il"."3. t-z-viv‘rii‘.‘ w - um: m mmmfm o: mmmu mm; a: wwmm AGKIWLTUR‘E m 7% AREAS .01: FARM Mtémxmés. V 1 1* WM 6%. My i #853" w a PM cam»! :sme.»umyagsmf : Jam” Raina ngimTiihén ,a'1955 _ '. THESIS This is to certify that the thesis entitled The Preparation of Michigan Teachers of Vbcationa1.Agriculture in two ‘Areao of Farm Mechanics presented by James Roland Hamilton has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Doctor's degree tum WWW Major pray/Kr Date M5— THE PREPARATION OF MICHIGAN TEACHERS OF VOCATIONAL AGRICULTURE IN Two AREAS OF FARM MECHANICS BY James Roland Hamilton AN ABSTRACT Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan State University of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF EDUCATION Department of Vocational Education 1955 APPPoved by THESIS - 3; - its" James Ireland namiiton Purpose. To establish a basis for instructional planning in two areas of farm.mechanics for the preparation of Michigan teachers of vocational agriculture by: making an assessment of the relative hmportance of farmpshop and farmpstructures abilities needed in teaching vocational agriculture in Michi- gan; and by evaluating the adequacy of the instruction received by teachers in these abilities. Method. Agricultural engineers collaborated in preparing two lists consisting of: 110 farm-shop abilities, and seventy farm-structures abilities. The importance of these items in teaching vocational agriculture was rated by: fourteen agri- cultural engineers at Michigan State University, sixteen per- sons in teacher education in Michigan, eighty Michigan teachers of vocational agriculture, and forty-two farmer members of advisory councils. The adequacy of training was checked by eighty teachers of vocational agriculture. Score values were assigned for three different degrees of importance and training. Findings and interpretations. (1) There was general agreement among the four groups in regard to the importance of 180 farmpmechanics abilities. (2) The importance of farm, mechanics abilities in teaching vocational agriculture was rated highest in the units of: general principles, use and care of tools, arc welding, and concrete-masonry; the impor- tance was scored lowest in forge work, sheet-metal, cold-metal, 365§03 u afilé‘s lifilauu‘llmul l CUE painting, and related-woodwork abilities. (3) The training was rated as most adequate in sheet-metal, cold-metal, rope- work, tool-care, and concrete-masonry abilities; the training was checked as least adequate in the units of pipe fitting, oxy-acetylene welding, forge work, repairing farm structures, and related woodwork. (h) Correlation tables revealed that the harmony between the importance and training indices could 3be improved by increasing the instructional emphasis in the units of: general principles, use and care of tools, pipe fitting, and repairing farm structures; the data indicated that decreases in the instructional emphasis were needed in rcpe, sheet-metal, and concrete-masonry abilities. The managerial abilities were rated higher in importance and lower in adequacy of training than were the manipulative type. A3 a means of further development of abilities in college training teachers suggested: increasing field trips and project construction, adding activities in planning Shops, and increasing activities in tool processes; teachers reported that farm background and teaching practice were Valuable as supplementary experiences in improving farms mechanics abilities. Cur: _ ll,l|l|l I‘ll I: Isll‘ll‘l‘lllll 1“ THE PREPARATION OF MICHIGAN TEACHERS OF VOCATIONAL AGRICULTURE IN Two AREAS OF FARM MECHANICS BY James Roland Hamilton A THESIS Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan State University of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF EDUCATION Department of Vocational Education 1955 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author is deeply grateful for the invaluable services rendered and the good counsel provided by all the resource persons and friends who assisted with the investigation and the writing of this report: Doctor Harold M. Byram, Chair- man of the Guidance Committee, patiently advised the writer and lent moral support throughout the course of the study. Other members of the guidance committee assisted the author in innumerable ways: Doctor H. P. Sweany was especially helpful in the preparation of the report; Doctors W. M. Carleton, W. F. Johnson, and C. R. Megee assisted the author with many problems during the investigation. Doctor D. J. Sorrells ably filled a vacancy on the guidance committee. Members of the staffs in agricultural engineering and agricultural education at Michigan State University, together with Mr. Harry Nesman and other state consultants in agri- cultural education, aided materially in making the investiga- tion successful. Mr. Carl Albrecht's assistance throughout the investigation was invaluable. Michigan teachers and farmers c00perated in furnisning the data that were used in the study. The author's wife, Frances, made a Special contribu- tion to this report through her constant encouragement, and by her untiring efforts in connection with the clerical work. The author's son James, and daughter Kay, performed valuable Clerical services at various stages in the investigation. TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER Page I. INTRODUCTION Definition of the Problem. 1 Basic Assumptions ‘ h Scope and Limitations of the Study 6 Definition of Terms 8 Bagiground of the Problem. 12 II . REVIEW OF LITERATURE Literature in Farm Mechanics Relating Directly to the Preparation of Teachers 20 Literature Relating to the Methods and Techniques of the Investigation 29 Summary of Literature Reviewed 37 III. THE INVESTIGATION The General Plan of the Investigation kl Selection of Respondents _ Sh hmportant Events in the Progress of the Investigation 75 Summary 80 IV. PRESENTATION OF DATA RELATIVE TO THE FARM-SHOP AREA Similarities and/or Differences of Respondents by GroupsSh Subarea, or Unit, Analysis 98 Item Analysis 101 Teachers' Suggestions for Ability Development 139 Supplementary Experiences of Teachers lh3 ii llillill.lil.l[!.lllllulll{!ll Ill-I In. TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont.) Page V. PRESENTATION OF THE DATA RELATIVE TO THE FARM-STRUCTURES AREA Similarities and/or Differences of Respondents by Groups 1&9 Subarea, or Unit, Analysis 167 Item.Analysis 170 Teachers' Suggestions for Ability Development 205 Supplementary Experiences of Teachers 210 v1. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS FOR TEACHER PREPARATION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE STUDY Summary - 21h Conclusions ‘ 22h Implications for Teacher Preparation 228 Recommendations for Future Study 230 LITERATURE CITED 232 APPENDICES 2 36 iii TABLE I. II. III. IV, V. VII. VIII 0 IX. 3X. XJE, XII, LIST OF TABLES ' PAGE Groups of Respondents and Numbers of Individuals I Included in the Investigation N3 Agricultural Engineers Reporting in Farm Shop and Farm Structures, Number and Percent Included, by Sub-groups 59 State Leaders in Teacher Education Reporting in Farm Shop and Farm.Structures, Number and Percent In- cluded, by Sub—groups 62 Teachers of Vocational Agriculture Reporting in Farm Shop and Farm Structures, Number and Percent \ 65 Farmer Members of Advisory Councils Reporting in Farm Structures and Farm Shop, Number and Percent by Schools 73 Extent of Agreement Between Groups of Respondents >as Revealed by the Grand Total Scores of Importance and Training Covering llO FarmpShop.Abilities 86 Extent of Group Agreement Indicated by Intercorrela- tion Coefficients of Scores of Importance and Training Based on Subarea Ranks, by Groups of Respondents ‘ 89 Percentage Scores of Importance and.Training of 9 Subareas of FarmpShop Abilities by Groups of Respondents 90 Ranks of Importance and Training Based on Subarea Percentage Scores as Checked by 6 Groups of Respondents in Farm Shop 91 Inter-Group CorrelatiOns Coefficients by Subareas, Based on the Individual Ranks of Ability Scores of Importance.in Farm.Shop 9h Characteristics of the Distributions of Training and Importance Scores of 110 Abilities in Farm.Shop 102 Extent of the Agreement Between the Training and Importance of 110 Farm-Shop Abilities Taken One Subarea at a Time 10h iv I‘All. 11 _‘ .‘..ll[[.i[.ill.ll‘{{{‘l{ I. J XIII . XIV. XVI. XVII . XVIII . XIXL XXIII; XXIV LIST OF TABLES (Cont.) Characteristics of Scatter Diagram Changes Indicated in the Training Emphasis in the Three Highest Levels of Farm~Shop Abilities Fringe-Area Changes Suggested in the Training Emphasis of the Three Highest Levels of FarmFShop Ability Scores Itemized Statement Relative to the Importance, Training, and Extent of Agreement of 110 Farm. Shop Abilities Comparison of the Training and Importance Status of Abilities Located in the Five Score Intervals Number of Abilities in Each Subarea, Classified as to Types and Score Levels Teachers' Suggestions for Improving the Development of Abilities in the College Training Program in Farm.8hop Supplementary Experiences Reported by Teachers as Having Improved Their Ability to Teach Farm-Shop Activities , Extent of Agreement Between Groups of Respondents as Revealed by the Grand Total Scares of Importance and_Training Covering 70 FarmpStructures Abilities Percentage Scores of Importance and Training of 7 Subareas of Farm-Structures Abilities, by Groups of Respondents Banks of Importance and Training Based on Percentages Page 108 113 120 12} 13h 137 INC ‘1145 152 155 of 7 Subareas of Abilities, by Groups of Respondents, in Farm Structures Extent of Group Agreement Indicated by Inter- correlation Coefficients of Scores of Importance and Training Based on Subarea Ranks, by Groups of Respondents Inter-Group Correlation Coefficients by Subareas, Based on the Ranks of Ability Scores of Importance in Farm Structures 156 157 163 \ . . . o . . ‘.l I If]! ll '1]!!- Ir” XXVI. XXVII. XXVIII . XXIX, XXX. XIXI. XXIII. XXXIII. XXXIV. LIST OF TABLES (Cont.) Characteristics of the Distributions of Training and Importance Scores of 70 Abilities in Farm Structures Correlation Coefficients of the Ranks of Items in the Training Paired with Items in the Composite, Taken by Subareas Changes Indicated in the Training Emphasis in the Three Highest Levels in the Farm-Structures Distributions Fringe-Area Changes Suggested in the Training‘ Emphasis in the Three Highest Levels in the Farm- Structures Distributions Itemized Statement of 70 FarmpStructures Abilities Relative to the Importance, Training and Extent of Agreement Comparison of Training and Importance Status of Abilities in the Five Levels of the Distributions in Farm.Structures Number of Abilities in Each Subarea, by Types and Score Levels' Teachers' Suggestions for Improving the Development of Abilities in the College Training Program in Farm.Structures 'Sumplementary Experiences Reported by 39 Teachers as Having Improved Their Ability to Teach Farm- Structures Activities vi 173 185 191 195 200 203 206 212 LIST OF FIGURES FIIGURE 3“. Section chart of plans for tabulating scores of 110 farm-Shop abilities by five groupings: First stage record. EL. Section chart of plans for tabulating scores of 70 farm-structures abilities by groupings: Second stage record. L3.. Geographic distribution of MI schools representing farm-shop reports, 28 counties included. 1&0 Geographic distribution of 39 schools representing farm-structures reports, 27 counties included. PAGE #7 SO 67 68 53. Geographic distribution of 9 advisory councils repre- sented by h2 farmers reporting in both areas of the StUdy e 6-» Scatter diagram.of llO farm-shop abilities. '7. Scatter diagram of 70 farmpstructures abilities. vii 7k 107 177 ‘Il.[lll.lllll.llll [Ill.l[[l-lixl[[[[[ . CHAPTER I INTRODUC TI ON This study pertains to the problem of the preparation of Michigan teachers of vocational agriculture in two areas of farm mechanics. The major phases of the problem are pre- sented in the following order: (1) definition of the problem, (2) basic assumptions made, (3) scope and limita- tions of the study, ()4) definition of terms used, and (5) background of the problem. Definition of the Problem Since the early years in the history of vocational education in agriculture farm mechanics has been recognized as an essential phase of the instruction. The continuing 1Titer-ease in the mechanization of agriculture and the trend toward the use of more power tools and equipment in farming Operations have increased the needs of farm people for in- 8151'f'11ction in all phases of farm mechanics. Teachers of V°cationa1 agriculture should receive adequate preparation fob conducting such instructional programs as would meet those needs. There is apparently a natural lag of time between current far'ming practice and college curriculum offerings in farm m“filanics as well as other fields of agriculture. If the ins”Situtions thatare responsible for the preparation of teachers of vocational agriculture are to improve their in- structional programs they should have factual information as a basis for determining what the curriculum offerings should be. .— --}’ This study was conducted in an attempt to answer two major questions relative to the preparation of teachers in farm mechanics as follows: (1) "What abilities are needed by Michigan teachers of vocational agriculture in teaching tne‘farm-shop and farm-structures phases of their local pro- grams?” 6(2) "How adequate has the college instruction been in developing the abilities that Michigan teachers need in (- their local programs?" In an effort to answer these questions the following plans of investigation were set forth to be used as a guide: 1. To obtain samples of the several groups of personnel in Michigan representing valid opinion in regard to farm mechanics as a phase of vocational agriculture. 2. To establish the relative importance of the various farm-shop and farm-structures abilities needed by MIChigan teachers of vocational agriculture. 3. To determine the adequacy of the preparation re- ceived by Michigan teachers in the various farm-shop and farm- 81”"ufiiures abilities needed in teaching local programs. h. To provide an accounting or digest of the nature and eXtent of the changes needed in the structional emphasis, in °rder to bring the importance and training statuses of each ability into closer harmony. lllll‘l.l.ll.‘ll[.lllll.l 5. To provide a detailed guide for instructional planning for teacher preparation in farm mechanics by pre- senting an itemized statement of the 160 abilities, showing the (a) importance status, (b) adequacy-of—training status, and (c) extent-of-agreement status of each item. 6. To establish a basis for suggesting ways and means of further development of important abilities in the farm-mechanics course work taken by Michigan teachers of vocational agriculture . 7. To assess the nature and extent of supplementary eatperiences that improve the farm-structures and farm-Shop abilities of Michigan teachers of vocational agriculture. Three factors affect the need for this study in Michigan. 1. The importance of various farm-mechanics abilities does not remain fixed. The importance of farm-mechanics abilities as they relate to teaching vocational agriculture in Michigan changes with the needs for instruction in local Programs. Variations in farming practice, changes in local faJi‘rn--rr1echanics facilities, and other developments, affect the 1r"Pertance of the abilities needed by the teacher. It seems necessary, therefore, that periodic studies be conducted to determine the effect of such developments upon the im- portance of various abilities as a basis for curriculum planning. 2. The farm-mechanics curriculum for the preparation or teachers in Michigan is relatively new. The present farm- mechanics curriculum for vocational agriculture teachers in Michigan has now been in effect several years. It appears desirable that an attempt be made at this time to evaluate the adequacy of the teacher preparation in terms of the importance of farm-mechanics abilities needed by teachers in the state . 3. There is continuing demand for teachers who are qualified to teach the farm-mechanics phases of vocational agriculture in Michigan. The number of local departments that offer farm-mechanics as a part of the regular program is increasing; this factor is likely to stimulate this de- mand still farther in the years ahead. These three factors briefly summarize the needs for this study in Michigan: the overall needs for the study are further elaborated upon in the review of literature. Basic Assumptions This study recognizes and accepts the following assumptions: 1. Abilities represent one of the major products of the learning process . 2. The teachers' needs for abilities should repre- sent one of the major objectives of the teacher-preparation “urges in farm mechanics. 3. The development of abilities in the trainees taking the courses represent a realistic product of the Bu“hm—lacy of the teaching. 1... There is no ultimate. authority. on what. should be included in the teacher-preparation curricula in'farm mechanics in Michigan, but the most unbiased estimate would be represented by adequate samples of personnel asSociated with the various aspects and levels of vocational education‘_ in agriculture in the state. S. The final selection of the centent of farm- mechanics courses for the preparation of vocational agriculture teachers should be based upon the needs of Michigan teachers; these needs should be assessed in terms of the relative im- . portance of the needs of farm people. A satisfactory way of stating teachers' needs would be in terms of abilities, required in teaching the farm-mechanics phases of vocational agricul- ture at the local level. I 6. A reasonably workable index of the past adequacy 01‘ the training can be established for use in determining the approximate extent of the change needed to produce closer aSlt‘eement between the training emphasis and the importance 1ride): of each ability studied. 7. It would be desirable to have the instructional °mphasis directed so as to produce the highest possible agl‘eement between the importance and training indices of each ability in the farm mechanics courses. 8. Experienced teachers of vocational agriculture wh° have taken the farm-mechanics courses as preparation fol“ teaching, have sound opinion relative to su8833t1n8 ways and means of improving the deve10pment of abilities in college course work. Scope and Limitations of the Study Scope This is a study in farm mechanics which includes the area of (l) farm shop, and (2) farm structures, and the major efforts have to do with determining what the course content should be, and with determining what the future training em- Phasis should be. Four Sarnples of respondents are included in the com- Posite sample in each of the two areas. The composite Samples were limited to the following groups of personnel: (a) regular members of the staff of the agricultural engineering department of Michigan State University; ' (b) regular members of the staff, and graduate assis- tants of the department of agricultural education of Michigan State University: (0) supervising teachers of the agricultural education service in Michigan; (d) state consultants of agricultural education in Michigan; (e) regular teachers of vocational agriculture, cer- tified to teach farm mechanics in Michigan and experienced in tieaching farm mechanics: (f) farmer-members of advisory councils serving local departments of vocational agriculture in Michigan where farm mechanics is taught as part of the program of vocational agri- culture: (3) this study involves only the technical agricul- ture aspects of teacher preparation. Limitations of the Study 1. The data used in this study are subject to the usual error that is inherent in scores based on opinions. It has ‘been noted in other parts of the study that percentages .found throughout the study represent a relative measure only. 2. Scores representing adequacy of training include, sand reflect, teachers' reactions to whatever each considered "adequacy” to be. Personal biases and/or errors of judgment muay be reflected in the training scores. 3. Recommended changes in the instructional emphasis 01? particular abilities are subject to error because of Changes that may have taken place in the farm-mechanics curriculumsince the respondents received the training in t11C>se abilities. h. Ability was defined on the check lists, however, 1males is no way of knowing whether all respondents accepted the} definition as stated when checking the point scale. 5. A few respondents checked a majority of the abildlties at the highest possible point, while a few others checked a majority of the items at the lowest possible point. 6. The scale on the checking instrument includes only three possible checks for each item, i.e., 0-5-10 points. Scores probably would have been more accurate if the scale had been constructed on a continuum. 7. Although the study includes a favorable percentage of the total advisory council members that were available in the State, the total number included is not large enough to be representative of the farmer population in the entire state. 8. Teachers' suggestions relative to ways and means of .improving the development of abilities in college courses, znay often refer to courses and methods that may have undergone alterations since the teachers were in school. Because of the unstructured nature of the section of the study on teachers' suggestions it was necessary to condense the state- ments into common items. Definition of Terms Farm.mechanigg. The term farm mechanics is used in this investigation to include all of the nonteehnical Phases of agricultural. engineering as embodied in the five arcsia: (1) farm shop, (2) farm.structures, (3) rural elec- trilfiication, (h) farm.power and machinery, and (5) soil and Water management. Processing agricultural products is ac- cepted in some sections of the country as the sixth area. Farm structur:_e___s_. Farm structures has been used in this study to designate a subject area in farm mechanics which includes such units as (l) farm building construction, (2) concrete and masonry, (3) painting and glazing, etc. The area title is used interchangeably with "farm buildings and For special reasons the seventy individual conveniences " . items in this area were expressed as ”abilities". Teachers of vocational agriculture frequently refer to "jobs" within this area, viz., "constructing a breeder house". Farm shop is used to designate a subject Farm shop. area in farm mechanics which includes such units as (1) tool fitting, (2) arc welding, (3) pipe fitting, etc. This study included nine such units and the 110 individual items were expressed as abilities. Teachers of vocational agriculture often use the expression shop "job" in reference to an activity such as "sharpening . jack plane". §ubarea or unit. These terms were used interchangeably to designate a block of related-subject abilities, or activities, Within an area; a subdivision of an area into the naturally related phases. Example: Arc Welding is one "unit” or "subarea" of the area of farm shop. Importance. Importance denotes a quality of being 688ential, weighty, or representing something of great moment. The term was used in this study as a relative measure of the val-he or worth of various farm-mechanics abilities to teachers °f Vocational agriculture in teaching the farm-mechanics phases I'll-III} 10 of local programs. The varying degrees of importance used in the checking scale were (1) essential, (2) moderate, (3) none. This scale applied to the units as well as to the individual abilities, and formed the basis of the statis- tical analysis. _Ag_e_gt_1acy of training. Adequacy implies sufficiency for a purpose. The teachers who checked the forms in this study exercised the prerogative of making the decision as to whether the training received in a particular ability was sufficient, or adequate. Thus, the worth of a particular ability in teaching vocational agriculture classes would enter into the teachers' evaluation of the training; i.e., (l) a small amount of instructional emphasis might be adequate for devel- oping a minor ability in the trainee, whereas, (2) a large anount of instructional emphasis might be inadequate for developing a major ability in the student. The varying degrees 01‘ adequacy of training used in the study were: (1) adequate, (2') moderate, and (3) none. The statistical analysis of the adequacy of training was based onthis system of checking. Ability. The quality in an agent which makes an action Poasible; suitable or sufficient power, faculty, or capacity (to do or of doing something).1 This study employed the conno- tation of: “knowledge, understanding, and reasonable skill". \ _ P 1 James A. H. Murray, A New English Dictionary on Historical prigci les, Volume 1, Oxford: At the Clarendon Press, I , a O. 11 Psychologists apply two connotations in using the word, namely, (1) ability may refer to aptitude or proficiency, or (2) ability may denote both aptitude and proficiency. It seems, however, that ability is used, in the main, to denote aptitude plus learning. The word ability has been used quite widely in des- cribing objectives of vocational education}8 and it will be noted that the objectives listed by the subcommittee report2 of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers and Agricultural Education Specialists, were stated in terms 3 of abilities. Lancelot devotes much discussion to the word ability. He refers to the abilities as "human factors.... representing knowledge in action". The U. S. Office of Education publication, entitled "Organization and Administration",u spells out one of the main functions of teaCher education as being the development 0f abilities needed by teadhers of vocational agriculture. in Educational Objectivg§_in Vocational Agricultugg, (Vocational Division Monograph, No. 21, Washington, U. S. Office Of Education, l9h0). 