AN .WALUM‘lON O! PRACt‘fltES USED @4- swam mum; mama PROGRAMS m macmw ' 3‘th 9:! ma Wm of M. A. MECHW HATE UMSETY :Howwé fisssgiu Eomm W57 AN EVALUATION OF PRACTICES USED IN CONDUCTING YOUNG FARMER PROGRAMS IN MICHIGAN by HOWARD DOUGLAS BERNSON A THESIS Submitted to the College of Education of Michigan State University of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Vocational Education 1957 61/ x 41/ v“ 7 - ‘ ‘l‘ (1,. .l f) L: 2 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The writer wishes to express his appreciation to Dr. H. P. Sweany for his friendly assistance in the preparation of this study. Acknowledgment is given to the teachers of vocational agriculture who cooperated in the study and made the results possible. The writer also wishes to express appreciation to his wife, Nancy, for her valuable assistance and suggestions. AN EVALUATION OF PRACTICES USED IN CONDUCTING YOUNG FARMER PROGRAMS IN MICHIGAN by HOWARD DOUGLAS BERNSON AN ABSTRACT OF A THESIS Submitted to the College of Education of Michigan State University of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Vocational Education 1957 Howard Douglas Bernson Purpose. To analyze the practices used in conducting Michigan young farmer programs to determine the degree of use and the value that those teachers place upon the practices. Method. Data for the study were obtained by the use of Schedules A and B which were sent to forty Michigan teachers of vocational agri- culture who conducted young farmer programs in 1955-1956. Thirty of the schedules were returned. The data, pertaining to the 171 practices evaluated, were grouped into thirteen areas of teacher activity. The practices were analyzed from two points of view: (1) The percentage of teachers using the practices, (2) The value the teachers using the prac- tices placed on them. Findings and Interpretations. The following summarizations were based upon the data presented: Slightly over one-third of the practices were valued highly and used by a majority of the teachers. Teachers were using and approving a relatively high percentage of practices in the areas of "public rela- tions,” ”program planning,” “classroom teaching,“ ”on-farm instruction,” "evaluation,’I and 'administration." Areas where the percentage was low were: I'financing," I'young farmer social activities," “class organiza- tion," and "use of special teachers." In light of the value placed on certain activities it would seem that certain procedures should become more common. They are: (1) Ad- ministrators should take a more active part in the program, (2) Teachers should contact personally young farmers in organizing and conducting their educational programs, (5) Advisory committees of young farmers Howard Douglas Bernson should be utilized in all phases of the program, (A) Young farmer meet- ings should usually be the discussion type, (5) Class discussions should be based on the problems of the young farmers, (6) Young farmer problems should be solved by using local data and experiences, (7) Visual aids should be used to vitalize the instruction, (8) On-farm instruction should be utilized to recruit, instruct, evaluate, and encourage young farmers, (9) Time should be allotted during the school day for the tea- cher to direct a young farmer program, (10) Young farmer programs should include recreation and refreshments in addition to studying technical agriculture, (11) Teachers should use a variety of practices in young farmer work, (12) Teachers should include the young farmer s wife in the program. Approved JA/ f He Po Sweany 7 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I. FORMULATION AND DEFINITION OF THE Statement of the Problem. . . General Statement . . . . . Purposes of the Study . . . Importance of the Problem . PROBLEM Scope and Limitations of the Study. Definitions of Words and Phrases. . . Assumptions Underlying the Study. . . II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE. . . . . . Literature Reviewed in the Area Young Farmer Programs . . . . Administration and Policy . Public Relations . . . . . Planning a Program. . . . . Organizing Class Groups . . Planning the Instruction. . of Organizing Scheduling and Locating Courses . . . . . . Literature Reviewed in the Area of Conducting Young Farmer Programs . . . . The Teacher . . . . . . . . Preparation for the Class . Methods . . . . . . . . . . On-Farm Instruction . . . . PAGE 0ka 10 10 16 18 19 2o 21 25 28 CHAPTER , PAGE Financing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Teachers and Teacher Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Social Activities and Special Features. . . . . . . . 51 Literature Reviewed in the Area of Evaluating the Young Farmer Program. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 Methods of Evaluating . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 Factors Which Hinder Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 III. DESIGN OF THE STUDY 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 8181 Kinds of Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sources of Data and Methods of Securing Data . . . . . 57 Analyses of the Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 IV. FINDINGS OF THE STUDY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 U Criteria for Reporting the Findings . . . . . . . . . . 59 Practices Used and Valued Highly. . . . . . . . . . . 59 Promising Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 Practices Not Recommended . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 Analysis of the Findings According to the Areas of the Schedule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Administration and Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Public Relations. 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Planning a Program. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Organizing Class Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Planning the Instruction... . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Scheduling and Locating Courses . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Conducting Classes. 0 e e e e e e e o o o o e o o e 0 AB CHAPTER Conducting On-Farm Instruction . . . . . . . . Financing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Providing Teachers and Teacher Time. . . . . . Supervising Special Teachers . . . . . . . . . Evaluating . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Social Activities and Special Features . . . . V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Purpose. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Recommendations and Implications . . . . . . . . Problems for Further Study . . . . . . . . . . . BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendix A Letter Sent to Teachers With Schedules A and B Appendix B Location of Young Farmer Classes 1955-56 (Map) ‘Appendix C Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendix D SchedulesAandB................ PAGE 49 50 51 52 52 55 55 55 55 55 55 5s 60 62 65 68 7O 72 75 87 TABLE I. II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. VIII. IX. X. XI. XII. XIII. LIST OF TABLES Young Farmer Trends in Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . Valuable Procedures of Administration and Policy in Young Farmer Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... Valuable Procedures of Public Relations in Young Farmer Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Valuable Procedures in Planning a Program for Young Farmers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Valuable Procedures in Organizing Class Groups of Young Farmers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Valuable Procedures in Planning the Instruction for Young Farmers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Valuable Procedures of Scheduling and Locating Courses for Young Farmers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Valuable Procedures in Conducting Classes for Young Farmers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Valuable Procedures in Conducting On—Farm Instruction for Young Farmers . . . . . . . . . . . . Valuable Procedures of Financing Young Farmer Education Valuable Procedures in Providing Teachers and Teacher Time for Young Farmers. . . . . . . . . . . . Valuable Procedures When Supervising Special Teachers of Young Farmers . . . . . . . . . ... . . . Valuable Procedures in Evaluating Young Farmer Programs PAGE 40 41 42 45 44 45 1+6 49 5o 51 52 55 TABLE XIV. XV. XVI. XVII. XVIII. xxx. Valuable Procedures in Providing Social Activities and Special Features for Young Farmers . . . . . Number of Years Experience Conducting Young Farmer Programs of the Vocational Agriculture Teachers Surveyed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Number and Percentage of Practices Used and Valued Highly. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Michigan Schools Conducting Young Farmer Programs 1955-56 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Schools Returning Schedules A and B. . . . . . . . Practices Considered Less Valuable by Teachers . . Practices Added by Teachers. . . . . . . . . . . . PAGE 54 74 75 76 77 78 85 CHAPTER I FORMULATION AND DEFINITION OF THE PROBLEM Statement of the Problem General Statement. The intention of this study was to evaluate the practices used in organizing, conducting, and evaluating young farmer programs by teachers of vocational agriculture in Michigan. Puzposes gf‘thg‘Stgdy. The purposes of this study were: 1) to determine the extent to which certain practices are used by teachers of vocational agriculture in conducting young farmer programs in Michigan, 2) to determine the value teachers place upon these practices in an effort to identify the valuable practices. Importance 2: the Problem. Teachers of vocational agriculture throughout the United States are generally agreed that one of their most important problems is the development and maintenance of successful young farmer programs. The United States Office of Education has indicated its concern over the future of young farmer education. This office has also pointed out the need to determine what constitutes a successful young farmer pro- gram. This has led to the development of a national young farmer study which is in progress at the present time, in the hope of discovering the characteristics of successful young farmer programs. It has also led to the development of I'pilot programs" which are designed to discover and evaluate innovations in young farmer education. Since 1950, data show that young farmer programs have shown a slight reduction in the number of young farmer classes conducted and also a small reduction in the number enrolled. TABLE I YOUNG FARMER TRENDS IN MICHIGAN1 Year Number of Young Enrollment Average Farmer Classes Per Class 1950-51 68 1,064 15.6 1951-52 . 81 1,164 14.4 1952.55 78 1,148 14.7 1955-54 60 1.157 19.5 1954.55 65 956 14-9 1955-56 59 864 14.6 According to a study using 1950 census data, and cited by the United States Office of Education, 66 per cent of the farm male popu- lation between the ages of 14 and 29 are out of school and eligible to participate in young farmer programs. This is pointed out by Sweany, who reported that as a result of studies conducted in Michigan, "young farmers should be provided an educational program first if not all groups of farmers can be offered classes at one time."2 Murray and Ahalt5 found in a survey of 52 teachers that over 90 per cent of the teachers felt young farmer programs would enhance the 1Data obtained from the Agricultural Education Division, Office of Vocational Education, Department of Public Instruction, Lansing, Michigan. 2H. P. Sweany, 223 Institutional-On-Farm Training Program_ in Michi with Implications for Adult Education, Research Bulletin— No. 4 (East Lansing, Michigan: Department of Vocational Education, Michigan State College and Lansing, Michigan: State Board of Control for Voca- tional Education, 1955), p. 15. 5Ray A. Murray and Arthur M. Ahalt, The Possibilities of Syste- matic Education for Young_ and Adult Farmers in Magyland, Part— II, Survey of Vocational Agriculture Teachers, Miscellaneous Pub. 204 (College Park, Maryland: University of Maryland, Agricultural Experiment Station, April, 1954), p. 42. standing of vocational agriculture in local communities. Nearly two thirds of the teachers felt the teaching of young farmer groups one of their primary responsibilities. In emphasizing the importance of the young farmer program, Hunsicker4 states, Well-informed, efficient, and progressive young farmers are extremely important to the Nation's welfare. Approximately 80,000 of them are needed each year as replacements for farmers who retire or die. It is important that they become successful. As new farm operators, these young farmers should have access to agricultural instruction during their period of establishment, when they need it most. No amount of education before or after that period can compensate for the great need at that critical time. Scope and Limitations 22 the Study. During the school year 1955- 1956 there were 42 young farmer programs in Michigan. Schedules were sent to 40* of the teachers. Thirty of the forty teachers completed and returned their schedules giving a 75 per cent return. The limitations of this study were: 1. There were a relatively small number of schools conducting young farmer programs in comparison with the number of schools offering high school and adult farmer programs. 2. This study will not include a list of practices essential to successful young farmer programs. This study is merely an evaluation of the practices by the teachers using them. The fact that they rate an item of great value is not to imply that the practice is not always essential. 4H. N. Hunsicker, Plam ming_ and Conducting_ a Program_ of Instruction in Vocational Agriculture for Youn Farmers, Vocational Division Bulletin No. 262, Agricultural Series No. 67 ZWashington, D. 0.: United States Government Printing Office, 1956), p. 4. *Two instructors were not included in the original list obtained from.the Michigan Department of Public Instruction, and therefore their assistance was not solicited. 4 5. Some successful teachers who conducted young farmer programs had dropped out of the teaching profession, and their rating and use of practices in young farmer programs were not obtained. 4. Because of the small number of programs, it was decided that each teacher would be sent a copy of both Schedules A and B. The addi- tional time factor involved in answering both schedules perhaps deterred some teachers from.answering and may have influenced the reliability of the evaluations. Definitions of Words and Phrases Advisory committee, planning committee, or 12225.£§£ESE council. A group of five or six farmers selected from the members of the young farmer program to help decide policies. Advisopz council. Committee comprised of successful farmers and representatives of other interests in the school area to counsel the public schools on problems related to the education of people interested in agriculture. Approved practices. '. . are defined as procedures considered essential in the performance of farming activities and supported by experimental evidence or successful experience."5 Egz farmers. I'Farmers with large businesses who make progressive changes in farm operations resulting in good profits .... active socially and in farm organizations .... commonly approached for information and advice by other farmers."6 5George Ekstrom and John B. McClelland, Adult Education i3 Voca- tional Agriculture (Danville, Illinois: The Interstate, 19525, p. 100. 