DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 357 250 CE 063 664

AUTHOR Simelane, M. Jethro; Miller, Larry E.TITLE Use of Agricultural Subject Matter by Secondary

Students in Swiff4and. Summary of Research SR 69.INSTITUTION Ohio State Univ., Columbus. Dept. of Agricultural

Education.PUB DATE 93NOTE 14p.PUB TYPE Reports Research/Technical (143)

EDRS PRICE MF01/PC01 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS *Agricultural Education; Curriculum Development;

Developing Nations; Educational Attitudes;Educational Improvement; *Educational Needs;*Education Work Relationship; Foreign Countries; HighSchools; High School Students; *Outcomes ofEducation; *Program Effectiveness; *StudentAttitudes

IDENTIFIERS *Swaziland

ABSTRACT

A descriptive-correlational study was conducted todetermine the extent to which students used the subject mattercontent taught in the "0" Level School Agriculture Program inSwaziland. The target population was 493 graduating "0" Levelagriculture students in Swaziland. Data were collected in a schoolvisit and through a mailed survey monitored to ensure 100 percentresponse. The questionnaire contained five sections that measuredcontent in the following areas: plants and soil science, livestockand poultry production, farm structures and machinery, management andoperation of agriculture business, and personal characteristics. Thestudy found that students enrolled in the program rarely used theinformation they learned in the program and had low intentions ofusing it in their future. A number of recommendations were made:ensure that education is integrated with work; employment skills inagriculture should be used as a basis for curriculum content;students should be trained to use the skills taught; and agricultureshould be taught as applied science. Further research was alsorecommended. (Contains 11 references.) (KC)

***********************************************************************

Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be madefrom the original document.

***********************************************************************

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Othce o EducanonalResearce and improvement

EDU TIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC)

nrsdocument has oeen reptoduced as

received from the demon or OrglInizapon

originating tt

r MINN changeshave peen made tc,Imp,Ove

rowed...0ton ClustitY

Pomts view of optmonsstated ,n th.s docu

men' do .01 neCeSsarityrepresent ottic.al

OERt posthon or potty

Summary ofResearch

Department of Agricultural EducationThe Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43210

Use of Agricultural Subject Matter bySecondary Students In Swaziland

M. Jethro Simelane and Larry E. Miller

Introduction

Education in Swaziland is composedof formal and non-formal programs. Thesystem is administered by the Ministry ofEducation, and by private or volunteer agen-des. The formal system is comprise of edu-cational programs at the primary, second-ary and high school level. The educationalsystem has been greatly influenced by theBritish system since Swaziland was once aBritish Protectorate. The entire educationalsystem has been centralized, but dividedinto regional education offices to facilitateadministration. Students have paid a fee fortheir education from kindergarten through`O'Level (k - 12 grades), the governmentprovided bursars (scholarship) for highereducation students (Figure 1).

The school curriculum had not in-cluded agriculture until after independence.The idea of incorporating agriculture intothe school curriculum was piloted and imple-mented by Gooday between 1973 and 1976,and became known as "Schools Agriculture."The idea of agriculture in schools emanatedfrom emerging issues and concerns of the1920s through the 1970s. During this pe-riod, the debate was: should education inSwaziland be for a few or for all; whu+quality should be stressed; whether educa-

SR 69

"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY

TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC).-

tion should be for consumption or produc-tion; and how much tradition and modernityshould be incorporated (Gooday, 1980)?

When the Schools' Agriculture Pro-gram (SAP) was started, the governmentconsidered it essential that programs bedeveloped congruent with the local situa-tion. Government enforced the conceptsthat school programs should be highly prac-tical in nature, should be geared toward self-employment, and should provide the echni-cal background which would enable the moreable students to continue to higher educa-tion (Ministry of Education, 1985). The ideaof enforcing highly practical programs wasfurther illustrated by Athumani (1987) whenhe stressed that government had to ensurethat education was integrated with work.He argued that education was expected to beterminal at any stage and even primaryschooling should be complete in itself bypreparing pupils for life in the predomi-nantly rural communities.