2 " ricultural Engineering Phases of Teacher Training Jfor Vocat onal Agriculture", (A Re ort of the Subcommittee on ricultural Teacher Training CommIttee on Curriculums, College I) vision, American Society 0 Agricultural Engineers in Colla- boration with an Advisory Group of Agricultural Education Specialists, Submitted on June 22, 1 bk). 3 W. H. Lancelot, Permanent Learning, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, Third Printing 19m; pp. 21, 22, 23. h Agricultural Education, Organization and Administra- IEEQE; (Part I, Vocational Bulletin, 13. Washington; U. S. Office of Education, Revised 1939); pp. 20-21. 12 Background of the Problem The passage of the Morrill Land-Grant Act in 1862 creating a system of State Agricultural Colleges marks the beginning of a nation-wide system of agricultural education supported by federal funds. The growth and development of that movement was strengthened by the passage of the Smith- Iever Act in l9lh, creating the extension service, and was climaxsd by the passage of the Smith-Hughes Act in February 1917 creating a federally supported system of vocational edu- cation as a cooperative enterprise between the states, local communities, and federal government. The purpose of the Smith-Hughes Act was passed to foster the further growth and development of vocational education in several areas re- quiring skillful and technical training. The U. 8. Office PUblication which sets forth administrative policies states that the purpose of the Smdth-Hughes Act was: "to provide for sceperation with the states in the promotion of such education in agriculture and the trades and industries; to provide for cooperation with the states in the preparation of teachers of vocational subjects; and to appropriate money and regulate its expenditure." 5 The passage of the Smith-Hughes and Smith-Lever Acts aI-‘lparently came about as a result of public demand for edu- cation of a skilled and technical nature, not hitherto aWailable in the public schools. Both of these laws were Passed after long debate in congress, and after it became \. 5 Ibid., p. 1. 13 apparent that the creation of the land grant system had not met the public needs for agricultural, trade, and industrial education. Although the land-grant colleges were meeting with success, the knowledge and skill avail- able in those institutions had not been brought to the farmer level. The extension service and the vocational edu- cation organizations were established primarily, then, as the "channeling agencies" between the land-grant institutions and the people who need that type of education in various life occupations. Agricultural education was one of the first branches of vocational education to make large strides in terms of growth and recognition on a national scale, and the early Years of the movement were marked by the difficulty of se- curing teachers of vocational education in agriculture. During a greater part of the history of vocational education the shortage of teachers has been a common problem, and the JOb of preparing an adequate teacher supply has represented One of the major aspects of vocational education. The Smith- Hughes Act recognized that the success of vocational education '"Ould depend, ultimately, upon having an adequate supply of good teachers available and money was appropriated for that purpose. Other acts passed since 1917, George-Dean, 1936, George- Barden, 19M), have strengthened and expanded the national 8yatem of vocational education, and in each instance provision It has been made for teacher education. That the problem of providing an adequate supply of vocational teachers is con- sidered to be of national concern is illustrated in a publi- cation issued by the U. 8. Office of Education which states: "The most important factor in the program of vocational education in agriculture is the local teacher of voca- tional agriculture. His trainigg. therefore, is vital to the success of the program”. That a similar concept is held by leaders at state levels is illustrated by the remarks of T. E. Browne,7 (l9h2), Director of Teacher Education at North Carolina State College, in the Foreword of a bulletin that relates to teacher preparation in farm mechanics as follows: "This bulletin is designed for the use of teachers of vocational agriculture... Teachers of vocational agriculture in North Carolina are urged to place greater emphasis upon the teaching of farm.shop work. North Carolina State College is stressing the teaching of farm.shop to a greater degree than ever before in its teacher education program. Ample provisions have been made for an up-to-date farm shop...in tge new quarters of the Teacher Education Division." These excerpts apparently typify a general feeling in the country in regard to the importance of proper training for teachers of vocational agriculture in farm mechanics. inhe author placed particular stress on the farmpshop phase <1f teacher education. Early in the history of vocational 6 Ibid., p. 20. 7 J. K. Coggin and G. N. Giles Farm Sho Activities ui ment, ulletin S. University of NorEH Carolina, fund %9 E ‘. e g , e 0 19,42; p0 6. 8 Ibid. education in agriculture there grew up a movement to provide additional preparation for teachers of farm.shop, and as early as 1922 it was evident that state leaders in vocational education were interested in investigating ways and means of improving the farm mechanics training for teachers of voca- tional agriculture. That this concept was held is illustrated in the following quotation selected from a California bulletin. It states, "The California plan for vocational agricultural instruction in secondary schools organized under the federal and state vocational education acts, places special emphasis on the subject of farm.mechanics. ...Not less than one—half of the total tbme set aside for applied work must be devoted to farm projects and not less than one-fourth to farm mechanics." The material covered by this bulletin represents an attempt to establish a basis for planning the course of study in farm.mechanics in California schools. The under- taking was a joint project between the University at Berkeley, and the State Vocational Office. Professor L. M. Roehl of Cornell University collaborated in the state-wide study that was conducted. The term "farm.mechanics“ is used in the bulletin to designate all phases of agricultural engineering, and this early application of the expression later gained Ilational acceptance. Some of the techniques used and the IPrinciples set forth in the California study are still valid in the field of farm mechanics. 9 Farm Mechanics for California Schools, University of (3alifornia Division of Vocational Education, Berkeley, Cal., jBulletin ll. Nov. 1922, p. 3. 16 The increase in mechanized farming, and the introduction of inventions and new principles into agriculture, have inten- sified the demands for better trained teachers in farm mechanics. At the same time, these developments have increased the problems of the agricultural engineering departments in their teachervpreparation work. The effects of the second world war further stimulated the need for teachers who were qualified to teach the farm- nechanics phases of vocational agriculture; the operation of the national defense and food production war training programs through the local departments of vocational agriculture further emphasized the farmrmechanics program. During that period the local farm-shop facilities were improved in many localities, and the public generally became aware of the value and need for adequate farm.mechanics programs in the local schools. At the end of the war a large number of manufacturing concerns that had been engaged in the production of war goods turned their main efforts to the manufacture of farm equipment. The rapid eXpansion of mechanized farming since the close of the war has been the greatest in the history of the country, and this development has served to intensify the problems in preparation of teachers in the various phases of farm mechanics. As a climax to the growing problem of teacher training in this field the American Society of Agricultural Engineers, in collaboration with a group of Agricultural Education Specialists}O issued a publication outlining h 10 American Society of Agricultural Engineers, 22. cit. 17 a proposed curricula in five areas of farm.mechanics; each area was presented in the form of objectives and suggested abilities to be developed by teachers and prospective teachers of vocational agriculture. As a result of that report, and other developments, a good many departments of agricultural engineering began to reorganize the farmrmechanics courses for the preparation of teachers of vocational agriculture and began to incor- porate into the courses more of the type of instructional program advocated in the subcommittee report. A standing committee, relative to the teacher training question, had been organized into a permanent committee, and in 1953 a second report11 was issued as a revision of certain phases of the first report. At this time (1953) a sixth area "processing farmpproducts" was suggested although it was not officially adopted as part of the report. At the present time teacher-preparation programs in farm.mechanics appear to be more similar in various sections of the country; an increasing number of agricultural engineering departments now follow the plan as advocated by the reports of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers and Agri- cultural Education Consultants. Several of the larger insti- tutions, including Michigan State University, have established divisions of farm.mechanics, and the teachers of vocational 11 Agricultural Engineering Phases of Teacher Tgaining for locational Agriculturg, Report II. Pro-Service and In-Service Training Programs,TThe American Society of Agricultural Engineers, St. Joseph, Mich., 1953( 18 agriculture receive their farm-mechanics preparation in these divisions. Where the latter type of organization prevails a separate curriculum is provided for the prospective teachers of vocational agriculture, and this study is concerned with the areas of farm mechanics in a division of the type described. The various terms that have been used in connection with the agricultural engineering phases of vocational agriculture have apparently been succeeded by the expression "farm mechanics". Some departments of vocational agriculture in local schools in Michigan do not teach farm mechanics as a part of the regu- lar program. This practice has been customary in schools that apparently lacked facilities for teaching the farm-mechanics phases of local programs. The number of departments in the state that teach farm mechanics as a part of the regular pro- gram is increasing, and there is a large demand for vocational agriculture teachers who are qualified to teach this phase of Work. The curriculum of the agricultural education majors at Michigan State University includes courses in all five areas of farm.mechanics. Graduates of this curriculum.are qualified by training to teach farm mechanics at the present time. The Present application of the problem has to do with the courses that are taken by these trainees. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITEriATUnE Within the past two decades the concept of farm.mechanics as a phase of vocational agriculture has undergone a great deal of change, with the result that the review of literature has been complicated by a problem.in.nomenclature. Some of the earlier studies refer to 'farm.shop" as including all of the agricultural-engineering phases of vocational agriculture, whereas ”farm mechanics" is presently accepted as being the term.that most adequately describes this phase of agriculture. The expression I'farm.mechanics" is used to denote all phases of agricultural engineering in these reviews, while ”farm shop" is used to designate one area of farm.mechanics. . The "Summaries of Studies in Agricultural Education", and various other publications, have reported a large number of investigations in farm mechanics since the passage of the Smith-Hughes Act. Only a limited number of these reports iheve pertained directly to the preparation of teachers. Quite a few of these studies, however, have been of such ‘nature as to have direct implications for teacher preparation in farm mechanics. It has been assumed, over the years, that the farmpmechanics problems and needs of farm people consti- tute a valid basis for instructional planning, both at the high school and college levels. In the absence of direct 20 research findings it has been necessary to accept the assumption as cited in this investigation and review of literature. The review of literature is presented in three phases: (1) studies and/or writings in farm.mechanics that have direct implications for teacher preparation; (2) studies and/or writings that relate to the method and techniques used in the present investigation, without regard to the subject area; (3) summary, or digest, of the reviews. Literature in Farm Mechanics Relating Directly to the Preparation of Teachers One of the earlier works that was directed toward establishing a basis for course planning in farm.mechanics was reported by Struck1 in 1920. The investigator's resource information was supplied by hOO Pennsylvania farmers who were fathers of voca- tional agriculture students. The units of concrete, wood work, and metal work were submitted to the respondents in the fomm of questionnaires. Struck's data show that a great majority of the repair work needed on Pennsylvania farms was being done by the farmers themselves; the author uses these findings to support his recommendation that the instructional programs in vocational agriculture should emphasize the type of work that farmers actually do, i.e., repair, rough construction, etc. Theodore F. Struck, Farm Sho Werk in Penns lvania, (Rural Life Department, Special Bulletin 0. l, ennsylvania State College, State College, Pennsylvania, 1920). hather Editomia2 (1 mmct‘ anal I therescurce {and on 273 study shat: a a! l tcmpars content. T \ctaal sit; “Etienne: 0.3131103) t! that: {Efi‘nn ' 32:24.1 1 . 21 Another early study in farm mechanics was conducted in California2 (1922) for the purpose of establishing a basis for instructional planning in farm mechanics in that state. Again, the resource information was based upon actual conditions found on 273 California farms. The units of activity in this study show more detail than.Struck's3 study exhibited, and a scoring system.was used to rate the importance of each item as a comparative basis for determining the nature of the course content. The only basis used in the California study was the actual situations found on fanms, whereas the present in- vestigation will use a cross-sectional approach (of valid Opinion) to obtain the basic data for the analysis. Another early study, of a similar nature, was reported by Armstrongh in.Minnesota, involving a total of 560 farmers. The findings, as reported by that study, are in close agree- ment with the earlier research reported by Struck,5 i.e., farmers indicated that they do most of the repair work that is done on farms. The three studies cited in the foregoing discussion, came at the rate of one a year in widely separated areas, and pro- duced such.uniform.findings, that they seemingly established 2 Farm.Mechanics for California Schools, (Agricultural Education Series,No. 2, Division Bulletin, No. 11. Berkeley: University of California, 1922. hS pp. 3 Struck, _p. c__i__t. red E. Armstron ,Farm.Repair and Construction Work $ucaig§nel Mggograph o.*u. Minneapolis: University of Minne- 5 Struck, pp. cit. 22 the validity of the use of community surveys as a means of determining what should be included in the farm.mechanics instruction; the records show that there is a notable in- crease in the use of this method in all phases of agricultural studies in the immediate years following. (Daviesé reported on a study of 200 farmers in Colorado in 1923, the results of which were used to establish a basis for instructional planning. Davidson7 reported on a study for the purpose of establishing a basis for course construction in farm mechanics in Kansas, based on the findings from.the interview of 320 farmers. The latter represents the first large study in farm mechanics using a different method; pre- vious studies had depended upon the use of questionnaires and/or check lists as the principal means of collecting the data. Kennedy's8 study, reported a few years later, attempted to establish a basis for instructional planning by checking on the needs of Ohio farmers for farmpmechanics skills. The investigator collected the data through personal visits to the farms and by having vocational agriculture teachers and 6 L. K. Davies, ”Farm Shop work in Vocational Education", éUnpublished‘Mastef's t esis, Colorado Agricultural College, or Collins, 1923 . 9 pp. 7 Allen P. Davidson, "A Study of Farm Shop and Agricultural Engineering of Kansas Farms: Its Relation to Vocational Agri- culture in Kansas High Schools," (Unpublished Master's thesis, Kansas State College of Agriculture, Manhattan, 1925). no pp. 8 Arthur C. Kennedy, "A Study of the Needs for Training in Farm.Mechanicg‘in Ohio," (Unpublished Master's thesis, Ohio State University, Columbus, 1927). 57 pp. 23 students help with the task. The findings, again, are stated in terms of rather large instructional, or subject, units with very little detail of individual skills or abilities stated.. A different technique was introduced by Sharp,9 in 1928, in a farmamechanics study which was conducted to establish a basis for instructional planning for high school classes. The investigator prepared comprehensive lists of farmp mechanics jobs and submitted these to farmers for checking the importance of each item in farming. A total of 500 farmers' opinions provided the basis for Sharp'slo recommenda- tions which stated, in effect, that the instruction should be confined to the jobs that are essential to the actual Opera- tion of the farm. After Sharp's investigation there was a trend toward greater detail in regard to the individual skills and abilities used in farm.mechanics studies. Walker,11 a well-known author in agricultural education circles, reported on a farmpmechanics study in 1931, in Nebraska, which purposed to determine what the content of farm mechanics courses should be in Smith-Hughes high schools in that state. 9 Marley A. Sharp, ”A Suggested Course of Study in Farm Mechanics for High Schools Based on the Opinions of Five Hundred Farmers," (Unpublished Master's thesis, Iowa State College, Amos, 1928). 37 pp. 1° Ibid. 11 Clyde Walker, "Determining the Content of Farm.Mechanics Courses of Study for Smith-Hughes Agricultural Departments in High Schools", (Unpublished Master's thesis, the University of Nebraska, Lincoln, 1931). 80 pp. .l.‘ (ill-I'll] The questionnaire method was used to collect the Opinions of 200 farmers. Based upon the data supplied by farmers, Walker recommended reducing the emphasis on construction- work and increasing the stress on operation, care, and re- pair of farm power and machinery. Geiger'slz study a year later followed the familiar method of determining what the "farm shop” needs were by making surveys of 100 farms. Data were collected by the use of questionnaires, and the findings are based upon the jobs that were actually being done by the farmers included in the study. The investigator concluded that farmers spend most of their time doing repair work, whereas, teachers de- vote most of the instructional emphasis to construction jobs. The recommendation was made to increase the instruction in the areas where farmers perform the greatest number of jobs. In 1938 Wright’s13 investigation purporting to establish a basis for instructional planning at the high school level “88 reported, and this study has been widely quoted and re- ferred to, in farm-mechanics circles since that time. The ' investigator introduced a technique which involved the c=hecking of jobs, by farmers, in regard to the items which K 12 Albert J. Geiger, "A Study of Farm-Shep Work in Florida," (Unpublished Master's thesis, University of Florida, Gainesville, 1 3 Carlton E. Wright, "A Study of the Needs for Training in Farm Shop in High-School Departments of Vocational Agricul- cul‘e in the State of Vermont," (Unpublished Master's thesis, OPnell University, Ithaca, New York, 1938). 120 pp. 25 "they desired to do better", in addition to the usual approach of listing the jobs that were actually being done on the farm. 0n the basis of the data supplied by 100 farmers, Wright sug- gested that the latter perform a greater number of jobs in the areas of carpentry, tool fitting, fencing, and machinery repair; whereas, forge work, soldering, furniture construction, and drawing represent areas of less activity. The data re- vealed also, according to Wright, that farmers would like to improve their abilities in making electrical repairs and in- stallations, repairing machinery, carpentry, forge, and cold- metal work. The investigator concluded that (l) the status of the farmer is not a factor in determining the amount of mmchanical work done; (2) type of shop work done on large ,farms is similar in nature and extent to that of mediumpsized -farms. The results, concluded the author, show that more Inechanical work is done on farms that have farm shops. Mulliganlh introduced the technique of obtaining a crose-section of Opinion relative to the farmsmechanics needs of farmers in forty-two New York counties. The inves- tigator included the following respondents in the study: (1) 109 farmers, (2) 111.2 teachers of vocational agriculture, and (3) eighty-eight college students. The individuals in the _ three groups checked the relative importance of mechanical Skijlla and ”knowledge" in farming. The data, as reported by \- 1 1“ Clarence w. Mulligan, "A Study of the Needs for Training t2 Farm Mechanics in New York State," (Unpublished Master's 6318, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, 19141). 155 pp. :1- 26 the investigator, show that the three groups were in general agreement in regard to the type of courses needed in vocational agriculture. The items included in the study are stated in terms of units rather than as individual skills and abilities, and the highest ranking of these are reported as follows: (1) tool fitting, (2) repairing machinery, (3) wood working, (h) saw filing, (S) rope splicing, (6) painting, etc. The investigator reported that one-half of the farmers included in the study had farm shops. During the same year Proctor15 reported on a study from Colorado that was designed to establish a basis for course con- struction in a particular community. Farmers and farm boys were asked to check 177 different mechanical Jobs in regard to, (1) the frequency of the occurrence of the job in farming, and (2) whether the farmer performed it. The conclusion JPoached by the investigator was that (1) if fifty or more farms report the occurrence of a Job it should be included in the course of study, (2) if fifty percent, or more, farmers report doing a particular job, it too, should be included in the course of study. McCreight16 attempted to establish a basis for course construction by determining the extent of the use of farm \_ .l 15 Phillip W. Proctor, ”A Course in Farm Mechanics for fiittafield. Illinois Comunity High School," (Unpublished aster's thesis, Colorado State College of Agriculture and Mechanics Arts, Fort Collins, 1914.1). 59 PP- M 16 M. G. McCre’ight, "A Study or the Use of Acquired Farm c>;.°3lrliilnics Abilities by Selected Vocational Agriculture Graduates Nebraska Public High Schools," (Un ublished Master's thesis, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, 1951 - PP- 27 mechanics abilities in farming.