6C. B. Wood, "Securing Enrollment for Out-of-School Groups," Agricultural Education Ma azine, XXVIII (June, 1956), 284. 5 "Pilot" programs. Schools selected to try out or discover innova- tions in organizing, conducting, and evaluating young farmer programs to make them.more effective. Resource person. A person with specialized training or experi- ence used to supplement instruction. ”Single 2323: 322533. A series of class meetings dealing with one enterprise, such as dairy, soils, beef, or crops. Special teacher. A teacher employed on a full or part time basis who, although not possessing all the formal requirements of a teacher, has had recent and successful experience in the subject matter he is to teach. He must meet the requirements of the State for his certification.7 ngpg farmer. .... young men mostly between 16 and 50 years of age who are out of school, farming or wanting to become established in farming.8 ‘12225 Farmer Chapter 25 Association. ”An organization of, by, and for young farmers who are enrolled in a young farmer program of vo- cational agriculture."9 22225.235225 program. ”A program of organized systematic instruc- tion in agriculture aimed specifically at helping young men solve their pro- blems in becoming established successfully as farmers in the community."10 7Hunsicker, 2p. cit., p. 15. 8Hunsicker, 2p. cit., p. 2. 9Mark Nichols, Young Farmers - Their Problems, Activities and Educational Program (Danville, Illinois: The Interstate, 1952), p. 85. 10Hunsicker,p_p. cit., p. 8. Assumptions Underlying the Study This study is based on the following assumptions: 1. Since schedules A and B were adapted from a similar study of adult farmer programs, it is assumed such practices were appropriate for use in surveying practices used in young farmer programs. 2. The practices used in organizing, conducting, and evaluating young farmer programs are the major causes of success or failure of the programs. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE In reviewing related literature, the author did not find another study to parallel his: however, there was much literature that contributed to a broader background on which to proceed with the problem under study. There was a great deal of literature in periodicals, much of which was not of an authoritative nature since it was not the result of study. This review will include many of the non-study articles en- countered in periodicals because the author felt them to be of much worth in achieving a measure of understanding of the young farmer program. 7 The author has confined his review to the area of young farmer education as much as possible. Moeckel1 and Byrama studied adult farmer programs in terms of the areas of organizing, conducting, and evaluating such programs. The authbr of this study has concluded that for the purpose of report- ing his review of the related literature, these areas provide a proper frame of reference for the material reviewed in relation to his problem. 1Rolf Edward Moeckel, ”A Study of Practices Used by Teachers of Adult—Farmer Classes in Michigan" (unpublished Master's thesis, Michigan State College, East Lansing, Michigan, 1955). ZHarold M. Byram, Harry w. Kitts, and Lloyd J. Phipps, Organiz- __g, Conducting, and Evaluating Adult-Farmer Courses in the Central Region, Bureau of Research and Service, College of Education (East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, 1955). Literature Reviewed in the Area of Organizing Young Farmer Programs The area of organizing young farmer programs is a broad one; therefore, the author has subdivided the review of literature into the following categories: 1. Administration and Policy; 2. Public Relations; 5. Planning a Program; h. Organizing Class Groups; 5. Plan- ning the Instruction; 6. Scheduling and Locating Courses. ”g/Administration and Policy. School administrators have a re- sponsibility to the teachers of vocational agriculture in supporting a young farmer program. Michigan data from the national young farmer 5 study rated ”Administrative approval and active support" a very significant factor influencing programs of young farmer education. This same study rated ”Coordination of the young farmer program with the total adult education program" significant in influencing local programs. ‘/ £32132 Relations. Public relations is an important factor to the administrators of schools. Ultimately, it is the clue to the ac- ceptance or rejection of any young farmer pragram. Guiler5 evaluated his young adult farmer programs through the use of an evaluative instru- ment, in which 70 (95.5 per cent) of the farmers participated. Seventy- 5Donald Meaders, “Data From.Nationa1 Study of Young Farmer Pro- grams" (Lansing, Michigan: Department of Public Instruction, 1956). (Mbmeographed.) Albid. 5Gilbert Samuel Guiler, 'An Evaluation of the Young and Adult Farmer Programd. Canal Winchester, 1950-51" (unpublished Master's thesis, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, 1951), cited from United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Office of Education, Summaries 22 Studies $3 Agricultural Education, Vocational Division Bulletin No. 251, Agricultural Series No. 65—(Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1955), p. 55. 9 seven per cent of the farmers were of the opinion that a better school relationship existed as the result of adult education programs. There are many ways of carrying out an effective public relations 6 program. According to Sledge , public relations "can be achieved most effectively by the teacher of vocational agriculture contacting each individual on the farm, gaining the respect and admiration of the in- dividual rather than mass media approaches." Supporting this statement was a Vermont study by Cushman7 which revealed that individual contacts were the best means of informing the people. Hobgoodgalso considered personal contact the best way to sell the program.to the young farmer. The findings of a study by Murray and Biser9 showed that personal contact and use of newspapers and postal cards were used frequently in obtaining enrollments. The EPA was used most frequently in promoting classes. 6George W. Sledge, "Young Farmer and Adult Farmer Enrollment Need Not Be a Problem," Agricultural Education Magazine, XXVII (March, 1955), 202. —""'— 7Harold R. Cushman, "What are the Factors Hindering the Conduct- ing of Young Farmer Programs by Vermont Teachers of Vocational Agricul- ture and How Can These Factors Be Overcome?" (unpublished Doctor's thesis, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, 1951), p. 664. 8Thomas Newton Hobgood, 'Problems Involved in Organizing and Con- ducting Young Farmer Programs Including Suggested Solutions" (Unpublished Master's problem, North Carolina State College, Raleigh, North Carolina, 1952), cited from United States Department of Health, Education and Wel- fare, Office of Education, Summaries of Studies in Agricultural Educa- tion, Vocational Division Bulletin No. 251, Agricultural Series No. 35 (Washington, D. 0.: United States Government Printing Office, 1955), pp 0 39-400 9Ray A. Murray and Lloyd D. Biser, I'Successful Young and Adult Farmer Classes“ (nonthesis study, University of Maryland, 1955), cited from United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Summaries of Studies inA gr1icultural Education, Vocational Division Bulletin No. 255, Agricultural Series No. 64 (Washington, D. 0.: United States Government Printing Office, 1954), p. 48. 10 o/ 10 Planning 3 Program. Wall states, "A program of education for young farmers to be successful, must start with the farm problems and interests that young men have." Atherton11 concluded from his study that young farmers will respond to an educational program designed to meet their needs. Wall12 suggested asking three to five young men who have demon- strated good leadership ability to serve as a planning committee to 15 assist in planning the program for the year. Hunsicker agreed, adding that this planning committee should come from different neighborhoods in the school area. Hobgoodll+ suggested that if there is no active council, it may be wise to select one to aid in the development of the program. Organizing Class Groups. While reviewing literature, the author pondered the idea of the influence a young farmer chapter might have in promoting a young farmer program. Wall15 said, 'A local organization of the young farmers can be of much help to the teacher in recruiting, organizing, and maintaining interest in the program.” 10Stanley Wall, ”Young Farmer Programs are Needed,u Agricultural Education Ma azine, XXIX (October, 1956), 82. 11James C. Atherton, "Young Farmer Education in Vocational Agri- culture" (nonthesis study, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, Arkansas, 1955), cited from United States Department of Health, Educa- tion and Welfare, Office of Education, Summaries pf Studie§_ip Agricul- tural Education, Vocational Division Bulletin No. 255, Agricultural Series No. 53 (Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1956) , pe 17o 12Wall, $33. 333. 13H. N. Hunsicker, Planning and Conducting 2 Program pf Instruc- tion 32 Vocational Agriculture for Young Farmers. Vocational Division ll 16 . Orr recommended that purposes of the chapter include: a. To provide organized and systematic instruction for all young farmers of the community, based on the needs and interests of the individual members and the community. b. To assist the young farmers to become satisfactorily established in farming. c. To provide leadership training for the members. d. To promote community services needed in further develop- ing the community. 6. To provide recreational opportunities for the young farmers and their families. Michigan data from the national young farmer study, however, rated "the formulation of self-directing formally organized local associa- tion' of little significance as a factor in influencing local programs of young farmer education.17 In the regional report of the cooperative study,18 77 per cent of the veterans in each state indicated that members of the classes should form.their own organizations to assume responsibility in planning and conducting educational programs. Ninety per cent of the teachers of vocational agriculture and veterans instructors in this study indicated the veterans should have their own organization. Bulletin No. 262, Agricultural Series No. 67 (Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1956), p. 17. lanobgood, 122, 223' 15118.11, 220 Elie p. 850 16Kennett Eugene Orr, ”Developing a Young Farmer Organization in Virginia" (unpublished Master's thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Blacksburg, Virginia, 1952), p. 97. 17Meaders, _1_O_c_. 233. 18Central Regional Conference on Research in Agricultural Educa- tion, Report of the Coo erative Study_ of Institutional On-Farm.Training in the Central Region Danville, Illinois: The Interstate Printers and Publishers, Inc., n.d .), p. 44. 12 In a study by Murray19 in which 170 teachers of successful young farmer programs responded, 60 per cent of the teachers had classes or- ganized with officers and committees and 55 per cent reported operating young farmer associations. The Mifflinburg, Pennsylvania Young Farmer Association20 has been commended for its continued growth through fifteen years of operation. This group is an outstanding example of an effective association which began with a series of organizational events which no doubt contributed to the success of the group. For some time, the author has entertained the idea of promoting a county wide young farmer program. Such a plan would involve larger numbers of young farmers in the program, thereby more interest. Bender21 found in a study of 265 young farmers that young farmers usually prefer youth programs to be locally planned and organized, year round in scope, with some activities as a county or wider than county basis. The following should be given consideration in organizing a county young farmer program according to Fridline:22 1. All of the vocational agriculture teachers need to agree that a county group will meet the needs of the young farmers of their community. 19Murray and Biser, pp.'gi£., p. 48. 20Mifflinburg Young Farmers Handbook (University Park, Pennsyl- vania: Pennsylvania State University, 1955), p. 2. 21Ralph E. Bender, ''Community Service Includes Young Farmers," Agricultural Education Ma azine, XXVIII (August, 1955), 52. 220. R. Fridline, ”We Are Trying a County Young Farmer Program," Agricultural Education Magazine, XXIX (October, 1956). 77. 15 2. The young farmers need to take the lead in securing member- ship and planning the activities that are to be carried out. 5. Where there are enough young farmers in a community, a county group probably is not necessary. 4. A definite communication system needs to be in operation to maintain a good attendance. After conducting a county young farmer program, Fridline felt as though he had much success with such a program. The results of a study conducted by the Ohio Agricultural Experi- ment Station25 showed that there are many problems confronted by the young farmer's wife for which there is presently little organized help available. In his study, Hobgood24 recommended provisions should be made for one, two, or more suppers where the wives can be invited. Brum25 mentioned that "consideration and help can be given to the problems of the wife as well as to those of the husband, in order that they may more effectively work together toward their common goals." In offering education programs for the wives of young farmers, 26 Bender found that young farmers preferred a meeting planned and con- ducted for men and women separately, with some of the meetings through the year planned for combined groups. The author has observed that some teachers of vocational agricul- ture combine young and adult farmers in a single program. Guiler?‘7 25Herbert D. Brum, ”Include the Young Farmer's Wife," Agricul- tural Education Magazine, XXIX (October, 1956), 84. 2&Hobgood, 22°.2EE" p. 56. 25 26 BM, 1000 Cit. Bender, loc. cit. 27Guiler, loc. Egg. 14 found, in evaluating his adult and young farmer programs, that the in- terests and needs of young farmers in group discussions and social and recreational programs were sufficiently different from adult farmers to justify separate programs. Hobgood28 reported a case in which the young and adult farmers were combined because the instructor believed the young farmers benefit from the more experienced older farmers. Bender29 believed the problems of married young farmers differ enough from those of single men to warrant separate groups. Needs50 pointed out that a combined adult and young farmer class could be detrimental to the enrollment; "Several of the older men, and some of the younger farmers gave as their excuse for not attending regularly the fact that they felt out of place with the age group that made up the majority.” The results of studies conducted with rural young men in Kentucky show that young men under 19 years of age are not as definite in their plans to become established in farming as those over 19. Wall felt this indicated that the time spent with the older group would be more effective, and he pointed out the need for the teacher whose time is limited in the young farmer program to decide which groups to work with: young 28Hobgoodhgp. cit.,p. 26. 