Factors Associated W Participation of

Iowa Young Farmers in Agricultural Extension Programs

R o b e r t A . M a r t i n , Associate P r o f e s s o r
Mahmoud Hassan Omer, Post-Doctoral Associate
A g r i c u l t u r a l Education
Iowa State University

A c c e p t e d f o r Publication September 1987

Agricultural extension educators are continually searching for ways

In w h i c h t o b e t t e r s e r v e e x t e n s l o n c l i e n t e l e . W i t h o u t e v a l u a t i v e I n p u t
f r o m e x t e n s i o n c l i e n t e l e , e x t e n s i o n professionals m a y n o t k n o w s t e p s
t h a t s h o u l d b e t a k e n t o w a r d providing viable information. Because of
r a p i d c h a n g e s i n t e c h n o l o g y , v a r i o u s s e g m e n t s o f t h e a g r i c u l t u r a l indus-
t r y i n c l u d i n g v o c a t i o n a l agriculture teachers, extenslon educators, and
agribusiness p e r s o n s s h o u l d w o r k t o g e t h e r t o d e l i v e r agricultural educ-
t ion programs. T o d e l i v e r t h e s e p r o g r a m s e f f e c t i v e l y , It is necessary
t o determine t h e e x t e n t t o w h i c h y o u n g f a r m e r s u s e t h e services o f t h e
v a r l o u s a g r i c u l t u r a l a g e n c i e s , particularly the agricultural extenslon
program.

Prob I em

Agricultural extension e d u c a t o r s h a v e a t v a r l o u s times e x p r e s s e d

that young farmers have been a neglected group regarding the provi-
s i o n o f e d u c a t i o n a l activities (Crawford, 1969; Oparaugo, 1980; Smith,
1980). I n a s t u d y o f f a c t o r s affecting the establishment of young farm
o p e r a t o r s i n I o w a , C r a w f o r d (1969) f o u n d t h a t y o u n g f a r m o p e r a t o r s w e r e
n o t a c t i v e in e d u c a t i o n a l p r o g r a m s t h a t w e r e primarily designed to ald
them in making farm management decisions. While there Is a general rec-
o g n i t i o n o f t h e n e e d t o h e l p y o u n g f a r m e r s ( M a r t i n & Bla, 1986), t h e
authors found no other study that focused on the analysis of factors
associated with partlclpatlon of young farmers In agricultural extension
education a c t l v l t i e s in I o w a . As a result, a n u m b e r o f q u e s t i o n s b e c a m e
increasingly relevant:

1. How aware are young farmers of educatlonal services offered by

the C o o p e r a t i v e Extension Service?

2. How do young farmers become aware of the services of the Coop-

eratlve Extension Service?

3. What perceptions do young farmers have of the type and content

of t h e cooperative extension educational programs?

4. What channels of communication are the most effective in reach-

ing young farmers?

5. What are some reasons for young farmers’ p a r t i c i p a t i o n in

extens I on educat ion programs?

C u r r e n t l i t e r a t u r e a n d information were unavailable to answer the

q u e s t i o n s t h a t continue t o b e o f c o n c e r n t o a g r i c u l t u r a l e d u c a t o r s
including vocational agriculture teachers, extension professionals, and
agribusiness p e r s o n s . T h e r e f o r e this s t u d y w a s c o n d u c t e d i n a n a t t e m p t
t o p r o v i d e s o m e o f t h e a n s w e r s t o t h e s e questions. The need for thfs
s t u d y w a s a l s o b a s e d u p o n t h e f a c t t h a t b a s i c information is needed by
administrators and educators In order to coordinate planning and con-
d u c t i n g e d u c a t l o n a l p r o g r a m s f o r t h e m e m b e r s o f I o w a Y o u n g F a r m e r s Edu-
cational A s s o c l a t l o n (IYFEA).

45
 Purpose and Objectives

T h e primary p u r p o s e o f t h e s t u d y w a s t o d e t e r m i n e a n d a n a l y z e
s e l e c t e d f a c t o r s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h a w a r e n e s s a n d participation of members
of IYFEA in agricultural extension education programs. A secondary pur-
pose of the study was to determine perceptions held by members of IYFEA
r e g a r d i n g v a r i o u s agricultural e d u c a t i o n p r o g r a m s o f f e r e d b y t h e Cooper-
a t l v e Extension S e r v i c e .