- The investigator reported ' that, on the basis of responses from 182 farmers who took ' vocational agriculture in high school, the following areas of activity, represent the most essential items in the actual operations of farmers: (1) painting, (2) tractor maintenance, (3) tool sharpening, (ii) glazing, (S) farm machinery, (6) farm electricity, (7) rOpe, (8) carpentry, (9) forge, and (10) arc. welding. Areas reported by the investigator as ranking below the average in importance are: (1) tractor repair, (2) plumbing and sanitation, (3) soldering and sheet metal, (11.) heating and ventilation, (S) voxy-acetylene welding, (6) harness and leather, (7) concrete and masonry. The author concluded that high school students should be given opportunity) to acquire the majority of the essential skills as a student in vocational agriculture in high school. ’Cook and Byraml7 reported on a farm mechanics'study in 1952, based on the reports of 676 farmers' activities in five areas of farm mechanics. Although not made as a" direct attempt t0 establish a basis for designing college courses, this B1hit-fly has strong implications for teacher preparation in farm mechanics, and in this connection the investigators £188tuned that the preparation of teachers, in the main, should I” in agreement with the activities that farmers do or want to lawn. \ Se 17 G. C. Cook and H. M. Byram, "Mechanical Activities of Edl°cted Farmers in Michigan, Research Project, in Agricultural 19‘s‘cation, Library of Michigan State College, East Lansing, 'Ill -1") 28 The data on which the analyses are based are classified under the following headings: (1) activities that farmers perform, (2) activities that farmers hire done, (3) activities that farmers would like to improve their ability in performing. The area of farm shop appeared to be the most important, while soil and water management appeared to be of least importance. The type of farming done did not affect the extent of activities performed. ‘ The design of the Cook--Byram]"8 study differs from the majority of farm mechanics investigations in two principal respects, 35., (l) the items (activities) included on the survey forms are presented with sufficient detail to provide a discriminative device for selecting the individual units of subject content in instructional planning, (2) the organization of the. study was built around the five areas of instruction in farm mechanics. The principal points of difference between the Cook- Byrem study and the) present investigation are, (l) the sources 01‘ information used to establish the basis for analyses, and (2) the former covers all five areas of instruction, whereas t"his study covers only two. 29 Literature Relating to the Methods and Techniques of the Investigation A non-thesis study was reported in 1952 by Hutson and Ekstrom.19 'This investigation was designed to: (l) estab- lish a range of relative importance of various skills and understandings in several fields of technical agriculture included in vocational education; (2) to determine the ade- quacy of training received in the same list of items included in the importance phase of the study. All of the teachers of vocational agriculture in Missouri were asked to check both importance and adequacy of training, ”1d the reports were divided as follows: (1) teachers with five or more years of teaching experience, (2) less than 1' 1V6 years experience. The analysis was made on the basis of these two groupings. Some significant differences were found bet‘ieen the responses of the two age groups. According to the farm-mechanics division of the data, the investigators found that: (1) the items that ranked highegt in importance related to tool. fitting, concrete work, c“thing rafters, servicing tractors, arc welding procedures, use of farm level, farm-machinery maintenance, and electricity and wiring; (2) some units of farm mechanics that ranked near. the bottom of the importance scale were rope work, \ e 19 Denver B. Hutson and G. F. Ekstrom, "Training Needs Uh: Teachers of Vocational Agriculture",(Non-thesis study, Versity of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, 1952). 16 pp. 2‘ ‘..4J(.l.ll1(1 1)! it‘ll 3O glazing, laying out house plans, and the use of tile drain. The teacher preparation appeared to be best in the units (3) of tool sharpening, laying out terraces, soldering, aligning a cutter bar, arc welding, soil conservation practices, and farm machinery operation. The final conclusions reached by the investigators were not available, however, it would appear that a sound basis for instructional planning in technical agriculture courses has thus been established in Missouri by investigation. The units of subject matter and/or activities used in the Hutson- Elkstrom20 study are quite large in comparison to some of the more recent studies, i.e., ”operation of farm machinery" covers a large number of skills, activities, etc. Some of the techniques used by these investigators are being employed more frequently in recent research. Ryder21 reported on a non-thesis study in 1933, using the technique of cross-sectional opinion relative to the needs of the farmers for skills in preventive maintenance in farm machinery and equipment. The method used was to Validate a list of 85 skills by having agricultural engineers P°V1ew these items. The list was then submitted to (l) farmers, {2) teachers of vocational agriculture, (3) agricultural ed“-‘lucation specialists, and (h) agricultural engineers, for Chg cking on the importance of these items. Farmers, generally, \_ 2° Ibid. 01‘ 21 Gordon Ryder, "Skills Needed by Farmers in Selected Areas Farm Mechanics,” Non-thesis study, Ohio State University, Colmabua, Chio, 1953- 2’4» )3?" ¥_— | ii ‘IIIII ill? 2.1.1.4 31 rated skills lower than other groups, while agricultural engineers rated skills the highest. The investigator con- cluded that fifty of the items from the original list should be emphasized in farm mechanics instruction while four items should be omitted. Ryder's22 doctoral dissertation was an attempt to evalu- ate the effectiveness of the farm-mechanics aspects of teacher preparation of Ohio vocational agriculture teachers, based upon the teachers' appraisal of the adequacy of the farm-mechanics training received. The items on which teachers placed the adequacy rating was validated by obtaining 14.69 farmers' ratings of 375 problems relative to the importance of these items in farming. Ryder'sa3 study implies that the preparation of teachers should emphasize the problems that are reported by farmers as being the most important items. The State Department of Education of Wyominga" recently Published a special study, to determine what is needed in the instructional programs in farm mechanics in Wyoming high 8‘31510018. The investigators obtained the Opinions of 613 fathers of boys enrolled in vocational agriculture classes in wy<>lflling. The reports were used as a basis for establishing \ _‘ 22 Gordon Ryder, ”A Program of Teacher Evaluation in Farm anics Education for Vocational- riculture Teacher ” U - isheg octoral dissertation, Ohgg State Universityf'Colugbus, 0 pp. - .' 23 Ibid. p 21" Farm Mechanics Instruction That Farmers: Want Their Boys to .... W: Special Bulletin, The Wyoming State Department of Educa- on, Vocational Division, Laramie, Wyoming, 19514.). 10 pp. Mb (3 as? OFF 3 32 the relative importance of seventy-two activities in farm mechanics. The activities represented types of work rather than specific jobs. The highest ratings were listed as: (1) electric welding and cutting, (2) tool grinding and sharpening, (3) acetylene welding and cutting, (h) repairing field machinery, (5) adjusting field machinery, (6) adjusting engines, etc. Items that ranked lowest in this study were: (1) ornamental concrete work, (2) setting wagon tires, (3) making finished articles such as tie racks, etc., (Li) tooling leather, (5) rope work, etc. The publication concluded that local programs might be based upon the findings of this study since no differences were found to exist be- tween the commities studied in regard to importance of various items included on the list. In a book by Hamlinzs the "cross-sectional" or "inte- grated" type of course in vocational agriculture 'is advocated by the author; in this type of organization ”tight units" 01' subject matter, which may have been taught at a specific leV61 in the four-year curriculum, would be abandoned (at least partially so) in favor of subject units as they are n'E’Bded in solving farm problems. The author refers to this me t1'lod as ”scrambling". Cook, Walker, and Snowden 6 advocate the use of: (1) community surveys, (2) planning courses around the \ 33h! 25 H. M. Hamlin, A ricultural Educati n in Communit W, The Interstate Printers and PfiEIgsHers, DanvIIEe, -26 econd Printing, 1950. pp. 226-227. Met: G. C. Cook, Clyde Walker, and 0. L. Snowden, Practical mdhods in Teachin Farm Mechanics, The Interstate Printers ub ishers, Danvi le, 11., 1952. Chapter VII. 33 objectives of the instructional program, and (3) opinions and advice of advisory councils, farmers, shOp teachers, extension agents, and other local people in deciding upon the content of farm mechanics instruction. Hollenberg‘z7 issued a special pamphlet in 19514. through the U.S. Office of Education, advocating the "agricultural viewpoint" in organizing the instructional program in farm mechanics. By the use of this concept the author attempts to determine what the instructional needs in farm mechanics should be; Hollenberg advocates analyzing each agricultural enterprise which may be included in a total program of vocational agriculture. The farm-mechanics needs of a class in vocational agriculture would be derived through that type of analysis. The author suggests that the units in farm mechanics, in this sense, might be referred to as "dairy mechanics", "poultry mechanics”, etc., in terms of the appli- cation that is made of the various skills and abilities. The m~lthor suggests types, and units, of instruction to be included in the five recognized areas of farm mechanics. Rhoad's28 doctoral dissertation represents an attempt t° determine the training needs of vocational agriculture FA. H. Hollenberg, "Farm Mechanics Today and Tomorrow", 5 U. S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Office 8f Education, Division of Vocational Education, Washington, ° 0-. 1951+). 10 pp. 23 c. E. Rhoad, "a Study of the Comprehensiveness of Abilities i ygcTechnical Agriculture Attained by Prospective Teachers of “national Agriculture in Ohio Previous to their Entrance into dOnt Teaching;" (Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, the Ohio St qts University, Columbus, Ohio. 19h3)o 31+2 PP- lllil filial!“ .1 III. 4.ch 31+ teachers in several fields of technical agriculture by testing and measuring the adequacy of abilities possessed by a class Of college seniors in agricultural education. One section of The method used by (1) lists the study was devoted to farm mechanics. the investigator consisted of the following stages: of abilities in several technical-subject areas were validated , in terms of the needs of the items in.teaching, by having the Ohio supervising teachers check the items as to importance; (2) the seniors in a class in agricultural education were tested, through the use of a battery of specially constructed tests, to determine the extent of the abilities possessed as compared to the extent of the abilities needed. The findings reported by Rhoad29 showed that the seniors 111 agricultural education possessed 5h percent of the abilities considered to be essential in teaching vocational agriculture. OI! the_strength of the findings the author suggested various way 3 and means of strengthening the teachers-preparation pro- Sreums in technical agriculture courses. Chestnutt30 advocated a plan for organizing the instruction, in all phases of vocational agriculture, around the farming pro- grams of the students enrolled. On the basis suggested by the author, the instruction would vary from year to year, de pending on the types of farms represented by the enrollment \ 29 Ibid. 1., 30 S. L. Chestnutt, "A Plan Of Organizing Instructions, ASkcultural Education Magazine, 18: 128-129, January 1914.6. 35 in different classes, and depending on the types of agri- cultural enterprises actually owned and operated by the students in the class. Zindel31 used the method Of obtaining graduates' re- actions to various phases of undergraduate curricula to determine some of the strengths and weaknesses of the college courses as reviewed by those men. The data used by the in- vestigator consisted of reports from 25h graduates from various divisions of animal husbandry at Michigan State College. On the basis of the findings the investigator suggested several basic practices by which the instructional jprogram in animal husbandry in Michigan could help to meet the needs of graduates of that department. Another approach to the study of the animal husbandry curriculum, as this subject applies to the preparation of 'teachers of vocational agriculture, was reported by White32 111 1951. The investigator reported that the amount of tJPaining received in anbmal husbandry is positively related t<> the abilities possessed and jobs taught in animal hus- b'lrldry, and that the type of ability possessed is positively r'elated to the type of jobs that are taught. \ 31 Howard Zindel, ”A Study of Graduate Reaction to the filmal Industries Curricula at Michigan State College", Urlpublished Doctoral dissertation, Michigan State College, Eagt Lansing, Michigan, 1953). 175 PP- Ab 32 Conrad P. White, "Factors Associated with Certain fiLlities Possessed and Jobs Taught in Selected Livestock gtl1ierprises by Teachers of Vocational Agriculture in Michigan”, (tjrlpublished Doctor's thesis,Michigan State College, East sing, Michigan, 1953). 175 pp. 36 A regional study to determine the needs of teachers of vocational agriculture for technical skills was recently reported by Ahalt and Miller33 in which the data represent the responses of 132 teachers of vocational agriculture randomly selected from the North Atlantic Region. The list of skills submitted to the respondents included 205 items covering the major areas in farm mechanics. The findings of the study indicated that the highest ranking areas were: , (1) cold metal work, (2) woodwork, (3) soldering and sheet metal, (1;) painting, glazing and finishing, (5) tool fitting. The areas that'ranked lowest in the study were: (l) arc welding, (2) concrete, (3) blacksmithing, (’4) oxy-acetylene welding, and (5) fencing. It was stated that the investigators believed that the areas in welding ranked low because of the newness of these subject areas in the instructional programs. Mate1a3’4 used the technique of studying the curricula 01' twenty-two Land-Grant colleges to show the distribution of the relative importance of subject-matter areas in technical agriculture. On this, basis, the investigator listed agricultural °n81neering as constituting 18.6 percent of training in the 1field of agriculture. \ 33 Arthur M. Ahalt and Harry T. Miller, "Technical Skills ggfded in Farm Mechanics", The A ricultural Education Magazine, ‘ 7, January, 1955. V0 3"" A. G. Matela, "Content of Curriculum for Teachers of (Deational Agriculture in Separate Land-Grant Colleges", npublished Master's thesis, Iowa State College, Ames, Iowa, 19LL9). 12).; pp. 37 Kirkland35 attempted to determine the extent of the training needs of first year teachers of vocational agri- culture in Tennessee by analyzing the difficulties encountered in the several fields of technical agriculture. The investi- gator concluded that 2h percent of the teachers experienced difficulty in performing the essential skills in teaching farm me chani c s . Summary of Literature Reviewed The changing concept of farm mechanics as a phase of vocational agriculture, together with the increased appli- cation Of engineering to agriculture, has stimulated research and writings in this field. A total of 135 studies in farm mechanics (and farm shop) have been reported in the “Summaries 01‘ Studies in Agricultural Education", while implications for farm mechanics instruction are evident in a large number 01‘ investigations listed under other headings in the "Summaries" as follows: (1) "teacher education", and (2) "course of study”. The Agricultural Education Magazine has published approxi- mately forty-eight articles on various phases of farm mechanics. \ Dir 35 J. B. Kirkland, "A Study of the Professional and Technical of I‘2].culties Encountered by Teachers During Their First Year theTeaching Vocational Agriculture", (Unpublished'Doctor's 315, the Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, 1914.7). 1‘6“ pp. 38 In addition, special studies have been reported in connection with problems in farm mechanics, and some of these are not listed in the "Summaries of Studies". The latter statement applies also, to a number of thesis studies that were not re- ported in the summaries for various reasons. The basic patterns established by Struck and others in the early studies in farm mechanics have prevailed, in the main, throughout the history of the farm-mechanics phase of Vocational agriculture. In a large majority of the investi- gations reported, the analysis has been based upon farm mechanics operations and problems that are found on the farm, While another large group of studies has appealed to the Opinions of farmers. A few investigations have appealed to the opinions of persons other than farmers; the latter tech- nique has become more popular as a research technique within Very recent years. The appeal to opinion, in the main, has Songht responses in terms of (1) what is important to include in farm-mechanics programs, (2) how important are various items in farm mechanics, and (3) what activities would farmers like to improve their ability in performing. Within recent years there has been a trend toward showing 8“Paater detail in the units included in farm mechanics studies; as an example, Struck's early study included only three major items while Ryder's recent study in Ohio included approximately 375 separate items. Along with the introduction of this trend there has been a definite movement to evaluate the college 39 preparation of teachers in terms of instructional needs, and to suggest ways and means of improving the teachers' preparation on the basis of the findings of such studies. The characteristics or traits that most nearly typify farm-mechanics research reports throughout the years (and currently) are: (1) that a wide variation in the needs for various skills, abilities, etc., exists from one section 01‘ the country to another; (2) neither is there any one method of organizing and teaching farm mechanics that is acceptable in every part of the country. The fact that the findings of research in farm mechanics have varied so greatly is suggestive of close study of the methods and techniques used in order to make certain that future research will be valid in every respect. The review Of the literature has shown that there is a need for additional research in farm mechanics, particularly at the teacher preparation level. The apparent success of the 86Vera1 methods and techniques used in past studies indicates that the following adaptations that were used in the present 8tudy are sound research methods: (1) expert opinion was ob- tained from a cross-section of respondents representing various l€3Vels of vocational education in agriculture; (2) the °Psanization of the report was built around the "area" division or farm mechanics; (3) adequate detail was used in stating the abilities needed within each area of the study; (A) the to relative importance of the various abilities studied was established, within the limitations of the method used; and (5) an evaluation of the adequacy of teacher preparation ‘was made, within the limitations of the method used. CHAPTER III THE IN VBSTIG-ATI ON The purpose of this chapter is to trace the development of the investigation relative to the methods and techniques used. The following outline shows the order in which the material is covered: (1) the general plan of the study, (2) selection of respondents and descriptions of each group included in the study, (3) important events in the progress of the investigation. The General Plan of the Investigation Wh Method Used The normative method was used in this investigation to bring together the composite opinion and judgment of 38140111" tural engineers, state leaders in teacher education, experienced teachers of vocational education in agriculture, and farmer members of advisory councils, relative to the needs of Michigan tealchers for abilities in two areas of farm mechanics. The tw° subject areas included in the study were (1) farm shop and (2) farm structures. The geographic area included in the in- vestigation is the State of Michigan. I.\11°\'I'echnique to be Used in Collecting the Data A purposive sample was used as the major source of in- r oblilation on which to base the investigation. This is a LL2 sampling technique in which the respondents are selected to Ineet the specific requirements of the study. The qualifica- 'tions of respondents that are most important in this inves- tigation relate to the adequacy of professional experience, exhlcational backgrounds, and roles of leadership played by each. This study attempted to collect adequate samples of all.relevant segments of the population connected with vocational education in agriculture in the state of Michigan. Two major kind of information are needed: (1) responses regarding the importance of various farm-mechani cs abilities 111 teaching vocational agriculture; (2) responses in regard ‘to how well these abilities are being taught. In an attempt "to provide a sound basis for studying these two aspects of the problem, the plan calls for a single presentation of data supplied by: (1) four groups of respondents presented as separate groups, (2) a composite of the four groups, (3) a Separate group showing the adequacy of college training re- cBived by teachers. It was estimated that approximately 110 j~ndivid‘ua1s would be included in the composite samples in t><3th farm-shop and farm-structures areas of the study. The r1“umber of individuals actually reporting in the study, classified by groups, may be seen by referring to Table I. .The Mediggl of Measure for Responses The plan of the investigation makes use of ”teacher 8~bilities" in terms of farm mechanics, as the medium or unit 1+3 TABLE I GROUPS OF RESPONDENTS AND NUMBERS 0F INDIVIDUALS INCLUDED IN THE INVESTIGATION Respondents No. Included No. Included by Group in in Farm Shop Farm Structures Agricultural Engineers 11 11; State Leaders in Teacher Education 12 11; Teachers of Vocational Agriculture 141* 39* Farmer Members of Advisory Councils 14.2“ 14.2“.- TOTALS 106 109 *Teachers in Farm Shop are not the same individuals as those in Farm Structures. “Farmers included in Farm Shop are the same individuals 38 those in Farm Structures. of measurement. As a means of implementing the study, the term ability is used representing a worthwhile objective of education. Ability is defined in the problem section of the investigation. The selection of the term ability is based upon the acceptance of three assumptions, each of which affects and gives some direction to the overall plan of the investigation. Three Assumptions Used in Designing the Investigation The three basic assumptions that enter into the design of the study are as follows: 1. Objectives of the farm-mechanics courses should be set up in terms of abilities needed by teachers of voca- tional agriculture and should be taught somewhat in proportion to the teachers' requirements. 2. A valid method of assessing the extent and nature Of abilities needed by teachers of vocational agriculture should include the composite opinion and judgment of all segments of personnel who are closely associated with vocational educa- tion in agriculture. 3. One way to evaluate the college instructional Program for teachers of vocational agriculture would be in ter'ms of how adequately each ability is being deveIOped in °°mparison to its importance in teaching. Using these basic assumptions somewhat as a guide, the design of the investigation was organized in the form which Beemed to meet the needs and requirements of the study for 1+5 specific types of data. The principal plans are discussed in the following paragraphs to give. an overview of the study. Details relative to the scoring procedures and formulas used are presented in the topic "Tabulation of Data" and also in Chapters IV and V. Lnformation Needed 1. Evidence relative to the importance of and adequacy of training received in 180 farm-mechanics abilities needed in teaching vocational agriculture. 