29Bender, 1355. .932' 50Ralph E. Needs, ”Development and Evaluation of the Young Far- mer Program in Vocational Agriculture at Summit Station, Ohio, 1944-45" (unpublished Master's thesis, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, 1955): P. 15- 15 men interested in a program, or try to interest the younger men in a program of systematic instruction.51 Ahalt52 reported findings which deal with the problem. In his survey of 25 county staffs, 55 per cent of them favored programs with mixed young and adult farmer groups, and 50 per cent favored young far- mer groups alone. ' Forty-three per cent of the veterans in the cooperative study53 believed a combination of factors should be considered in grouping farmers in classes in schools having more than one class. In organizing young farmer groups 'it is important that a comp plete list be compiled of all young men between the ages of 16 and 50 residing on farms in the school area."5h Cushman55 found in his Vermont study, that a lack of knowledge by schoolmen of the number of young far- mers who might be interested in a young farmer program was an important hindering factor to the program. 51Stanley Wall, 223 Need 23 Qupggf-School Rural Young Men 33 Kentucgy for Sygtematic Training lg Farmin , Bulletin of the College of Education (Lexington, Kentucky: University of Kentucky, 1955), pp. 102-105. 32Louis F. Ahalt, "Interest of Young Farmers in Middletown Valley (Maryland) in Further Systematic Training in Agriculture.’I (unpublished nonthesis study, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, 1952), cited from United States Department of Health, Edu- cation and Welfare, Office of Education, Summaries pf Studies i3 Agricultural Education, Vocational Division Bulletin No. 251, Agri- cultural Series No. 65 (Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1955), p. 5. 55Central Regional Conference on Research, 22‘.21£°9 p. 45. 54Hunsicker, 22!.212‘! p. 20. 55Cushman, 2p.‘gip., p. 641. 16 In organizing young farmer groups, Hunsicker56 reported that 10 to 20 young farmers constitute a desirable class size. Many teachers of vocational agriculture are having problems organizing a class of this 37 size. Wood used key farmers to solve his enrollment problems. According to Hunsicker58, most successful teachers of young far- mers claim that the young farmers themselves are the key to recruiting members. As a result of his study, Wa1159 suggested that teachers who be- lieve there are not enough young men in their district to justify attempt- ing to organize a young farmer class should be motivated to study their district to locate the young men who are farming. v/Planning‘pgg Instructigg. The author concluded that the success of a young farmer program depends largely upon the use of a planned in- structional program. WallaO pointed out the need for a planned program of instruction revealing in his study that 60 per cent of the young men who expected to become established in farming would attend a young farmer class if there was one available and designed to meet their needs. 56Hunsicker, pp, 223., p. 52. 570. B. Wood, "Securing Enrollment for Out-of-School Groups," Agricultural Education Ma azine, XXVIII (June, 1956), 284. 58Hunsicker, 22!.23E'9 p. 17. 59118.11, 2g. SE." Po 115e holbid. 17 Sweany41 stated in his report on the evaluation of the institu- tional on-farm training program that the teacher should base the instruc- tion on the problems farmers are facing. Bender's)+2 study would indicate that young farmers have problems in the following areas: choosing a vocation, citizenship, becoming socially adjusted, preparation for marriage, home and family, health and physical, educational plans, moral and religious, and personal and social psychological problems. 45 Meaders , summarizing the Michigan data for the national young farmer study, indicated that single unit courses and a class planning committee had little significance in influencing local programs, and emphasizing individual farm and home planning had some significance. The amount of time spent on the young farmer program appeared to be a factor to consider when conducting the program. Hunsicker44 reported that successful teachers of young farmers devote 2 to 4 hours in preparation for each class meeting. In his study of 52 instructors, Ahalt45 found that 55 per cent preferred a "current problems" course, 19 per cent preferred "farm.me- chanics" and 16 per cent preferred a "single enterprise" course. 51H. P. Sweany, The Institutional-on-Farm Training Program_ in Michi with Implications for Adult Education, Research Bulletin No. 4 (East Lansing, Michigan: Department of Vocational Education, Michigan State College and Lansing, Michigan: State Board of Control for Voca- tional Education, 1955), p. 15. thender, loo. 2;}. AjMeaders, loc. cit. hhHunsicker, pp. 333., p. 52. 451mm, _1_og. g3. 18 Hunsicker46 suggested the following procedure when deciding on the course content: 1. Survey of the resources and farming programs of the young farmers. 2. Establishment of the objectives by the group. 5. Development of a tentative outline of content by the teacher. 4. Consideration, modification, and approval of a revised outline for the content of instruction by the young farmer council. 5. Consideration, modification, and approval of the revised outline by the group. Scheduling and Locating Courses. Regarding the number of meet- ings to be held and how often, Sweany47 reported that veterans in Michigan preferred group meetings monthly during the busy season and weekly dur- ing the slack season. 48 The Central Region study of veterans revealed that weekly meet- ings at the school were preferred; and that the veterans would rather hold classes every two weeks than monthly. Atherton49 found in his interviews with teachers and vocational agriculture supervisors that they felt classes should be held monthly or every other week, with fewer classes during busy season. 50 Murray's study revealed that in the successful programs studied, 90 per cent of the classes were held in the local school. Ninety-seven 45 47Sweany, 22. $0, p. 250 Hunsicker, 32. cit., p. 28. ABCentral Regional Conference on Research in Agricultural Educa- tion, 220 Cite, p. 580 49Atherton, lcc. cit. 50Murray and Biser, 10c. cit. 19 per cent of the teachers held meetings during evening hours and the two- hour class period was most popular. Wells51 questioned 99 young men living in a school district and reported that most of them.preferred meeting weekly for two hour periods during the off season. These men favored evening meetings for class in- struction and afternoon meetings for shop instruction. They suggested September and November as the best months to begin a class, 45 per cent preferring September. Michigan veterans52 thought farm mechanics sessions should be three hours long and class sessions two and one quarter hours long. The Central Region report55 found that two hours were recommended for non-shop classes and three hours were recommended for farm.mechanics classes. Literature Reviewed in the Area of Conducting Young Farmer Programs The second of the major areas of study in the young farmer pro- gram is the conducting of the program. For purposes of reporting the review of literature, the author has subdivided this area into (1) The 51John Hinton Wells, "A Study of the Need and Desire for a Young Farmer Class in the Bailey School District" (unpublished Master's thesis, North Carolina State College, 1955), cited from United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Office of Education, §EE‘ maries of Studies in Agricultural Education, Vocational Division Bulletin No. 256,—1gricultura1 Series No. 665(Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1954), p. 99. 52Sweany, pp. 313., p. 25. 55Central Regional Conference on Research in Agricultural Educa- tion, gp. cit., pp. 40, 42. 2O teacher; (2) Preparation for the class; (5) Methods; (4) On-farm instruc- tion; and (5) Social activities and special features. \Vfighg Teacher. Hunsicker5h pointed out that the teacher of voca- tional agriculture is the director of the young farmer program, even though he uses resource persons and educational aids extensively. Sweany's55 report on veterans found that 78 per cent of the veterans studied rated the employment of qualified teachers of "much value" in improving instruction. In the cooperative study of the Central Region, both veterans and instructors rated the securing of qualified instructors the best means of improving instruction. The problem of qualified in- structors for young farmers was encountered in several articles, one by John Heitz56 who found nearly one half of the Nebraska instructors ques- tioned felt they did not have sufficient training to teach adults, and Cushman57 reported that teachers hesitated to conduct young farmer pro- grams because they felt inadequate or out-of-date in their training. In case studies of nine teachers of well organized young farmer programs, Hobgood58 found that the number of years of teaching experience did not seem.to be a factor in the success of the program. Hunsicker59 pointed out that good teaching and the sharing of members in the responsibilities 54Hunsicker, pp. git., p. 51. 55Sweany,‘gp..git., p. 10. 5(SJohn J. Heitz, “Out-of-School Classes In Nebraska," Agricul- tural Education Ma azine, XXVI (December, 1955), 146. 57Cushman, pp. 32.3., p. 642. 58Hobgood, 22. git., p. 59-40. 59Hunsicker, 92. 331., p. 51. 21 for group meetings are key factors in successful young farmer programs; cooperation in conducting the program inspires a responsibility for maintaining it. Preparation for the Class. Hunsicker6O offered a group of sug- gested steps in preparing for group instruction: 1. 2. 5. Refer to the instructional calendar for the scheduled problem, or job, and check with the group for any changes or modifications. Think through the problem and its relationship to each member's situation. Decide upon the method of instruction best suited to the job or problem. Select and secure resource person if needed. Anticipate and list questions and related problems pertaining to the job or problem. List conclusions or decisions that should result from the instruction. Obtain or prepare appropriate charts, experimental data and other teaching aids. Plan the agenda and the instructional procedure. Discuss such program features as the business session and the social period with the chairman of the group or with the members responsible for them. He offered further suggestions for conducting group meetings properly: 1. 2. 5. Begin and close on time. Have the class room or shop clean and equipment properly arranged. Provide proper ventilation, good lighting, adequate heat, and comfortable seats informally arranged. 60 Hunsicker, 22. cit., p. 55. 22 4. Make all members feel welcome and a part of the group. 5. Conduct the meetings with dispatch yet with consideration and courtesy to all. 6. Encourage everyone to speak loud enough to be heard. 7. Encourage all members to participate. 8. Distribute copies of the conclusions of previous meetings. Hobgoodél, reporting from his case studies, found that the first meeting was used to get acquainted, set meeting dates, and time of meet- ing. Topics for class discussion were determined by the young farmers present, and the remainder of the period was used for an interesting demonstration, discussion, or an agricultural movie. In the matter of course content, as a result of his Iowa study of 75 instructors and 200 farmers in 1946, Strong62 reported that courses on current farm.problems had larger enrollment, greater average attend- ance, and more persistant attendance than one or two unit courses. He found that 67 per cent of evening schools were "current problems" and that 67 per cent of the instructors favored them. Eighty-seven per cent of the farmers favored ”current problems." Hobgood65 listed the key points that the teachers interviewed felt were essential to a successful program. 61Hobgood, 22, 333., p. 4. 62Wayne D. Strong, ”Types of Courses and Use of Speakers in Agri- cultural Evening Schools" (unpublished Master's thesis, Iowa State Col- lege, 1946), cited from.United States Office of Education, Federal Security Agency, Summaries gf_Studies ianducation, Vocational Division Bulletin No. 257, Agricultural Series No. 57 (Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1948), p. 97. 65H°bg00d, .920 2%., p. 220 25 Class centered on students' problems Group helped organize class Good supervised practice program Interest in farm mechanics Student participation in class discussions Interest in new information A well-balanced program Interest by teacher Demonstration projects Planning program before contacting students Recreational program with families Cooperation of school board Advertisement of pregram‘ The foregoing items could be utilized as a check list for use in organizing a local program. Methods. Hunsicker64 advised that each teacher use the method or combination of methods best adapted to his class and the particular problem or job under consideration when determining the best method of conducting the instruction. Murray65 found that the five teaching methods reported most fre- quently used were discussion, visual aids, lectures, demonstration, and guest speaker, and that 81 per cent of the teachers questioned taught less than 100 per cent of their classes. 61+Hun810ker, 220 fie, P0 55. 65Murray and Biser, loc. cit. 24 From.Sweany's66 report of the evaluation of institutional-on-farm training program, 75 per cent of the veterans rated demonstrations I'good" methods of teaching and 75 per cent rated discussions "good" methods. Eighty-five per cent of the teachers rated demonstrations 'good" methods of teaching and 87 per cent rated discussions "good" methods. Successful young farmer programs in the past have provided a wide range of group experiences for the members and have helped them solve their farm problems. Young farmers need, appreciate, and enjoy: 1. 2. 9. 10. 11. 12. Participating in group discussions, demonstrations, and other types of self-expression. Developing leadership abilities in: a. Conducting meetings. b. Serving as an officer. c. Serving on important committees. d. Conducting elections. e. Using parliamentary procedures. Participating directly and democratically in the affairs of the group. Functioning as an organized group. Assuming responsibility for group functions. Being recognized for achievements. Participating in community service projects. Participating in social and recreational activities as time permits. Participating in tours and field trips. Gaining status and recognition in a farm organization. Cooperating with other persons, groups and organizations. 67 Participating in contests, fairs, and agricultural events. 66SWeany, EBe fie, Pe 21+. 