The specific objectives of the study were as follows:

1. To identify selected occupational and demographic characteris-

tics of members of IYFEA.

2. To identify the types of contact and participation In agricul-

turai extension programs by members of IYFEA.

3. T o d e t e r m i n e t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f p r o g r a m p l a n n i n g I n t h e C o o p e r a -
t i v e E x t e n s i o n S e r v i c e a s perceived b y m e m b e r s o f I Y F E A .

4. To determine the Importance of selected program areas provided

b y t h e Cooperative Extension Service as perceived by members of IYFEA.

5. T o determine the importance of the methods of instruction used

b y t h e C o o p e r a t i v e E x t e n s i o n S e r v i c e a s perceived by members of IYFEA.

6. To Identify the perceptions held by members of IYFEA based on

selected demographic information.

Procedures

T h e p o p u i a t l o n o f t h e s t u d y c o n s i s t e d o f t h e membership o f I o w a
Y o u n g F a r m e r s E d u c a t i o n a l A s s o c i a t i o n (IYFEA). There were 400 members
of the I YFEA in 1986. This number represented a very smal I percentage
(5%) o f t h e f a r m e r s i n I o w a b e t w e e n t h e a g e s o f 1 8 a n d 4 0 . A s u r v e y o f
a p p r o x i m a t e l y 30% o f t h e m e m b e r s h i p w a s d e t e r m i n e d t o b e a p p r o p r i a t e f o r
q a t h e r i n q I n p u t r e g a r d i n g t h e p u r p o s e o f t h e study. T h e s u r v e y i n t r u -
ment w a s - f i r s t distributed t o the young f a r m e r s w h o a t t e n d e d t h e Winter
I n s t i t u t e ( a n educational seminar) of the IYFEA on Februarv 9. 1986. A
total of 51 members of IYFEA completed the survey Instrument.’ An addi-
tional random sample of 75 members of IYFEA was drawn from the popula-
tion. Questionnaires were mailed the third week in April, 1986. Fol-
l o w - u p l e t t e r s w e r e m a i l e d t h e t h i r d w e e k I n M a y . D u r i n g t h e third w e e k
o f J u n e , p h o n e cal I s t o t h e remaining non-respondents were made. Of the
75 young farmers in the sample, 65 did not respond to the initial mail-
ing. Through fol low-up procedures, 41 of the non-respondents returned
c o m p l e t e d q u e s t l o n n a i r e s f o r a f i n a l r e s p o n s e r a t e o f 5 1 , o r 68%.

I n d e p e n d e n t + - t e s t s w e r e u s e d t o d e t e r m i n e i f s i g n i f i c a n t differ-
ences e x i s t e d b e t w e e n t h e f i r s t g r o u p w h o a t t e n d e d t h e W i n t e r I n s t i t u t e
a n d t h e s e c o n d group o f y o u n g f a r m e r s ( t h e r a n d o m s a m p l e ) . The resu l t s
o f t h e t - t e s t i n d icated t h e r e w e r e n o s i g n if I c a n t differences between
the two groups. The two respondent groups were considered to be from
the sample population.

A s u r v e y questionnaire w a s u s e d t o c o l l e c t t h e d a t a . The survey

instrument included the foi lowing sections:

1. Importance of program planning. T h i s section I n c l u d e d t w e l v e

activities used by extension personnel In planning educational programs
for young farmers.

46
 2. Importance of selected program areas. T h i s s e c t l o n included
selected educational topics in livestock production, crop productlon,
and generaI agri cuIture.

3. importance of extension methods. This sectlon included 17

selected methods that are commonly used by extension personnel in pro-
viding assistance to young farmers.

4. Demographic Information. This section included selected demo-

graphic variables such as sex, age, educational level, and income.

5. Types of contact and particlpatlon. This section included

selected statements related to the extent of use, level of satlsfactfon,
a n d l e v e l o f participation in meetings sponsored by agricultural exten-
sion.

Llkert-type scales were used for the first three sections: 1 = not
important, 2 = of little importance, 3 = somewhat important, 4 = impor-
tant, and 5 = very Important.