2. Suggestions and experiences of teachers of vocational agriculture relative to some ways and means of improving the development of farm-mechanics abilities in college course work. The assessment of the relative importance of 180 farm- mechanics abilities, in two areas, was made by having an ade- quate sample of respondents check each item on a scale which was converted into numerical scores. Respondents included in the study were selected as representing valid opinion in I‘egard to the relative importance of farm-mechanics abilities needed in teaching vocational agriculture. The assessment of the adequacy of the training received by Michigan teachers of vocational agriculture in 180 farm- mechanics abilities was made by having experienced teachers check each item on a scale which was converted into numerical sc3Ores. The training data were obtained in a form similar to the importance scores, and both sets of scores were he converted into like terms in order to make comparison between the two scales possible. One section was devoted to an analysis of the data re- lating to teachers' suggestions for improving ability develop- ment in the farm-structures course work in college. Teachers' experiences were analyzed for possible effect on course planning. A Plan for Organizingmd Tabulating the D__t_ The purpose of this section of the study is to present the method used to organize and tabulate the scores in the two areas of farm mechanics. Provision was made to maintain group identity by tabulating the scores of the four groups separately. A basis for the analysis of the importance of eachability was provided by adding the four groups' scores to form a composite. The training scores were tabulated Separately as a basis for the analysis of the adequacy of the training. The tabulation was done in two stages that are described in the following: étgge-one tabulatign. The first step in this stage re- quired the preparation of ten large, ruled tables, each lined up alongside a series of the original lists of abilities in 81dish a way that each respondent's checks could be tallied for the 110 abilities in farm shop, and 70 abilities in farm at31r'uctures. The steps followed in the actual tabulation are 11 sted in an abbreviated form in Figure 1. This figure is a sonssz sausages: 7 L4 .m use .3 .m .N manoamWaom soapwasnap opoaaaoo on macaw esiu soaaom .Ha . .Hssoo on page omen» unampoa Heanouaaos nus: masses Haeapno> on» Mango .oH .oaoom owspaooaoa a can“ Havoc macaw pao>zoo .o .soae dons Sash one wnaao>oo oaoom Hope» spasm a damage on cause» depends o en< .m .mowepsooaoa oufla uao>noo use seasons» Add no mauve» nasano.aonnds aaaasam a GH .34: appease no mass mofiuafland can mdoaspsm 9 «H38. ensue eaoooa “gaseous .qssaoo Ga eopmaa moaoom hpaaane on» 664 .w v . .HdaOp announce a damage on .009 you .4 seasons as .uoaoou pH on» Ahaaeoapa0>v ec< .o .auaeuop: cocoon assaoo as ease house was muaadne some new deacon ma on» “haaspconaaonv 604 .m . .uhoonawao Headpasoaaws aonpo 2H Mo noaoom masseuse ca muons ease zeaaom .: .pmaa sneeze moapaaane.oad Mo moaoon Moons mounds asnafiam e GH .m .oocmpao Ea you zoned: someone on ocean m nomads muaadns no“ condom o nepcm .o Hepoa soasnsm.on .:Heapconmo: someone on condo . m senses 533.. 98 358 3 songs .s u .533. on» no 35235 on» son H =ouwaoeoS= someone an ocean Manson m henna we H .H hogan: aaaane on once mom - . u ousooa on aceasaumsa eopoaqaoo n.oon xeono .N _ OMM o m %H onmnwwommw ”MM“ .M .ouo .009 no .ocssaoo - .a m and as . Heoaaao> ca masoecoauoa no need: pang .H . NH 0a 0 my a .0» Muaawm< H - . 7m x . “3am wastage; 5 eozofioa Roam m. m. m m moamwwumum .< _ .L «socsnsm — a menu Baum ue0a< H . endoscommom no 08mm, m so: mmwcasas # . .eaonoeoa : maoSasm o: anemones add .em .noeou amH .nawam .w< coxoono m 96.6 a macaw; m use.” 98» g B 3 33 3.3.3.3. 33 come .8 H .cnoooh emcee umaum unmwfimdonw‘obuh n nouowaasu ona {Spam oau no noaoom wuapeasneu sou mafia Ho passe sownoom .H 2223‘ .3 us "section-chart" reproduction of five tables shown in a parallel arrangement; a scale of approximately one inch equals ten. inches has been used. Figure l is presented to give a general picture of the overall tabulation in regard to the number of respondents, and to illustrate how each one's responses were checked and tabulated. Little detail is possible in a table that is shown on such a small scale. The first-stage tabulation layout is too large to include in the study. Figure 1 shows that the names of the respondents were listed at the tOp of the tables, while the abilities appear along the left-hand margin. The illustration used in the "section-chart" lists three names of the agricultural engineering group together with their responses to the im- Portance of the first three abilities on the list. The l“Scares that are recorded refer to ”essential” (10 points), "mOderate" (5 points), and "none" (0 points). These checks appear in the originalinstrument of each respondent. The training scale differs from the importance scale in one way only, 1.1%., the first point on the checking scale is referred t° as "adequate". The other two points on the training a""Elle are the same as those applied in checking the importance. “Adequate" on the training list received 10 points. The skeleton list of abilities was divided into sub- abGas, the first of which contains 16 items. These subareas be‘present units of closely related abilities that require A9 separate analysis; thus, B" Forge Work has a certain unity that is different from H., Rope Work. The system of scoring that was used is outlined as follows: (1) each ability received a total score, by res- pondent groups, (2) each respondent received a score, by subareas, (3) each subarea of abilities received a numerical score and a percentage score,‘ U4.) a grand total score was derived, covering the entire list of abilities, and this score was converted into a percentage. Chapter IV cites an example of the conversion of numerical scores to percentages. A special word of caution is needed-in regard to the use of the percentage in the analysis of data. No absolute value is attached to any percentage score in these analyses. The Percentages are used only as a relative measure of relationship between the groups of respondents and between the importance and training scores. The need for percentages arises from the fact that the respondent-groups vary in size, thus, the mlmerical scores as a comparative measure would not be usable. The percentage provides a measure that is in like terms. Second-stage tabulation. This section explains the plan for. organizing the data into six tables for each area of the study. Each of the six tables represents the scores of SeDarate groups of respondents. Figure 2 is a section chart that illustrates some of the important steps in the second 8tinge of tabulation. This phase of compilation consisted of three major steps as follows: (1) the first-stage tabulation 50 .onauanoo Haney cacao as» damage on nonoom condos» opaecasoo cubes on» cod .NH .naep« use mdoasndn Adam .moaooe omeuaoeaoa on.moaooe seasons ouauoaaoe uao>aoo .HH .msoneQSm o mnfisaeSoa sou uuoooaa peoaom .onoom scanned enamoaSoe new on = the lowest in numerical values. The same holds true for the training scores. This phase of the analysis went beyond subarea-division lines and studied the individual items, Principally on the basis of numerical values. I A scatter diagram was used to plot the importance scores agafistt the training, to show the extent of agreement or dis- agreement, between the two factors. A special analysis of the’ changes that may be needed in the training emphasis was made. As a final step in this phase of the analysis the abilities were stated according to three statuses as re- vealed by the scatter diagram. Sh Teachers' suggestions and othggitrainigg. The analysis of this section of the study was limited to items that had some common support and seemed to be of some importance in the investigation. Supplementary experiences of teachegg. The "extra- curricular" experiences of Michigan teachers were analyzed to determine whether there is a basis for taking such ex- periences into account in planning the college courses for these teachers. Selection of Respondents general Criteria Practice varies from one state to another with reference to deciding upon the content and nature of farm-mechanics courses that are given for the preparation of teachers of vocational education in agriculture. In some instances in- atructtional planning is handled by special committees repre- 3°nt1ng the various groups of personnel who are responsible. G°nera11y speaking, however, the planning and organizing 01' teel’lnical agriculture courses are functions that are carried out; largely by the departments that teach the courses. The selection of a desirable sample of respondents will 8° far toward obtaining valid answers to two parts of the 12: 8‘30)? problem: (1) to determine what the relative importance \n x11 of various farm-mechanics abilities is; (2) to determine how accurately the farm-mechanics courses are now directed toward fulfilling the needs of Michigan teachers. . This is not a new problem as can be inferred-5 from the amount of investigation that has been devoted to it in re- cent years. Numerous methods and techniques have been employed in the studies of this nature. The majority of these inves- tigations have depended on surveys and field studies for the information needed. A great deal of variation is noted in regard to the respondents that have been used as resource Persons. The method used to select respondents in this study grows out of the question: "Who, individually or 0011ectively, constitute the most valid opinion relative to what farm-mechanics abilities are needed by Michigan teachers or Vocational agriculture?" The question above points back to the problem itself "here a more thorough treatment of it may be found, and it is merely noted here that the selection of the personnel of the required sample is a complicated problem, and the present attempt represents an effort to find out what the needs of teachers are by including representatives of all gr°ups of personnel who have a large stake in the teacher's pert'Ormance as it may relate to the college courses involved in this study. This premise leads to the establishment of some general criteria by which the major groups ’of respondents a be selected namely, "respondent groups used in this 56 Investigation are selected on the basis of maintaining a nuajor relationship in vocational education in agriculture.“ Relationships that appear to be direct and of a major nature are represented by the following groups: 1. Teachers of vocational agriculture. 2. Teacher_education staff members in agricultural 'education. 3. Farmer members of advisory councils. h. Members of the staffs of departments of technical agriculture having responsibility in the prepara- tion of teachers. 5. State consultants in agricultural education. 6. Supervising teachers of vocational education in agriculture. On the basis of this general criterion there are, perhaps, °ther groups that would qualify as participants in the study, ho“ever, the following additional criteria are submitted as beillg necessary in selecting the sample needed in this type of Study: 1. The group is qualified to express valid opinion in ‘this study on the basis of active participation and experience in a major function of vocational education in agriculture or 1n one that is closely related; or 2. the group is qualified by educational background 81ther by having taken formal course work in farm shop and/or S7 farm structures, or by having had adequate compensatory practical experience in the area of participation; or 3. the group is recognized as filling a major place of leadership in vocational education in agriculture in either preparation, selection, placement, or supervision of teachers; or u. the group is recognized as filling a major place of leadership in vocational education in agriculture in Planning, organizing, and/or teaching local programs of vocational agriculture. Based upon these criteria four groups of respondents are recOgnized as being qualified to participate and samples of each are included in the investigation. These groups are: ”(1) agricultural engineers, (2) state leaders in teacher edu- °a£10n, (3) teachers of vocational agriculture, (LL) farmer me“Ibex-s of’advisory councils. The composite opinion and J“figment represented by the four groups included, is recog- nized as fulfilling the requirements for a valid frame of re’feit‘ence upon which to base the analysis, conclusions, and 1mplieations of the study. State consultants in agricultural eclucl‘i‘tion have been combined with members of the staff in agricultural education of Michigan State University, and supervising teachers, to form the group, "state leaders in tea‘n‘ler education". ' By referring‘to Table I the overall situation regarding sa Inplea of respondents included in the two areas of farm 58 mechanics may be seen. A total of 106 persons are included in the section of farm shop, while 109 are included in the farm structures area. Furthermore, this table shows that the number of persons in each respondent group varies for each of the two areas of the study except for the farmer group which includes the same individuals in both areas of the study. Specific criteria applying to individuals within each Group of respondents together with the description of the samples used in each major group follow. Selection of Agricultural Engineers Table I compares the number of agricultural engineers i“chided in the study with all other groups of respondents, and Table II shows that there are fourteen, and eleven, r °5Pondents included in the farm structures and farm shop areas respectively. The respondents included in the study from the department of agricultural engineering at Michigan State University have been selected on the basis of meeting the Conditions as set forth in the specific criteria as rOJ‘IOWS : §pgcific cziterig. (l) the respondent is a full-time m . _ ”web of the staff of the department of agricultural engineering at Michigan State University; (2) the respondent has taken ade quate course work in the area of the study to be checked; 59 hpamao>acb madam damaged: .pcoEpAddoo wcaamodawce Handpasoaaww no cheeses: m.mo as ma o.Ho as ma as am gases 0 o o o o o 0 am up¢dpmamn< oaesowno o o o o o o o m oeuoq no cos a H cos a a H s someones mm m s m» m s m o coauceuxm . onunonsposnpm cos os os cos p s n - seem as “mean wcanoaoa I'.“ waspsOQmm weappoaom nopaofinom wcapaOQQm waapaodom oouaoanom phantom .02 .oz psooaom ..oz . .oz opadaoapndm smmepm In! 0 o w no.§fi anon a mohduodpnw Seem ca peosaosH donm.snem sq covsHoGH anommwzHHm HMpom 0 95m mpcooaodmom mucoonoauom mbomwtmbm Mm .QNQDAUZH azmommm 924 mamZDz mmmpaopmem zmdm 02¢ momm zmdm 2H wZHBmommm mmMMZszm A4mDBADUHmO< HH mum<8 60 (3) the respondent has had adequate experience in (a) teaching farm.mechanics or farm shop (area to be checked), or (b) re- search dealing with farm structures or farm shop (area to be checked); (A) personal factors are not taken into consideration. These include age of respondent, locale of past experience, degrees held, and the like. The fact that these men are members of the staff is accepted as evidence that the respon- dents are leaders in agricultural engineering. The information in Table II lists 32 staff members as full-time employees at Michigan State University (two :members of which are on leave of absence), while a group of graduate assistants brings the total to fifty-nine. The use of only a part of the staff as resource persons is explained by the fact that some of these individuals do not qualify by the criteria. In several of the six academic and three all—college divisions the personnel are found to be specialists in particular fields, and some of these staff mem- bers have had little or no experience in the two areas of farm mechanics being investigated. Agricultural engineers in- cluded in the study are members of the regular staff at Michigan Staff University. These individuals have been selected for this particular study on the basis of training and experience in farm shop or farm structures, notwith- standing the fact that the entire staff would be qualified under the general criteria. Table II shows that eleven agricultural engineers are reporting, of the twelve who are eligible to participate in 61 the farm-shop area, while fourteen are reporting, of the fifteen eligible in the farm-structures area. Three respon- dents reporting in farm structures are not eligible to report in farm shop. Due to a wide range of experience and education in various states the graduate assistants are not included in the study although a number of them were inter- viewed in this connection. From Table II it is seen that the overall percentage of returns is 91.6 for farm shop and is 93.3 for farm structures. Percentage is determined on the basis of the number actually reporting as compared to the number solicited. Selection of State Leaders in Teacher Education There are fourteen respondents in teacher education re- porting in.farm structures and twelve in farm shop as re- vealed by the data in Table III. Information in Table III shows the number of persons included in the four sub-groups together with numbers and percentages of these respondents reporting in both areas of the study. The sixteen different individuals reporting in the two areas were selected on the basis of meeting the specific criteria listed below, in addition to being qualified.as a group under the terms specified in the general criteria: Specific criteria. (1) The respondent is a member of the staff in agricultural education of the department of vocational education at Michigan State University including 62 m.mc es ms e.mc as :s cc ccs m m cos m m e cos n m o.cc m m c cos s s cos s s s mac m c cc s m c MN Qsoooa aspen ocean .m on econd £909 as Hepoa .m on mohfipodhpm m msm>seem opus deuce .N seem as wnseaodoe nonsfiz .N om cocssoss unneededmoa Hence .H a: mean seem as mGsBaOQoa 903852 .H msc>sna4 cues one oopsaodH mpsoecommem sauce .m Mm «.me on em cc s: . mm cos saw so . whosoeee guesses: sense mssp as waspaOQem waspaodom popsossom waspaOQom waspaOQom dopsossom opedsospaem maonoeoa psooaom .oz .02 pcooaom .02 .02 on newsnosz ossswssm so scone mendpozApm.Euem as oopsHodH mmnm Sham as oedsaonH honsdz honsfiz announcemem unneededeom - HepoB Hence azmcmmm nzs mmmzoz .mmmceoomsm zmsc ass scam seem zs casemccmm mmossoosmcs sszcsesoc> so mmmmosme >s msmea 66 l9Sb-55. These Michigan departments employed Zhl teachers of vocational agriculture as shown by the list for that year. The conditions set forth by the general criteria seem to be met by the Michigan teachers as a group, however, when the individuals are studied it is apparent that only a part of the teacher group is eligible according to the criteria. It is to be noted that only those individuals whose teacher preparation in farm.mechanics,and experience, qualify them to express valid opinion are accepted. The 80 teachers men- tioned above are the group that are qualified by meeting the specific criteria: Specific criterig. (l) The respondent is a regular teacher of vocational agriculture as evidenced by the appear- ance of his name on the list of Michigan teachers approved by the state department of public instruction, (2) the respondent is certified to teach farm mechanics by the state department of public instruction, (3) the respondent is new teaching farm.mechanics, or has taught this subject in the past, (h) the respondent has taken the prescribed course work, or its equivalent at Michigan State college, in the area 0f the study to be checked. The final selection of teacher respondents represented a rather complex problem beacuse of the variability that has existed in the farm-mechanics program in the state during the A" “ ‘19 \V \ $- " m arseao mum ALPINA MINA! O \‘ [iLAflA . t " y oscoaA AltONA ‘ ugfl‘l‘f‘ DNAV Fig. 3. ( MAN/5. wwono new; 90mm 06mm 10550 t. C'Oogra hi d1 t' ibuti O - C Of “’1 P 8 1‘ on MASON Lu: 05mm cups LAowv ””1446 schools representing u ..- farm-shop reports, 28 ‘ o Q My 6"” counties included. J 0:54AM Imam; MECOSIA menu MIDLAND O ruscou SAN/LAC Ml/SIIE. Myawb am or damw m" 0 crust: “Pm 0mm IOWA away 5mm. 0 3. m 0 Hum, m: “(.1561 any (Ara/I mum LIV/N637]! O O O MIMI/RAW [Au A. cum/4 arm»: WAS'HH’MIV mm * O O 0 § 0 .31 us: suomw sum ”USN“ mu t M0 0 E S -. 07' \ \ \ \ A «M § 3 ’5, ”a, K a. f A m» mar ”Wm K , \ WWW ‘MAmNAc *‘K can . ' t<7 :53 ‘ I 49 . "e 4", _ we”?! ~+ .. Alt. aruco mm ALPzNA ___ Ammo A, G 1- ms“ CRAWF'D oscoDA “COM 6RD "AV An maul/g 0086M WAN mm: Fig 0 (4. O . . _ O O . LAKE mow CLAN: MN ARENAC Geographic distribution w 01' 39 schools repre- ' M" senting farm-structures Ntmrco mcosrA IsAuuA MIDLAND 0 reports , 27 counties mu smuc included. ._4 0 AcoNrauu mmb «(MAN 0 0 NtNr J __ 0 sum: up“. 0mm mm «mm 5mm. 3mm 0 O « U n 0 must: Aw“ uucANo wm " sAroN INeNAAt LmNcsr' C) O n VAN MAM ImAAlA. CALNoUN ,JuxsoN NAsNrsNAu mm c 0 o o as: 0 31mm mNcN mum "6"“0 mono: .. 0 00 Les. 1 1 ... a“ ”° “' 0“ so' or cu .— .e. r: .1! . v” v. Av 0: -1. ' n4 9% «la (11.31)! ..I ...! fihu v“; Cu ‘1‘ 69 past ten to fifteen years, and because of the changes that have occurred in teacher certification during that time. A study of the data on which Table IV is based shows that eighty teachers are included in the study, while the total number in Michigan is Zhl for the l9Sh-l9SS school year. This would appear to represent a low percent of participation until it is realized that only slightly more than 100 teachers are qualified, according to the general and specific criteria governing their selection. The two lists of teachers re-~ porting, together with the schools they represent, have been appended to the study. See page 233 . The geographic dis- tribution of the schools where they taught is plotted on two maps of the state of Michigan, Figures 3 and u. Schools reporting in the farm Shop area are distributed over twenty- eight counties while farm-structures reports represent twenty- seven counties. A study of these maps will show that a good coverage of the state was obtained in both areas of the study, with the exception of the upper peninsula, which is represented by only one school. In addition to the eighty teachers' reports that are included in the study, nine other reports are classified as "late arrivals", making a total of 8h percent reporting in the overall returns. An original list of 120 teachers, as prospective respondents, was revised downward to 106 after omitting several teachers at their own request and for other P83801180 70 The only personal factor considered, aside from educa- tion as a specific point in the criteria, is the number of years of experience in teaching, and this is incidental to sample selection under the terms of the criteria. frhe length of teaching experience was examined as a preliminary analysis to ascertain whether any real differences existed between the group with the most experience, as compared to the group with the least experience. This preliminary analy- sis did not reveal any significant differences when the group was divided at the five-year line in both areas, con- sequently all teachers are presented as a single group in each of the two areas of the study. Teaching experience ranges from.one to seventeen years. Selection of Farmer Members of Advisory Councils The data in Table I show that forty-two farmers are in- cluded in each of the two areas however these individuals are counted in both areas of the study. One of the general cri- teria requires that the respondents' group be closely associ- ated with a major function of the process of vocational education in agriculture. The practice of having farmers serve in an advisory capacity in the planning of local pro- grams is recognized as being one of the advanced techniques in vocational education in agriculture at the present time. Farmers who hold membership in these organizations serving local departments of vocational agriculture in Michigan are 71 recognized as being qualified to express valid opinions in the study, by virtue of the close relationship that exists between the members of such organizations and the local de- partments. Membership in an advisory council is accepted as evidence that the respondent is filling a major place of leadership in agriculture. As a group, farmer members of advisory councils have been selected as respondents, with confidence, that they are qualified to participate. The following specific criteria apply in the final selection of individuals: Specific criteria. (1) The respondent is a regular nmmber of an advisory council serving a local department of vocational agriculture in Michigan; (2) farm mechanics is taught as a part of the regular program in the local depart- ment; (3) the member is classified as a “farmer“ by the local teacher of vocational agriculture. ' It should be noted that educational background, experi- ence, age, farming status, and other personal factors, have not been considered in the selection of the farmers for this sample; personal factors are considered as being incidental in sampling. The reports included in the study from nine advisory councils in Michigan represent an effort to obtain opinions from all active advisory councils in the state where farm nmchanics is taught as a part of the regular program of 72 vocational agriculture. A study of the information given in Table V shows that sixty-six respondents are included in this investigation; three of the members are women. The size of advisory councils included ranges from five to ten farmer-members, but this may not represent the total member- ship in any given council. The same table indicates that reports are included from.63.6 percent of the council members, and an additional three late arrivals brought the overall re- turns to 68.2 percent of the eligible membership. The geographic locations of the schools served by the nine advisory councils are shown on the map of Michigan in Figure 5. A study of the distribution of the locations re- veals that a total of seven counties, is represented, three councils being located in Lenawee County. Other geographic areas represented are as follows: (a) the lower western coastal region, one school; (b) the northern section of the lower peninsula, two schools; (0) the thumb area, two schools; (d) central lower Michigan, one school; and.