67 HlmSiCker, _O_£e Cite, Pe éje 25 Murray and Ahalt68 found that of the major types of instructional methods preferred by farmers, group discussion was preferred by 29 per cent and speaker and discussion by 22 per cent. The study of the development of the young farmer program at Summit Station, Ohio, conducted by Needs69 found that the young farmers preferred a varied instructional program rather than all lectures, panels, or group discussion. All the young farmers rated tours a valuable part of the program. Forty per cent of them.rated movies of much value, and 60 per cent rated the agricultural library of much value. Nearly 27 per cent of the Summit Station young farmers indicated shop tools and equipment of much value, and 26.7 per cent also rated it of little value. Data reported by Meaders7O rated the ”use of field trips, tours, field days as a variety of teaching method' more than significant in influencing young farmer programs. Cushman71 recommended avoiding supervised study, notebook work, 72 recitation, and lectures. Hunsicker reported that reading or study periods during meetings are not common, but if they are held they should be properly motivated and supervised. 68Ray A. Murray and Arthur M. Ahalt, The Possibilities of Syste- matic Education for Young and Adult Farmers in Maryland, Part IV, Survey of Farmers in Selected Communities. Miscellaneous Publ. 208 (College Park, Maryland: University of Maryland, Agricultural Experiment Station, 1954), Pe 79e 69Needs, 22. fie, Pe 26e 70Meaders, loc. cit. 71Harold R. Cushman, "The Vo-Ag Teacher Is the Key," Better Farms ing Methods, XXVII (October, 1955), 25. 72Hunsicker, gp.'git., p. 57. 26 In the cooperative study of the institutional on-farm instruction program in the Central Region, veterans rated various techniques regard- ing their value in instructing. They rated demonstrations highest, field trips second, motion pictures third, and wire and tape recordings lowest.75 The same veterans rated bulletins and circulars highest in value as refer- ences for adult courses. United States Department of Agriculture bul- letins and circulars ranked second. Teachers of vocational agriculture and the veterans instructors agreed with the veterans ratings. Bulletins from other colleges had the least value for all the groups. Teachers of vocational agriculture in this study gave their highest score to the use of the blackboard as a visual method, with demonstrations second, and field trips third. 74 Hunsicker commented, "Instruction is made more effective by the extensive use of teaching aids." He went on to discuss the wide possibilities of the use of printed materials, the use of visual aids, and resource persons. Strong75 found in his Iowa study that instructors with longer experience use fewer speakers. There was an average of four outside speakers used in "current problems" courses and two outside speakers used in unit courses. He discovered that the enrollment, average at- tendance, and persistsncy of attendance increased as the number of 75Central Regional Conference on Research in Agricultural Educa- tion, 22. Cite, P0 490 7I‘Hunsicker,2p._.'5:__i_1:_., p. 57. 75Strong, l22’7213° 27 meetings with outside speakers increased. One half of the teachers favored two or three meetings with outside speakers, while over one half of the farmers wanted four to five meetings utilizing speakers. However, data fromMeader's76 study rates the use of resource persons and outside speakers of little significance in influencing local programs, in the opinions of the teachers questioned. Young farmers at Summit Station, Ohio, requested the use of resource speakers at from.50 per cent to 75 per cent of the meetings with an average of 45 per cent.77 Sweany's report78 revealed that the veterans preferred teachers who devoted their full time to adult farmers. He found it significant that special teachers were most acceptable to farmers. Seventy-four per cent of the Michigan veterans thought the Soil Conservation Service should assist the schools in the adult education programs and 80 per cent of the teachers thought the Cooperative Extension Service should be used. It was found that the Soil Conservation Service, Michigan State University, and the Cooperative Extension Service were used more than other agencies in the training of veterans. The cooperative study covering the Central Region79 reported that veterans expressed their belief that the agricultural agency which could be of the greatest help to the educational program was the Soil Conservation Service. Teachers of vocational agriculture agreed with 76 77 Meaders, loo. git. Needs, _O_Re £222., pe 29e 78S weany, 22e Cite, pe 29e 79Central Regional Conference on Research in Agricultural Educa- tion, 22o Cite, Pe 60e 28 this, while the veterans instructors felt the Cooperative Extension Service could be of the most assistance. x/QEfiEEEE Instruction. Individual on-farm instruction is a most important part of conducting the young farmer program. Nearly 87 per cent of the enrollees in the Summit Station study rated home visitations as being of much value.80 Guiler81 found that 76 per cent of the far- mers interviewed believed that teacher visits were of much value; 80 per cent indicated that teacher visits should be every three months or more frequent. Teachers and veterans surveyed in the regional and na- tional studies rated individual instruction on the farm nearly as valu- able as classroom instruction.82 Thirty-four per cent of the Michigan veterans thought 25 per cent of their time should be spent in on-farm instruction and 5# per cent of the teachers expressed the same thought. Forty-three per cent of the veterans and 40 per cent of the teachers thought on-farm instruction should be monthly. A high percentage of veterans and teachers thought the farmer should know when the teacher would be making the visit. Hunsicker85 advised that the success of on- farm instruction depended largely upon the arrangements made in regard to the time involved in the job that is to be done or the decisions to be made. He also said that the teacher should make a special point of 80Needs, 22. 319., p. 27. 81Gilbert Samuel Guiler, "An Evaluation of the Young and Adult Farmer Program at Canal Winchester, 1950-51' (unpublished Master's thesis, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, 1951), cited from United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Office of Education, §EE' maries of Studies in Agricultural Education, Vocational Division Bulletin No. 251, Agricultural Series No. 65 (Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1955), p. 55. 82$weany, 22. 333., p. 17. 85Hunsickertgp. 333,, p. 46. 29 praising the young farmer's accomplishments each time a visit is made. A large per cent of veterans in ten states preferred 55 to 50 hours of on-farm instruction, with teachers of vocational agriculture and vet- erans instructors in agreement. Veterans also indicated that farmers would prefer on-farm instruction once a month rather than twice a month and weekly rather than every other‘month.84 Needs found that the Summit Station young farmers desired an average of 5.4 visits per year.85 The report of the cooperative study of the Central Region showed classroom.instruction of more value to the veterans in each state than either small group or individual on-farm.instruction. Financing. Although the young farmer program is now financed through the combined aid from national, state, and local funds, there has been a recent move to reduce the amount of financial aid granted to vocational education. Guiler87 found that 60 per cent of the farmers studied reported that adult education should be financed by public funds simdlar to elementary and high schools. Over 75 per cent of Michigan veterans indicated they were willing to pay tuition to finance adult education programs.88 Over 55 per cent of the veterans queried in the Central Region study indicated their willingness to pay taxes for a local 81+Sweany, op, cit., p. 25. 85N66d8, .22.. .220, p. 280 60entral Regional Conference on Research in Agricultural Educa- tion, 22. cit., p. 20. 87 Guiler, loc. cit. 883weany, fie fie, pe 19o 50 adult education program. Twenty-seven per cent recommended federal funds would be the best single source of financial aid for future programs of adult farmers. Nineteen per cent recommended combined federal and state aid and 5.55 per cent recommended state aid. Only 1.67 per cent recommended that the local school finance future programs. Fifty—seven per cent of the veterans felt it advisable to use tax money for adult education and 82 per cent of the veterans instructors and 90 per cent of the teachers of vocational agriculture responded that tax monies should be used for adult education work.89 Teachers and Teacher 2123. Teachers of vocational agriculture reported that the difficulties encountered in conducting a young farmer program.arose primarily from the lack of time teachers and members de- voted to the program.90 Athertong1 reported insufficient time as a major reason for not conducting out-of-school classes, and Ahalt92 found that 58 per cent of the teachers studied lacked the time to con- duct young farmer or adult farmer programs with non vocational high school classes the greatest deterrent. Most young farmer programs are begun by the teacher devoting extra time to them. .As the program begins functioning and does so successfully, the administration will usually cooperate by relieving the teacher of some of his day school duties.95 89Central Regional Conference on Research in Agricultural Education, gp.‘git., pp. 6#-68. 9O 91 Atherton, loc. cit. Orr, gp.'git., p. 91. 92m1t, L02. fie 95Hunsicker, 22, cit., p. 15. 51 State supervisors expressed their belief that part of the school day should be set aside for young farmer work, but only one fourth of the school administrators felt such a practice feasible in their schools.94 Clark's findings indicated that where high school enrollment is 25 or less, a half-day could be spent on adult farmer work. When the high school enrollment reaches 60, additional teaching personnel should be considered.95 Hunsicker advised that scheduling high school classes in vocational agriculture so that specific time is available to the teacher of the young farmer is a desirable way for a school to make provisions for a teacher to conduct a successful program.96 Sggial Activities 2nd Special Features. When questioned by 97 Atherton, teachers, supervisors, and administrators felt that social and recreational activities should be included in the young farmer pro- gram, but some thought it was inadvisable to combine them with regular classwork. In 1952, Orr98 found that to keep the young farmer interested, he must have something interesting to work on and some type of recrea- tion in conjunction with his work. Recreational activities as a part of the young farmer program were rated by 75.5 per cent of the young farmers 99 as of I'much value" when questioned by Needs. 94Atherton, loc. cit. 95Loy R. Clark, "Selected Practices and Policies for Promoting Adult and/or Young Farmer Education in Ohio" (unpublished Master's thesis, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, 1955), cited from United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Office of Education, §EE’ maries 22 Studies in Agricultural Education, Vocational Division Bulletin No. 255, Agricultural Series No. 64 (Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1954), p. 15. 96Hunsicker, 22, 332., p. 15. 97Atherton, loc. cit. 980rr, pp.‘git., p. 59. 99Need8, 22e fie, Pe §7e 52 Veterans questioned in Michigan indicated that 52 per cent pre- ferred trips and tours; 26 per cent, family programs; 25 per cent, ban- quets; and 25 per cent, refreshments.100 Meaders reported data rating the stress of social and recreational phases of the group's activity a very significant factor in influencing 101 102 found that two local young farmer programs. Murray and Biser thirds of the teachers of successful programs he questioned had provi- sions for recreation. Literature Reviewed in the Area of Evaluating the Young Farmer Program t//Methods‘gf Evaluating. ”Evaluation can be done by an interview, question and answer period, or a written form or questionnaire. In some cases evaluation may be done merely by observing the improvements or changes made by the enrollees."102 Schroeder105 has organized a group of check lists designed to help evaluate an adult education program. These include: (1) Clientele Served, (2) Flexibility of Schedule, (5) Methods of Instruction, (4) Coordination, (5) Cooperation, (6) Results, and (7) Total Program. He 1OOSweany, 'ERe Cite, pe 26e 1O1Meaders, loc. cit. 102Murray and Biser, loc. cit. 105Needs, 22. cit., p. 24. 104W. P. Schroeder, Helps for Evaluating Programs 2: Adult Educa- tion in Vocational Agriculture, Professional Series Bulletin No. 5, Bureau of Research and Service (East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, 1955), p. 27. 55 felt that those concerned with vocational agriculture in adult education should find the criteria IIrural clientele served,” "flexibility,' “results," I'methods," I'coordination," and "cOOperation' acceptable bases for evalua- tion. He rated the following of less value: “relative size of pro- gram, percentages of attendance,‘ “maintenance of activities," and 'activities materializing.‘ Schroeder concludes: 1. Evaluation is a part of instructional planning and teaching. 2. Many individuals are needed to make a meaningful evalua- tion of a program. 5. Self analysis by class members, with or without the help of the teacher, is effective in reviewing a program, and should be clearly recognized as an important part of evaluation. 4. Both the educational and agricultural results of in- struction are significant. 5. Some closely related (evaluation) practices are scattered throughout the rank order list, judgment is needed in selecting and implementing them. In national and regional studies, veterans programs were evaluated by the change in farming status, increase in net worth, improvement of the home and family living, and participation in community activities.105 The Michigan study of veterans revealed that 96 per cent of the veterans were better established in farming, and that the educational 106 programs have helped others not participating in the veterans program. 1°53weany, 22. 2%., p. 11. 106Sweany,‘gp. cit., p. 9. 54 The Central Region's cooperative study found that over 50 per cent of the veterans in nine states indicated that student progress should be measured by the number of new and improved practices applied on the farm; 51 per cent of the veterans instructors agreed as did 60 per cent of the teachers of vocational agriculture.107 Factors E§E£§.§$ESEE Programs. In evaluating the young farmer program, one arrives at that perplexing problem of identifying the fac- tors which are hindering the program from attaining a greater degree of 108 found that the factors which had a marked effect on success. Heitz the number of out-of—school classes were: (1) instructor's preference, (2) instructor's lack of training, (5) lack of time, (4) lack of com- munity surveys, (5) lack of publicity, (6) the indifferent attitude of the administration. Cushman109 identified several probably hindering factors which were supported by evidence strong enough for assumption but not proof: Local citizens did not realize the potentiality of the program, inade- quate training of teachers in determining needs and program planning, and inadequate training in methods of group instruction. 107Central Regional Conference on Research in Agricultural Education, 22. cit., p. 28. 