Statlstlcal p r o c e d u r e s y i e l d e d p e r c e n t a g e s , m e a n s , s t a n d a r d devia-
tlons, +-tests, and one-way analysis of vat-lance for various information
presented In this study. A reliabliity e s t i m a t e (Cronbach a l p h a ) w a s
c o m p u t e d f o r t h e I n s t r u m e n t , a n d it was determi n e d t o b e a p p r o p r l a t e f o r
t h l s s t u d y (.94). Al l a n a l y s e s w e r e c o n d u c t e d t o a n s w e r t h e s p e c l f ic
objectives o f t h e s t u d y .

Results

T h e r e s u l t s pertaining t o d e m o g r a p h l c I n f o r m a t i o n a r e summarized a s
fol lows: (a) t h e m a j o r i t y o f t h e r e s p o n d e n t s w e r e b e t w e e n 2 0 a n d 3 9
y e a r s o f a g e ; (b) t h e r e s p o n d e n t s ’ e d u c a t i o n a l l e v e l w a s r e l a t i v e l y h i g h
(22.6% h a d b a c h e l o r ’ s d e g r e e s ) ; (c) t h e m a j o r i t y o f t h e r e s p o n d e n t s
I i v e d o n t h e f a r m ; a n d (d) overal I , t h e r e s p o n d e n t s ’ g r o s s I n c o m e w a s
also falriy high (36.6% had gross incomes of $50,000 or above).

The results pertaining to types of contact and participation In

a g r i c u l t u r a l activities are summarized as follows:

1. N e a r l y 30% o f t h e r e s p o n d e n t s f i r s t h e a r d o f t h e C o o p e r a t i v e
E x t e n s i o n S e r v i c e t h r o u g h m a s s media, 2 6 . 4 7 % f r o m f a m i i y m e m b e r s , a n d
24.51% from friends/neighbors.

2. The majority (82.23%) of the respondents indicated that they

had participated In meetings sponsored by the Cooperative Extension
Service. O n l y 10% h a d n e v e r p a r t i c i p a t e d i n m e e t i n g s s p o n s o r e d b y t h e
Cooperative E x t e n s f o n S e r v i c e .

3. Seventy percent of the respondents indicated that they were

satisfied o r v e r y satisfied w l t h s e r v i c e s / i n f o r m a t i o n p r o v i d e d b y e x t e n -
sion service. O n l y 8 r e s p o n d e n t s (7.84%) i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e y w e r e dis-
s a t i s f l e d w f t h t h e s e r v i c e s / I n f o r m a t i o n p r o v l d e d b y t h e e x t e n s i o n serv-
Ice, and 18 respondents (17.64%) indicated that they had no opinion.

The results pertaining to the importance of program plannlng In the

Cooperative E x t e n s i o n Service i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h r e e p l a n n i n g activities
received a rating of 4 or higher. These activities were as follows:
a n a l y z e f a r m l n g community s i t u a t i o n ( m e a n = 4 . 1 5 1 , u n d e r s t a n d a n d pro-
v l d e e d u c a t l o n a l p r o g r a m s t o m e e t e d u c a t l o n a l n e e d s ( m e a n = 4.08), a n d
p l a n a n d p r e p a r e e d u c a t i o n a l activities (mean = 4.03). T h e remaining
activities w e r e r a t e d b e t w e e n 3 . 4 4 a n d 3 . 9 7 ( T a b l e 1).

47
Table 1

Means, Standard Deviations, and Rankings Regarding Level of Importance

o f P r o g r a m P l a n n i n g a s P e r c e i v e d b y I o w a Y o u n g F a r m e r s (N = 102)

Valid
Rank Activities Cases Mean SD
-

1 Analyze farmlng community situation to 102 4.15 .86

identify educational needs

2 Understand and provide educational programs 100 4.08 .87

to meet educational needs

Plan and prepare educational activities 100 4.03 .85

Determine priorities of community needs 101 3.97 .85

Review past programs to Identify their 102 3.90 .90

strengths and weaknesses

6 Train county extension council to perform 98 3.87 1 .05

their jobs

7 Identify community resources, facilities 101 3.80 .88

a n d s e r v i c e s t o assist w i t h e x t e n s i o n p r o -
grams

8 P l a n practical learning activities for tar- 100 3.79 .95

g e t audiences

9 Identify audience for specific programs 100 3.77 .96

10 Identify and involve appropriate community 101 3.69 .97

leaders in the program development

11 P l a n activities to help individual clientele 99 3.65 .96

with problems

12 Involve county extension council in the 101 3.44 .99

program development process

T h e r e s u l t s p e r t a i n i n g t o t h e irrportance of selected educational