(e) southern Michigan, three schools. I One advisory council was fully qualified to participate except for the fact that the teacher of vocational agriculture is new in the position, and that school was omitted from the study at his request. Seventeen councils were considered for use in this investigation, however, the criterion re- garding farm.mechanics as a required part of the regular 73 TABLE v FARMER MEMBERS OF ADVISORX COUNCILS REPORTING IN FARM STRUCTURES AND FARM SHOP, NUMBER AND PERCENT BY SCHOOLS-m- Advisory Councils Fflggegf N°;n§1§§1b1° No. Percent by S°h°°1 Members Solicited Hamming “wrung Gaylord** S S 2 no Allegan 10 10 u no East Jordan 9 9 u hh-h Mayville 7 7 7 100 Onstead 6 6 h 66.6 St. Charles 7 7 3 h2.9 Tecumseh 5 5 h 80 Yale** 7 7 6 85.9 Brittonfifl 10 10 8 80 TOTALS ‘ 66 66 be 63.6 OVER-ALL RETURNS 66 66 1+5 68.2 *Numbers and percentages refer to both farm.shop.and farm structures since the same individutls are counted in both areas of the study. **0ne report from this council marked "late arrival", not counted in the "included reports", but cited as an over-all percentage of returns. 4b In [NON \ mm“ mom“ “a 93.27 D '| . , ’90 / 0% ' .._ . / aunt. orszsa Amman ALnNA F ' ' Arm: 0 WALNASAA (NA wr‘D oscooA ALCOIM F18 e 5 maul/m mum. mum Iosco Geographic distribution “‘ 9 advisory councils mom can: sum» AnNAC represented by A2 farmers ' ”03°" reporting in both areas of. I w the B tudy . «:ANA szrco MtcasrA menu DLAND ' ruscou :ANliAc .t ...Ls mmw «mar «6mm '5” r I r... 0 sum: “P“, [am a/NmN 3mm. sow mum aw mar (AIDA INeNAAv iMNur’N AALAAIA. CALNOUN JACKSON nun—mils NA rNE orb ‘ _ 37..»an MUCH mum 6‘6 mono: F r 0" 8‘ er“ a" u" 04' 7S vocational agriculture program reduced the list to ten, and nine are represented in the final count. Personal letters were sent to the respondents explaining the nature of the forms to be checked and asking that the completed instruments be returned by mail. The names of each council member included in this investigation are listed and appended to the thesis. Important Events in the Progress of the Investigation This section of the study gives an accounting of the develOpment of the forms used to collect the data and re- lates some of the important events in the history of the study. Preliminary Preparation and Construction of the Instrument The original design of the study included all five areas of farm mechanics, (1) farm shop, (2) farm.structures, (3) farm.mechinery and tractors, (h) rural electrification, (5) soil and water management. These are the areas recognized by‘the Amrican Society of Agricultural Engineers1 as con- stituting the field of farm mechanics. As the study developed it became apparent that the scope would have to be reduced to two areas. This decision was made when it became apparent 1 Agricultural Engineerigg Phases of Teacher Training for Vocational Agriculture, Report II, Pro-Service and In-Service Training Programg, (American4Society of Agricultural Engineers, St. Joseph, Michigan, 1953). 76 that five areas included a greater scope than the investigation could cover successfully. The instruments used for collecting the data were pre- pared in the form of abilities needed by teachers of vocational agriculture in teaching farm mechanics. Two lists of abilities were constructed, one covering the area of farm-shop, the other covering farm-structures. {The initial preparation was made by searching the farm-Shep and farmpstructures literature. A 2 relative to these major portion of the 1953 committee report, two areas, was incorporated into the lists. Some study was made of the content of courses given at Michigan State College as teacher preparation in farm.shop and farm structures, in preparing the lists, but the abilities selected were not con- fined to or limdted by these factors in any way. The design of the study did not include or require com- -- plete validation of the abilities submitted on the forms since the major efforts of the investigation itself were directed toward this end. Erhe validation.method consisted of having the lists checked by the specialists in the farm- shop and farmpstructures divisions of agricultural engineering at Michigan State University. Several revisions of the lists were made with the assistance of these specialists. In order to make the selection of abilities more valid the lists were left "open-ended" in the final draft. 2 Ibid. Members of the investigator's guidance committee made valuable suggestions relative to the further preparation of the instrument. In addition, state consultants in agricul- tural education, and members of staff in agricultural educa- tion of the department of vocational education of Michigan State University, made valuable suggestions in this regard. During the period of September to December 19Sh, the forms were undergoing revision and reconstruction, and the final draft was completed in December of that year. Formg,Comp1eted and TrialgRun Belg A trial run, or test, was conducted to check the com- pleted instrument at a meeting of the Michigan State College Staff in agricultural education, and supervising teachers, in December of l9Sh. At that thme the purpose and method of the study was explained, and one-half of the supervising teachers were given farm-structures forms to check while the other half were given farmwshop forms to fill out. Ar- rangements were made to collect the completed instruments at a later date. Teachers agreed to ‘make suggestions rela- tive to needed revisions of the forms and to note these on the completed instruments. The plan of the study was discussed, also, at a meeting of the state research committee and a generally favorable reaction was noted. A recommendation was made at that meetrng to send the farmpstructures forms to one-half of the 78 participating teachers of vocational agriculture in the state and to send the farm-shop phase of the study to the other half. This suggestion was accepted and incorporated into the plan. No further revision in the forms was made, and a schedule for mailing the instruments to the teacher group was set up to begin during the first week of January 1955. Letters Mailed to Teachegg Personal letters to teachers of vocational agriculture were prepared, covering the nature and purpose of the study, and 120 of the instruments were placed in the mail on January 7. 1955. The records of returns show that the first thirteen reports were received from teachers on January 11, 1955. and continued to.arrive for several days. The last entry was recorded on February 18, 1955, making a total of eighty-nine reports received. However, nine of these reports arrived after tabulation was begun, and were not included in the data used. Several prospective respondents were dropped from.the original list as being ineligible for various reasons. Forms Sent to Farmer Membergzof Adgisory Councils In view of the smaller number of farmer members of advisory councils, it was decided that the two forms covering farm shop and farm structures should be sent as a "double form" 79 covering both areas of the study, and to request farmers to check the forms in both areas. According to plan, sixty-seven letters were mailed to farmer-members of advisory councils on January 18, 1955, and the first three reports were received on January 22, 1955. Daily entries are noted on the records at a rate of four to five reports a day for the period ending February 18, 1955. totaling forty-six returns. Four of this number are not in- cluded because of arriving too late for the tabulation. State Leaders in Teacher Education and Agricultural Engineers Interviewed Teacher education specialists and agricultural engineers were asked to check both areas of the study. The instruments, in this phase of the investigation, were delivered in person, and at the same time interviews were held with the men, ex~ plaining the nature and purpose of the study, and giving in- structions for filling out the instrument. Arrangements were made to collect the completed forms in person; this was done according to plan in most cases. Altogether, about fifty inp terviews were conducted with professional and technical specialists, although several of these latter werefinot in- cluded in the study for various reasons. The campaign that was conducted in connection with holding interviews, and collecting the completed forms, began in January 1955, and continued through February of 80 that year. Response from all professional groups was ex- cellent, as the records show. Furthermore, it is believed that the large number of teachers and farmers reporting in the investigation represent those who have the greatest interest in farm mechanics, and the need for a purposive sample is served a good cause through the natural selectivity that thus, prevails. Recording and Tabulating_Raw Scorgg Tabulation charts were prepared in accordance with the method that was described in the plan of the study, and the tabulation of raw scores began on February 15, 1955. The scores of the teacher group were recorded first. Tabulation continued for the next six weeks, including first and second- stage recording. Summary This chapter has traced the development of the investiga- tion through the several phases of its history as follows: method A. The general method used in the study was the normative survey. B. The purposive sample was employed as a means of ob- taining a composite of valid opinion from various individuals in the field of vocational education in agriculture. 81 C. The geographic area included in the investigation is the state of Michigan. D. The responses sought are in answer to two aspects of a problem.in farmpmechanics as follows: 1. What is the relative importance of various farmp shop and farmpstructures abilities in teaching vocational agriculture? 2. How well are these abilities being taught in comparison to their importance 7 E. The plan of the study required adeouate samples of respondents from four groups: (1) agricultural engineers, (2) state leaders in teacher education, (3) teachers of voca- tional agriculture, and (h) farmer members of advisory coun- cils. V F. The plan provided for collecting the information by means of a check list of abilities in each of two areas of farm.mechanics (l) farm shop, (2) farm.structures. The data were collected by mail and by personal interview. 1. Two checking scales were provided, one regarding importance of each ability, the other relating to the adequacy of training received. 2. A scoring system.assigned numerical values to the responses as follows: 10-5-0 points. G. The tabulation of the data was done in two stages including 215 respondents checking 180 abilities on a scale. The first-stage tabulation related to recording and summarizing 82 the raw scores. The second-stage tabulation results provide the following: 1. 2. 3. S. 6. Importance scores of 110 farm-shop abilities and seventy farmpstructures abilities, summarized by respondent groups and by a composite. Adequacy of training scores of 110 farm-shop and seventy farmpstructures abilities summarized by a teachers group. Subarea, or unit scores, of nine farmpshop units and seven farm-structures units. A rank order of items within subareas, as well as a rank order of the subareas. Grand total scores covering the entire area in both areas. The plan also outlined the methods by which impor- tance and training were analyzed showing (a) group analyses, 1b) subarea or unit analyses, (c) item analyses, and (d) teacher suggestions and experi- ences. Selection of Respondent; The four groups of respondents were selected in accordance with (1) general criteria, and (2) specific criteria for each group. A high percentage of representation was obtained from each of the four major groups included. Each sample was described relative to important characteristics. A total 83 of 106 and 109 respondents are included in the farm-shop and farm-structures areas respectively. The major events in the history of the study were traced in regard to delivery of survey forms, receipt of data, and the method used in tabulating the data, covering the period of September 19Sh through March, 1955. CHAPTER IV PRESENTATION OF DATA RELATIVE TO THE FARMpSHOP AREA The data relative to the farmpshop phase of the investi- gation are presented in this chapter including 106 individuals' scores covering 110 abilities on the list. The order of pre- 1 sentation follows the general plan of the study as outlined in Chapter III. Five types of analyses are presented as follows: (1) similarities and/or differences between the groups of respondents, (2) comparisons of relationships among the nine subareas of abilities with reference to both importance and adequacy of training, (3) an itempanalysis, or study of relationships among the 110 abilities in the farmpshop area without regard to subarea divisions, (h) a study of teachers' suggestions for improving the development of farmpmechanics abilities in the college courses taken by these men in farm.shop, (S) a study of teachers' supplementary experiences that improved their ability to teach the farm-shop phases of vocational agriculture. Similarities and/or Differences of Respondents by Groups The assessment of group relationships is presented in three sections as follows: (1) the overall picture of group harmony, as revealed by the grand totals of importance scores of the four groups of respondents compared to the composite 85 scores, (2) the extent of agreement, as indicated by correla- tion coefficients computed by comparing the rank order of importance of the subarea scores, by groups of respondents, paired in all possible combinations, and paired with the composite ranks, (3) the extent of group differences, as indicated by the ranks of ability scores within the subareas, by groups of respondents, paired in all possible combinations; the correlation coefficients of all possible pairings of the four groups are presented, by subareas, as a means of showing specific points of disagreement, (h) each group is tested with the training scores, based on the ranks of the subareas. The Extent of Group Aggeement as Revealed by the Overall Egportance Scores in Farm Shop Table VI presents the grand-total importance scores covering the entire list of 110 abilities. The data show (1) the highest possible score, (2) the numerical scores recorded, (3) the percentages, (h) the difference when compared to the composite. a The composite scores of importance representing the responses of 106 individuals show that the percentage of im» portance, based on the highest possible score, is 78.7, which is computed by taking the total 91,785 points as a percent of 116,600, the latter representing the highest score that is possible, and it is referred to throughout the study as the highest possible score. Other total numerical scores are 86 .pceoaoq N.ms mo oaoem epfieoasoo on» on eoaeosoo o.m Ho soapefi>eo o>wpowes «.mpnomeaqoa owopsooaeo has» one .ooa.NH no oaoom oabwmeoo beeswan on» ma psooaoa d.m~ ea menace ooo.o no eaoon dope» .maeosamno fienduadoaamo ens umzoaaom we been on masons cabs» ease «maoz o . n.Ni m.n+ 0.0+ b.m3 opauoaaoo Sosa soapoa>ea H.mm n.mw o.m~ 3.0m u.:m H.mn eaoom owepsoouom Hence ooa.me oom.eaa oo~.ee ooa.m: oom.ma ooa.~a .seem assesses seeswem msm.:~ mma.ae moo.mm omm.em o:~.aa oeo.e .eeeeeeom esoem asses meanness . .osbfl .mawsm .maonoooa opanoosoo eaoahdm oaeooeoa .noeea .«aw4 nulmunna_ sea m: a: we as wsmwmmaa epon.eeaeuaommm mmHBHAHm< mommlzmoo GZHZHde Q24 mozmm m4 mBZHQZDmmmm.mo MMDomw 2mmzamm Bzmzmmmm< m0 BZMBNH H> mfim<fi 87 shown as percentages which have been derived on a similar basis. Percentages have been introducted into the analysis to provide a measure that is expressed in like terms. Some common measure seems necessary in order to make possible the direct comparison of group scores involving variable N's in the groups. The extent of agreement between groups, in regard to the overall percentage scores, in the importance phase, is high.when each group score is compared to the composite. {The table shows that the largest difference is a positive 6.0 percentage points, when the teacher-education group is com- pared with the composite total. This difference is significant at the 5 percent level. The tendency to score the importance higher seems to be characteristic of the teacher-education group in both areas of the study. The extent of this differ- ence seems to have little bearing on the analysis, although this question is studied further in later phases of the inves- tigation. The data in Table VI show that teachers are in closest agreement with the composite scores of importance, where a difference of only 1.7 percentage points is found. Agricul- tural engineers' total score represents the largest negative difference of 3.6 percentage points. It is noted that engi- neers tend to rate the importance slightly lower than other groups of most items throughout the investigation. Farmers' ratings, on the basis of a total, are slightly lower than 88 the composite, as the negative 2.7 percentage points indicate. Appraisal of the overall agreement, based on the data presented, shows that there is general agreement between the groups. Extent of Group Agreement as Revealed by_Subarea Scores Table VII shows the inter-correlation coefficients of the five groups when the rank order of importance is compared by subarea scores, and every possible paring between the five groups is used. These coefficients were computed from the ranks in Table II by the use of the rank method of correlation. . 2 . _ 6 ($Ld ) The formula for computing these values is. rho = 1 m The companion Tables VIII and IX show that the ranks are based on percentage scores; the percentages do not measure the absolute level of importance, or training, but.represent the relative status of each. It is pointed out, however, that the overall scores of importance run considerably above the 50 percent level which would not normally be expected if the in- strument had contained a better balance between the ”essential" and "none" items on the check lists of abilities. . - Generally, the group scoring-patterns as revealed in the study of the overall responses hold true also in the subarea ratings. As an example, leaders in teacher education scored tool care at 98.8 percentage points, the highest score re- corded, while agricultural engineers scored forge work at h8.8, the lowest percentage recorded in the farm-shOp phase of the study. 89 Ho>oa scooped H on» no paoodmflswdmae Ho>oa psooaoo m on» no pnooahfiawdmt «0.- ma.u mo. NH.- mm. meanness .maonoooe .H> mo.- see. same. same. as». seaseeseo .> ma.- teem. . seam. tea. has. estates .>H so. seas. seam. . sea. ems. assesses .HHH ma.u same. the. ewe. seam. .osem honoree .HH mm. sea. sue. emu. ttmm. V .eawcm .asme .H He. > >H HHH HH H mcfisaoae .oSbm .mamsm .mpoSoooa 09Hm01800 maosamm muoaoooa .zoooa .Hawd mmdoau mazmnzommmm mo mmDomo mm .mMzdm mum Eda. 91 : a m a a H esso Hoes .H m m a m a 0 see: them .m n b d b m o msaoaox osoahpooeihxo .w m m m m s a mosses: see .a m e m m m .: msseeaa seam .m -a a m a m m Hess: steam .a m m e e s m asses ease .o o e e e e .0 see: smash .m s m H m m .m eeaeaesasm asseqso .< .oan .mamcm mononsm opHmoaSoo maoanm masseuse genomes .Haw4 lwcanaeaa cocovaomEH Ho xnom.. no zoom momm ngm 2H mazmazommmm mo mmboma 0 MM ammoMmu m< mmmoom HGoH unconen H as # Ho>oH pneonen m mm. on. no. tea. tea. op. ease noes .H ma.- em. as. om. 4:. mm.- sac: oaom .m seam. atom. atom. some. seem. some. mesons: eaonaaoesnaxo .o sass. seen. same. name. ease. / some. menses: one .a the. ass. mm. mm. an. we. weapons cone .m 1.2. some. 2.2. .22. some. .8. asses posse .o on.. on. ms. the. me. am. Hesse once .0 same. toe. on. on. on. me. sao=_emaoa .m 4:. mm. mm. me. too. some. soaoaoanaa essence .4 mnonnem anonoooa enonndh. .om .noeea unenoooe anonnmm nonm_Endm one one one ond on.e ono assesses nowwmwwww somwmwwwm. .eamcm .we .namsm_.w< .samcm .w4 HDZH mus zo ammo on nachos =0: .pCoSooame asepoemmapem on maowoa zm: .psoaooawe Swan 09 meshes =m= .moapaawnw Mo mHonEhm on seems washesn meow sped soaussapsoo pnomcq HN MN .m Hm mm .N .H mm monocm occupaogfiHux moassafips seem-Ssse oaa Ho seamsse soppuom .o .wsm mm mm Hm mm mm 2 p a m as sac Has nae.ee.wam m2 m3 mm 3.3. Smaamfim omaém m4 am.mm. ME, NH.H- .He e :Hawoam m m mam 0H4 mac me oamumma a- md< mac mm can we HH-<.~4 on om.sm.ma om.em on em . mm.am Has an cam mewumam oa<.m<.:< :H<.e< ao.:o.me co mao.mo K m m o mu mu mam Nac.me Hm Ham om.mm.am osmaoam was me .sm.mm on.mn ma<.n«.a-< m4 mo.ao mu m o c was :H . oae.:c me we Ham.:m mm.mm.am amumam mam mo mn.en.ao so.mo we.mm.:m.ma _ mosoom eacsssa-w omoa omo mom can was A -mmo noon -maw noes -om: 108 TABLE XIII CHARACTERISTICS OF SCATTER DIAGRAM Importance Scores Training Scores X-Variable Y-Variable Interval No. of Score Interval No. of Score No. Abilities Range No. Abilities Range Included Included 1 22 h20-735 l 21 30-130 2 22 7&0-810 2 23 135-210 3 21 815-895 3 21 215-265 L; 23 900-950 u 23 270-310 5 22 950-1030 5 22 315-370 The diagram, shown in Figure 6 is composed of twenty-five cells and has been completed by entering each ability in its proper cell. A symbol corresponding to the original order of arrangement of the list of abilities has been used to identify each item: A-l, refers to subarea general principles, item 1, "planning school-farm.shops ---". Each ability has two scores, each of which.must be considered in entering the item on the diagram, as an example, importance 970 and training 310. The score 970 falls into the fifth step-interval, while the training score 310 falls into the fourth interval of the y-axis. A-l thus has been. entered in the fourth row of cells, counting from the bottom, and is located in column five. There are four types of relationships depicted in the diagram and these are defined as follows: 1. High agreement, designated as "h", denotes a relationship that exists when the training score and the 109 importance score of an ability fall in equal step-intervals. The center diagonal row of five cells running from the upper right hand corner to lower left hand corner of the diagram represent the area containing the high agreement area. 2. Satisfactory agreement, denoted by "S”, refers to the abilities that have training scores falling in an interval adjacent to the importance interval either above or below. The two diagonal rows of cells adjacent to the "high agreement" row represent the satisfactory agreement zone. 10f the eight cells found in this area, four are above the perfect agreement row and four are located below it. 3. Overemphasis of training, designated by "0", repre- sents an ability score on the training scale that exceeds its importance score by one or more full intervals, that is, at least one score interval separates the two measures. This area is located in the upper left hand corner of the diagram and contains a total of six cells. It is possible for the training score to exceed the importance by four full intervals. A. Underemphasis of the training, symbolized by "U", is the opposite of overemphasis as defined in item 3, above. This cluster of six cells is located in the lower right hand corner of the diagram. By noting the position of a given ability, in the diagram, in relation to the interval scales of both variables, it is thus possible to assess three statuses of that item. The 110 name of the ability can be identified by checking the symbol against the original list. Figure 6 illustrates the dispersion of the scores when plotted on this type of diagram, and the cases of "under- emphasis" as well as "overemphasis" of the training, are easily located. The extent of the overemphasis is measured by listing the items in the upper left hand portion of the diagram, beginning with the diagonal row of cells one full cell-row removed frmm the high-agreement row. This includes six cells, however, two cells in this area are vacant. The four cells representing overemphasis of training contain a total of twenty abilities categorized as follows: 0. Cold Metal 1 ability D. Sheet Metal 9 abilities H. Rope Work 10 abilities Total 20 abilities 0f the twenty abilities in the overemphasized classifica- tion it is noted that nineteen of them belong in two subareas. These data agree with the analysis of the subareas which in— dicated that the importance and training were out of agreement in these two units. The extent of the underemphasis is determined by counting the number of items found in the six cells in the lower right hand corner of the scatter diagram and these are classified as follows: 111 A. General principles 9 abilities E. Pipe fitting 1 ability F. Arc welding 3 abilities G. Oxy-acetylene welding l ability I. Tool care 3 abilities Total 17 abilities By referring to the diagram it will be noted that one ability, included in the "under" class listed above, is out of agreement to the extent of five intervals. Thirty-eight abilities are classifed as high in agreement, however, four- teen of these are located in the first interval of importance and training. The abilities included in the two diagonal rows of cells containing the scores designated as satisfactory in agreement, include thirty-five, and these, added to the thirty-eight items above yield an overall total of seventy- three cases of satisfactory and high agreement. This amounts to 66.3 percent of the total distribution of 110 items on the list, while the number of abilities in the underemphasis class is 15.h percent of the total. The overemphasis group of 20 abilities turns out to be 10.2 percent of the total. The data presented in this section show that there are some areas of rather sharp disagreement between the importance and training emphasis given to certain types of abilities. Quite a lot of the high and satisfactory agreement is centered in and around the two lowest intervals of importance and training. 