108John J. Heitz, "An Analysis of Certain Selected Factors Which May or May Not Affect the Number of Out-of-School Classes in Vocational Agriculture in Nebraska” (unpublished Master's thesis, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, Nebraska, 1955), cited from United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Department of Education, Summaries of Studies i2 Agricultural Education, Vocational Division Bulletin No. 256, Agricultural Series No. 66 (Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1954), pp. 42-45. 10901181113331, _O_Be go, ppe 641-642e 55 Summary The author found in his reading that there was a great deal of agreement in the practices used in organizing, conducting, and evaluating young farmer programs. These practices, advocated by most of those in the field, are basically the items used in the author's schedule. The reader may have observed, as the author did, that very few deviations occur in the practices used. The "pilot program“ as discussed earlier in the manuscript takes on added stature when one realizes that from it may come the innovations essential to a growing and influential program. In several instances, the ideas of young men were contrary to those expressed by instructors. Perhaps these ideas are the clues to more successful young farmer programs in the future. CHAPTER III DESIGN OF THE STUDY This chapter will explain how the study was conducted. It will include the kinds of data obtained from.the teachers, the sources of the data, the methods of securing the data, and the analysis of the data obtained from the teachers of vocational agriculture. Kinds of Data The author felt that for his purposes, this study would be best accomplished by the use of an evaluative schedule. This would enable him to reach the greatest number of teachers and acquire a uniform set of data. In preparation for carrying out the proposed study, a schedule was prepared similar to the one used in gathering the data for the re- port of the study of adult farmer classes in the Central Region.1 This revised schedule was used to evaluate practices used by teachers in or- ganizing, conducting, and evaluating young farmer programs in Michigan. After evaluating the practices it was hoped that it would be possible to identify some practices that would contribute to promoting successful young farmer programs. 1Harold M. Byram, Harry W. Kitts, and Lloyd J. Phipps, Or anizin , Conducting, and Evaluating Adult Farmer Courses in the Central Re ion, Bureau of Research and Service, College of Educatioh_(East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, 1955). 57 Sources of Data and Methods of Securing Data Schedules A and B were sent to forty teachers conducting young farmer programs during the school year 1955-56. Schedule A had 86 practices to be evaluated and schedule B had 85 practices to be evaluated, all of which pertained to organizing, conducting, and evaluating young farmer programs. Due to the fact that there were not many young farmer programs to evaluate, it was necessary to send both schedules to each teacher. The increased time needed to complete both schedules possibly contributed to only 75 per cent of the teachers returning the schedules. Two of the schools had a change of teachers and one teacher was not in the profession at that time. The study was limited to the young farmer programs in the state of Michigan. There were 45 separate young farmer programs in 59 schools, and the 42 teachers conducting the young farmer programs were identified by the Michigan State Department of Public Instruction. The schools con- ducting young farmer programs during that period will be found in the Appendix along with a list of the 50 schools returning schedules A and B. In order to obtain a higher return, personal contacts were made by telephone. This brought about the return of more schedules. Analyses of the Data The practices in Schedules A and B were evaluated on the basis of: (1) value placed on them by teachers and (2) the per cent of tea- chers using the practices. It was hoped that as a result of this evalua- tion we would be able to identify practices (1) used and valued highly, (2) used with little agreement regarding their value, (5) used and dis- continued, (4) not used, and (5) used by a few teachers but rated highly. 58 In determining the value of the practices, the following rating value was used: 5 2 Much value 2 = Some value 1 - Uncertain O a No value For each response to a practice this rating scale was used and an average of all responses was determined. This average was used in comparing practices with each other. The percentage of teachers using the practices was determinedcn the bases of those who responded to the schedule. Some practices had "no reply" and were not included in determining the per cent of teachers using a practice. The data will be analyzed in the following areas of the study: (1) Administration and Policy, (2) Public Relations, (5) Planning a Pro- gram, (4) Organizing Class Groups, (5) Planning the Instruction, (6) Scheduling and Locating Courses, (7) Conducting Classes, (8) Conducting On-Farm Instruction, (9) Financing, (10) Providing Teachers and Teacher Time, (11) Supervising Special Teachers, (12) Evaluating, and (15) Social Activities and Special Features. 59 CHAPTER IV FINDINGS OF THE STUDY Criteria for Reporting the Findings In each of the thirteen areas under study, the author has indicated those practices rated 2.5 or higher and those practices which are used and valued highly, are promising, and are not recommended in accordance with the criteria established. Practices Used and Valued High 1. In Tables II through XIV, the practices used and valued highly are indicated by a bar following the practice. The criteria for these practices are (1) 50 per cent or more of the respondents used the practice, (2) the respondents valued it 2.5 or higher. I Promising Practices. In Tables II through XIV, the promising practices are indicated by a bar following the practice. The practice is indicated by a single asterisk if 16 to 50 per cent of the respondents used the practice and gave the practice a value rating of 2.5 or higher. Practices 523 Recommended. In Tables II through XIV, the prac- tices not recommended are indicated by a double asterisk. These prac- tices have been used by less than 16 per cent of the respondents and they placed a value rating of 2.5 or higher on them. The practices that had a value rating less than 2.5 and were con- sidered less valuable by teachers will be found in the appendix. The practices added to the Schedules by the teachers will also be found in the appendix. Analysis of the Findings According to the Areas of the Schedules The findings of the study are divided into the thirteen areas of teacher activity. Administration 322 Policy. The practices which were valuable and used by teachers were related to obtaining the approval of the TABLE II VALUABLE PROCEDURES OF ADMINISTRATION AND POLICY IN YOUNG FARMER PROGRAMS Teachers Per Cent of Rating Practice Teachers Using 2.81 xxxxxxxxxxx Secure administrative xxxxxxxxxxxx 95. approval for program 2.69 xxxxxxxxxxx Avoid conflicts with xxxxxxxxxxxx 96.7 all-school activities 2.67 xxxxxxxxxxx ‘ Have a policy statement xxxx 50. from the Board of Education* 2.67 xxxxxxxxxxx Offer course for any xxx 20. group requesting them* 2.56 xxxxxxxxxx Coordinate meetings xxxxxxxxxxx 90. and courses with other agencies 2.55 xxxxxxxxxx Keep the Superintendent xxxxxxxxxxxx 96.7 and/or Principal in- formed. *Promising practices valued but not in common usage. administrator and the avoidance of conflicts with other previously planned educational meetings of the school or other agricultural education agencies. Other practices which may be as valuable relate to having a defin- ite policy statement made by the Board of Education and to the offering 41 of classes to organized groups of young farmers. Of less importance as viewed by the teachers were practices in- volving the administrator or principal in meetings of the class or in a final session of a course. ‘Pgblig Relations. Of the many media used in public relations activities, personal contact was utilized by all the teachers, who con- sidered it the most valuable approach. TABLE III VALUABLE PROCEDURES OF PUBLIC RELATIONS IN YOUNG FARMER PROGRAMS Teachers Per Cent of Rating Practice Teachers Using 2.95 xxxxxxxxxxxx Use personal contact xxxxxxxxxxxxx 100. 2.74 xxxxxxxxxxx Use circular letter or xxxxxxxx 65.5 boxholder postcards 2.65 xxxxxxxxxxx Use telephone xxxxxxxxxx 76.7 2.65 xxxxxxxxxxx Use local papers xxxxxxxxxxxx 95.1 for announcements 2.56 xxxxxxxxxx Notify public of ad- xxxxxxx 55. ministrative approval Some of the other valuable practices which were used by teachers were using circular letters, boxholder cards, telephone, local newspaper, and notifying the public of administrative approval. Posters, handbills, school paper, and the local radio station were of less importance in reaching the public as viewed by the teacher. Planning 3 Program. Teachers used a number of practices in plan- ning a young farmer program. Over one half of the practices to be 42 evaluated were used, which was a higher number than in most of the other areas of organizing, conducting, and evaluating young farmer programs. Teachers have made use of an advisory group to help plan the con- tent of the instruction and consider this practice valuable. Most tes- chers felt that offering a "unit' course was also valuable. TABLE IV VALUABLE PROCEDURES IN PLANNING A PROGRAM FOR YOUNG FARMERS Teachers Per Cent of Rating Practice Teachers Using 2.71 xxxxxxxxxxx Offer courses for xxxxxxx 56.7 various groups on basis of need. 2.62 xxxxxxxxxx Use an advisory com- xxxxxxx 55.5 ndttee or council 2.61 xxxxxxxxxx Extend important xxxxxxxx 62.1 courses more than one year 2.54 xxxxxxxxxx Offer "unit" courses, xxxxxxxxxxx 86.7 not unrelated topics Practices of less importance were: Determining the objectives, planning a long time program, and using formal surveys. Organizing Class EIEEEE‘ Michigan teachers did not utilize many of the extensive numbers of practices available in organizing young far- mer programs. This may be so because the use of the personal approach proved to be so successful that the teachers did not attempt a variety of practices. Conducting a course in cooperation with business establish- ments was also considered valuable. 45 Another practice which may be as valuable is inviting the entire community to special meetings of the course. TABLE V VALUABLE PROCEDURES IN ORGANIZING CLASS GROUPS OF YOUNG FARMERS Teachers Per Cent of Rating Practice Teachers Using 2.79 xxxxxxxxxxx Use personal contact xxxxxxxxxxxxx 96.5 to recruit members 2.69 xxxxxxxxxxx Conduct courses in con- xxxxxxx 55.5 nection with a business establishment 2.5 xxxxxxxxxx Invite the Community xxxxxx 46.7 to special meetings* *Promising practices valued but not in common usage. The teachers evaluated other practices but rated these of less importance in organizing class groups. Using leading farmers, telephones, announcements at events, high school students, and an advisory committee were those used to recruit members. Planning the Instruction. Several of the practices which were valuable and used by teachers were related to giving the class member a part in deciding upon the content of the course, using advisory committees, surveying the class members, and discussing the possible course content on the farms of the members. Some practices which may be valuable were related to using con- sultants in planning the instruction and integrating the high school and young farmer course content. Of less importance as viewed by the teachers was organizing the course content on a seasonal basis. Teachers also suggested that a TABLE VI VALUABLE PROCEDURES IN PLANNING THE INSTRUCTION FOR YOUNG FARMERS Teachers Per Cent of Rating Practice Teachers Using 2.84 xxxxxxxxxxx Confer with advisory xxxxxxx 56.7 Committee 2.79 xxxxxxxxxxx Survey members' in- xxxxxxxxxxxx 96.7 terests to determine content 2.68 xxxxxxxxxxx Have class select xxxxxxxxx 75.5 content from list of problems 2.67 xxxxxxxxxxx Interview members on xxxxxxxxxxxxx 100. farm regarding course content 2.67 xxxxxxxxxxx Schedule films, slides, xxxxxxxxxxx 85.7 in advance of course 2.67 xxxxxxxxxxx Use ag. agencies as xxxxx 40.0 consultants in planning content* 2.57 xxxxxxxxxx Use consultant in plan- xxxxxx 46.7 ning the instruction* 2.5 xxxxxxxxxx Integrate content of xxxxx 41.4 high school and young farmers* *Promising practices valued but not in common usage. valuable practice was allowing the members of the first class session to determine the content of the course. Scheduling and Locating Courses. A majority of the teachers used ninety minute discussion periods, conducted 15-20 meetings per year, and held the young farmer meetings in the high school. tices were also viewed by the teachers as valuable practices. These prac- 45 TABLE VII VALUABLE PROCEDURES OF SCHEDULING AND LOCATING COURSES FOR YOUNG FARMERS Teachers Per Cent of Rating Practice Teachers Using 2.85 xxxxxxxxxxx Hold meetings in a xxx 20.7 neighborhood location* 2.8 xxxxxxxxxxx Conduct a course or xx 19.2 over 20 meetings a year* 2.78 xxxxxxxxxxx Limit discussion meet- xxxxxxxx 60.0 ings to 90 minutes 2.7 xxxxxxxxxxx Conduct a course of 15 xxxxxxxxx 71.4 to 20 meetings a year 2.62 xxxxxxxxxx Hold meetings in the xxxxxxxxxxx 86.7 high school only 2.58 xxxxxxxxxx Conduct a course of 10 xxxxxx 50.0 to 15 meetings a year *Promising practices valued but not in common usage. Valuable practices which were not used by many teachers were hold- ing meetings in locations other than the school and conducting over 20 meetings per year. Some of the practices thought to be of less importance were holding meetings in the homes of class members, conducting a year around pro- gram, and holding some class meetings during the day. Some additional suggestions by the teachers were limiting shop periods to 180 minutes and holding meetings in the barn on field trips. Conducting Classes. Of the practices offered for evaluation, almost one half were reported used and considered valuable. Nearly all of the practices which were valuable were used by a majority of the teachers. related to the first meeting, classroom, and class discussion. TABLE VIII VALUABLE PROCEDURES IN CONDUCTING CLASSES FOR YOUNG FARMERS 46 The practices which were valuable and used by teachers were Teachers Per Cent of Rating Practice Teachers Using 2.95 xxxxxxxxxxxx Base discussions on xxxxxxxxxxxxx 100. the problems of members 2.9 xxxxxxxxxxxx Discuss proposed plans xxxxxxxxxxxxx 100. at the first meeting 2.88 xxxxxxxxxxxx Start and stop xxxxxxxxxx 85.5 meetings on time 2.86 xxxxxxxxxxx Use local situations xxxxxxxxxxxxx 100. as examples 2.85 xxxxxxxxxxx Use local data in xxxxxxxxxxxx 96.7 class discussions 2.82 xxxxxxxxxxx Use members in deter- xxxxxxxxxxxx 95.5 mining class objectives 2.81 xxxxxxxxxxx Introduce class members xxxxxxxxxxxx 95.1 at the first meeting 2.8 xxxxxxxxxxx Conduct group discus- xxxxxxxxxxxxx 100. sion type meetings 2.79 xxxxxxxxxxx Use demonstrations xxxxxxxxxxxx 96.7 2.78 xxxxxxxxxxx Give some information xxxxxxxxxx 79.0 about each member 2.77 xxxxxxxxxxx Provide table space for xxxxxxxxxxxxx 100. all members of the group 2.77 xxxxxxxxxxx Use technical experts xxxxxxxxxxx 89.7 as resource persons 2.74 xxxxxxxxxxx Assist in formulating xxxxxxxxxxxx 95.2 plans of action 2.74 xxxxxxxxxxx Hold teacher's opinions xxxxxxxxxxx 90.0 until group gives theirs TABLE VIII (continued) 47 Teachers Per Cent of Rating Practice Teachers Using 2.75 xxxxxxxxxxx Ask provocative ques- xxxxxxxxxxxxx 100. tions to draw group problems 2.69 xxxxxxxxxxx Call class members by xxxxxxxxxxxxx 100. their first names 2.68 xxxxxxxxxxx Use members' farm. xxxxxxxx 65.5 records for deter- mining content 2.65 xxxxxxxxxxx Have all-day students xxxxxxxx 66.7 give demonstrations 2.65 xxxxxxxxxxx Provide seats so all xxxxxxxxxxx 90.0 can see the others 2.62 xxxxxxxxxx Take time to summarize xxxxxxxxxxxxx 100. frequently 2.62 xxxxxxxxxx Conduct 'work shop" xxxxxx 46.4 type meetings* 2.58 xxxxxxxxxx Have members indicate xxxxxxxxxx 82.8 practices they will adopt 2.56 xxxxxxxxxx Use visual aids xxxxxxxxxxxx 95.2 frequently 2.54 xxxxxxxxxx Put members on some xxxxx 45.5 committee during course* 2.55 xxxxxxxxxx Pass out an outline to xxxxxxx 56.7 help stay on the subject 2.5 xxxxxxxxxx Have group analyze dis- xxxxxxxx 62.1 cussion for accomplish- ment *Promising practices valued but not in common usage. 