program areas Indicated that four topics in livestock production
r e c e i v e d a r a t i n g o f 4 o r h i g h e r o n a 5-point s c a l e . T h e s e topics were
as follows: p r o d u c t i o n r e c o r d s (4.16), m a r k e t i n g o f I livestock (4.14),
p r o d u c t i o n m a n a g e m e n t (4.04), a n d h e a l t h a n d diseases ( 4 . 0 1 ) . The
remaining topics in livestock were rated between 3.59 and 3.87 (Table
2). F i v e t o p i c s i n c r o p p r o d u c t i o n r e c e i v e d a rating of 4 or higher on
a 5-point scale. These topics were as follows: marketing of crops
(4.26), p r o d u c t i o n r e c o r d s (4.06), a n d s o l I f e r t i I ity (4.01). The
r e m a i n i n g t o p i c s in c r o p p r o d u c t i o n w e r e r a t e d b e t w e e n 3 . 6 3 a n d 3 . 9 1
( T a b l e 3).

48
Table 2

Means, Standard Deviations, and Rankings Regarding Level of Importance

of Selected Topics in Livestock Production as Perceived by Iowa Young
F a r m e r s (N = 102)

Valid
Rank Topic Cases Mean SD
-

Production Records 93 4.16 .86

Marketing of Livestock 4.14 .85
Product I on Management 2: 4.04 .79
Health and Diseases 95 4.01 .86
Herd Records 94 3.87 .91
Feeds and Feed1 rtg 3.86 .87
B r e e d i n g a n d Reproduction 9”: 3.81 .92
Use of Computer 94 3.59 1.07

Table 3

Means, Standard Deviations, and Ranklngs Regarding Level of Importance

o f S e l e c t e d T o p i c s I n C r o p P r o d u c t i o n a s Perceived by Iowa Young Farmers
(N = 102)

Val Id
Rank Topic Cases Mean SD
-

Marketlng of Crops 98 4.26 .80

Production Records 4.14 .76
Production Management ;a9 4.12 .75
Chemical S a f e t y 4.06 .91
Soil Fertility 2 4.01 .95
Pests and Diseases of Crops 99 3.91 .92
Crop Pesticides 99 3.78 .97
New Crop Varieties 98 3.70 .93
Use of Computers 98 3.63 1.05

T h e r e s u l t s p e r t a i n i n g t o t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f t h e m e t h o d s o f instruc-
tion u s e d b y t h e C o o p e r a t i v e E x t e n s l o n Service indicated t h a t t h e
highest r a t e d m e t h o d w a s l o c a l c o m m u n i t y m e e t i n g s ( 3 . 8 2 ) . T w o I n s t r u c -
tional methods tied for the second rating: newspaper articles and
county meetlngs (3.73). The remai ni n g m e t h o d s w e r e r a t e d b e t w e e n 3 . 0 4
a n d 3 . 7 2 ( T a b l e 4).

The respondents were very s imiI a r i n thelr perceptions regard-

ing the importance of program planning when they were grouped and com-
p a r e d , b a s e d o n s e l e c t e d demographic varlables other than sex. Fema I e
r e s p o n d e n t s r a t e d five p l a n n i n g a c t i v i t i e s significantly higher than

49
Table 4

Means, Standard Deviations, and Rankings Regarding Level of Importance

of Selected Methods Used by Extension Service as Perceived by Iowa Young
F a r m e r s (N = 102)

Valid
Rank Methods Cases Mean SD
-

1 Local community meetings 98 3.82 .92

2 Newspaper articles 99 3.73 .87

i County Newsletters meetings 9 79 9 3.73 3.72 1 .oo.90

4 Demonstrations 98 3.72 .83
6 Bul letins 99 3.63 .92
7 Area meetlngs 98 3.60 .98
: Rad Tours i o 998 3.59 3.49 .85
.55
programs

:P TelevisionFarmvisits p r o g r a m s 9”: 3.45 3.48 1.04 1.02

12 Use of computer 98 3.35 1.12
13 Educational displays 98 3.31 .94

1’54 Offlce Self study conferences 9 89 8 3.27 3.09 1.96 .oo

State meet I ngs 98 3.07 .88
Telephone conferences 98 3.04 1.04

male respondents. These activities were: identify community r e s o u r c e s ,

d e t e r m l n e priorities, understand and provlde educatlonal programs, pre-
pare educational a c t i v i t i e s , a n d p l a n l e a r n i n g activities.