In view of the need to tie future ex-pansion of secondary level education tomanpower requirements and employmentopportunities, the National EducationalReview Commission Report (1985) recom-mended that:

2

BEST COPY ORM

2

DEGREES 4 YEARS

DEGREES & CDE 4 YEARSDIPLOMAS 2 YEARs

SECONDARY TEACHER

TRAINING 2 YEARs

1461

TECHNICAL TRAINING

2 YEARSHEALTH TRAINING

3 To 4 YEARS

ASENIOR SECONDARY EDUCATION

FORMS 4 AND 5

AGES 16-17

PRIMARY TEACIMR

TRAINING 2 YEARs

CRAFT TRAINING2 YEARS

*-JUNIOR SECONDARY EDUCATION

FORMS 1-3AGES 13-15

PRIMARY EDUCATION

GRADES 1-7AGES 6-12

PRE-PRIMARY EDUCATION

AGES 3-5

Figure 1. Structure of the formal education system, Kingdom of Swaziland

1. The Ministry of Education introducesubjects which will provide pupilswith an education that will preparethem to participate fully in indus-trial, agricultural and communitydevelopment.

2. The school program must be diversi-fied to include practical, occupationaland subjects like agriculture, homeeconomics and technical trade skills

At the high school level, agriculturewas first introduced as agricultural science,and in 1983 changed to 'O'Level agriculture,which was studied in this research. Foryears, educational evaluation studies havebeen based on the paradigm that utilizationis a discrete activity which is the responsi-bility of the potential user (Gube, 1986;National Institute of Education, 1978).However, it became evident that even withthe accumulation ofmore utilization studiesand with the improved technological proce-dures for the transfer end dissemination ofknowledge, the frequency and impact ofknowledge use did not increase substan-tially (Rich and Caplan, 1978).

In recent years, awareness has grownthat utilization is not a unitary concept butrather that there are different types or de-grees of utilization (Larsen, 1980; Fullan,1980). Increasingly, researchers have beenacknowledging the alternative forms of uti-lization and are incorporating them intoresearch and evaluation studies (Larsen, etal., 1976; Yin, et al., 1976; and Dunn, 1980).The purposes of such studies has been todescribe more precisely how and to whatextent the knowledge was actually imple-mented.

Utilization is a complex process in-volving practical, organizational, socio-eco-nomic, and attitudinal components in addi-tion to the specific use of information orknowledge. Any study on utilization must

recognize the contribution ofpractical, orga-nizational, socio-economic and attitudinalfactors to the eventual use of information.Larsen, in considering the major models forresearch on knowledge utilization, foundthat the situation in which knowledge is tobe used was of major importance. He statedthat "it is impossible to conceptualize theutilization of knowledge without consider-ing the situation in which the utilization ofwill occur" (1980). Therefore, several appro-priate situational factors were included inthis investigation and labelled"personological characteristics."

Purpose and Objectives

The major purpose of :his study wasto determine the extent to which studentsused the subject matter content taught tothem in the 'O'Level Schools AgricultureProgram in Swaziland. Research questionsproviding focus for the study included:

1. Which knowledge and skills of the`Olevel SAP subject matter contentdid students intend to use?

2. To what extent did students use theknowledge and skills from the subjectmatter content?

3. Which section of the syllabus wasused more by students?

4. Which knowledge and skills of thesubject matter content were cur-rently being used by students?

5. What was the relationship amongcurrent and intended use of knowl-edge and skills of subject matter andstudents' personological characteris-tics?

The major purpose of the SAP is tomeet the needs of persons who engage infarming or related occupations. The work ofthe Swaziland Government in communicat-ing improved agricultural practices to farm-ers and encouraging the adoption of these

4

'V

4

techniques through agricultural extensionis of vital importance for the improvement ofagriculture. Further, the SAP, if taught asa practical art and science on well-devel-oped school farms in the high schools, wouldbe a powerful source of change and improve-ment in agriculture for the farmers as wellas their children who attend high school.Farmers may get advice from their childrenor visit the schools to ascertain whether ornot their children are practicing some of theskills and knowledge.

The importance of this investigationrested with the prospect that educationalplanners could use the results to strengthenthe existing SAP and provide future direc-tion. The identification of useful skills andabilities could be a source of planning infor-mation for parents, teachers and teacherpreparation institutions.

Procedures

Research Design

The research design in the study wasdescriptive correlational. This method al-lowed the research to determine the direc-tion and magnitude of relationships amongvariables.