48 Much general agreement appeared in the approach to the first class meetings. Members were introduced, some information about each member was offered, and plans were discussed in most of the programs reported. The atmosphere of the meeting was aided, in most instances, by providing table space for everyone, addressing members by their first names, and seating them so they can see each other. The factors were considered important by the teachers using them. Nearly all the teachers surveyed indicated that they used members in determining class objectives and used local data and situations in class. These items were considered of value, as was the use of members' problems as the discussion basis. This practice was used by the entire group responding. Demonstrations were commonly used, as were visual aids and technical experts. All teachers used the group discussion type of meetings and rated it valuable. In the class meeting, nearly all the teachers reported using practices that were designed to include the class members in the meet- ing and to give the group an opportunity to express themselves. Most teachers did not use class members on committees as much as possible or conduct "work shop'I type meetings, but those who did re- garded it highly. Of less importance as viewed by the teachers were practices related to teaching methods of role playing, the preliminary ungraded examination, forums, the use of non-class farmers as discussion leaders, and recorded outside speeches. A small number conducted supervised study, with those who used it placing some value on it. Nearly all the teachers reported that they passed out educational materials and considered it a practice of some value. 49 Other practices of less importance were using class members to present demonstrations, maintaining suspense regarding solution of the problem, asking direct questions of individuals, and using speakers and forums. One teacher suggested the use of tours for some meetings as a valuable practice from his point of view. Conductinngn-Farm Instruction. There were a number of practices which were reported valuable by a high percentage of the teachers. They TABLE IX VALUABLE PROCEDURES IN CONDUCTING ON-FARM INSTRUCTION FOR YOUNG FARMERS Teachers Per Cent of Rating Practice Teachers Using 2.82 xxxxxxxxxxx Provide on-farm instruc- xxxxxxxxxxxx 95.5 tion during course 2.81 xxxxxxxxxxx Visit enrollees before xxxxxxxxxxx 86.7 the first course meeting 2.79 xxxxxxxxxxx Use field trips, tours, xxxxxxxxxx 80.0 or field days 2.71 xxxxxxxxxxx Give priority to those xxxxxxxxxxxx 95.5 needing the most help 2.68 xxxxxxxxxxx Take helpful materials xxxxxxxxxxxx 95.5 along on all farm visits 2.65 xxxxxxxxxx Promote demonstrations xxxxxxxx 66.7 on members' farms 2.5 xxxxxxxxxx > Have class visit each xxxx 55.5 member's farming program* 2.5 xxxxxxxxxx Provide bus for field xxx 26.7 trips transportation* * Promising practices valued but not in common usage. 50 provided on-farm instruction while the course was in progress, visited young farmers before the first meeting of the course, used tours, field trips, field days, and took helpful materials along on farm visits. When the teachers lacked time to spend with all young farmers, the teacher gave priority to those needing the most help. A practice which may be valuable is providing a bus for trans- portation when the class as a group visits each member's farming program. Some of the less important practices as evaluated by the teachers related to using class time to study the purposes of on-farm.instruc- tion, providing on-farm instruction to class members only when they request it, providing a definite system of on-farm instruction visits during the summer, taking key individuals in the community along on farm visits, and helping to locate breeding stock and seed. Financing. Financing the young farmer program does not appear to be a problem since federal and state funds help pay for the program at this time; therefore, none of the practices evaluated were valuable and used by a majority of the teachers. TABLE X VALUABLE PROCEDURES OF FINANCING YOUNG FARMER EDUCATION Teachers Per Cent of Rating Practice Teachers Using 2.5 xxxxxxxxxx Have class members buy xxxxx 41.4 their consumable supplies* *Promising practices valued but not in common usage. Having class members purchase their own consumable supplies is one practice that may be considered a valuable one. 51 Teachers thought practices of less importance were related to providing refreshments and charging an enrollment fee. Most schools had the class members donate money for their refreshments. Providing Teachers 223 Teacher 2223. Finding time to conduct a young farmer program was achieved in most instances by having a certain portion of the school day set aside for young farmer work. Securing the last periods of the school day for the young farmer program was valu- able and used by teachers. TABLE XI VALUABLE PROCEDURES IN PROVIDING TEACHERS AND TEACHER TIME FOR YOUNG FARMERS I t- Teachers Per Cent of Rating Practice Teachers Using 5.0 xxxxxxxxxxxx Use only special teachers x 15.5 with an agricultural ' degree** 2.81 xxxxxxxxxxx Secure ”free periods" xxxxxxxxx 70.0 during the day 2.8 xxxxxxxxxxx Use last period for or- xxxxxxxxxx 85.5 ganization work and visitation 2.5 xxxxxxxxxx Use class members for xxxxxxxx 60.0 teaching whenever possible 2.5 xxxxxxxxxx Use only special tea- xx 15.8 chers who have teach- ing experience** ** Practices not recommended (valued highly but used by only a few teachers) Of less importance as viewed by the teachers are practices in- volving the use of special teachers, director of adult education, and 52 utilizing periods of the year when high school classes are not in session. Supervising Special Teachers. There were no practices which the teachers regarded as valuable and which were used by a majority of them; most of the teachers had never used special teachers. The instructors who used special teachers said that holding con- ferences with them was the best method of supervision. TABLE XII VALUABLE PROCEDURES WHEN SUPERVISING SPECIAL TEACHERS OF YOUNG FARMERS Teachers Per Cent of Rating Practice Teachers Using 2.65 xxxxxxxxxxx Hold conferences with xxxx 28.6 special teachers* 2.5 xxxxxxxxxx Assist special tea- xxxx 28.6 chers plan their instruction* 2.5 xxxxxxxxxx Observe on-farm in- xx 14.5 struction of special teachers** *Promising practices valued but not in common usage. **Practices not recommended (valued highly but used by only a few teachers) Evaluating. On-farm instruction and observation by the teachers were the most utilized and valuable method of evaluating the young far- mer program according to the teachers. The production records of a young farmer were considered of high value for evaluation. Nearly three fourths of the teachers used check lists of approved practices to evalu- ate the program of instruction. TABLE XIII VALUABLE PROCEDURES IN EVALUATING YOUNG FARMER PROGRAMS Teachers Per Cent of Rating Practice Teachers Using 2.89 xxxxxxxxxxxx Use farm visits by xxxxxxxxxxxx 95.5 the instructor 2.79 xxxxxxxxxxx Use production records xxxxxxxx 65.5 of class members 2.67 xxxxxxxxxxx ‘ Observe practices on xxxxxxxx 60.0 tours of members' farms 2.65 xxxxxxxxxxx Use agricultural educa- xxxxxxxxx 75.5 tion agencies to evaluate program 2.65 xxxxxxxxxxx Use on-farm summer xxxxxxxx 65.5 meetings for evaluation 2.55 xxxxxxxxxx Use check list of prac- xxxxxxxxx 69.0 tices planned and adopted Most of the teachers reported that they studied attendance records of the class members as an evaluative tool, but considered this practice of less importance. Others include using advisory committees, standards, study of whom the program serves, and the last meeting for evaluating period. Sggigl Activities and Special Features. Less than one fourth of the practices in the study pertaining to this aspect of the program were reported used by a majority of the teachers. About three fourths of the teachers felt recreation and refreshments were an important part of the young farmer program. 54 An achievement night may be as valuable as recreation. TABLE XIV VALUABLE PROCEDURES IN PROVIDING SOCIAL ACTIVITIES AND SPECIAL FEATURES FOR YOUNG FARMERS Teachers 4 Per Cent of Rating Practice Teachers Using 2.8 xxxxxxxxxxx Give recognition to xx 16.7 outstanding members* 2.8 xxxxxxxxxxx Promote class organi- xx 16.7 zations (cooperatives, etc.)* 2.59 xxxxxxxxxx Provide recreational xxxxxxxxx 75.5 activities 2.52 xxxxxxxxxx Provide refreshments xxxxxxxxx 70.0 2.5 xxxxxxxxxx Have an achievement xx 20.0 night* *Promising practices valued but not in common usage. Movies, picnics, and awarding diplomas were activities conducted but not to an appreciable extent. 55 CHAPTER V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Summary 222 Purpose. The purpose of this study was an attempt to analyze the practices used in Michigan young farmer programs to determine the degree to which they are used and the value that those teachers place upon the practice. [Thg‘Mgthgd. Data for the study were obtained by the use of schedules which were sent to all Michigan teachers of vocational agri- culture who conducted young farmer programs in 1955-1956. This instru- ment was similar to the schedule used inva regional study pertaining to adult farmer instruction. Thirty of the forty teachers contacted responded. 223 Findings. The following summarizations were based upon the data presented in Chapter IV: 1. Teachers used and valued highly 56 per cent of the practices evaluated by the teachers of vocational agriculture responding to schedules A and B. 2. Teachers of vocational agriculture in Michigan have conducted young farmer programs an average of 4.8 years. 5. The findings of this study indicated that although the administration is consulted and informed, rarely are the superintendent or principal included in the young farmer meetings. Policy statements were seldom issued, but teachers who practiced this feel it is valuable. Classes were not limited in size, data reveal that the average number of young farmers per class dropped to 14.6 from a high of 19.5. 56 4. Practices in "public relations" and ”planning a program" were used by a majority of the teachers and were valued highly. Practices in “organizing class groups," ”scheduling and locating courses," "super- vising special teachers," and "social activities and special features" were the areas in which a low percentage of the practices were used and valued highly. 5. Since 1950, young farmer programs have shown a slight reduc- tion in number and also in the number enrolled. In Michigan, the average number of young farmers per class has dropped to 14.6 from a high of 19.5. 6. Advisory committees were a valuable means of planning the young farmer program. 7. The interests and needs of the individual provided the basis for the instruction. 8. A young farmer program in most instances was a series of 15- 20 meetings held during the winter months. The classroom.meetings were discussion type meetings held for 90 minutes. 9. Nearly one-half of the practices concerning on-farm instruc- tion were used and valued highly by teachers of vocational agriculture. 10. Teachers were provided time during the school day for the organization of a young farmer program and visitation of class members. This period of time was provided near the end of the school day. 11. Teachers of vocational agriculture did not use special tea- chers to a great extent but those who used them found them of value. 12. The evaluation of instruction was most frequently and effi- ciently accomplished by the use of observation during on-farm instruction. 57 15. Teachers of vocational agriculture provided recreation and refreshments for the members of the young farmer program, but did not provide other social activities and special features, such as movies, picnics, and awarding diplomas. 14. Of the many media used in public relations activities, per- sonal contact was utilized by all the teachers who considered it the most valuable approach. 15. Teachers of vocational agriculture used personal contact to recruit members for their young farmer programs. They considered this a highly valuable practice. 16. An advisory council developed proposed plans for the year and these were discussed at the first meeting of the group. 17. The practices which were valuable in conducting the classes were related to the first meeting, classroom, and class discussions. There was general agreement regarding the first class meeting. Members were introduced, some information about each member was offered, and plans were discussed. Teachers obtained a suitable atmosphere by pro- viding table space for everyone, calling members by their first names, and seating members so that they could see each other. Nearly all the teachers indicated that they used members in determining class objectives and that they used local data and situations in the class. They also reported using the problems of the members in class discussions. Demon- strations, visual aids, technical experts, and discussion type meetings were rated highly. Nearly all the teachers reported using practices in the class meeting that were designed to include the class members in the meeting and to give the group an opportunity to express themselves. 58 18. The study indicated that the best time to conduct on-farm instruction was before and during the series of meetings. 19. Thirty six per cent of the practices evaluated were con- sidered good practices. 20. Some areas of organizing and conducting young farmer pro- grams had many practices which were not used by a majority of the tea- chers nor valued highly. Conclusions There are many practices that teachers of vocational agriculture can use in carrying out a program of young farmer education. This study was an attempt to discover what practices are used and the value placed on them by teachers offering young farmer programs. The following con- clusions can be drawn: 1. Administrators do not play a very important role in the development of young farmer programs. 2. Using local papers, radio stations, school paper, circular letters, posters or handbills, and telephones are less valuable than personal contact in carrying on public relations. 