112 An overview of the data presented shows the following facts: _ l. ROpe work -- overemphasized lO abilities 2. Sheet metal - overemphasized 9 abilities 3. General principles -- underemphasized 9 abilities h. Arc-welding -- underemphasized _ 3 abilities 5. Tool care -- underemphasized ' 3 abilities The "satisfactory” group is not dealt with here but is further analyzed in later sections of the study. The scatter diagram shows that twenty-two ability scores are included in the lowest step-interval of hmportance, as follows: B. Forge work 11 abilities D. Sheet metal 3 abilities G. Arc and oxy-acetylene 5 abilities H. Rope work 3 abilities Total 22 abilities Furthermore, it is seen by'examining the second-step interval of importance that most of the remaining items in sheet metal and rope work fall into that class, thus, the majority of the abilities in these three subareas are located in the two lowest intervals. These data show that forge work is not rated as an im- portant element in farm.shOp work. Rope and sheet metal rate relatively low in importance, but the diagram.shows that a few abilities in these two units have relatively high scores. Three or four items, representing a rather technical level of 113 .p .mum he oepdApmsaaa as easesopsa on couch mae>on * Ir» om m m 5H nausea mom I mam ecneaaanH cam oa< Ham .:m on mew - mam masseuse man .mo m< .34 as .eg .Hn “mosses nosoom m was .em .mm . NH .HH .He .saa omo . ooo oonupaocsH am ion 0:02 0:02 mas .osa .ese can . cam measaasa mm .wo mad .Han4 .h4 mowsem meaoem 4d Ham .mm sa< .ms4 omoa . mmo oosspsossa am .mm .:m .mn osoz osoz oa<..o< can - mam masseuse an .cn .mn .Hn m4 .34 «newsem eaoem m c« Ga Ga Ga mascaeaa omeoacon mascaeaa omeoacsH wcdaaeaa omdohoeg meanaeaa easemecH uses one an copaoaeeH omssso no spam as» an eopaoaesH omsaso no endpsz weasonm .soapSDHupuan waaqaeaa endpsz wcazonm .coapsodaaman oosspaoaBH Hepaoan use as nauseousH an sounds moapasane as» as nauseousH an ceases mespsaape in} #WMHBHAHm4 mommt2mmu ammmon mmmma mma zH mHmHN mumaououaoaooe seasons“ as moaoom wcadfieau one conepaodsd wsa>dn moapaaape co daemon sensuowswaM# 120 0H ma m ea nausea 0H ea Has mom . mam oossptoasa so mm .Hm as .mm mas .msc mom . mam masseuse so 3H4 .e< mo .Ho so “nomads oaoom . m mu Has use .me . omo . ooo oceaasoasH em .mm was :H .00 .mo 0H .ea .ma .osm - cam masseuse mo .Ho ~H< .m< .H-<_ Hm .sa< .04 . «mosses mosoom . a . nH once . mmo oasessossH :H .me .mo osoz once has .mc .esa can . mam masseuse ~H< .m4 .aud “newnam neaoem m as Ga Ga Ga meanness omeoacoa masseuse omeoaonH. mnacfieaa eedoaeen waadasmmwwneoaomw spam on» we counmwwwm mmdsnolmo oasuez damn opp n venue m eMddno Ho cannez on» mafiZonm .noapsoaApaan msHsHeaa on» wsfizonm .coapsnaapmnn consumedEH HeeaounH as» as mas>sopsa an sounds mosesaane on» as uflsssossH an seamen moapasan< mmmoom MBHQHmd momm SMdm.ho mam>mn HammuHm mmmma mma mo mHmK quda 121 acetylene abilities and one cold metal item; the decreases in training involve one cold metal ability and one sheet metal item. The names and nature of these items can be checked in the following section where the itemized state- ment of the complete list of 110 abilities appears. The fringe-area suggested changes presented in the preceding analysis includes a total of twenty-nine increases in the training emphasis, or 22 percent of the total number of abilities lying in the three highest levels, counting both distributions; the eighteen decreases that are suggested represent 13.6 percent of the total number in these highest levels. Altogether, the forty-seven suggestions for shifting the emphasis represent 35.6 percent of the total number of abilities included. The ninety-two items included in both categories of changes represent 69.0 percent of the total populations of both interval bands; these are divided almost equally be- tween the changes and suggested changes. Itemized Statement of 110 Farm-Shop Abilities The purpose of this section of the analysis is to pre- sent the entire list of farm-shop abilities, showing (1) the importance level*, (2) training level*, and (3) extent of agreement existing between the importance and training levels of each item. In this particular phase of the analysis, the * Level and interval are used interchangeably to designate division of the distributions; see Figure 6. 122 abilities are identified by name as they appeared on the original survey fomms. It will be noted that the abilities were referred to by symbol instead of by name in previous analyses. Each ability is rated in accordance with the three statuses, as specified above, and these data have been gleaned from Figure 6, as presented in the preceding section. The first column in Table XVI to the right of the names of the abilities refers to the importance interval, which is the same as that used in connection with the scatter diagram shown in Figure 6. To illustrate the method used to determine the levels of the training and importance scores of each ability the following example is given: the first ability listed in farm shop is referred to as A-1, and it is located in the fifth column, or fifth interval of the diagram. This interval ranges from.955 to 1030 points inclusive--the highest 20 percent of the scores. The ability A-l has a score of 970 points. Since the score 970 falls in the fifth interval the number ”5" has been entered by A-l in Table to indi- cate its importance status. . .The second column in Table XVI, referring to the training status, is obtained by the same method as described above for the importance status. An example of the method of evaluating one ability as to its training status ability A-l, has a training score of 310 points, which belongs in the fourth 123 TABLE XVI ITEMIZED STATEMENT RELATIVE TO THE IMPORTANCE, TRAINING, AND EXTENT OF AGREEMENT OF 110 FARM-SHOP ABILITIES Final Standing of Each Abilities Included in This Area Abiligy in Rggard To: Importance Training Extent of Intervals Intervals Agreements-e A. General Principles -- Ability to 1. Plan schbol-farm.shops according to the instructional needs in the cemmunity ‘ ' ' 5 h S 2. Plan school and home-farm.shops in accordance with the economic status of local agriculture. h h H 3. Plan school and home-farm shops in accordance with functional requirements. 5 h S h. Select and purchase desirable equipment for school-farm.shops 5 3 U 5. Use basic shop equipment effectively. 5 3 U 6. Store shop equipment effectively. h 3 S 7. Purchase and store BhOp supplies.. h 2 U 8. Design and apply adequate safety color system.to the walls and equipment in school shops. 2 l S 9. Maintain and repair shop equipment commonly found in farm.mechanics shops. 5 2 .U 10. Select shop work for instruction in accordance with economical practice and training value of each job. 11. Plan shop jobs to show cost, labor, and correct design. 12. Enfbrce the use of safety measures in school shops. 13. Apply first aid treatment in case of shop accidents. 1h. Locate and use available resource materials. \J'lU'lF’U'I WPF'NW WCMCIC'. * l, 2, 3, E, 5 refer to relative position of the ability-score in the distributions of importance and training. Refer to Fig. 6. as Extent of agreement refers to the relative positions of both training and importance intervals of each ability; "H" refers to high agreement, "S" denotes satisfactory agreement, "U” refers to undeiempgasis of the training, "0" denotes overemphasis. Refer LOFge e 12h TABLE XVI (Cont.) Final Standing of Each Abilities Included in This Area Ability in Regard To: Importance Training Extent of Interval Interval Agreement 15. Establish and follow desirable policies of public relations in the use and operation of school shops. h 2 U 16. Maintain inventories of equip- ment and supplies. h 2 B. Forge work -- Ability to: 1. Build and maintain a satisfactory forge fire. 1 l H 2. Measure and mark stock for various forging operations. 1 l H 3. Heat stock for various forging operations. 1 l H h. Draw stock to desired shape. 1 l H 5. Upset stock to desired shape. 1 l H 6. Bend stock to dimensions. 1 2 S 7. Forge-weld steel 1 l H 8. Recondition plow shares. 1 l H 9. Temper tool steel 1 2 S 10. Anneal hardened steel 1 l H 11. Cut hot stock to dimensions. 1 l R 0. Cold Metal Work -- Ability to: 1. Measure and mark cold metal stock accurately. ’ 3 h S 2. Select correct hack saw blades and out various kinds of metal. 3 3 H 3. Drill accurate holes to dimensions.u 5 S h. Select correct taps and cut inside threads. 3 3 H 5. Select correct dies and cut outside threads. 3 h S 6. Reverse dies and clean-up damaged threads. 2 3 S 7. Bend cold stock to accurate dimensions. 3 3 H 8. Rivet metal together. 2 h 0 9. Select proper files and do various filing Operations. 3 2 S 125 TABLE XVI (Cont.) Final Standing of Each Ability in Regard To: Abilities Included in this Area Importance Training Extent of Interval Interval Agreement D. Sheet Metal and Soldering -- Ability To: 1. Measure, mark, and cut stock to dbmensions. 3 5 0 2. Lay out radial patterns. 1 3 0 3. Bend sheet metal to dimensions. 2 h 0 h. Do simple forming Operations. 2 3 S, 5. Shape and tin soldering coppers. 2 5 O 6. Solder a lap seam. 3 5 0 7. solder a hook seam. 2 5 O 8. Sweat on a patch. ' 3 5 0 9. Rivet sheet metal together. 2 h 0 10. Cut stove pipe or other similar surfaces. 1 2 S 11. Operate a blow torch. 3 3 H 12. Lay out various kinds of seams. 1 3 0 E. Pipe Fitting - Ability to: 1. Select correct pipe site and type for a given job.. A 3 S 2. Compute required lengths of pipe for a given job and cut to dimensions. 3 h S 3. Cut pipe threads properly. h h H Ii. Ream.pipe to specifications after being cut. 3 h S 5. Select pipe fittings for a given job. A 3 S 6. Assemble pipe and pipe fittings and tighten correctly. 3 3 H 7. Cut out damaged section of pipe from a fixed line and repair in place. 2 1 S 8. Prepare a standard bill of materials of pipe and pipe fittings for a given job and estimate cost. 2 l S 9. Sweat copper pipe joints. 3 l U —--*------—-----—--- 1F. .Arc Welding -- Ability To: 1. Select and purchase the most desirable arc welder for the school or home-farm shop. A h H 126 TABLE XVI (Cont.) Final Standing of Each Ability in Regard to: Abilities Included in This Area Importance Training Extent of Interval Interval Agreement 2. Maintain and repair are welder and accessories. 2 2 H 3. Assemble arc welding equipment and adjust current for welding. 5 5 H A. Do satisfactory flat position welding. 5 5 H 5. Do satisfactory horizontal position welding. 5 5 H 6. Do satisfactory vertical pesition welding. h 3 S 7. Do satisfactory overhead position welding. 2 2 H 8. Make satisfactory welds of various types, i.e., butt, lap, fillet, corner. 5 5 H 9. Do satisfactory brass welding with the carbon arc torch. 2 2 H 10. Apply hard surfacing material. A 2 U 11. Cut metal and punch holes with the arc welder. 3 h S 12. Apply solder with special arc welder attachment. 1 l H 13. Weld cast iron. h l U 1h. Build up worn surfaces. h 2 U 15. Practice and enforce safety measures in the use of arc welding equipment. 5 5 H 16. Recognize and analyze welding errors. G. Oxy-acetylene Welding -- Ability to: 1. Select and purchase the most desirable oxy-acetylene welding equipment for the school or home- farm.shop. h 2 U 2. Assemble oxy-acetylene equipment for various processes. 5 h S 3. Adjust gages and flame for various processes. 5 5 H h. Do satisfactory flat position welding. 5 5 H 5. Do satisfactory vertical position welding. l 2 S 6. Do satisfactory overhead position welding. 1 1 H 127 TABLE XVI (Cont.) ..— u- —- Final Standing of each Ability in Regard to: Abilities Included in This Area Importance Training Extent of Interval Interval Agreement 7. Do satisfactory horizontal position welding. ’ 3 3 8. Make satisfactory welds of various types, i.e., butt, lep, edge. 9. Do satisfactory brass welding. 10. Cut metal with the cutting torch. ll. Weld pipe satisfactorily. 12. Apply hard surfacing materials. 13. Fuse weld cast iron. 1h. Apply hard solder (silver). 15. Test equipment for leaks or other defects. l6..Practice and enforce safety measures in all oxy-acetylene welding. 17. Identify various welding errors. 5 :1: \u HPWNUIW-F' N HHNHUlel CD mmmmmmm F'U'l (DEG H. Rope Work -- Ability to: 1. Select type and size of rope for a given need. 2. Store rope correctly. 3. Calculate strength and safe load for a given size of rcpe. h. Tie common knots. 5. Make common loops. 6. Make common hitches. 7. Make long splice. 8. Make short splice. 9. Reeve a set of blocks. 10. Determine mechanical advantage in a given set of blocks. 11. Finish the ends of rope for permanence. 12. Make cattle halters. 13. Make casting tackle for various farm animals . H mw H HNNNNWN mm m rm w Hmmpmmm p: m 00 o mooooom 00 I. Tool Care -- Ability To: 1. Select correct grinder wheels for various uses. 2. True up grinder wheels. 3. Grind drill bits. U'l-F'F" F'NN (Odd 128 TABLE XVI (Cont.) Final Standing of Each Ability in Regard to: Abilities Included in this Area Importance Training Extent of Interval Interval Agreement h. Grind cold chisels. 5. Dress up punches. 6. Install shop tool handles. 7. Repair, service, and maintain common tools and equipment found in school-farm.shops. 5 2 U rat-4:- 5 S h H 3 S 129 interval of training and the number "h" has, therefore, been entered as the symbol for the training status. The third column in Table XVI refers to the extent of agreement, and this information has been extracted from the diagram in Figure 6; the symbols used to designate the harmony between the training and the importance are the same as those in that diagram, that is, the H, S, U, and 0 refer to the ex- tent of agreement as high, satisfactory, underemphasis, over- emphasis respectively. For further details refer to previous section of this study. . This table does not present new data but does present the essential facts relating to individual abilities in a differ- ent type of organization which provides the name of each ability and the data relative to the three statuses of each. Both types of presentation--scatter diagram and individual-item standing-~seem to have necessary functions in the analysis. The diagram shows the overall situation with respect to dis- persion of the abilities, areas out of agreement in the over- all distribution of training and importance, general picture of importance and training by various levels, and the like; the present method is used to show exactness of detail with respect to the status of each ability in farm shop, and these data are presented for each item.ss it appeared in its original setting. The subareas are maintained, intact, for reference in course planning. It can be determined, by checking the data for a few of the items in the present listing, that the most important features pertaining to the 110 individual abilities in the farm-shop area have been presented in the preceeding section, relative to the analysis by scatter diagram. The nature and extent of the several classifications of farm-shop abilities was discussed in that phase of the study including (a) detailed information relative to specific abilities included in the high, low, and medium.groups according to score intervals, (b) detailed analysis of specific abilities included in groups classified according to areas of agreement, and (c) detailed analysis of changes suggested in the training emphasis of specific abilities in various score intervals of the distribution. This phase of the investigation has presented the list of 110 farm.shop abilities by name, and by subareas, as they appeared on the survey forms. The status of each item.has been presented with reference to its levels of importance and training, and the extent of agreement existing between these two levels, in terms of a statistical criterion. The essential points relative to each subarea of abilities have been presented.under the headings of the subarea names. The main points relating to the individualiabilities in each subarea, are presented in the subsequent material. 1. The first subarea on the list contains sixteen abilities classified under the title of general principles, which are sometimes referred to as "fundamentals of farm shop". 131 Fifteen, of the sixteen items in this unit, are found in the upper three intervals of training. The large number of abilities located in the cells of underemphasis indi- cates that the training is out of balance in the low direc- tion. A total of nine items are checked as underemphasized. 2. The eleven abilities in forge work represent the lowest subarea, as a unit, in the study. All items in this unit fall into the lowest level of importance. The training is in high agreement with the importance, as indicated by the majority of H's. Only two abilities in this subarea are found above the first interval of training and these are lo- cated in the second level. 3. Cold metal work is found to be above average in importance in farm.shop, based on the status of abilities included. The unit contains nine abilities; and seven of these are located in the upper three levels of importance. The training, in a majority of the abilities, is in harmony with the importance levels of the individual items with eight falling into the upper three levels of training. A. A majority of the abilities included in sheet metal work are located in the low brackets of the importance distribution. The training scores of sheet metal abilities, however, are found in the high levels of the training dis- tribution. The resulting relationships are signified by a large majority of instances of overemphasized training. 132 5. The majority of the abilities listed in pipe fitting have above-average score-levels in importance, al- though a few fall in the second interval on the scale. The training in pipe fitting seems to be in agreement with the importance as indicated by the large number of abilities found in the "S" and ”H" cells. 6. The presence of eleven arc welding abilities in the upper two intervals is evidence of the high importance' given the majority of items in this unit.‘ Four abilities in arc welding, however, are located in the two lowest brac- kets of importance; a study of these items shows that they are activities of a specialized nature. The training is in agreement with the importance in most of the sixteen abilities, only three instances of underemphasis being noted. . 7. The situation in oxy-acetylene unit is very shmi- lar to that found in arc welding, that is, the hmportance of a majority of the seventeen items is high on the scale, however, abilities including five specialized typesof‘activities are found in the lowest two brackets. The sixteen marks of high and/or satisfactory indicate that a high level of agreement exists between the training and importance scores in this sub- area. Only one case of underemphasis is noted on the list of -seventeen items. Twelve items, of the seventeen on the list, are found in the upper three intervals of importance. 133 8. The subarea of rope work contains thirteen abilities, but only two have scores on the scale as high as the third interval of importance. {The other eleven are lo- cated in the two lowest intervals on the importance scale. In contrast to the low_status of importance, the training level averages almost four, and a state of disagreement be- tween the training and the importance scores is indicated by the ten marks for overemphasis. 9. Although the number of abilities included in the area of tool care is not large, the seven items studied are located in the fourth and fifth intervals of importance, thus signifying that activities relating to tool fitting are imp portant in the area of farm.shop. The training picture is out of harmony with the importance of the tool care abilities. The relationship is indicated by the six marks for underemphasis. The high percentage score of the unit, tool care, has been shown, andused, in previous analysis, and it should be noted that there are only a small number of abilities in- cluded in this blockand this must be considered as a factor in final evaluation of units. Digest of Data Relative to Selected Factors of the Item.Analysis This section of the study represents a digest of data re- lated to selected factors of the item analysis and is considered to be complementary to that analysis. Table XVII is organized 13h .thHHnm asanoanawd has sou He>aoch odafihopoo on o .wam com # ee ee Hm mm mw mm Hm Hm mm mm mm mm OHH eHeeee m m e a o o m o H o N m H m a eeeo Heea .H w m 0H m H m m m H m a o m 0 MH see: teem .m s. m.m 0 NH : s a H m s m m m e NH weHeHe: encampeoeuhxo .w e m.m e NH N H m m H H m m m. e eH meweHes ee< .m a m e a m o o m m a m m o o o wcHeeHs eeHm .m H a HH 3 o m H m a a m o m 0 NH Heeez peesm .n e m w a o o H m s e m H H o 9 see: Heeez.eHeo .o o m o o o HH m o o o o o o 0 HH see: emeem .m e H o mH m o m H m o e a o m 0H eeHeHeeHem Homecow .< .saa .QEH .nae .qEH .GHB .QSH .aaa .QEH .Gha .QmH .cna .QE .Gae .QEH and paw on : mHo>oA ‘ nu. sum dendnzm e e g . m: ended no o 90.5: $wA<>mHBZH QMOUw Hme mm& 2H QMBN mgmca accused m on» as pamoamacwam # to». :m. an. #om. vow. mchHsae . . .maomooea .H> to». tom. seam. «tam. same. ceHeeaseu .> em. tee. the. ems. aNe. aeeaaea .sH He. team. tem. ems. ass. maeeeeea .HHH tom. seam. ems. ems. team. .esem panacea .HH asbm. ammo. #Nm. amp. atom. .mawcm .m< .H .wmwmwmmw cademm .esom .mnmam masonw hm -1 commpaodEWI opHmodaoo macsssm amazedea AesosoPH» .Haw4 spacesoamem Ronny mosam> eomwuaomEH 'll mam wGHGHNaBI '7') mazmnzommmm m0 mmaomw Mm amazHxN mumda 158 (3) the rho correlation coefficients computed from all possible pairings of groups of respondents. The training ranks are compared to the importance ranks of the different groups as an added measure of group relationship. The percentages listed in Table XXII show the range of scores covering the entire area of farm structures and these data show that teacher-education personnel tend to rate the subareas of farmpstructures abilities higher on the importance scale than other groups, while teachers are second in this respect. Farmers and agricultural engineers seem to be about even in their ratings of the importance of the seven sub- areas. These data show the range in percentage scores to be 52.5 to 90.5, the former referring to agricultural engineers' rating of D, related woodwork, while the latter rating repre- sents the score of the teacher education group of B, tool care. The differences between the individual groups, by subareas, are seen by comparing each group perCentage score with the corresponding composite score which appears in the last column of the table. {There is little variability of subarea percentage scores between groups, considering the varied backgrounds of education and experience of the respon- dents. The companion Table XXIII indicates the numerical ranks of percentage scores based on the respondent groups' percen- tage scores. These data show, as an example, the rank order of agricultural engineers' subarea scores in farm structures 159 2-l-h-7-6-3-5, and these ranks should be read and interpreted as follows: (1) the "2", as the first number in the series, refers to the first subarea on the list of the abilities, that is, A, general principles. The number "2" refers to the place of importance of subarea A, in the whole series of seven subareas, that is, subarea A, is the second largest score in the series. (2) The second number in the series, "1", refers to unit B, tool care, and indicates that this unit ranked first in importance, since the score of that block is the highest in the series. (3) Other numbers in the series should be read and interpreted accordingly. Table XXIV is the third member of the series of tables on which this phase of the analysis_is based, showing the correlation coefficients, derived through the use of the ranks of the percentage scores. The statistic, rho, is a method of measuring the relationship of rank order, sometimes referred to as the rank method of correlation; it is con- sidered to be a valid measure of relationship where the N is small. Rho is particularly valuable for use in computing correlation coefficients of asymmetrical distributions, such as the scores in the present study. The method used to comp puts the correlation coefficient in Table XXIV is to apply a 6 D?