Population

The population consisted of all gradu-ating students in the 'O'Level agriculturalprogram in the 16 schools that offered agri-culture in Swaziland during the period ofApril to June 1988. A list of schools offeringagriculture was obtained from the office ofthe Senior Inspector ofAricultural Schools.Frame and selection errors were controlledby getting an up-to-date list of schools offer-ing 'Olevel agriculture. The study involvedall schools offering agriculture at 'O'Leveland all graduating students enrolled in ag-riculture were studied; hence sampling er-

ror was not a threat to validity. The totalpopulation for the study was 493 graduatingstudents doing 'O'Level agriculture. Thirty(30) parents were randomly selected by us-ing the list of students. Two students weresystematically picked from each school andtheir parents interviewed to provide cross-validation to the responses of their children.

Data Collection

Two methods of data oollection wereused. The bulk of the data were collectedfrom students using a self-administeredquestionnaire. Additional data were col-lected throughinterviews with parents. Datawere collected during the months of April toJune, 1988. The target population were 493graduating 'O'Level agriculture students inSwaziland. After the initial visit by theresearcher to the school to collect data in agroup setting, °vies of the instrument wereleft with the agriculture teacher at eachschool to administer to those students whowere not present on the day of the visit bythe researcher. A return addressed, stampedenvelope was provided to each teacher fortheir convenience. This was done to controlnon-response error and produced a responserate of 100%.

Instrumentation

An instrument was developed usingthe Kreb's model (1969) of evaluation. Stu-dents were asked to indicate using a five-point, anchored, Likert-type scale, their per-ceived "Use" of the subject matter content-from the 'O'Level course of study.

The questionnaire contained five sec-tions:1. Part I items measured content per-

taining to plants and soil science.2. Part II items measured content relat-

ing to livestock and poultry produc-tion.

3. Part III items measured contentdealing with farm structures and ma-chinery.

4. Part IV items measured content re-lated to management and operationof agricultural business.

5. Part V items measured personologi-cal characteristics.

The questionnaire consisted of close-ended items and scales. The anchored rat-ing scales were as follows:

Current Use Intent to Use

1= Never used A = Intend to use

2 = Seldom used B = Do not intend to use

3 = Sometimes used

4 = Often used

Content validity was established by apanel of experts who reviewed the instru-ment. Suggestions were implemented andthe instrument revised accordingly. Theinstrument was pilot-tested using first-yearstudents enrolled in the two-year programin agricultural education, Faculty (college)of Agriculture, University of Swaziland, todetermine reliability. Measures of internalconsistency were determined usingCronbach's alphas. Coefficients from thepilot test ranged from .71 to .97 and thosefrom the actual study ranged from .71 to .90.

Data Analysis

Descriptive statistics (frequencies andpercentages) were used to organize and sum-marize the data. Relationship among vari-ables were established by using Chi-Square,Cramer's V, and Phi Coefficients to deter-mine the direction and magnitude of therelationships.

g

Findings of the Study

Current Use of Subject MatterContent by Students

As shown in Table 1, students in the`O'Level SAP in all four areas of the syllabusreported that they rarely used the skills andknowledge taught in the program. How-ever, the plants and soil science section ofthe program was rated higher in use bystudents than livestock production, agricul-tural mechanics and agricultural busines.

Intended future use of subject mattercontent, as illustrated in Table 2, revealedthat the majority (308) of the students didnot intend using the skills and knowledgetaught in all four sections of the program.However, the management and operation ofagricultural business was rated higher (44%)than the other sections insofar as intent touse was concerned. The agricultural me-chanics was rated second (41%) with plantsand soil science (25%) and livestock produc-tion (24.6%) rated third and fourth, respec-tively.

Students who reported, Table 3, thatland availability was a limitation used theknowledge and skills more often than thosewho stated land availability was not a prob-lem. Students who did not live with anelderly male family member stated they usethe plants and soil science knowledge andskills more often than those who had anelder male family member in residence. Inthe Swazi culture it is not common for eld-erly people to immediately accept informa-tion from the young. Agricultural educationin high schools is a new subject hence par-ents would expect very little from it.