T h e r e s p o n d e n t s w e r e v e r y similar in their perceptions regarding

the Importance of program areas when they were grouped and compared
based on s e l e c t e d d e m o g r a p h l c v a r i a b l e s , o t h e r t h a n a g e a n d s e x . Most
o f t h e o b s e r v e d d i f f e r e n c e s i n v o l v e d G r o u p 3 (40 y e a r s o r o v e r ) which
consistently rated the importance of the program areas lower than other
groups. Female respondents rated livestock production and horticulture
significantly hlgher than male respondents.

T h e r e s p o n d e n t s w e r e v e r y similar in t h e i r p e r c e p t i o n r e g a r d i n g
t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f extension m e t h o d s w h e n g r o u p e d a n d c o m p a r e d , b a s e d o n
selected demographlc varlables other than age and sex. Most of the
o b s e r v e d differences I n v o l v e d G r o u p 3 (40 y e a r s o r o v e r ) w h i c h con-
sistently rated the importance of extension methods lower than other
groups. F e m a l e r e s p o n d e n t s r a t e d e d u c a t l o n a l displays, s t a t e meetings,
and use of computers significantly higher than male respondents.

Conclusions

The respondents seemed to have a fairly high level of awareness of

the Cooperatlve Extenslon Service. They also seemed to have a fairly
high level of satisfaction with the services/information provided by the
Cooperative Extenslon Service.

50
 The respondents indicated that activities of program plannlng were
important . The three activity items rated most important, in descending
order, were: analyze farming community situation, understand and pro-
v i d e e d u c a t i o n a l p r o g r a m s , a n d p l a n a n d p r e p a r e e d u c a t i o n a l activities.

The respondents placed a very hlgh priority rating on educational

programs on marketing, production records, and production management.
The respondents a I so i ndi cated that the h ighest rated methods of commu-
nication included local community meetings, newspaper articles, and
county meeti ngs.

Implications and Recommendations

Understanding the prof i le of characteristics of the participants in

terms of who participates and reasons for participation is important for
those concerned with the process of planning educational programs for
the members of IYFEA.

High priority rating f o r a c t i v i t i e s w h i c h s h o u l d b e c o n s i d e r e d f o r

s u c c e s s f u l p r o g r a m p l a n n i n g r e f l e c t s t h e n e e d f o r s o m e o t h e r considera-
t ions, s u c h a s coordination and cooperation among agencies, program
planners, and the members of IYFEA.

H i g h p r i o r i t y r a t i n g f o r e d u c a t l o n a l p r o g r a m s in l i v e s t o c k p r o d u c -
tion and crop production reflects the current situation among the mem-
bers of IYFEA. Some of the potential educational topics included mar-
keting, production management, and production records. This Information
was consistent with a study conducted by Martln and Bia 11986). These
a u t h o r s i n d i c a t e d t h a t I o w a y o u n g a n d a d u l t f a r m e r s p l a c e d h i g h priority
ratings on educational programs on marketing, plannlng, and management.

It appears from this study that extenslon program plannlng should

b e a p p r o a c h e d primarily f r o m t h e p o i n t o f t h e c l i e n t e l e s e r v e d , a n d sec-
o n d a r f l y f r o m a s u b j e c t m a t t e r point o f v i e w . T h e C o o p e r a t i v e Extension
S e r v i c e s h o u l d i n c r e a s e t h e i n v o l v e m e n t o f m e m b e r s o f I Y F E A I n planning
and conducting educational programs. Training should be conducted for
e x t e n s i o n p e r s o n n e l o n h o w t o I n v o l v e local p e o p l e . Tralning should be
made available for young farmers so they can contribute more to exten-
sion programing. Extension professionals, young farmers, and IYFEA
l e a d e r s s h o u l d identify a n d p r l o r i t i z e e d u c a t i o n a l n e e d s . Educational
p r o g r a m s s h o u l d b e p l a n n e d a n d / o r revised for present and future young
f a r m e r s t o e m p h a s i z e t h e e d u c a t i o n a l t o p i c s w i t h t h e h i g h e s t priority
(i.e., p r o d u c t i o n r e c o r d s , m a r k e t i n g , a n d p r o d u c t i o n m a n a g e m e n t ) .