- the formula rho 1 - N (N - l) 1 Henry E. Garrett, Statistics in Psychologygang‘Educa- tionI Longmans, Green and Company, New York, 1953. P. 355. 160 A study of the array of coefficients in Table XXIV shows that all of them are statistically significant at the five percent level and eight of the twenty are significant at the one percent level. Farmers' scores produce the lowest relationships when paired with other groups, although all of the coefficients of the latter are above the five percent level. The coefficients pertaining to agricultural engineers and leaders in teacher education contain two rho's in each instance above the one percent level, while the teachers' list includes one coefficient that is significant at the one percent level. The composite grouping shows the highest rela- tionships when paired with all other groups. The data presented in this section of the study tend to affirm the earlier presentation showing that a high positive relationship exists between groups, when based on their responses on the importance of the various subareas of'abili- ties in farm.structures. As an added measure of the extent of group agreement (of less importance) each groups' ranks of importance, by subareas, is paired with the ranks of the training, by sub- areas. The rho's listed in the last column of Table XXIV show the extent of these relationships. These coefficients show that agriculturalengineers' and teacher education leaders' ranks of importance, taken by series of subareas, are in agreement with the training ranks, at the five percent 161 level. Likewise, the ranks of subareas of the composite grouping is positively related to the training, that is, the 109 individuals considered collectively are in agree- ment when their rank order of the subareas on importance is compared to the rank order of the subarea training scores. Teachers' and farmers' ranks are not in complete agreement with respect to the training, as revealed by the coefficients of .61 and .5h, neither of which is significant. The comparisons that appear to have some bearing on the assessment of group differences and similarities are dis- cussed and summarized as follows: (1) agricultural engineers and leaders in teacher education are in harmony with respect to their rank order of importance, compared to the rank order of the training. This relationship is affirmed by the coeffi- cient of .86 for that pairing; (2) farmers' coefficient of .Sh indicates that their ratings vary the greatest from the order of training ranks, and although there is some positive relationship indicated, this coefficient is below the 5 per- cent level; (3) teachers' rank order of importance of subareas, paired with training ranks does not yield a statistically significant rho although it shows a positive relationship; when the whole subarea arrangement of the respondents' ranks of importance is considered the agreement between the impor- tance and the training is fairly high. This is signified by rho .79 -- the composite paired with the training. 162 Generally high agreement between groups is shown to be prevalent from.these comparisons and this fact is in harmony with the data previously presented. Gregg Relationships a§_Revealed by the Ranks of Importance Scores of Abilitie§_within Subareas of the FarmPStructures Area The extent of specific points of agreement or disagree- ment between groups of respondents is further indicated by the coefficients of correlation shown in Table XXV. These rho's have been computed by the method used to calculate subarea coefficients with one variation noted as follows: the rank order of abilities in the present method of analysis is determined on the basis of individual scores instead of subarea scores. As an example, the data in Table XXV show that agricultural engineers ranked the abilities in subarea G, repairing farm buildings, as follows; 1-6-3-h.S-7-2-h.5. The first figure listed in the series is "1“, indicating that the score of ability number one in this subarea is the highest on the list of seven individual items, while the score of ability number two on the list is in sixth place, according to the magnitude of the scores of each item. Two abilities are tied for rank four, with ninetyefive points each, there- fore both are given a rank of n.5, thus there is no rank four or five in this series. . A study of the coefficients listed in Table XXV shows that each respondent group has been paired with all possible 1&3 sendoduanwam no He>oH accused who *# consoamdzwam mo doped smocked e>am # was. ma. om. me. seam. as». mmcaeaaem no easaom .e me. «an. m:. cede. seem. am. sesame: new osonoeoo .a seam. ease. «so. same. seen. ##me. madness use meapeaam .m seem. 00. ms. atom. eemm. sea. meaaaozeooz.eopaaom .o same. ease. atom. taco. «ado. gene. soauoseancoo .o co. seem. «so. eeao. seem. an». cede Hoes .m an. seem. so. oo. mm. 0:. nofleaonasm essence .4 maoShdm anesmmwe naowmwm Gowwaumw whenowoa mhtham mohfipofihpm Bush and noapwosom Goapdosvm use one bad maenoeoa genomes nonoeoa. .aawsm .wd .enmcm .w< .onwcm .w< Xxsmumo on nachos so: .pnoaeoawe hAOpeeuuauaa on nachos am: .psoaeeame news as anodes am: .uouuaaane no uaonahm on» on homes onenascnuhop sped soapssanaoo szwmq ea as ma me an 2 u, m m 3 Zach meuom me.~e . me . mn.oq .mm .om on.sa.ea.mn _ . em.eu ‘ mac 1. m 4 m 7 «a ms was ee.ae 2e om .mn oHH-os .om .HH-< .Hao.oao - A .o< . m can 0 a is m a A a, .a .2 h a m e o.mo oea- H .m .~< .He .sa .Hs .ofle .: . _ o o 5a.:e . ma oo.me ma.mm oomumea .m can .Hm .mo ..:0 s<.s<.m< am.mm .m o o . ma.~a an. ommomom aw.“ (”WW nonoom m meanness-» mew mew ooa mm“ uomm uomo umes. -ooo . meaoom accessedaHtx . modpaaaee nonnaosape Bush as Ho_2ewweav woaueom .n .ma& 178 show the relation between different percentage levels of importance compared to the same percentage levels on the training axis. By examining the diagram in Figure 7 it will be seen that it contains twenty-five cells arranged in five columns and five rows, the columns representing various intervals of importance of the distribution by quintile division, and the rows representing the five intervals of training scores in the distribution by quintile division. The method of scaling consisted of dividing each of the two frequency distributions into five units of approximately 20 percent. This method of division produced intervals of approximately fourteen scores each, Cutting points were determined by calculating the first, second, third, and fourth quintiles, then followedseveral minor adjustments which were necessary in order to place all equal scores in the swme in- terval. Step-intervals then, were established on each axis so as to include: (1) the first step interval, of fourteen importance scores below the first quintile, or 420 through 685 points, (2) the second interval, of fifteen importance scores above the first and below the second quintile, or 690 through 790 points, etc. The y-scale was constructed in a similar way, using the training scores and making adjustments so as to include equal scores in the same step interval. When the diagram.was completed, each ability was plotted in its preper cell with respect to its importance 179 and training scores; as an example, the first ability on the list, coded A-l, refers to the first ability listed in subarea A; this item has an importance score of 900 points and a training score of lhO points. By reading along the x-axis it will be noted that this score belongs in the fifth, or highest interval of importance. Reading up the y-axis the correct step interval of the training score is found in the third row from the bottom; hence the symbol A-l, is entered in column five, row three. In a similar manner, the entire list of abilities are plotted on the scatter dia- gram. This structure provides a method of determining the status of any ability on the list by noting the location of the item in the diagram in relation to both.importance and training axes. In addition to these two measures, the ex- tent of agreement between the importance and training can also be determined; as an example, reading in the fifth row from.the left, the second cell from the bottom contains the symbol E12. By checking the master list of abilities in the next section of this chapter, it will be found that 312 refers to selecting and applying metal paint to farm machinery. Some interpretations that can be determined from the position of E12 on the diagram are: (1) this ability has an importance score falling in the fifth interval and the training score falls in the second interval; (3) since the training interval is three and the importance interval 180 is five, the extent of agreement is labeled as "underemphasis" of the training and is marked "u". By examining the diagram further, it will be noted that the extent of agreement is classified in four ways, namely, 1. High agreement: High agreement is defined as being the relationship between the training and importance intervals of a given ability existing when these intervals are the same, that is 5-5 or h-h. The abilities representing high agreement between the two variables will be found in the diagonal row of five cells running from the upper right- hand corner to the lower left in the diagram, The symbol "H" is used to designate this relationship. 2. Satisfactory agreement: A relationship that exists when the training and importance intervals of a given ability lie in adjacent positions on the scale, either above or below,‘gig., training 5 -- importance h, or the relation- ship might be reversed. There are eight cells so classified and the letter "S" signifies this relationship. 3. Overemphagis of training: An ability having a training score that falls on the scale at least one full interval above its importance interval represents the rela- tionship referred to as "overemphasis", as an exmmple, training 5 -- importance 3. The six cells clustered in the upper left-hand corner of the diagram represent this area, referred to as "O". 181 h. Underemphasis of the training: An ability having a training score that falls on the scale at least one full interval below its importance interval is considered to repre- sent "underemphasis" in terms of the training. The six cells which cluster in the lower right hand corner of the diagram comprise this area, and the symbol used to designate under- training is "U". . A study of the scatter diagram, Figure 7, reveals the following facts: l.- The two highest intervals of the importance scores contain abilities from the following subareas: A. General principles 6 abilities B. Tool care and use 8 abilities C. Construction of buildings 5 abilities D. Related woodwork l ability E. Painting and glazing 3 abilities F. Concrete and masonry 3 abilities G. Repair of buildings 2 abilities 2. The lowest interval of importance scores contain items from subareas as follows: A. General principles 1 ability 0. Construction of buildings 3 abilities D. Related woodwork 7 abilities E. Painting and glazing 3 abilities 182 3. The two highest intervals of training scores contain abilities from.subareas as follows: A. B: C! D. F. General principles Tool care and use Construction of buildings Related woodwork Concrete and masonry \J n) ~q -q 0\ abilities abilities abilities abilities abilities h. The lowest training interval contains fourteen abilities, distributed as follows: C. D. E. F: G. Construction of buildings Related woodwork Painting and glazing Concrete and masonry Repair of buildings to w- Un <> »- ability abilities abilities ability abilities S. The five cells representing high agreement con- tain twenty-eight abilities, nine of which are located in the lowest interval of importance, and may be discounted to some extent in assessing the agreement between training and importance. Nevertheless, the nine lowest scores belong in the seventy items in the study, and the twenty-eight scores classified as high in agreement represent ho percent of the total number. The item.statement follows in the next section, where the agreement by individual abilities may be checked. The abilities are identified by name in that section. 183 6. Of the cells representing the "overemphasis" area in the diagram, three cells contain nine abilities, or 12.8 percent of the total, while three other cells are vacant. 7. The "underemphasis" area contains nine items also, or 12.8 percent of the total, and two cells in that section of the diagram are vacant. 8. The "satisfactory" area contains twenty abilities, or 3h.3 percent of the distribution. The information presented in connection with the scatter diagram constructed from.an x-variable of importance scores and a y-variable of training scores, revealed the following essential facts in regard to farm.structures abilities: 1. A majority of the abilities included in the upper NO percent of the impgjtance scores came from.the subareas .tool care and use, general.princip1es, and construction of buildings, while the largest block of abilities found in the lowest interval of importance belong in the subarea of re- lated woodwork. 2. The upper to percent of the trainingigggggg are the units tool care and use, construction of buildings, con- crete and masonry and general principles. 3. The lowest interval in importance includes items mostly from.re1ated woodwork, construction of buildings, and Painting. 18h h. The lowest interval of training scores contains abilities mostly from related woodwork, painting and glazing, and repair of buildings. 5. The high agreement area contains twenty-eight abilities, or to percent of the total number included in the farm structures area. 6. The over and underemphasis areas of training each contain nine abilities, or 12.8 percent of the total distribUtione 7. The satisfactory agreement area contains twenty- ‘ four abilities or 3h.3 percent of the total. Digest of Data Relative to Some Changes Indicated in the TrainingEmphasis of Farm.Mechanic§ Abilities This phase of the investigation represents an outgrowth of the preceding section of the study, and is complementary to it. The purpose of the present analysis is to assess the extent of the changes in the training emphasis that seem to be indicated by the data in the scatter diagram, Figure 7. Two types of analyses are represented by Tables XXVIII and .XXIX; the first relating to the definite changes indicated, are supported by the statistical criterion of at least one full step-interval of buffer zone between the importance and training intervals of a given ability; the second, referring to the fringe-area changes or suggestions to be studied, are 185 .5 .mwm Ho Seaweed heavens one as pepeapmsaaa ms maebaepafi op nachos doped # o ‘M m, m easemw. ma .ma mew . mos :m No mm .mc meaoom eocwpaogsH CH ewndm m4 .a-< 04 .04 mm oea - mas . meaoom wadsaena :« owsem m mam . 0mm mm .mm eaoz oaoz be .Hw mohoom oocepnerH cu emcem mo com a med meaoom madcadae ea owedm : ma .ma oeoa . com :9 0:02 0:02 Nam monoom oecepaoaeHca ownem me am omm . mom m1 .o< N< .HI< meaoem wnacflaas Ga ewcdm m weanasaa massaeae mcanfiena madcaeae endoscoa omeoaonm emeoaoen cheeses“- 1' pepsoaesH memcdno msflzonm peueoadnHimewadno mussoam .soapsnanpmfin madcaeaa on» as .noapsnaapmaa oondpaodSH on» :« Ha>peusH masseuseH an scenes moapaaan< maesaopeH an seamen moapaaane mZOHBDmHMBmHQ mmmnaobmamlzm4m mma 2H *mqm>mu BWMMOHm mmmma awe 2H mHmdmmzm GZHZHde Ema 2H GHE40HOZH mmwzKN mnmaean he cepmaq mowpaaunfi. mas>sopem an saunas moapaaan< mZOHBDmHmBmHQ mmmDBODmamlzmMH 9mmmem mmmme NEE 2H mHmdmmzm GZHZHmu H>Hm awe 2H mflHBHAHmd mo mbadam moz<9mom2H Q24 wZHZHde mo zomHm no upcosoeasoon on waaonoooe aopfiposaua you squad soapdduaco> one aoaaoHSuaH one swanon .OH A V A V A V A V A V A V .nemaoe». you «Been one upmaon aooaoa no swamoa .o A V A V A V M V A V A V .uadaeopda no Haas caucuses s oadaonm .c A V A V A V V A V A V .eaoeuseae .g. a. . noapsaoa :« uwsaoaasn no soapsooa on» seam .u A V A V A V A V A V A V .apcdan asap poaaeopzd one odem .o A V A V A V A V A V A V .nohdpodhpo Bush ho wwzassho oanfiaa one: .m A V A V A V A V A V A V .naaAsopqs wsdeAAsn oAnauVooe pace poonom .: A V A V A V A V A V A V ...eseostp..2t.e . . - Ho amoo one hpaoando Assam opsswpuu .m A V A V A V A V A V A V ....Aeseoaa. Hdhfipasoaams nsoans> uo upcoanasooh Hacoaaonsu on wdaoaooos mohfipoShao seam .N A V A V A V A V A V A V onodsocooo ho uednaocaan . canon on wcwonoooo nonsaoSMun Shah Guam .H «o» AuAAAn< nu mwAaAosaam Assumes .4 mmmbsopmam 924 chHnuHDm andm «dead .H pa wcaoo ca Haas» mo undead capecouwoa a mafia madcawha one cause ocoz one Add» Ahaa>wpwd news no mafiucaumaoccs ecu swooazonx sensuous oz cam utoeoz noe< swaaqama mo mo mmmmo¢ma Mm QMGHMZ mmHBHqud mo MDDBM 4 < Kaeaodq< GA oepmaq announcemom on pcom onesnnoapmond mo AA owsaV voonm seafloonn m Nanmmm< 2&5 APPENDIX C List of Farm-Shop Abilities Included in the Study Area: Farm Shop A. General Principles -- Ability to: 1. 2. 3. 1+- 5. 7. 9. 10. 11. 12. ii. 151 16. Plan school-farm.shops according to the instructional needs in the community. Plan school and home-farm shOps in accordance with the economic status of local agriculture. Plan school and home-farm shops in accordance with functional requirements. Select and purchase desirable equipment for school- farm.shops. Use basic shop equipment effectively. Store shop equipment effectively. Purchase and store shop supplies. Design and apply adequate safety color system to the walls and equipment in school shops. Maintain and repair shop equipment commonly found in farm.mechanics shops. Select shop work for instruction in accordance with economical practice and training value of each Job. Plan shop Jobs to show cost, labor, and correct design. Enforce the use of safety measures in school shops. Apply first aid treatment in case of shop accidents. Locate and use available resource materials. Establish and follow desirable policies of public relations in the use and operation of school shops. Maintain inventories of equipment and supplies. B. Forge Work -- Ability to: l. 2. 3. ‘5‘: 7: 9: 10. 11. Build and maintain a satisfactory forge fire. Measure and mark stock for various forging operations. Heat stock for various forging Operations. Draw stock to desired shape. Upset stock to desired shape. Bend stock to dimensions. Forge-weld steel. Recondition plow shares. Temper tool steel Anneal hardened steel. Cut hot stock to dimensions. 21m C. Cold Metal Work -- Ability to: l. 2. 3. 7: 8. 9. Measure and mark cold metal stock accurately. Select correct hack saw blades and out various kinds of metal. Drill accurate holes to dimensions. Select correct taps and cut inside threads. Select correct dies and cut outside threads. Reverse dies and clean-up damaged threads. Bend cold stock to accurate dimensions. Rivet metal together. Select proper files and do various filing operations. D. Sheet Metal and Soldering -- Ability to: l. 2. 3. l4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. ll. 12. Measure, mark,and cut stock to dimensions. Lay out radial patterns. Bend sheet metal to dimensions. Do simple forming operations. Shape and tin soldering coppers. Solder a lap seam. Solder a hook seam. Sweat on a patch. Rivet sheet metal together. Cut stove pipe or other similar surfaces. Operate a blow torch. Lay out various kinds of seams. E. Eipe Fitting -- Ability to: l. 2. 3. 6. 7. 8. 9. Select correct pipe size and type for a given Job. Compute required lengths of pipe for a given Job and cut to dimensions. Cut pipe threads properly. Ream.pipe to specificiations after being cut. Select pipe fittings for a given job. Assemble pipe and pipe fittings and tighten correctly. Cut out damaged section of pipe from.a fixed line and repair in place. Prepare a standard bill of materials of pipe and pipe fittings for a given Job and estimate cost. Sweat copper pipe Joints. F. Arc Welding -- Ability to: 1. 2. 3. 1+. S. Select and purchase the most desirable arc welder for the school or home-farm shop. Maintain and repair are welder and accessories. Assemble arc welding equipment and adjust current for welding. Do satisfactory flat position welding. Do satisfactory horizontal position welding. f ‘ ;- . "L2. . ‘1 'fl’ \ ""hv . I._V G. H. 9. 10. 11. ii. 15: 16. 2k? Do satisfactory vertical position welding. Do satisfactory overhead position welding. Make satisfactory welds of various types, i.e., butt, lap, fillet, corner. Do satisfactory brass welding with the carbon arc torch. Apply hard surfacing material. Cut metal and punch holes with the arc welder. Weld cast iron. Build up worn surfaces. Practice and enforce safety measures in the use of arc welding equipment. Recognize and analyze welding errors. Day-Acetylene Welding -- Ability to: 1. 17. Select and purchase the most desirable oxy-acetylene welding equipment for the school or home-farm shop. Assemble oxy-acetylene equipment for various processes. Adjust gages and flame for various processes. Do satisfactory flat position welding. Do satisfactory vertical position welding. Do satisfactory overhead position welding. Do satisfactory horizontal position welding. Make satisfactory welds of various types, i.e., butt, lap, edge. Do satisfactory brass welding. Cut metal with the cutting torch. Weld pipe satisfactorily. Apply hard surfacting materials. Fuse weld cast iron. Apply hard solder (silver). Test equipment for leaks or other defects. Practice and enforce safety measures in all oxy- acetylene welding. ' Identify various welding errors. Rope Work - Ability to: 1. 2. 3. Select type and size of rope for a given need. Store rope correctly. Calculate strength and safe load for a given size of rope. Tie common knots. Make common loops. Make common hitches. Make long splice. Make short splice. Reeve a set of blocks. Determine mechanical advantage in a given set of blocks. Finish the ends of rope for permanence. ' Make cattle halters. Make casting tackle for various farm animals. I. 248 Egg} Care -- Ability to: 1. 2. 3. h. 6. 7. Select correct grinder wheels for various uses. True up grinder wheels. Grind drill bits. Grind cold chisels. Dress up punches. Install shop tool handles. Repair, service, and maintain common tools and equipment found in school-farm shops. 'a ~m~ A. ...-..- -‘_-a-a APPENDIX SUMMARY OF DATA RELATIVE Agricultural Teacher Engineers Education Group T’3Ch91‘BA " so ‘ Q C 0 g o I; 4: fl 4-3 fl 4-, s a ‘2 z .2 a 0 . 0 n o . o u 0 g 0 a 2 '8 {g l: = '3 8 g 0 '0 g H m E z +3 m E: z p n o 0 d o. o W 22 z .3 O 0 g a . . . a . :2 :3 :2 0 <3 o o ‘5 5 54 z z 2' 2 z z A. General Principle 3 1 8309510201103182350 2 920100930105 26150335 3 9201001110115 3110 0360 1 101010512 0 0 120 32 9 0365 5 10101051110115 3821390 6 611180102011030833110 7 71109010111053083310 8 6111807111 90152112270 9 7110901110115 3560380 10 8 3 0 9511 1 0 115 3011 0355 11 7110901200120 2911 13115 12 11 0 011011 1 0 115 38 2 1390 13 10 1 0 105 11 1 0 115 30 10 1 350 111 2 010010 2 0 110 32 9 0365 15 710901011105 3290365 16 ,7 u 0 9010 2 0 110 2911 1315 $23.23. 86.1 1525 92.1 "75 8...; 5"“ Rank 3 >3 3 2A9 I ' ’ - mm”- (3.5 L 8s: D 188% TO THE FARM SHOP AREA : E yam Farmers Composite Sample Teacher's Training A a H j a a o d o m o . d 4-1 w-l a .4 +2 '* ‘ +9 d +2 o +2 a f. .‘ s a c: a c: a. a h ' 0 0 0 II 0 0 0 n 0 o O H 9!: m "d c: »--| m 'o c: H m 'o r: a ‘r' an o 0 as _m o o as a o +3 g5; M 2: z 43 a: :2: z 43 HI g 2 £3 ... a a a 5* a a a 9 a a a 2‘7 5: 2 2 Z Z Z. Z 2 z z 3;; 11L 1 0 815 90 11 2 970 21 20 o 310 2g; 36 6 0 390 80 ‘ 26 0 930 ' 20 19 2 295 IF 36 5 1 385 87 18 1 960 18 22 1 290 :2; 36 6 0 390 90 16 0 980 12 20 9 220 1;. no 2 0 u1o 99 6 1 1020 12 27 2 255 3,§ 3h 8 0 380 80 22 h 910 It 19 8 235 {a 32 9 1 365 79 22 5 900 7 21 13 175 28 m 0 350 56 L16 1*. 