Livestock production knowledge andskills tended to be used more often by stu-dents of ages 17 and 19 than those 14 to 16

6

Table 1CURRENT USE OF THE KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS GENERALLY TAUGHT IN THE

VLEVEL AGRICULTURAL PROGRAMS (N=493)

Extent of Use

Never Used Seldom Used Sometimes Used Often Used Totalf % f % f f % f %

1. Plantsand Soils 1 .2 125 27.5 303 66.7 25 5.5 454 100

2. Livestockand Poultryand theirProducts 62 13.2 199 42.3 185 39.4 24 5.1 470 100

3. AgriculturalMechanics 50 10.5 185 38.9 179 37.6 62 13.0 476 100

4. ManagementandOperation ofAgriculturalBusiness 78 16.6 185 39.4 163 34.7 44 9.4 470 100

Table 2FREQUENCIES AND PERCENTAGES OF STUDENTS REGARDING INTENDED USE OF THE KNOWLEDGE AND

SKILLS TAUGHT IN THE 401EVEL AGRICULTURE PROGRAM (N=493)

Intend to Use Do Not Intend to Use Total

Domain f % f %

Plants and Soils 28 25.0

2. Livestock andPoultry and theirProducts 28 24.6

84 75.0

86 75.4

AgriculturalMechanics 56 41.2 80 58.8

4. Managementand Operationof AgriculturalBusiness 53 43.8

112 100.0

114 100.0

136 100.0

68 56.2 121 100.0

or 20 to 24 years old. Students from ruralareas reported using the knowledge learnedfrom livestock production more than thosefrom semi- rural or urban areas. Agricultureis most commonly practiced in the ruralareas of Swaziland. Students coming fromfarm homes practicing mixed farming had abetter chance of using the livestock produc-tion knowledge than those from specializedfarms. This might be due to the fact thatvery few farmers in Swaziland specialize.

Most families in Swa'iland dependon some form of agriculture to make a livingand as a source of income. Students did notsee money as a constraint for them to use theagricultural information learned from highschool. Students who did not have land hadhigher intentions to use information learnedin agricultural mechanics than those whohad access to land.

Information learned from manage-ment and operation of agricultural businesswas rated with high intentions by studentsfrom mixed farms. Students coming fromrural areas saw possibilities in using theinformation learned from agricultural man-agement.

Relationship among Use andPersonological Characteristics

The relationships among each of thepersonological characteristics of studentsrnd their current use and/or intended use ofthe knowledge and skills learned from thehigh school agriculture program were iden-tified and described. Cramer's V Correla-tion Coefficients and Phi Correlations Coef-ficients were used to describe the magnitudeof the association. Table 4 revealed negli-gible to moderate relationships existedamong the personological characteristics andthe current use and/or intended use of sub-ject matter.

S

7

Conclusions

Students enrolled in the 'O'Level SAPrarely used the information they learned inthe program and had low intentions of usingit in their future.

Recommendations

Based on the findings of the study thefollowing recommendations were made:

1) The Ministry of Education and Cur-riculum Development Centre shouldensure that education has been inte-grated with work.

2) Skills needed for employment in ex-isting agricultural occupationsshould be used as a basis for curricu-lum content.

3) The SAP should be designed to pre-pare high school leavers to use theknowledge and skills while currentlyenrolled in the program and aftercompletion.

4) The purpose of `O'Level training isnot to return to the farm but to ad-vance to college.

5) The SAP should be taught as an ap-plied science.

Suggestions for FurtherResearch

The following suggestions for furtherresearch are forwarded:

1)

2)

A study identifying the knowledgeand skills needed in the total agricul-ture industry should be conducted toprovide information for developingcurricula that would be more rel-evant to the employment opportuni-ties in the agriculture sector.A study of similar purposes and de-sign should be conducted regarding

Tab

le 3

ASS

OC

IAT

ION

(X

2) O

F ST

UD

EN

TS'

PE

RSO

NA

L C

HA

RA

CT

ER

IST

ICS

WIT

H A

GR

ICU

LT

UR

AL

CO

NT

EN

T A

RE

AS

TA

UG

HT

IN

TH

E `

ME

M A

GR

ICU

LT

UR

E P

RO

GR

AM

Agr

icul

tura

l Con

tent

Are

a

Plan

t and

Soi

lL

ife

Stoc

kA

gric

ultu

ral

Man

agem

ent &

Ope

ratio

nsSc

ienc

ePr

oduc

tion

Mec

hani

csof

Agr

icul

tura

l Bus

ines

s

Cha

ract

eris

tics

Use

dIn

tent

Use

dIn

tent

Use

dIn

tent

Use

dIn

tent

Gen

der

1.44

0.01

1.34

0.86

2.94

0.34

3.43

0.06

Age

12.1

45.

