to the items checked comment should be made on: 1. 2. Action to improve since last appraisal. Characteristics contributing to success: sense of reSponsibility for welfare of county. Characteristics hindering program progress: tendency to overlook little details--leave them to chance. Recommended action to strengthen extension program and to build the county agent; Farm organizations have something to offer an extension program-~3ee if they can help; Review program periodically--this helps involve people and keeps their interest high. It will also keep the program from going astray; Discuss office techniques with secretaries; Do not wait for questions from other agents--to build the entire program-take some initiative in guiding and training newer agents. T 10L}: IV “VALUaTlCh‘I or sown y EXTENQICN ...tomn leF enemas I‘" 5—. J , [vi ‘ “ ” ' :rril IL 19 W ” . ' u , uated ov: U at3. «p-- - , Name: igent "5" County. val . . .1 -.- a ‘ ~13 fiv ,'fie‘s;or program and ijrove agent The purpose of this evaluation is to furnish a guine to strengthen the COHHLJ 3xL n l I I ”I T 1 I performance ii) e‘rdi I lit] on re 0M4!'rn If] ' ' ba 3 I] tr”. a. «z . o» F (' Ta~ ...c— I n P“ '1’. 1 Ta .F ...n. - cq :I ~ -. ..fv I 1.--1p: t . «7‘1 A - ,— (.1 , .F 3 E: D ' -J ‘I i m “I - ' - ‘ -. K»! .- . .l . l ' f“ 1.1;; ‘V a) O ‘*.,).[l.' l, a 11 'er .I‘4 ‘4‘ \d . .u “‘ .- . n — ‘ C e ‘ U J d (l . I - It " ,- ;' O I: .2. . - 1 - a . . _, I al to county extension personnel. The pregram to be evaluated is: PROD-Mid ml} SITUILTION: Lack of adequate marketing facilitie sfor b:roilers. OBJm “TIVES (in terms of period for «hich pro*‘am is planner) DeveIOping better marketing facilities for broilers. ~O.L (in terms of QULlClOdtPI aioption oi prxcoice m) istablishment of Delaflar-Va type auction, JOB U5 HIPTIOH (in terms of reaponsibilitit as to tre counta extension program): agent Will counsel with the coxm mittee and execute joos assigned cooperate with ot er staif memonrs. maintain adequate records on the project, evaluate the program. and work With ot.er a on 313s. Unsatis- Very Out- I . Item to be Evaluated factory Fair Good Good standing support ior lValU1thfi l 2 3 L 5 e. 7 d 9 IO ‘— 1. Problem Lnalysis Preparation of background material . , . - , 3 3.- 1 Local people y were not involved in pr3aarit1cn 2. Countfgnxiansion wor or v only description of auction prepared . 1.: U: 5-: N..- .L p X}. ..A x}. . .11..“ . . 1' ..~ .J_.: . .r‘. T‘ .‘: 3. Waterlsion specialist X I): lC-Ct‘ IDIOPIIM tion 1.5.1. J ,n B. Use material to study over- . . , Ur _JV, . - r": 6"“‘37 ‘ 3- 43: ,;l<, 1’ ES 1"- all situation to determine 1n333u1d r I SFD t; M ’_-‘ " 4" . 31° C l' ‘ if}? interest ne3ds, problems, Opinions to 1 J clmi o and objectives x C.l Involvement of paop ole l. Committees represent . A” - 3 areas of county x or01lcr arois represented b income levels x one low income fIrmer 0. interest CFOUPS x lDGUSLPI W011. r3 risenueu J d ethnic groups x lii 3st 3thic group in poultry . V . DIN a’. - I Droouccrs not rsyrrsent3z . v ‘vn Wi. n; res +tu 1 a' 2. Leadership development x oz min carri.- ”I? IOJI 3.Leadrr511p participation x m3:; ocr