790 7 12 22 130 32 9 1 365 81 22 o 950 10 15 16 175 36 6 0 390 85 21 0 955 9 25 7 215 30 12 0 360 78 27 1 915 10 18 13 190 %; no 2 0 A10 100 5 1 1025 21 15 5 285 36 5 1 385 87 17 2 955 7 11 23 125 27 13 2 335 78 26 2 910 12 23 6 235 .33 7 2 365 82 21 3 925 13 15 13 205 :3 31 8 3 350 77 .25 .1 895 10 13 18 165 4/ 6085 18990 3505 J 89.95 88.22 53.83 APPENDIX D Teachers Teacher Education Group, Agricultural En oj A .Hapoa osoz .oz opsaoooz .oz asausomnm .02 «Hence osoz .oz ousaoooz .oz Hadesomum .oz waspoa osoz .oz ouaaeooz .oz Hoauaommm .oz SUBAREA Forge Work B. 2 255 1 265 2 250 h 235 u 225 0 275 7 20 114. 170 70 12 27 7O 13 27 65 ll 28 1 8 8 9 8 3 3 SS 7 8 7 1 SO 1 1 2 3 SS 70 10 27 6O 8 29 75 1h 27 6S 55 h 7 l 2 6O 6 2 7 3 2 3 3 10 55 75 60 8 250 ' 1 305 70 17 16 1 8 8 8 8 3 3 7O 21 19 1 2 1 l l 5 230 3 220 60 1O 26 2 8 6 10 I 32 6 7O 7&0 60 590 11 26&J Total 56.06 59.12 u8.76 Percent Rank 250 (Continued) Farmers Composite Sample Teacher's Training H H A. d 0 a o a! o ~4 -p '4 .9 .4 .9 .u s u a A» a c: h :3 so :2: h 0 0 0 on 0 O 0 n 0 0 0 In M 'U I: H w ”d :2 H m 'U s: H a O 0 d C O O a e) o 0 d m 2: 2 +3 m 2: 2. +3 :21 z a +3 6 <3 6 9‘ 6 6‘ 6 5* 6 6' 6 5* z z z z z z. z z z _ 11 19 9 235 31 61 11 615 6 6 29 90 12' 21 9 225 29 61 13 610 6 7 28 95 15 18 9 210 30 62 11 610 5 16 20 130 16 18 8 250 32 59 15 615 6 13 22 125 13 18 11 220 26 60 20 560 1 13 21 105 16 18 8 250 37 58 11 660 7 13 21 135 10 17 15 185 19' 16 11 120 3 6 32 60 19 13 10 255 12 12 '22 630 1 12 25 100 11 2011 210 10 52 11 660 6 18 17 150 1 2315 155 31 61 8 660 3 12 26 90 10 21 11 205 22 67 17 555 h 10 27 9o 2&30 6595 11' 70' “"' 52.59 9 56.56 25.91 9 APPENDIX D ricultural Teacher gineers Education Group Teachers H H H a o d o d o H +3 H +3 H +3 +3 a! 43 d 4-3 d SUBAREA g g . a g t; . ... 8 2 . n m 'U s: H m 'd :3 H I! 'd c: H n O 0 d n O O I n O 0 d m 53 z '9 m ‘5: Z «P m s: z +1 O O 0 e e e 54 e e e E4 0 e O E"! O O O O O O O O 0 2 z .z z z z z z z C. Cold Metal Work 1 11 0 0 110 10 2 0 110 30 11 0 355 2 9 2 0 100 ll 1 0 115 25 16 0 330 3 9 2 0 100 10 2 0 110 30 11 0 355 1 8 3 0 95 10 2 0 110 23 18 0 320 5 9 2 0 100. 10 2 0 110 21 17 0 325 6 6 5 0 85 8 3 1 95 22 18 1 310 7 83095102011029120350 8 6 5 0 85 9 3 0 105 26 15 0 335 9 7 1 0 90 10 2 0 110 29 12 0 350 Total *‘ 860 975“ 3035‘ Percent 86 e 86 90 e27 820 11 Rank 2 h, 11 251 (Continued) Farmers Composite Sample Teacher's Training H H H s o a) 0 c3 0 H p H p .4 4a 4.) a: +3 a! +3 Cl G :4 c: :4 s: a. O O 0 D 0 0 O m 0 O o n m 'o a H m "o a H as o s: H C O 0 d m 0 0 d an O 0 d a: z: 2: +3 21 z :2: +3 a: 2*. 2 +3 0 . e 54 e e e E-e e e e E. O O O O O O O O O z z 2 z z z z z 2: 23 1h 5 300 71 27 S 875 23 15 3 305 23 18 l 320 68 37 1 865 11 21 6 230 35 6 1 380 81 21 1 915 28 lO 3 330 28 13 1 315 69 36 1 870 13 19 9 225 28 13 1 315 71 31 l 880 19 16 6 270 21 20 1 310 56 16 1 790 16“ 12‘ 13 220 20 19 3 295 67 36 3 850 18 17 6 265 17 20 5 270 56 13 5 795 21 11 6 280 20 18 1 290 66 36 1 810 10 21 10 205 '7710 '2336"“ 80.81 63.11 a'u‘nA-«.l-v \‘I u A. “A i.— .... _ ' Agricultural Engineers Teacher Education Group APPENDIX D __A Teachers vi .4 r4 3 f3 .3 3 .‘3 3 SUBAREA ‘5 3 ‘5 2 ‘5 2 8 3 8 n 8 6° 8 £3 3 «8 2 £3 2 2 2 z: 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 a ' o o e e e 0 e e e E e e e B O O O E4 O O O O O O z z z. z z z z z z D. Sheet Metal and Soldering 1 9 2' 0 100 9 2 l 100 31 10 o 360 2 5 6 0 80 1 7 1 75 15 25 1 275 3 7 10 90921100 23 180320 1 6 5 0 85 7 1 1 90 22 16 3 300 5 830958101003371365 6 6 5 o 85 8 '1 0 100 30 10 1 350 7 65085660903191355 8 6 5 0 85 8 1 0 100 32 8 1 360 9 6 5 0 85 8 1 0 100 28 ll 2 335 10 3 6 2 60 6 6 0 90 18 22 1 290 ll 8 3 0 95 9 2 1 100 29 12 0 350 12 3 6 2 6o 1 8 0 80 20 21 0 305 Total 1005 3965 Percent 76.13 78.12 80.58 Rank 5 8 7 252 (Continued) Farmers Composite Sample Teacher's Training '3 O r; I) r; 0 33 :3 I: 2‘ 12 1'3 :3 2 2 2 § 33 2 .2 5 3 ° 8 2 2 2 g 2 2 2 .3 2' 2 2 2g 20 18 1 290 69 32 5 850 26 11 1 330 13 21 8 235 37 59 10 665 16 19 6 255 13 25 1 255 52 19 5 765 18 21 2 285 16 23 3 275 51 18 7 750 16 21 1 265 20 15 7 275 61 37 8 ' 795 30 11 0 355 18 21 3 285 61 39 3 - 835 28 12 1 310 17 20 5 270 60 1o 6 800 29 12 0 350 18 20 1 280 61 37 5 825 28 13 0 315 15 21. 3 270 57 11 5 790 22 11. 5 290 11 21 1 260 11 58 7 700 5 10 26 100‘ 22 19 1 315 68 36 2 860 11 10 17 190 12 26 1 250 39 61 6 695 11 22 5 250 - 6mm} 8 3260 73.31 7 9330 68. 1 3355 APPENDIX D Agricultural Teacher Engineers Education Group Teachers H H H C O G O G 0 H 8 H 43 H +3 a as +3 a a a s s. u s t. c: a 8 8 8 '3 8 8 3 .3 8 8 3 .‘3 SUBAREA n o o +9 a o o e a o o a! til 5: z 0 £21 2: 2'. +1 m 5: z +1 e e e B e e e g e O O E90 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 12. Pipe Fitting 1 9 2 0 100 12 O 0 120 31 10 0 360 2 8 3 O 95 12 0 O 120 31 10 O 360 3 8 3 0 95 12 0 0 120 31 7 0 375 1 560 801200120 28 130315 5 7 )4 O 90 11 1 O 115 32 9 O 365 1 6 7 )1 O 90 11 1 O 115 29 10 2 310 7 I 7 3 6 2 6O 8 )1 O 100 22 16 3 300 ; 8 3 2 1 90 )4. O 100 19 20 2 290 ’4 9 83095102011021161290? Total 795 1020 3025 ‘ Percent 80.30 guehh 81e97 I Rank 1 2 (Continued) Farmers Composite Sample ww-—— ‘ -‘ —........w m-' a 253 -—-.—- QN— __ Teacher's Training '4 r1 do H a 0 H0 010 H 4-) as: «49 +3 at an +213 :1 $4 000 fit. 0 0 0 0 D n 13 s o o o s n m *6 G .4 GOOH 0013 OH I: O O a E21226 no a a 1:1 2': z +1 ...: a: 9‘0) e e .g 2225' 3:43:29 2.3.92 26 15 1 335 78 27 l 915 11 17 10 225 22 19 1 315 73 32 1 890 19 16 6 270 29 13 0 355 83 23 0 915 21 13 305 22 16 1 300 67 35 1 815 21 11 6 280 29 12 1 350 79 26 1 920 11 16 11 220 28 13 l 315 75 '28 3 890 17 16 8 250 25 13 1 315 58 39 9 775 3 11 27 85 15 22 5 260 50 18 8 710 13 21 105 26 11 2 330 65 35 6 825 o 7 31 35 7715 ‘ 1775 76.85 81.18 18.10 APPENDIX D ricultural Teacher gineers Education Group Teachers r! 24 .4 a o a o o o H a *4 +2 *4 u .9 as +3 a! +3 d C f-c C a G h svmm 22228222822: m o o o m <3 0 a a o o a £3 22 2: -9 :n E: :a ‘3 El 5: .z .9 . 0 O 0 e e e a e e e E—o e e e E. o 0 <3 0 o o o o o :z z :2 :z :z z z =z :3 F. Arc Welding 1 3 0 95 10 2 O 110 29 12 0 350 2 1 S 2 6S 8 2 2 90 22 16 3 300 3 9 2 O 100 ll 1 O 115 36 3 2 375 1 11 O O 110 12 O O 120 38 3 O 395 5 3 O 95 10 2 0 110 36 O 385 6 5 6 O 80 9 3 0 105 32 2 355 7 2 5 1 15 7 1 1 9O 19 20 2 290 8 10 l O 105 ll 1 O 115 37 1 0 390 9 l 9 1 SS 8 3 1 95 18 19 h 275 10 6 1 l 80 8 1 O 100 32 9 O 365 ll 5 S l 75 10 2 0 110 30 10 1 350 12 l 7 3 15 5 7 0 85 16 23 2 275 13 3 8 O 70 2 1 100 32 9 O 365 11 6 S O 85 9 3 0 105 31 7 0 375 15 10 l 0 105 12 0 0 120 10 l 0 105 16 10 l O 105 12 O O 120 39 2 O 100 Total 1315 1690 S650 Parcont 711071 88.02 86.12 Rank 7 6 2 251 (Continued) Farmers Composite Sample Teacher's Training 5 ‘3 . a 5 :3 o 5 3 o 3 '8 3 '2 :3 '8 8 :2 3 8 8‘ .3 Cd 2: 2 +3 1’21 2: z 3 it! 2 2:. g 37 5 o 395 81 22 o 950 22 15 1 295 23 16 3 310 57 39 10 765 10 12 19 160 39 3 0 105 95 9 2 '99s 29 1o 2 310 36 o 390 97 9 o 1015 31 6 1 370 32 9 1 365 86 19 1 955 28 . 10 3 330 3o 11 1 355 76 27 3 895 20 12 9 260 25 11 3 320 53 13 10 715 8 12 21 110 32 9 1 365 90 15 1 975 27 11 3 325 23 17 2 315 50 18 8 710 7 11 20 110 30 1o 2 350 76 27 3 895, 11 16 11 190 29 13 0 355 71 30 2 390 23 9 275 20 19 3 295 12 56 8 700 30 7o ‘31 11 o 365 75 3o 1 900 16 19 '110 30 10 2 350 79 25 2 915 10 15 16 175 38 3 1 395 100 5 1 1025 28 10 3 330 36 o 390 97 o 1015 22 16 3 300 85. 11 572 81.75 113 75 58.53 3am 'I‘.’ #fi—fll APPENDIX.D -——- ‘— 1 1t a1 Teacher Agmfigfieegg Education group Teachers H H H .3 3 .3 3 .2 .8 += 6 +2 3 +1 a a: $1 .n A :1 t-o 0 0 O a 0 O 0 G O O 0 a SUBAREA : 1’ g 1; g g; g 5; 3 <1 :3 .4 6 2 z 43 m .6. z .3 6 2 2 g 6 <3 6 E” 6 <6 6 9' <3 6 6 5‘ z z z z z. z z z 2 G. Oxy-Acetylene Welding 1 9 2 o 100 9 3 0 105 29 12 0' 350 2 8 3 o 95 12 0 o 120 38 0 395 3 8 3 0 95 12 0 0 120 39 0 100 1 9 2 0 100 12 0 0 120 37 0 390 1 5 5 6 0 80' 9 3 0 105 15 7 19 185 6 1 7 3 15 1 1 90 9 27 5 225 7 6 5 0 85 10 2 o 110 25 15. 1 325 8 7 1 0 90 12 0 0 120 36 5 o 385 9 6 5 0 85 7 5 0 95 31 7 3 315 10 7 1 0 90 12 0 0 120 38 3 o 395 11 3 5 3 55 9 3 0 105 23 17 1 315 12 5 6 0 8o 9 3 0 105 30 9 2 315 13 1 1 3 60 8 2 2 90 17 20 1. 270 11 1 8 2 50 5 5 2 75 9 23 9 205 15 7 3 1 85 9 3 o 105 23 15 3 305 16 10 1 0 105 12 0 0 120 11 0 o 110 17 9 2 0 100 12 0 0 120 39 2 0 100 Total 1100 1825 5615 Percent 71.86 89.16 80.98 Rank 6 5 (Continued) Farmers Composite Sample Teacher's Training— .-| H H d o m 0 as 0 H9 H +3 .4 p 4.: q: 4-3 c8 9 a! c: h r: £1 G A o 0 0 0 ll 0 o 0 £0 0 0 c: an In '0 c: H a: "o :1 H m '0 o H n o o as an o o a In 0 z. a In E: 2: 4’ Ed :2 .z ‘p In :2 -P O O o 0 e e e E-q o e e E! O O O B O OO O o o O O z 222 Z Z 2 2 z 35 7 o 385 82 21 0 910 11 19 11 205 32 9 1 365 90 15 1 975 21 '19 1 305 31 1 375 93 12 1 990 30 10 1 350 29 12 1 350 87 18 1 960 30 9 2 315 23 18 1 320 52 31 20 690 9 9 23 135 18 21 3 285 ‘ 35 ' 59 12 615 2 9 30 65 23 18 1 320 61_ 10 2 810 15 16- 10 230 29 12 1 350 81' 21 1 915 25 11 2, 320 21 ‘19 2 305 65 36 5 830 18 13 10 215 28 13 1 315 85 20 1 950 30 9 2 315 18 23 1 295 53 18 5 770 6 13 22 125 23 15 1 305 67 33 6 835 10 13 18 165 23 15 1 305 52 11 13 725 6 9 26 105 17 16 9 250 32 52 22 580 1 1 36 30 28' 13 1 315 67 31 5 810 8 11 22 135 38 1 395 101 1 1 1030 26 12 3 320 32 1 365 92 13 1 985 22 15 295 " 5660 11530 3720 79.27 80.63 53.37 APPENDIX.D ' 1t 1 Teacher Afigéfgeegga Education Group Teachers .4 .4 2+ a o a o a 0 ml 9 H 4-? H .p 1: a +a a +2 d c n n t. a a A sum 33213222222. u c: o a n <> o '9 a o o :4 Ed 2 2'. 49 Id 2 z 0 Ed 2 Z a e e 0 60-. e e e E. e e e g 0 <1 0 o <> 0 o o» o la 2 2: z z 2: :3 .3: :z s: H. Rope Work 1 1 7 0 75 10 2 0 110 23 17 1 315 2 6 2 3 70 9 3 0 105 22 19 0 315 3 5 1 2 70 8 1 0 100 19 21 1 295 1 5 6 O 80 8 1 0 100 30 11 0 355 5 1 6 1 70' 6 5 l 85 25 16 0 330 6 1 7 0 75 8 3 1 95 26 15 0 335 7 3 8 0 70 8 1 0 100 27 11 0 310 8 3 8 0 70 7 5 0 95 27 11 0 310 9 3 7 1 65 8 2 2 90 13 21. 1. 250 10 7 3 l 85 5 7 0 85 12 25 1. 215 11 5 6 0 80 9 3 0 105 30 11 0 355 12 2 8 l 60 6 6 O 90 23 18 0 320 13 353 55 92110012272255 Total 925 1260 1050 Percent 61.68 80.76 75.98 Rank 8 F-n~'.fl ‘ A: 1.1.1.11 ‘J 1131 ”loci-ax" to No- Norma Q: o. - \‘o. ...-_ 256 (Continued) Farmers Composite Sample Teacher's Training H H H (I 0 d 0 a 0 H «9 «4 +2 q-c +9 p a +1 <8 4-) an 53 £4 £1 S-c £1 54 O 0 0 O) 0 o 0 m 0 O 0 m a to a re a 'U a r4 9 T: a .4 n O O m an O 0 d 91 O 0 d H 2: 2: 49 s4 2 :z -n m E: z «0 O O 0 e e o E-c e e e 54 e e e E. O O O O O O O O O z a z z z z z z z 17 22 3 280 51 18 1 780 20 16 280 16 22 1 270 53 16 7 760 20 16 5 280 19 20 3 290 51 19 6 755 16 8 17 ‘200 22 18 2 310 65 39 2 815 26 11 1 315 15 21 3 270 50 51 5 755 25 13 3 315 15 21‘ 3 270 53 19 1 775 23 15 3 305 15 22 5 260 53 18 5 770 25 11 2 320 16 23 3 275 53 SO 3 780 25 13 3 315 15 25 2 275 39 58 9 680 8 9 21 125 :11 26 2 270 38 61 7 685 18 9 11 225 20 19 3 295 61 39 3 835 31 8 2 350 21 20 1 310 52 52 2 780 21 10 7 290 113 21 3 285 12 55 9 695 “ 8 13 20 115 fl 3660 i ' 98.95 ‘ 3165 67.03 71.80 65.0 APPENDIX.D ricultur 1 111° Orfla Edu888§23r0roup Teache r ' H a o H H 64 p d e d 0 41 at H u .4 .p G 1+ 9 d a a o o o n a h c h SUBAREA 23822222222: :21 z z +3 an o o a n g o a 01 ca 2 z #1 :a z a e e e E-q O O O O O o e 0 E4 0 o e E4 2: z z o o o o o o —1 z z z z z z I. Tool Care 1 8 3 0 95 12 0 0 120 28 13 0 315 2 8 3 0 95 ll 1 0 115 29 12 0 350 3 9 2 0 100 12 O 0 120 35 6 0 380 1 9 2 O 100 12 0- 0 120 33 8 0 370 5 9 1 1 95 12 0 o 120 33 7 1 365 6 7 1 0 90 11 1 0 115 32 8 1 360 7 9 2 0 100 12 O 0 120 37 1 0 390 Total 830 2560 Percent 87.66 98.80 89.30. Rank 1 l 1 GRAND TOTAL 9090 11210 36250 PERCENT 75.12 81.69 80.37 1 257 tam; (Continued) tuna Farmers Composite Sample Teacher's Training 6+ 6+ r+ 4 £3 .3 .3 .3 .3 3 O :8 +3 cs +1 (I! 49 d , a :3 1+ '1 :1 s. n a 1+ on k 0 0 O H 0 0 0 H (D 0 0 H on: 3 '8 ‘6 3 ‘6’ '8 ‘6 3 8 ‘3 8 “’ 3 3 5. 61 z z o a: 2 z o 11 2 z ‘6 J z Z: 0 e e E. e e o E" e e e B 4 0 <> 0 o o o o o o ; c’ 0 Z. Z 2 z Z 2: Z 24' Z , z z 1/ ‘ 32 10 0 370 80 26 0 930 9 17 15 175 3 8% . 29 11 2 315 77 27 2 905 11 11 16 180 12 9 ‘1 35 7 0 385 91 15 0 985 21 17 3 295 hr 5 .3 30 12 0 360 81 22 0 950 25 11 2 320 3 28 11 0 350 82 22 2 930 23 11 1 300 3 ": 30 12 0 360 80 25 1 925 15 16 10 230 2 °“ 35 6 1 380 93 12 1 990 '12 17 12 205 7 4; .1 ,,/{ 2550 6615 1705 2.31 2 l u. 1 ' 35085 91785 21865 75.91 78.71 55.13 \ APPENDIX E List of FarmsStructures Abilities Included in the Study Area: Farm Buildings and Structure; A. General Principles -- Ability to: 1. Plan farm structures according to sound principles of economics. 2. Plan structures according to functional requirements of various agricultural enterprises. 3. Estimate size, capacity and cost of farm structures. 1. Select most desirable building materials. 5. Make simple drawings of farm structures. 6. Read and interpret blue prints. 7. Plan the location of buildings in relation to the farmstead. 8. Prepare a standard bill of materials. 9. Design or select Joists and beams for strength. 10. Design the insulation and ventilation plans for structures according to requirements of various 1.1, agricultural enterprises. “ ’ 11. Locate and use Building Manufacturers "Plans Services". B. ‘Qgg and Care of CarpgntryTools and Eguipment -- Ability to: 1. Select and purchase carpentry tools according to accepted standards. 2. Use basic carpentry tools correctly. 3. Sharpen, adjust, maintain, and repair carpentry tools. 1. Select and purchase power woodworking equipment for the school and farm.shop. 5. Operate power woodworking equipment correctly. 6. Maintain and repair power woodworking equipment. 7. Store carpentry tools effectively. 8. Place shop equipment in best location for safety and efficiency. 9. Apply principles of safety in the use of tools and power equipment. (3. Construction of Farm Buildings -- Ability to: 1. Measure, mark, and cut materials to specified dimensions. 2. Drive various kinds of nails. . Use wood connectors and fasteners. 1. Lay out foundation lines and set grade stakes for bui lding: e 25 9 Place or pour footings for various structures. Calculate dimensions, cut, and erect framing. Calculate dimensions, cut, and erect common rafters. Apply roofing. Cut and apply sheathing and siding. Cut and install insulation material. Calculate dimensions, construct, and erect stairways. Cut and apply material for interior and exterior walls. D. Related Woodworking -- Ability to: Construct common wood Joints. Select and use wood glue. Use wood dowels. Drill holes in lumber. Construct kitchen cabinets. Make small articles of furniture. Repair furniture. Install door locks. Cut and install linoleum, and floor tile. Construct ordinary wood projects for farm use, i.e., trailer box, feed bunker, poultry feeder, etc. E. Painting and Glazing -- Ability to: 1. 9. 10. 11. 12. Select house paint and other wood finishes according to requirements. Mixand/or tint paint according to requirements. Prepare surfaces for painting. Select proper paint brushes and apply paint, varnish, shellac, and enamel. Clean and store paint brushes. Apply paint with paint sprayer. Select, mix, and apply wood stains. Treat lumber with preservatives. Select and apply proper masonry paint. Measure, cut, and install glass. Refinish furniture. Select and apply metal paint to farm machinery, roofing, etc. F. Concrete and Masonry -- Ability to: 1. 2. 3. he 5. ‘Bstimate quantities and costs of concrete and masonry materials needed for a given structure. Select aggregates for making concrete and test for qua 11 ty e Select masonry blocks and determine quality. Construct forms needed in building various concrete structures common to the farm. Mix, place, and finish concrete. 6. 7. 8. 9. 260 Select and apply paint, coloring, and waterproofing materials to concrete and masonry. Prepare mortar for concrete masonry. Lay concrete masonry according to standards of construction. Repair or patch broken concrete. G. Repair of Farm Structures -- Ability to: 1. 2. 3. 6. 7. Determine need for repairs and estimate costs of given JObe Repair foundations. Repair roofs. Repair windows and doors. Repair floors. Repair fences and gates. Repair farm equipment made of wood. SUMMARY OF APPENDIX F THE DATA RELATIVE Agricultural T h ‘ducngongrp,‘TeaCher8 H H H e o a. e c o SUBAREA :3 3 13'? :3 6 c a a s. a a <9 e 0 <3 0 o o e o m 11 c n «3.8 c: o m 1: m m m <3 0 6+ m <3 0 6+ 6 o o .4 :3 z: 2: c :3 :2 z «I In 2322 d .p .a in e e e 0 e e e o e e e O o o 0 6+ <3 0 c3 54 o o o 24 2: :z z 23:: :a z 2: 2 General Principles 1 10 1 O 120 9 5 0 115 21 18 O 300» 2 12 2 0 130 ll 3 O 125 27 12 0 330 3 S 2 95 13 1 0 135 26 13 0 325 1 6 0 110 13 1 0 135 21 15 0 315’ 5 10 1 0 120 ll 3 0 125 29 9 l 335 6 10 1 0 120 12 2 0 130 17 20 2 270 7 lO 3 l 115 9 5 0 115 23 11 2 300 8 9 1 l 110 l1 0 0 110 30 8 l 310 9 3 8 3 70 6 7 1 95 9 21 6 210 10 3 9 2 75 10 3 1 115 13 25 l 255 ll 11 3 0 125 6 8 0 100 11 22 3 250 1190 1330 3230 77 27 86 36 75.29 1 Use and Care of Tools 1 10 1 0 120 12 O 130 26 11 315 2 12 2 0 130 11 0 110 36 3 375 3 12 2 O 130 11 O 110 37 2 380 1 10 1 O 120 10 O 120 25 11 305 5 lO 1 0 120 13 O 135 31 8 350 261 TO THE FARM STRUCTURES AREA Farmers Composite Sample Teacher's Training H H H a) 0 a! O a! 3 I: ‘2 13 '8 I: 6 c: a ‘3 ‘* G h 0 m i: '8 8 .3 8 «8 8 .3 :2 .8 n .1 In 0 0 d a) O 0 d a O 0 C Cd :2 z 4; m 2 z 43 Cd 5.: 2 +3 0 o 0 £4 0 o o [-1 o o o B O O O O O O O O O z z z z z z z z 2‘. 32 9 1 365 72 36 1 900 1 26 12 110 32 1o o 370 82 27 o 955 5 21 13 155 21 19 2 305 67 38 1 860 7 20 12 170 20 19 3 295 65 11 3 855 7 22 10 180 23 15 h 305 73 31 5 885 17 13 9 235 18 20 1 280 57 16 6 800 12 19 8 6215 ~25 15 2 325 67 -37 5 855 9 19 11 185 10 25 7 225 63 37 9 815 15 15 9 225 19 16 7 270 37 55 17 _ 615 2 15 22 95 20 18 1 290 16 55 8 735 2 21 13 110 16 22 1 270 17 755' 7 715 1. 1o 25 90 3300 9653‘ . 18 0 71.12 75.17 12.65 3 2 3 3 20 18 1 290 68 35 6 855 10 18 11 190 31 8 o 380 96 13 o 1025 10 21 5 220 29 1o 3 310 92 11 3 990 10 21 8 205 29 11 2 315 71 3o 5 890 1 16 19 120 35 6 1 380 89 19 1 985 8 19 12 175 APPENDIX F Agricultural Teacher Teachers Engiggars Education Grp1.1 H r4 .4 as o d o d 0 H .9 .4 u ~4 u SUBAREA 3g g -g g ‘g g a) o o a 0 O O a Q 0 O m rd 2 vi a 'd a :4 a: 13 G n a) O 0 d a O 0 d a O O H In :2 z +9 :fl 2::2 +2 ca 5: 2: a I O O «P e o e E-c e o o [-1 o O 0 O ' O o O O O O O O O E4 z z 2 Z z 2 z z z W; B. Use and Care of Tools (Cont.) 6 5 9 0 95 5 9 0 95 18 19 2 275 7 8 5 1 105 9 5 0 115 28 11 0 335 8 11 3 0 125 11 3 0 125 31 8 0 350 9 13 1 0 135 11 0 0 110 36 3 0 375 Total 1080 1110 3060 Percent 85.71 . goon? 87017 Rank 1 1 1 C. Construction of Farm,Buildings 1 13 1 0 135 11 0 0 110 31 5 0 365 2 1 1 110 11 3 0 125 21 11 1 310 3 6 8 0 100 11 3 0 125 18 20 1 280 1 10 1 0 120 11 3 o 125 27 12 0 330 5 6 8 0 .100 11 3 0 125 26 13 0 325 6 8 6 0 110 13 1 0 135 27 12 0 330 7 8 6 0 110 13 1 0 135 30 9 0 315 8 5 9 0 95 10 1 0 120 19 19 1 285 9 1 9 1 85 10 1 0 120 12 25 2 215 10 1 9 1 85 10 1 o 110 18 19 2 275 11 3 11 0 85 6 6 2 90 6 26 7 190 12 2 11 1 75 9 1 1 110 5 21 10 170 T tel 1210 60 Pgrcent 72.02 86.90 11 73.71 3150 I Rank 1 3 5 262 (Continued) Farmers Composite Sample Teacher's Training r4 r4 r4 60 m0 (60 ~44) «44-? «n+3 +2 m +3 a in w as. an as. OOQmCOO 000 w'OSH 00136 a gggg £§§§c3§§§ {112323 eeee-c 0000 0000 222 2225 2229 20 18 1 290 18 55 6 755 2 13 21 85 27 13 2 335 72 31 3 890 13 13 13 195 35 7 0 385 88 21 0 985 17 11 8 210 10 2 0 110 103 6 0 1060 15 18 6 210 ' ‘7 3155 8135 1670 83.16 85.98 17.57 1 1 31 11 0 365 92 17 0 1005 21 11 1 280 18 18 6 270 62 39 8 815 18 11 10 235 16 22 1 270 51 53 5 775 6 22 11 170 21 16 2' 320 72 35 2 895 10 13 16 165 21 20 1 310 61. 11 1 860 10 11 15 170 21 17 1 295 69 36 1 870 11 17 11 195 23 15 1 305 71 31 1 895 11 19 6 235 16 19 7 255 50 51 8 755 6 12 21 120 , 10 29 3 215 12 61 6 725 8 9 22 125 8 27 7 215 32 67 10 655 6 9 21 105 9 21 9 210 21 67 18 - 575 1 12 23 100 8 26 8 210 21 65 20 565 2 8 29 60 '7276‘ 9 0 1 66* 61.88 3 71.79 39 11.88- 9 APPENDIX F Agriculqual Teaeher Engineers Educg§1on Grp. Teachers __1 H H H :30 do do SUBAREA 3:; :38 :38 Sh Ch Ch ooouooouooou GI'U : :4 m 13 a rd n 'd c :H :3 :8 :2. .8 :8 :2 :2 :8 :8 :8 23 .8 O O O Gees-400054.008 000 000 000 222 222 ZZZ D. Related Woodworking 1 812100191 8513233215 2 1 9 1 85 0 11 0 70 11.23 2 255 3 2 7 5 55 0 11 3 55 9 22 8 200 1 8 1 2 100 10 0 120 21 18 0 300 5 1 7 6 15 0 7 7 35' 7 18 11 160 6 0 7 7 35 0 1 10 '20 9 16 11 170 7 2 6 6 50 2 8 1 60 8 21 10 185 8 2 11 1 75 3 9 2 75 11 21 7 215 9 1'11 2 65 1 10 0 90 5 20 11 150 10 12 1 1 125 12 2 0 130 37 2 o 380 Total 735 710 2260 Percent 52.50 52.85 57.91 Rank 7 7 E. Painting and Glazing 1 9 1 1 110 11 3 0 125 22 17 0 305 2 1 7 3 75 6 8 0 100 7 22 10 180 3 11 3 0 125 13 1 0 135 23 15 1 305 1 6 8 0 100 11 3 0 125 23 16 0 310 5 8 6 0 110 11 3 0 125 27 11 1 325 6 1 7 3 75 7 7 0 105 21 17 1 295 f 7 3 7 1 65 2 9 3 65 9 23 7 205 263 (Continued) Farmers Composite Sample Teacher's Training r! H H 03 0 (8 0 d 0 H +9 a +2 H *3 49 co 43 an 4-3 a: c h C h g h 0 0 a) m o o 0 0 0 0 in m 'd c: H m 'U c: 0! a: "U G H “I 0 0 a: an O 0 H In 0 0 d :a z: 2: -9 El :1 :2 d In E: z: :0 O 43 O a e e B e e e o e e e B O O O O O O E O O O i z z 2 z 2 Z 2 z 21 18 3 300 16 51 9 730 3 19 17 125 15 22 5 260 33 68 670 11 25 85 17 20 5 270 28 60 21 580 10 28 60 16 20 6 260 55 16 8 780 15 15 9 225 8 20 11 180 16 52 11 120 2 6 31 50 8 23 11 195 17 50 12 120 3 6 30 60 8 21 10 200 20 59 30 195 o 7 32 35 9 27 6 225 25 68 16 590 2 2 35 30 5 21 13 170 15 65 219 175 1 1 31. 30 32 _ 9 1 365 93 11 2 1000 8 17 11 165 6160 885""' 57.53 56.51 22.17 22 17 3 305 61 11 1 815 5 21 13 155 11 22 9 220 28 59 22 575 1 12 23 100 23 16 3 310 70 35 1 875 7 16 16 150 20 18 1. 290 60 15 1 825 6 15 18 135 20 20 2 300 66 10 3 860 5 15 19 125 15 21 3 270 17 55 715 1 5 33 35 12 21 6 210 26 63 20 575 1 11 27 65 APPENDIX F Agricultural Teacher Engineers Education Group Teachers H- H H 080 €00 dd) «4+: «44-: «+3 +3 a +> m +1 a SUBAREA g 3 <0 3 3 o 5 3 a: , Sgéflgg‘éflguéfl : m :::z '3 In 2: z ‘3 a: :3 z '3 ; 000000000000 1' 222522292229 E. Painting and Glazing (Cont.) 8 1 9 1 85' 7 6 1 100 21 15 0 315 9 6 8 0 100 8 6 O 110 18 20 1 280 10 5 8 1 9O 10 1 O 120 21 18 0 300 11 1 7 6 15 l 5 8 35 8 18 13 170 12 ‘ 8 5 1 105 12 1 l 125 32 6 1 350 Total 1085 , . 1270 3310 Percent 61.58 75.59 71.3 Rank 6 6 6 F. Concrete and Masonry 1 9 5 0 115 12 2 0 130 25 11 0 320 2 8 6 O 110 12 2 O 130 23 16 O 310 3 1 8 2 80 8 6 0 110 21 15 3 285 1 8 6 0 110 11 3 0 125 26 13 0 325 5 l1 0 0 110 12 2 0 130 32 6 1 350 6 1 8 2 80 9 5 0 115 22 6 11 250 7 ll 3 0 125 12 2 0 130 26 13 O 325 8 1 10 0 90 10 1 0 120 25 13 1 315 9 8 5 1 105 9 5 0 115 21 18 0 300 Total 955 1105 2780 Percent 75.79 . 87.69- 79.20 Rank 3 2 3 261 (Continued) Farmers Composite Sample Teacher's Training '4 .4 24 d 0 d 0 d o «a 4-1 H 1: .4 4.: +3 at +3 d +3 a c: 1. :2 74 G S. o O 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 m 'd c: m m 'd c: m m 13 c: m a O O H In 0 O H m o O H Cd >3 2 u! {:1 E z 6 Ed 2‘: z a +1 +3 +3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 E4 0 O 0 E4 0 O 0 E4 2 z z z Z. 2 Z 2 Z 21 15 3 315 59 15 5 815 1 11 27 65 21 18 3 300 53 52 1 790 1 11 27 65 15 20 7 250 51 50 8 760 6 13 20 125 6 22 11 170 16 52 11 120 0 8 31 10 _EP 16 0 310 78 28 3 920 3 10 26 80 3310 9005 1110 65.67 68.81 21.35 5 6 22 20 o 320 68 11 0 885 18 13 8 215 16 22 1 270 59 16 1 820 19 11 6 260 11. 27 1 275 17 56 6 750 11 15 13 185 21 17 1 325 69 39 1 885 8 19. 12 175 23 18 1 320 61 16 2 810 10 21 8 205 18 19 5 275 63 38 8 820 1 12 26 70 20 19 3 295 69 37 3 875 10 16 13 180 10 32 o 260 19 59 1 785 11 15 13 185 16 22 1 270 51 50 5 790 1 11 27 65 2610 7150 1570 69.01 1 75.91 2 11.72 APPENDIX F »ricu1tural Teach r AEngineers EducationoGpoup Teachers .4 .4 .4 d0 ‘50 60) ~40) H43 «4+3 1 u m a a ‘0 a , c a a h a a 1 SUBAREA 332.333.2323 ; _u o o .4 a o 0 Fa m <3 0 a - m 2 :z a an E: z a hi :3 :z a I a a 0 II 0000000000054 0 o o 54 o o 0 5c 0 <3 0 z z ;z z :z :z 2: :z 2 G. Repair of Farm Structures 1 10 3 1 115 10 1 0 120 25 11 0 320 2 5 8 1 90 6 7 1 95 23 16 O 310 3 8 1 2 100 7 6 1 100 26 13 0 325 1 6 7 1 9S 8 6 O 110 21 15 0 315 5 6 5 3 85 ’8 6 o 110 21 18 o 300 6 8 S 1 105 8 6 0 110 28 11 0 335 7 7 5 2 95 8 6 o 110 25 12 2 310 Total 685 755 2215 Percent 69.89 77.01 81.13 Rank 5 5 2 GRAND TQTAL 6910 7800 20335 Percent 70.81 79.59 71.18 26S (Continued) Farmers 06mposite quple *u_T0acher'e Traigigg r1 r4 a d 0 d 0 a! 0 d -p .4 p 14 p 43 a: +1 as +3 d I: A c: 34 G A O 0 0 O 0 0 (D 0 O a 'U a a a 13 G a n '0 C n a O O H o o O H 00 o o H I31 1: z 03 Ed 2 z 03 {:1 2‘. z a «D +3 +1 0 0 0 0 e 0 0 o 0 0 0 O O O O E! ‘ O O O E! O O 0 E-G z z 2 z z 2 z 2'. 2: 21 15 3 315 69 36 1 870 3 16 20 110 22 18 2 310 56 19 1 805 0 9 3o 15 22 15 5 295 63 38 8 820 2 9 28 65 19 18 5 280 57 16 6 800 3 12 21 9o 18 19 5 275 53 18 8 770 2 7 30 55 25 13 1 315 69 35 5 865 5 9 25 95 20 17 5 285 60 1o 9 800 5 15 19 125 2075 5730 585 70.60 75.09 21.12 1 7 20115 55220 9620 68.52 72.37 35.23 1 ll -- --- 'm—_ _ ..r—-.-_.4I..- —.- — F _- - _.— A _ 14.1-.. 83.21 '1‘ F: " -. .' 3' 8' 9“. Lfi'Lz-lu l'l V" J m F”: : VIII. < N0v19 58 39 3'; 59 -.-cc 0“ 11.400.01.21— 111%” 0.07. 7 1950 a? 211-15191 z a It ”...-..., "f9 40"" --...H. ‘ .. . v, , _ 7 g 1'