9114

.27*

9.66

38.8

76.

4825

.66

3.11

Hom

e ar

ea6.

480.

4914

.27*

0.16

10.2

31.

215.

747.

69*

Typ

e of

sch

ool

3.17

1.58

2.20

0.09

8.13

*0.

012.

652.

60

Typ

e of

far

min

g at

hom

e19

.03*

1.43

23.3

6*1.

6112

.34

5.84

12.5

77.

28*

Lev

el o

f ed

ucat

ion

of m

othe

r12

.73

5.16

17.0

81.

469.

474.

5522

.90

4.27

Lev

el o

f ed

ucat

ion

of f

athe

r17

.09

5.01

12.7

45.

109.

475.

2615

.21

12.6

8

Occ

upat

ion

of m

othe

r23

.50

10.7

229

.38

10.8

622

.71

8.46

25.8

812

.53

Occ

upat

ion

of f

athe

r20

.39

11.7

335

.35

9.86

34.5

812

.69

32.2

317

.12

Ord

er o

f bi

rth

at h

ome

11.4

55.

347.

281.

228.

252.

b47.

772.

56

Lan

d av

aila

bilit

y18

.43*

0.01

15.3

10.

027.

574.

56*

5.05

0.53

Fina

ncia

l con

ditio

n2.

870.

155.

410.

9615

.14

0.00

8.35

*0.

00

Eld

er m

ale

fam

ily in

res

iden

ce9.

67*

0.03

3.82

0.01

1.56

0.00

3.53

0.37

Loc

atio

n of

sch

ool

1.34

0.00

3.82

0.21

1.21

0.00

1.16

6.18

*

*p<

.05

10

Tab

le 4

RE

LA

TIO

NSH

IP B

ET

WE

EN

ST

UD

EN

TS'

CU

RR

EN

T U

SE A

ND

/OR

IN

TE

NT

TO

USE

SU

BJE

CT

MA

TT

ER

CO

NT

EN

T S

TU

DE

NT

S' P

ER

SON

AL

CH

AR

AC

TE

RIS

TIC

S

Agr

icul

tura

l Con

tent

Are

a

Plan

t and

Soi

lL

ife

Stoc

kA

gric

ultu

ral

Man

agem

ent &

Ope

ratio

nsSc

ienc

ePr

oduc

tion

Mec

hani

csof

Agr

icul

tura

l Bus

ines

s

Cha

ract

eris

tics

Use

dIn

tent

Use

dIn

tent

Use

dIn

tent

Use

dIn

tent

Gen

der

.06

.01

.05*

.11

.08

.78

.91

.04

Age

.10

.23*

.16

.29

.17

.22*

.14

.16*

Hom

e ar

ea.0

9.7

1*.1

2.0

4*.1

0.1

0*.0

8.2

5*

Typ

e of

sch

ool

.08

.12

.07

.04

.13

.03

.08

.16

Typ

e of

far

min

g at

hom

e.1

5.1

1*.1

6.1

2.1

2.2

1*.1

2.2

5*

Lev

el o

f ed

ucat

ion

of m

othe

r.1

0.2

2*.1

1.1

1*.1

2.1

8*.1

3.1

9*

Lev

el o

f ed

ucat

ion

of f

athe

r.1

1.2

1*.1

0.2

1*.0

3.2

0*.1

1.3

3*

Occ

upat

ion

of m

othe

r.1

4.3

3*.1

5.3

2*.1

3.2

6*.1

4.3

3*

Occ

upat

ion

of f

athe

r.1

4.3

6*.1

8.3

3*.1

7.3

4*.1

7.4

0*

Ord

er o

f bi

rth

at h

ome

.09

.22

.07

.11

.10

.14

.08

.15

Fina

ncia

l con

ditio

n.0

8.0

6*.1

1.1

2*.1

8.0

0*.1

4.0

0*

Lan

d av

aila

bilit

y.2

0.0

1*.1

8.0

4*.1

3.2

0*.1

1.0

9*

Eld

er m

ale

fate

ily in

res

iden

ce.1

5.0

2*.0

9.0

1*.0

6.6

10.0

9.0

7*

Loc

atio

n of

sch

ool

.16

.02*

.11

.07*

.05

.02*

.05

.25*

NO

TE

: Cra

mer

's V

cor

rela

tion

coef

fici

ents

exc

ept f

or P

hi c

oeff

icie

nts

as a

ster

iske

d(*)

.