5. Organizing a group of young farmers can best be accomplished by direct personal contact of the individuals desired in the program. 4. There are two important factors which contribute to good Inlanning of the instruction. First, teachers should utilize an advisory (committee of four to six members to do some initial planning. Second, ‘txheir proposals should be presented at the first regular meeting of the group to give all members a chance to voice their opinions. The use of 5111 advisory committee is an excellent opportunity to utilize and involve imritiividuals in helping to plan a young farmer program. 59 5. Young farmer programs should have 15 to 20 meetings per year. The meetings should be primarily of the discussion type and last for approximately 90 minutes. 6. A worthwhile young farmer class bases the class discussion on the needs and interests of the class members and uses local situations and data during the discussion. Demonstrations along with other types of visual aids are used to stimulate learning. 7. On-farm instruction and visitation is important to the success of the young farmer program. It can be accomplished most efficiently by visiting the young farmers before the class meetings begin and dur- ing the progress of the course. 8. Teachers need to be given time during the school day to work with young farmers. It is best if this time is near the end of the school day so that the teacher can make efficient use of his time. 9. Evaluating the results of a young farmer program is done best by getting out on the farm and observing what approved practices the individuals are putting into use. 10. In addition to technical training in agriculture, young far- mers need recognition, the feeling of belonging to a group, as well as some social activities. 11. Teachers of vocational agriculture do not use a great enough variety of teaching techniques in conducting young farmer classes. 12. Some areas such as, (l) organizing class groups, (2) scheduling and locating courses, (5) supervising special teachers, and (4) social activities and special features appear to be lacking in practices that are used and valued highly. 60 Recommendations and Implications As a result of the data presented and the conclusions drawn, these recommendations are made: 1. Administrators should be encouraged to take an active part in the development of young farmer programs. This could be accomplished by appearing at class sessions during the series of meetings. The adminis- trator may welcome a young farmer group at the beginning of the series or appear at the final session. 2. Teachers of vocational agriculture should not overlook the vital importance of personal contact when working with young farmers. This practice should be used to sell the young farmer program to the community. 5. Advisory committees of four to six young farmers should be used in organizing, conducting, and evaluating young farmer programs. 4. Young farmer meetings should usually be the discussion type meeting, but occasionally other types of meetings are desirable. Other types of meetings such as lecture, lecture discussion, work shop meet- ings, field trips, and tours give variety to the meetings. 5. Class discussions should be based on the problems the young farmers are having on their own farms. 6. In solving the young farmer problems, use local data and experiences to make the solutions more practical. 7. Demonstrations and other types of visual aids should be used to vitalize the class situation. 8. On-farm instruction should be utilized to recruit, instruct, evaluate, and encourage young farmers. 61 9. Teachers of vocational agriculture should be allotted time during the school day to direct a young farmer program. This time would best be utilized near the end of the school day. 10. Young farmer programs should include something beside the study of technical agriculture. Recreation and refreshments should be included in the program of young farmer activities. 11. A variety of different practices should be used to organize, conduct, and evaluate young farmer programs. Using a greater variety of practices will be helpful to the teacher of vocational agriculture in accomplishing his objectiVes. 12. Since young farmers are usually between 16 and 50 years of age, many will be married. Therefore, more work should be done in an effort to bring the young farmer's wife into the program. As she is a partner in the farm.business, her interest and cooperation are essential to her husband's success. If teacher time is available, a young farmer program might operate best with two separate groups; one for single young men, and one for the married young farmers. 15. Teachers of vocational agriculture should be given more train- ing in public relations work, using advisory committees or councils, and conducting effective group discussions. 14. Since thirty six per cent of the practices evaluated are considered good practices, this implies that teachers ought to utilize them in young farmer work and teacher trainers should stress them during the training period of teachers of vocational agriculture. 15. Some areas of organizing and conducting young farmer programs had a low percentage of practices which were used by a majority of the teachers and valued highly. This may imply that such areas as organizing 62 class groups, scheduling and locating courses, supervising special tea- chers, and social activities and special features may need further de- velopment in locating practices which are valuable. Problems for Further Study 1. A study to determine the characteristics of successful young farmer programs. 2. A study to determine why young farmers do not participate in young farmer programs. 5. Studies to develop new practices and techniques which can be used in organizing, conducting and evaluating young farmer programs. 4. A study to determine the best procedures for effective on- farm instruction. BIBLIOGRAPHY 64 BIBLIOGRAPHY Ahalt, Arthur M. and Ray A. Murray. The Possibilities of Systematic Education for Young_ and Adult Farmers in Maryland. Part II, Survey of Vocational— Agriculture Teachers. Miscellaneous Pub. 204. College Park, Maryland: University of Maryland, Agricul- tural Experiment Station, April, 1954. Ahalt, Arthur M. and Ray A. Murray. The Possibilities of Systematic Education for Young_ and Adult Farmers in Maryland. Part IV, Survey of Farmers in Selected Communities. Miscellaneous Pub. 208. College Park, Maryland: University of Maryland, Agricul- tural Experiment Station, June, 1954. Annis, William A. 'A Young Farmer Program.'Pays', " Agricultural Educa- tion Magazine, XXIX (October, 1956), p. 82. Bender, Ralph E. "Community Service Includes Young Farmers," Agricul- tural Education Ma azine, XXVIII (August, 1955), pp. 52-55. Brum, Herbert D. 'Include the Young Farmer's Wife,” Aggicultural Education Ma azine, XXIX (October, 1956), p. 84. Brunner, H. S. "Why Young and Adult Farmer Instruction?” Agricultural Education Ma azine, XXVI (December, 1955), p.151. Byram, Harold M., Harry W. Kitts and Lloyd J. Phipps. Organizing, Con- Region. Bureau of Research and Service, College of Education. East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, 1955. Central Regional Conference on Research in Agricultural Education. Report_ of the Cooperative Study of Institutional On-Farm Training in the Central Region. Danville, Illinois: The Interstate Printers and Publishers, Inc., n.d. Cushman, Harold R. "The Vo-Ag Teacher Is the Key," Better Farming Methods, XXVII (October, 1955), pp. 20-25. Cushman, Harold Robert. "What Are the Factors Hindering the Conducting of Young Farmer Programs by Vermont Teachers of Vocational Agri- culture and How Can These Factors Be Overcome?“ Unpublished Doctor's thesis, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, 1951. Ekstrom, George F., and John B. McClelland. Adult Education in Voca- tional Agriculture. Danville, Illinois: The Interstate, 1952. Evans, George R. 'Evaluation of the Young Farmer Program," Agricul- tural Education Magazine, XXV (May, 1955), p. 256. 65 Fidler, L. B. “Teaching Young and Adult Farmers," Agricultural Educa- tion Magazine, XXVIII (March, 1956), p. 214. Fife, Ray. Developing Young Farmer Programs In Ohio. Bulletin No. 100. Columbus, Ohio: The Department of Agricultural Education, Ohio State University, 1945. Fridline, C. R. "We Are Trying a County Young Farmer Program," Agri- cultural Education Magazine, XXIX (October, 1956), p. 77. Gilberg, Swen A. "Organizing the Young Farmer Program," Agricultural Education Maggzine, XXIX (November, 1956), pp. 109-110. Heitz, John J. "Out-of-School Classes in Nebraska," Aggicultural Education Magazine, XXVI (December, 1955), p. 146. Hobgood, Thomas Newton. "Problems Involved in Organizing and Conducting Young Farmer Programs Including Suggested Solutions." Unpublished Master's problem, Department of Agricultural Education, North Carolina State College, Raleigh, North Carolina, 1952. Hobgood, T. N., Jr., Selz C. Mayo and C. C. Scarborough. I'Organizational Procedures for Young Farmer Programs,“ Aggicultural Education Maggzine, XXV (November, 1952), pp. 115-116. Hunsicker, H. N. Planning and Conducting 3 Program 2: Instruction in Vocational Agriculture for Young Farmers. Vocational Bulletin No. 262, Agricultural Series No. 37. United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Office of Education. Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1956. James, J. A. "Wisconsin Young Farmers," Agricultural Education Magazine, XXIV (June, 1952), p0 2750 Meaders, Donald. Data From National Studying Young Farmer Programs. Lansing, Michigan: Office of Vocational Education, Department of Public Instruction, 1956. (Mimeographed) Mifflinburg Young Farmers Handbook. University Park, Maryland: Depart- ment of Agricultural Education, Pennsylvania State University, 1955. Moeckel, Rolf E. "A Study of Practices Used by Teachers of Adult Far- mer Classes in Michigan." Unpublished Master's thesis, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, 1955. Needs, Ralph E. I'Development and Evaluation of the Young Farmer Program in Vocational Agriculture at Summit Station, Ohio, 1944-1945.” Unpublished Master's thesis, Department of Agricultural Educa- tion, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, 1955. Nichols, Mark. Yonng Farmers - Their Problems, Activities and Educa- tional Program. Danville, Illinois: The Interstate, 1952. 66 Orr, Kennett Eugene. "Developing a Young Farmer Organization In Virginia." Unpublished Master's thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Blacksburg, Virginia, 1952. Phipps, Lloyd J., and Glen Charles Cook. Handbook gn Teaching Vocational Agriculture. Danville, Illinois: The Interstate, 1952. Puttman, Jack. "Varied Programs for Young Farmers,I Agricultural Education Ma azine, XXIV (March, 1952), pp. 199-200. Schroeder, W. P. Helps for Evaluating Programs_ of Adult Education in Vocational Agniculture. Professional Series Bulletin No. 5.- East Lansing, Michigan: Bureau of Research and Service, School of Education, Michigan State University, 1955. Sledge, George W. ”Young Farmer Enrollments Need Not Be a Problem," Agricultural Education Magazine, XXV (November, 1952), p. 106. Sweany, H. P. The Institutional-On—Farm Training Program in Michi With Implications for Adult Education. Research Bulletin No. 4. East Lansing, Michigan: Department of Vocational Education, Michigan State College, and Lansing, Michigan: State Board of Control for Vocational Education, 1955. United States Office of Education, Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Summaries of Studies in Agricultural Education. Voca- tional Division Bulletin No. 251, Agricultural Series No. 65. Washington, D. 0.: United States Government Printing Office, 1955. , Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Summaries 22 Studies in Agricultural Education. Vocational Division Bulletin No. 255, Agricultural Series No. 64. Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1954. , Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Summaries 2: Studies in Agricultural Education. Vocational Division Bulletin No. 256, Agricultural Series No. 66. Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1956. , Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Summaries 2: Studies in Agricultural Education. Vocational Division Bulletin No. 265,- Agricultural Series No. 68. Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1955. , Federal Security Agency. Summaries of Studies in Agricul- tural Education. Vocational Division Bulletin No. 257, Agri- cultural Series No. 57. Washington, D. 0.: United States Government Printing Office, 1948. ,Federal Security Agency. Summaries of Studies in Agricul- tural Education. Vocational Division Bulletin No. 245, Agri- cultural Series No. 62. Washington, D. 0.: United States Government Printing Office, 1952. 67 Wall, Stanley. "Young Farmer Programs Are Needed," Agricultural Educa- tion Magazine, XXIX (October, 1956), p. 82. *— Wood, C. B. ”Securing Enrollments for Out-of-School Groups," Agricul- tural Education Magazine, XXVIII (June, 1956), p. 284. APPENDICES APPENDIX A 70 APPENDIX A LETTER SEKT TO TEACHERS WITH SCHEDULES A AND B Onsted, Michigan Iovember 15, 1956 Dear , There has been much talk recently concerning the improvement of the young farmer program. At the present time there is a national Young Farmer Study being conducted by the U. S. Office of Education. I am interested in trying to find some possible solutions for conducting successful young farmer programs and have chosen this area for my thesis study. I believe you, too, would be interested in helping to find some possible solutions. I would appreciate it very much if you would answer the en- closed survey and return it by December 15. If We could get the survey back by that date, we could use the information this year. Believing that you will be interested in the information, I will send you the results of the study. Sincerely, Howard Bernson APPENDIX B APPENDIX B 72 00' '8' 04‘ '3' Legend: Each x represen s a young armer class conducted in that c ty in 19555-56. WE MICHIGAN 43' I? 1 SCALE ‘2. "QT“ 39 m3 . Z“ 1 ‘.° was 20 o 20 no ‘ —=_=- - KM. (culled I Inn by Anita D. Pmllo Ikb. Stlm (allege, Dop't. oi jut & 600.. u- u- n- u- as- u- a:- sun Ptus Conduit "51 I4 LOCATION or YOUNG FARMER CLASSES 1955-56 APPENDIX C APPENDIX C TABLE XV MIME-ER OF YEARS EXPERIENCE CONDUCTING YOUNG FARIVER PROGRAMS OF THE VOCATIONAL AGRICULTURE TEACHERS SURVEYED Years Number of Teachers 1 O O O O O O O O O O O 1+ 2 O 0 O O O O O O O C O 1 25000000000001 TOtalooooio Average . . . 4.8 years APPENDIX C (continued) TABLE XVI THE NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF PRACTICES USED AND VALUED HIGHLY Number Number Per Cent of Used Used Area Practices and and Valued Valued Highly Highly Administration a. Policy . . . . . . . . 10 4 z+0.0 Public Relations. . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5 62.5 Planning a Program. . . . . . . . . . . 7 4 57.0 Organizing Class Groups . . . . . . . . 15 5 25.0 Planning the Instruction. . . . . . . . l5 5 58.4 Scheduling & Locating Courses . . . . . 14 4 28.6 Conducting Classes. . . . . . . . . . . 51 24 47.1 Conducting OnyFarm Instruction. . . . . l5 6 46.0 Financing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 O 0 Providing Teachers & Teacher Time . . . 