Because most of the significant differences In the ratings of the

Importance of program planning, program areas, and extension methods
were attributed to the df f ferences of sex and age, it Is Important to
c o n s i d e r t h e s e f a c t o r s w h e n p l a n n i n g a n d conducting educatlonal programs
for members of IYFEA.

L o c a l m e e t i n g s , county meetings, and newspaper articles are methods

that should be used in planning educational programs for young farmers.

The results of this s t u d y s h o u l d b e s h a r e d w i t h e x t e n s i o n a d m i n i s -

trators, IYFEA leaders, Iowa young farmers, and individuals responsible
for planning a n d p r o v i d l n g s e r v i c e s f o r t h e m .

In summary, r e s u l t s o b t a i n e d f r o m t h i s s t u d y r e v e a l e d i n f o r m a t i o n
regarding c h a t - a c t e r l s t l c s , t y p e s o f c o n t a c t a n d participation, and needs
of Iowa young farmers. These results are important for extension educa-
tors to be responsive to the needs of young farmers In Iowa.

51
 References

C r a w f o r d , H. R. (1969). Factors affecting the establishment of young

f a r m o p e r a t o r s i n I o w a a n d I m p l i c a t i o n s f o r agricultural education.
Unpublished d o c t o r a l dissertation, Iowa State Unlverslty, Ames.

M a r t i n , R . , & Bia, J. (1986). Educational programs for young/adult

farmers: A needs assessment and analysis (final report). Ames:
I o w a S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , D e p a r t m e n t o f A g r i c u l t u r a l Education.

O p a r a u g o , S. M . (1980). Factors associated with the continued estab-

lishment of farm operators In Iowa. Unpublished d o c t o r a l disserta-
tion, Iowa State University, Ames.

S m i t h , K. L. (1980). Educational f a c t o r s affecting t h e c o n t i n u e d estab-

I ishment of young farm operators In Iowa. Unpubl i shed doctora I di s-
sertatlon, Iowa State Unlverslty, Ames.

(Flowers & O s b o r n e - - C o n t i n u e d f r o m p a g e 26)

References

Binkley, H. R., & Tulloch, R . W . (1981). T e a c h i n g vocatlonal agricul-

ture/agribusiness. Danville, IL: Interstate.

Bloom, B. (1956). Taxonomy o f educational objectives: Handbook I cog-

initive domain. New York: David McKay Co.

B r u n e r , J. S. (1961). The act of discovery . Harvard Educational

R e v l e w , 91, 2 1 - 3 2 .

Crunkilton, J. R., 8 K r e b s , A . H. (1982). T e a c h i n g agriculture through

problem solving. D a n v l l l e , I L : Interstate.

D a w s o n , M. D. (1956). Lecture versus problem-solving teaching elemen-

tary soil science. S c i e n c e E d u c a t i o n , 40, 3 9 5 - 4 0 4 .

H a y s , W. L. (1973). Statistics for the social sciences. New York:

Holt, R l n e h a r t a n d Winston.

M e h r e n s , W. A . , & L e h m a n , I. J. (1973). M e a s u r e m e n t a n d e v a l u a t i o n In
educatlonal psychology. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

M o o r e , G. E., & M o o r e , B. A . (1984). The problem solving approach to

teaching: H a s I t o u t l i v e d i t s u s e f u l n e s s ? T h e J o u r n a l o f t h e Ameri-
c a n Association of Teacher Educators In Agriculture, - 25 (2) s 3 - 10 .

Newcomb, L . H., M c C r a c k e n , J. D., 8 W a r m b r o d , J. R. ( 1986). Methods of

teaching agriculture. Danville, IL: Interstate.

P h l p p s , L . J . (1980). Handbook on agricultural education In public

schools. Danvllle, IL: Interstate.

T h o m p s o n , 0 . E., & T o m , F . K. T . (1957). C o m p a r i s o n o f t h e effective-

ness of a pup1 I centered vs. a teacher centered pattern for teaching
v o c a t l o n a l agriculture. J o u r n a l o f E d u c a t i o n R e s e a r c h , 50, 6 6 7 - 6 7 8 .

W a r m b r o d , J. R. (1969). S o m e m y t h s a b o u t p r o b lem solving. T h e Agricul-

t u r a l E d u c a t i o n M a g a z i n e , 41, 2 3 1 - 2 3 2 .

52