volume 26, issue 1 april 2019 jiae › attachments › category › 185 › jiaee 26(1... ·...

Volume 26, Issue 1 April 2019

JIJourAnalofInter

EnationalA

Egricultural

&ExtensionEducation

AIAEE

A publication of the Association for International Agricultural and Extension Education

Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education Volume 26, Issue 1

1

Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education ISSN 1077-0755

DOI Prefix 10.5191 aiaee.org

The Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education (JIAEE) is the official refereed publication of the Association for International Agricultural and Extension Education (AIAEE). The purpose of the JIAEE is to enhance the research and knowledge base of agricultural and extension education from an international perspective. Acceptance rates for the past five volumes are: Volume 20 = 21%. Volume 21 = 13%. Volume 22 = 18%. Volume 23 = 12%. Volume 24 = 18%. Volume 25 = 9%. Articles intended for publication should focus on international agricultural education and/or international extension education. Articles should relate to current or emerging issues, cite appropriate literature, and develop implications for international agricultural and extension education. Manuscripts, or portions of manuscripts, must not have been published or be under consideration for publication by another journal. For publication in the JIAEE, manuscripts must pass the JIAEE’s double blind, referee process, where peer reviewers evaluate manuscript content and ensure readability. Reviewers are selected from the AIAEE membership. In the double blind, referee process, all references to authors are removed before the manuscript is sent to reviewers. Articles may be submitted for peer review a total of three times before they are no longer acceptable for publication in the JIAEE. Failure to meet the submission formatting guidelines will result in an automatic first rejection. Two different types of articles are solicited for the JIAEE: Feature Articles and Research Notes.

Feature Article A Feature Article should focus on philosophy, current or emerging issues, and the methodology and practical application of specific research and appropriate technologies, which have implications for developed and developing countries. Conceptual/Theoretical and Methodological manuscripts are also encouraged as submission for feature articles. If applicable, a feature article should report the findings from a fully investigated study. Feature articles are no longer than 20 double-spaced pages, excluding references.

Research Note

A Research Note is a concise but complete description of a limited investigation that will not be included in a later manuscript. It serves one of the following purposes: (1) presents initial proof-of-concept results on new ideas or program evaluations, timely issues, or innovative approaches; (2) reports replications or extensions of previously published research that does not merit another full-length manuscript yet provides results that contribute to a greater understanding of the phenomena under study. Research Notes are no longer than 10 double-spaced pages, excluding references.


2

Editorial Board and Leadership Team .................................................................................................... 4

From the Executive Editor ...................................................................................................................... 5 Book Review International Youth Development: A Review of Youth – Realities and Challenges for Achieving Development with Equality ........................................................................................................................ 7 Tegan J. Walker, Auburn University Research Notes The Influence of an Agricultural Subsidy Extension Program on Smallholder Maize Farmers in Tanzania.................................................................................................................................................. 10

Christopher Lameck, Tanzania Social Action Funds, Mbeya, Tanzania Kizito Mwajombe, Sokoine University of Agriculture, Morogoro, Tanzania Scott D. Scheer, Ohio State University

Feature Articles Extension Officers’ Adoption of Modern Information Communication Technologies to Interact with Farmers of Trinidad ................................................................................................................................. 17 Lendel K. Narine, Utah State University Extension Amy Harder, University of Florida T. Grady Roberts, University of Florida What Courses do I Need to Teach in Order to Address Food Insecurity in Sub Saharan Africa? A Delphi Study ........................................................................................................................................... 35 Carla Andrea Millares Forno, Texas Tech University Amy E. Boren Alpízar, Texas Tech University Todd Brashears, Texas Tech University Using Non-Probability Sampling Methods in Agricultural and Extension Education Research ................ 52 Alexa Lamm, University of Georgia Kevan Lamm, University of Georgia Group Cohesion and Application of Best Horticultural Farming Practices Among Farmer Groups in Meru County, Kenya ........................................................................................................................................ 60 Raphael Mwiti Gikunda, Texas Tech University David Lawver, Texas Tech University


3

Self-Perceived Readiness of Haitian Agricultural University Students to Enter the Workforce: A Call for Curriculum Reform ................................................................................................................................. 73 T. Grady Roberts, University of Florida Absalon Pierre, University of Florida AREA Project, Pétionville, Haiti Anne C. Gilot, University of Florida AREA Project, Pétionville, Haiti J. C. Bunch, University of Florida Senegalese Professors’ Intention to Engage in Learner-Centered Instructional Strategies in Agriculture Courses................................................................................................................................. 85 James C. Anderson, II, University of Georgia Ibukun D. Alegbeleye, Virginia Tech University Wangui C. Gichane, World Bank Azenegashe O. Abaye, Virginia Tech University Manuscript Submission Guidelines ....................................................................................................... 100


4

Editorial Board

The editorial board consists of the editors, the past editor and other members representing regions of the world.