12

10

the extent to which students, aftercompleting high school, use theknowledge and skills from their highschool agricultural program.

3) A study should be undertaken exam-ining the patterns and levels ofknowledge and skills actually taughtto and learned by the students.

4) A need exists to conduct several lon-gitudinal studies regarding the ac-quisition and use of subject mattercontent taught in the high school ag-ricultural program.

5) There is a need to further examinethe home farms as a setting for teach-ing students about agriculture.

References

Athumani, A. (1983). In-school and out-of-school curriculum for vocational de-velopment in Tanzania, Project 422,document #7. Prepared in f-onnectionwith the project on the analysis ofCurricula of In-school and Out-of-School Education for Vocational De-velopment in the Perspective of lifelong Education.

Dunn, W. N. (1980). The two communitiesmetaphor and models of knowledgeuse. Knowledge: Creation, diffusion,utilization. 1:515 -536.

Fullan, M. (1980). The role of human agentsinternal to school districts in knowl-edge utilization. Paper prepared forthe program on research and prac-tice, National Institute of Education.

Gooday, D. 0. M. (1980). Curriculum inno-vation in secondary school agricul-ture in Swaziland: A possible modelfor developing countries. UnpublishedMaster's Thesis. London: Universityof London.

Gube, E. G. (1968). Development, diffusionand evaluation. In T. I. Eidel and J.M. Kitchell (Eds.). Knowledge pro-duction and utilization in educationaladministration. Eugene: Centre forAdvanced Study of Educational Ad-ministration, University of Oregon.

Krebs, A. H. (1969). Model for evaluation ofsecondary programs of vocational edu-cation in agriculture. AgriculturalExperiment Station. College Park:Maryland University.

Larsen, J. K. (1980). Knowledge utilization:What is it? Knowledge: Creation,Diffusion, Utilization, 1(421-442).

Larsen, J. K., et al. (1976). Consultation onits outcome: Community and mentalhealth centres. Final Report. PaloAlto, CA: American Institute for Re-search.

Ministry of Education. (1985). NationalDevelopment Plan. Mbabane,Swaziland.

Rich, R. F. & Caplan, N. (1978). What do weknow about knowledge utilization asa field or discipline - The state of theart. Paper presented at the ResearchUtilization Conference, University ofPittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Yin, R. K., et al. (1976). A review of casestudies of technological innovationsin state and local services. A report.Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corpora-tion.

1 3

SUMMARY OF RESEARCH SERIES

The extent to which students use or implement the information or knowledgedelivered in an agricultural educational program is powerful information in the handsof educational planners as they revise the existing educational program and make itmore relevant. The methodology used in this study to determine knowledge utilizationcan be useful to educational administrators and planners as they revise educationalprograms.

This summary is based on a dissertation by M. Jethro Simelane under thedirection of Larry E. Miller. M. Jethro Simelane was a grae-xate student in theDepartment ofAgricultural Education at The Ohio State University . He is currently theHead of the Department of Agricultural Education and Extension at the University ofSwaziland. Dr. Larry E. Miller is a Professor, Department of Agricultural Education,The Ohio State University. Special appreciation is due to Maynard J. Iverson, TheUniversity of Georgia; Gary Leske, University of Minnesota; and Robert Agunga, TheOhio State University for their critical review of the manuscript prior to publication.

Research has been an important functi'n of the Department of AgriculturalEducation since it was established in 1917. Research conducted by the Department hasgenerally been in the form of graduate theses, staff studies, and funded research. It isthe purpose of this series to make useful knowledge from such research available topractitioners in the profession. Individuals desiring additional information on this topicshould examine the references cited.

Wesley E. Budke, Associate ProfessorDepartment of Agricultural Education

SR 69 1993