8 5 57.5 Supervising Special Teachers. . . . . . 4 1 25.0 Evaluating. . . . . ... . . . . . . . . 15 6 40.0 Social Activities and Special Features. 9 2 22.0 Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171 67 56 APPENDIX C (continued) 76 TABLE XVII MICHIGAN SCHOOLS CONDUCTING YOUNG FARMER PROGRAMS1 1955 ' 1956 1. Almont 15. Concord 29. Owosso 2. Ashley 16. Decatur 50. Perry 5. Athens 17. Durand 51. Petoskey 4. Bangor 18. Elkton 52. Portland 5. Bay City 19. Felch 55. Romeo 6. Bellevue 20. Grant 54. St. Charles 7. Britton 21. Imlay City 55. Saranac 8. Buchanan 22. Kingsley 56. Stephenson 9. Care 225. Marshall 57. Vassar (2 teachers) 10. Carson City 58. Williamston 24. Millington (2 teachers) 11. Cassopolis 25. North Branch 59. Yale (2 teachers, 12. Centreville 5 classes) 26. Olivet 15. Charlotte 40. Michigan State 27. Onsted University 14. Chesaning 28. OVid 1Obtained from the Michigan State Department of Public Instruc- tion, Agricultural Education Division. 2The number in parenthesis after a school indicates the number of young farmer programs in the school. 5 Yale was not included in the original list of schools, there- fore, their assistance in the study was not solicited. hThe young farmer programs as reported by the Michigan Department of Public Instruction included those conducted as a part of the Michigan State University Short Course Program. 77 APPENDIX C (continued) TABLE XVIII SCHOOLS RETURNING SCHEDULES A AND B 1. Ashley 16. Marshall -2 2. Bellevue 17. Millington 5. Britton 18. North Branch 4. Buchanan 19. Olivet 5. Caro 20. Onsted 6. Centreville 21. Ovid 7. Charlotte 22. Owosso 8. Chesaning 25. Perry .9. Concord 24. Petoskey 10. Decatur 25. Portland 11. Elkton 26. Romeo 12. Grant 27. St. Charles 15. Imlay City 28. Saranac 14. Kingsley . 29. Williamston -1 15. Marshall -1 50. Williamston -2 78 APPENDIX C (continued) TABLE XIX PRACTICES CONSIDERED LESS VALUABLE BY TEACHERS Teachers Per Cent of Rating Practice Teachers Using ADMINISTRATION AND POLICY 2.25 xxxxxxxxx Have Supt. or Prin. on xxx 26.7 the last night's program 2.25 xxxxxxxxx Set maximum limits on xx 15.5 class size 2.2 xxxxxxxxx Have Supt. or Prin. xx 16.7 welcome members at first meeting PUBLIC RELATIONS 2.56 xxxxxxxxx Use the school paper xxxxx 57.9 2.17 xxxxxxxxx Use posters or handbills xxx 20.7 2.1 xxxxxxxx Use local radio station xxxx 54.5 PLANNING A PROGRAM 2.48 xxxxxxxxxx Determine with others xxxxxxxxxx 85.5 the program objectives 2.45 xxxxxxxxxx Plan a long-time pro- xxxxxx 46.7 gram with a sequence of courses 2.21 xxxxxxxxx Use formal surveys xxxxxx 46.7 ORGANIZING CLASS GROUPS 2.48 xxxxxxxxxx Use leading farmer to xxxxxxxxxx 76.6 recruit members 2.45 xxxxxxxxxx Use telephone to xxxxxxxxx 70.0 recruit members 79 APPENDIX C (continued) TABLE XIX (continued) Teachers Per Cent of Rating Practice Teachers Using 2.58 xxxxxxxxxx Use an advisory comp xxxxxxx 55.5 mittee to recruit members 2.58 xxxxxxxxxx Provide membership cards xxx 26.7 2.56 xxxxxxxxx Have roll call and xxxxx 57.9 check on absentees 2.29 xxxxxxxxx Recruit members by an- xxx 25.5 nouncements at events 2.27 xxxxxxxxx Have members organize xxxxx 56.7 themselves 2.17 xxxxxxxxx Hold meetings for wives xxx 20.0 concurrently 2.04 xxxxxxxx Have high school stu- xxxxxxxxxx 85.5 dents aid in recruiting members 2.0 xxxxxxxx Have an organized group 5.5 sponsor a course PLANNING THE INSTRUCTION 2.48 xxxxxxxxxx Organize content on a xxxxxxxxxx 76.7 seasonal basis 2.46 xxxxxxxxxx Members elect a class xxxxx 45.5 committee to plan content 2.42 xxxxxxxxxx Confer with businesses xxxxxxxxxxx 86.7 regarding specialists, aids, etc. 2.58 xxxxxxxxxx Postpone certain content xxxxxxx 55.5 until the adult farmer 1.55 xxxxx Use a suggestion box x 10.5 APPENDIX C (continued) TABLE XIX (continued) Teachers 6 Per Cent of Rating Practice Teachers Using SCHEDULING AND LOCATING COURSES 2.45 xxxxxxxxxx Hold meetings through— xxxxxx 48.5 out a year 2.4 xxxxxxxxxx Hold meetings in homes xxxx 50. of class members 2.29 xxxxxxxxx Hold some meetings dur- xxxxxxx 56.7 ing the day 2.18 xxxxxxxxx Limit shop meetings to xxxxxx 44.0 120 minutes 2.15 xxxxxxxxx Never postpone or xxxxxxxx 60.0 cancel a meeting 2.0 xxxxxxxx Conduct a course of x 10.7 ten meetings a year 1.5 xxxxxx Conduct two or more x 6.7 courses simultaneously 1.0 xxxx Hold class meetings only 5.5 during the day CONDUCTING CLASSES 2.48 xxxxxxxxxx Give out educational xxxxxxxxxxxx 96.7 materials at meetings 2.48 xxxxxxxxxx Have group weigh each xxxxxxxxxxx 89.5 idea presented 2.48 xxxxxxxxxx Use class members to xxxxxxxxx 75.5 present demonstration 2.46 xxxxxxxxxx Maintain suspense as to xxxxxxxxxx 82.8 the solution of a problem 2.45 xxxxxxxxxx Ask members to present xxxxxxxxx 69. certain information to class 81 APPENDIX 0 (continued) TABLE XIX (continued) Teachers Per Cent of Rating Practice Teachers Using 2.44 xxxxxxxxxx Ask direct questions xxxxxxxxxxx 90. of individuals 2.44 xxxxxxxxxx Use speakers xxxxxxxxxx 85.5 2.45 xxxxxxxxxx Use forums xxxxxx 46.7 2.42 xxxxxxxxxx Start discussions with xxxxxxxxxx 80. a procedural question 2.56 xxxxxxxxx Ask members to come with xxxxxxxxxx 85.5 questions in mind 2.56 xxxxxxxxx Have non-class farmers xxxxx 56.7 serve as discussion leaders 2.55 xxxxxxxxx Use panel discussions xxxxxxxx 62.1 2.55 xxxxxxxxx Use supervised study xxxx 55.5 2.25 xxxxxxxxx Use ”buzz sessions" xxxxxxxxx 68.9 2.22 xxxxxxxxx Use an ungraded examina- xxxx 50. tion near beginning of course 2.20 xxxxxxxxx Provide a class evalua- xx 17.2 tor or observer 2.15 xxxxxxxxx Use questions that call xxxxxxxxxxx 90.0 for opinions not facts 2.14 xxxxxxxxx Elect a discussion xxx 25.5 leader from the class 2.06 xxxxxxxx Allow class members to xxxxxxx 55.5 smoke during class 2.0 xxxxxxxx Use tape recordings of xx 15.5 speeches made elsewhere 2.0 xxxxxxxx Use class officer to xxx 24.1 help conduct meeting APPENDIX C (continued) TABLE XIX (continued) 82 Teachers Per Cent of Rating Practice Teachers Using 1.75 xxxxxxx Use role playing xx 15.5 1.67 xxxxxxx Record discussions xxx 20.7 and play back 1.4 xxxxxx Have member as recep- xx 16.7 tionist at first meeting CONDUCTING ON-FARM INSTRUCTION 2.46 xxxxxxxxxx Help locate breeding xxxxxxxxxxx 86.7 stock and seed 2.45 xxxxxxxxxx Provide systematic on- xxxxx 57.9 farm visits during the summer 2.59 xxxxxxxxxx Use class time to study xxxxxxxx 60.0 the purposes of on-farm instruction 2.2 xxxxxxxxx Take key community xxxx 55.8 individuals on farm visits 1.85 xxxxxxx Provide on-farm instruc- xxxxx 45.5 tion only when requested FINANCING 2.55 xxxxxxxxx Ask members for refresh- xxxxxxxx 66.7 ment 1.8 xxxxxxx Allow young farmers to xxx 25.5 "treat" each other 1.67 xxxxxxx Charge an enrollment fee xxx 20.7 1.5 xxxxxx Obtain donations from x 6.9 businesses for re- freshments 83 APPENDIX C (continued) TABLE XIX (continued) Teachers Per Cent of Rating Practice Teachers Using .5 xx Have advisory committee x 6.7 pay for refreshments PROVIDING TEACHERS AND TEACHER TIME 2.46 xxxxxxxxxx Use special teachers not qualified for voc. ag. xxxxx 45.5 2.4 xxxxxxxxxx Hold meetings when all- xxxxxx 50.0 day classes are not in session 1.75 xxxxxxx Have a director of xx 15.5 adult education in the school SUPERVISING SPECIAL TEACHERS 1.65 xxxxxxx Observe their teaching xxxx 28.5 EVALUATING 2.47 xxxxxxxxxx Compare members with xxxxxxx 56.7 standards, averages, etc. 2.45 xxxxxxxxxx Study regularity of mem- xxxxxxxxxxxx 95.5 bers and attendance 2.45 xxxxxxxxxx Use advisory committees xxxxxxxxxx 76.7 to evaluate program 2.45 xxxxxxxxxx Use last meeting for xxxxxxxxx 72.4 course evaluation 2.52 xxxxxxxxx Study enrollment to see xxxxxxxxxx 85.5 who program serves 2.27 xxxxxxxxx Measure growth or de- xxxxxxxxx 75.5 cline in attendance 2.11 xxxxxxxx Study results of mems xxxx 50.0 here with non-members APPENDIX C (continued) TABLE XIX (continued) 84 Teachers Per Cent of Rating Practice Teachers Using 2.25 xxxxxxxxx Study change in members xxxxx 40.0 and community's attitude 1.67 xxxxxxx Use business men to x 10.5 evaluate the program SOCIAL ACTIVITIES AND SPECIAL FEATURES 2.4 xxxxxxxxxx Use recreational movies xxxx 55.5 2.58 xxxxxxxxxx Conduct a summer picnic xxx 26.7 2.55 xxxxxxxxx Use committees to con- xxxx 54.5 duct social activities 2.11 xxxxxxxx Award attendance diplo- xxxx 50.0 mas APPENDIX C (continued) TABLE XX PRACTICES ADDED BY TEACHERS 85 Teachers Per Cent of Rating Practice Teachers Using PUBLIC RELATION 5. xxxxxxxxxxxx High school students remind older 5.5 brother 5. xxxxxxxxxxxx Personal letters and cards 5.5 5. xxxxxxxxxxxx Young farmers contact other 5.5 young farmers 5. xxxxxxxxxxxx Postcards to all past FFA members 5.5 living in district PLANNING A PROGRAM 5. xxxxxxxxxxxx Group decides 5.5 5. xxxxxxxxxxxx Offer a continuing program in- 5.5 cluding recreation activities ORGANIZING CLASS GROUPS 5. xxxxxxxxxxxx Postcards to members of other 5,5 rural groups PLANNING THE INSTRUCTION 5. xxxxxxxxxxxx Committee or first class meeting 5.5 determines content SCHEDULING AND LOCATING COURSES 5. xxxxxxxxxxxx Limit shop meetings to 180 minutes 5.5 if students desired 5. xxxxxxxxxxxx Meeting may be in barn 5.5 APPENDIX C (continued) TABLE XX (continued) Teachers Per Cent of Rating Practice Teachers Using 5. xxxxxxxxxxxx Field trip x 5.5 5. xxxxxxxxxxxx 180-240 minute shop meeting x 5.5 CONDUCTING CLASSES 5. xxxxxxxxxxxx Use tours for some meetings x 5.5 FINANCING 5. xxxxxxxxxxxx Provided by the school x 5.5 5. xxxxxxxxxxxx Charge enrollment fee for farm x 5.5 shop class PROVIDING TEACHERS AND TEACHER TIME 5. xxxxxxxxxxxx Qualified Ag. man x 5.5 APPENDIX D 88 ...—dogs 9230 no meanwoum HsdoHuaosuo on» :33 $358 one mwnnpoefi 0332.68 HH .3 H N H no.5» HHs no coupons.“ H m m. m mm Mambo?" as .mdnpooa pmaH on» no 5.593 on» no meHoana no can anocnopnfiummsm chum H m m H «m 302: pmnnn 23 no Pangaea and? 250.33 Hangman .Ho\unw pnougnsnnomsm mean no me: o n n H H om .3 H. no 0.38 23 Sean noHpooeoe possum mason. mdnvnmwom psoewpopm hOHHom a spam H H m H Ramona Hogan w Hm memo.» a .3n prgmmw mbnuwhpwnqflacm museum HoHHom can nonugpqug n N W n N N P H T. J H om mmmmfmmms, A u um: um...“ Wmm. m a m m m a m m I m. a n e m 9 . m: .m I M. oonpoenq m m3» e3: no 3 Egon on: no...” hoped mmOHauénH no A: wagon can use .39». m3» 25» 6055:00ch o>wn H can» 033 pen 5an 23. non 28m “:5 olonpnwum mm: eon: o>mm H mach Hum 23 wage comenonsm no uopogamnn mommeo Eamon munch 63.2893 no nopsbz Ampobuqofl monumHo nofinwn mason wagons oonloomHo 930% no hongz Hoonom 2.52 < MADE?“ a Haas muumsmonsonns amuse o» mummmm HSoOH a manwmoswon msonm has momnooo H3 mpoHanOS 23 no museums thdown Honpo EonnH ewmasmg 41 esnsoeg noses; mer -notiand on 105 mom 1011 PIP 00 Hobos mmoHao non momneoo nonno H o m m mH manoH NE on 00.3» ..wé .932” no cannon o 925 32500 no oomodvom s nuts Ramona ofipzmsg a EHnH NH w H n m «oonno can masque no AHHmzn on» €33 4:30.39 H m n H H 3 mu“255 Hmnnom omD m m H H «H - 3M3 H ponhpmfi. dH on o» 835 whensma .<.h.h pmmq HHS on munwo Hmom H mum.» gonna nospdoo cm.» H mouse was whoppoH Hmsonnom H 2230.3 .8ch woman 352:5 .m.m "mnmnpo H no mmwmmmmmwsmu Ass “ m m .... .... m p a A. u. m. A u. m A . w m ..w u m m .... u a n u A . r. u n n u n n A I an 0 O 9 0 O 1.. O I M um 333.3 I, \P no on dozen om: mpH. one» come mmoHBoon 08H» meow non pman on» son open pen o>mn H n ..4 00H» you and» new: when H 91 moovnomno no mfiaxoono can HHoo nohoom a and p:SUHmonm a no noon mHoOHnno mo>Homgunp HdHoomm 0» hp oHOJB on» 0» Hpoans no mpnerosfioado hp chooses » a mu Assn muonm coNHndmno wan an uHo mpnouspm Hoonom on no unonsoa pHdHoon op Hsaoo no em: .ooh mandHonH .mona .nnoo w Honno 110M sou 41 mfiOHBoum 5 one Hanan henna no mnonaofi on mouse anon ”muonpo soon 3 3,2233 dos. mango: B maHuHoz ”moHastu .unosnnHHnmvuo unochsp oson nuHs :OHpoo::00 :H momLsOO vosnooo u axon iou ooHuompm mHmu uo>os o>an H mmoHeo¢mm no pH union 09H» 060» new hash mHm» 95 HuHoonn uano nanuHs nuances canny noohooo one! no voousoo nunHvoofi ouhsoo o 5 Son oSHsnovov mchooa mano aMH no .sfioo unnonao HHovu 0:» Hcho nonmmHo nosnun wnsoh :H oaoavuom can Hooson no noovcoo oohsoo oaunuoch no 9:09:00 can moHasdHa :H nvcwanmcoo mOHocowo ens causes 0:» vooHon op oneness unsHo :oHH4 n S n D. and w m Wm m mm as. O U. 9 u. um 10 m A A m A 08 N0 .. u u x u 1. . u n n u n MI. 8 9 9 9 no. 0 M u n2» h0>0§ 2:2 H osou non nod amok anu noocHucoonHu o>an 94 eaten on onIeA smog eaten qonw uteqaooug antes on pooh anv 09H» can non ...: pop h0>0§ opus H nusHvoofl nnaHo conga no on» voan one wcHneo nquoOHpnooou no no nomads a o>mm osoa uuuHo anth on» an chassis numHo conveyanH on noose“; omH o» ”weapons mono oasen WNOHfiodmm onasoo u usHhsv oopaHsEoo use» no nos! an o>um 95 ouam .naofiuon o>am use .mmsHvooE n50H>oaa soH>oh .musHpooE none on wauHo no humponoom no HmonHmoua amp S m. on m. m w o m mm a m a m a Po 9 A a u. A a u. a J a a an m. T. A A T. u A on n 8 8 n 8 1.0 w o m. m. o m. m. t a a e a m1 2. coHvooha mHloodmm k0>0§ noon H no on Boon us. .39». was. 2:» 96 H awndvoaa neon you whaou can: «muosuo n N S 0 P J womemmmmmmm 2 an a q a u u um in mmmmmmmm 2mm m m m m «.... mu v t a coauoahn algal was... con: 33845 MD a." 25.0% g in Eda n20 03%.? mica-abide! rt h0>0§ and» oaou you uuudu on» you opus pap o>an H «gang ".3.” “a: as H mod Gaga—4 97 N m HH n n N 303.055 «ova noun «0 «03.33?qu 93 £96.. 3 macaw on» 33 h S" J... M 3333' 254.525 HuHuuozgucoo .3 obaauoo>oum x3. mH HH H H 4 N 334 AM H W 43.35% mangoes 05 3 960 3 gong on» x: H m H N W [53533 H HT H 4: wd anal .630 06!: ”20023 HO 356.300." 093 on: N Am glam-Mal «canon .30: .312» no: 503583 an on: d H. W H NH 3% $56.» $33 3 gvno Gamma»? a use 23m m NH H H H 3 . nagging... 393 m an 939.305 350 Mo apnoea 5.3.“ on: WI N A gaging «3.3.3 gm 0. N S 0 S A P 1 J wommwmmwfimfi oz 9 A e u. a A u. x. e s n x w. J a u m o I u 1 A A n I A A o u n o .. n n e x A n n z . J M., e n m. u n n t. .m a a a a 4 a. 830$.» “a pa p AB» vows 302.053 . .«o 3. v.56.“ new in .32" was» 083 355:8»? .83: 053 9.5» no.“ awn—HM 2:. you 93: as 022 H I'll-laud...” gang Hoonom .33. «Sum 83 mafia won—Egan no unvoagnH oonnaAo ugh «56H vanguno no hoe—B: Anagoaoav nounaao hon—nah MESH 955.com. ooalooenm 930» Ho .3852 a! mgm 9 NHQZEA: 98 m N H AN 4 gunman! cam .3200,» and» .- no 23333.3 Eooom H AH : #4.. m 33 o a fi H N H 53 no E» 93» .3 .3.“th EHC .33 on: .q N N 3N1 AH : z x 8 0 N o a H H H :H H Juana! mo @3ng 53g: £35 £3.39- ovH>oum 3 HM m H1 333 N w w mi 1H 333% 62,29? oumoflxfi. 93:53 950» 25m H N 3 HH H a3 03 3 :OHmmaouHU .293. Shana macaw 28m H o m H1 mumnu «a 3 noavufioudd fiflhoo about.“ 53 hona H“ Magoo.- PHouoo. mano 23 .Ho 23an :3. 3 HI m m N H H M H] 303% you HHao page .hHHaflmH— .nqoflnoav mm: H : mH H N N H 3333 OH wH H N H1 Egg; N m NH H n JH gal .33qu on» madman one—0926 5355; H q dH n d a; 05. HHHw no 303” 05. H35 G333»? one No use gonads onv Ho 202.30 23. Qoom n N S n N S P 1. J Hum .u. o m m w o m m mmm .3 2 a u a u. a u u. x. m n u u. I A A W I A A w s m... o e n e a n a n. 1 a J m. a m. m. u a M n t .m a e a a 4 4 003095 ww a." 343 v0»: mmoHaofii .Ho NH Hanson 38 Ba hag n3» and» veg—HanconHv ~95: E HEHH 0:» you 023 as 23s H o p.33] Nun nag 99 xJon 1°“ PIP esneoea “0929.1 Jetnatq ou Jog enIaA on UIEQJSOUQ anteA on utezleoun anIeA smog enIEA qonw anIEA smog anIEA qonn OOHHONAQ h0>g 26: H voaqucoomHv om pcofiomndhhm mnvaon a 0vH>0hm mwchaoa an mHaHnouma HNQOvaoaum has“ o>Hc unaHo on: mafia» pHmH> 0b #0 you woman mHOH90on o>un H mmoHBooc «>2 H 5.3m USE GE‘ELY Demco-293