Editors

Kristina Hains, Executive Editor University of Kentucky 314 Garrigus Building Lexington, KY 40546-0215 [email protected]

Robert Strong Jr., Past Editor Texas A&M University 2116 TAMU College Station, TX [email protected]

Alexa Lamm, Managing Editor University of Georgia 318 Hoke Smith Building Athens, GA 30602 [email protected]

Association for International Agricultural and Extension Education Officers

Wayne Ganpat, President Dean, Faculty of Food and Agriculture UWI Circular Rd., St. Augustine, Trinidad, W.I.

Robert Strong Jr., Past President Texas A&M University 2116 TAMU College Station, TX 77843

Kristina Hains, President-Elect University of Kentucky 314 Garrigus Building Lexington, KY 40546

Peyton Beattie Graduate Student Representative University of Florida Gainesville, FL

Mary Rodriguez, Secretary The Ohio State University 314 Ag Administration Building Columbus, OH 43210

Roger Hanagriff, Treasurer Texas A&M University - Kingsville Kleberg Ag Building, Rm. 119 Kingsville, TX 78363

Kristin Davis, Member-At-Large International Food Policy Research Institute Pretoria, South Africa

U.S./World Representatives

Kristin Davis International Food Policy Research Institute Pretoria, South Africa

Leslie Edgar University of Georgia Athens, GA, USA


5

M. Craig Edwards Oklahoma State University Stillwater, OK, USA Wayne Ganpat, University of West Indies St. Augustine, Trinidad, W.I. Bryan Hains University of Kentucky Lexington, KY, USA

Mike McGirr USDA-CSREES Washington, DC, USA Martin Mulder Wageningen UR Wageningen, The Netherlands T. Grady Roberts University of Florida Gainesville, FL, USA

From the Executive Editor Merriam-Webster defines collaboration as:

“... to work jointly with others or together especially in an intellectual endeavor.” As young academics, we are encouraged to seek out those with similar or complementary interests and develop joint research projects. As older practitioners, often it is required to engage with groups or communities with which we can share resources, so there is synergy for everyone involved. And as late career “prac-acdemics,” it is not unusual for the field to expect us to mentor and share our collaborative secrets with the next generation. However, the concept of collaboration can be a tricky thing. There are many facets to effective collaboration. Who should I collaborate with? Does this faculty, practitioner or community member share a similar work ethic to mine? Once the collaboration begins, how do you develop trust, accountability and respect? Who should take on what roles, and what does effective delegation look like within a group? Finally, what happens when the resulting product is a rousing success? Or alternatively, what do you do when there is no product or it’s a miserable failure? One thing is for certain – if you can figure out all of the nuances of developing effective collaborative partnerships, often the results are no less than amazing. Unfortunately, the activity of collaboration tends to get a bad rap. As educational professionals, often there aren’t enough hours in the day to cultivate a new collaborative relationship. Or we feel there aren’t many individuals doing what we do. Or perhaps, it may just be easier to do the task yourself, rather than partner up with someone else for (what may be perceived as) the same results. But that’s the beauty of it – it won’t be the same results. Ideally, collaboration will lead to synergy, and synergy will lead to a better final product, and lots more future collaborations. This is the power of working together. Browse through the April 2019 issue of JIAEE and you will notice a wide variety of collaborations. Within this issue, we have both our last Book Review and our first Research Note. The Book Review looks at the text Youth: Realities and Challenges for Achieving


6

Development with Equality (edited by Daniela Trucco & Heidi Ullmann) which ultimately calls for stronger multidisciplinary approaches to policymaking related to Latin American and Caribbean youth. In our first Research Note, Tanzania Social Action Funds and Sokoine University of Agriculture partner with Ohio State University to discuss the influence an agricultural subsidy extension program has on smallholder maize farmers in Tanzania. Further in the issue, Information Communication Technologies (ICTs) are considered as a potentially effective way for extension officers to engage with farmers in the Caribbean; in a study on Best Horticultural Farming Practices (BHFP) in Kenya, it was determined that group cohesion does play a role in supporting application of BHFPs. From a workforce development standpoint, in a collaboration between the University of Florida and the UF AREA project, the self-perceived readiness of Haitian agricultural university students to enter the workforce was explored. In addition, there were more methodological or curricular-based articles. In a Delphi study from Texas Tech University, experts identified 80 topics in 24 courses that were considered foundational to a graduate certificate focused on food security for Sub-Saharan Africa. Regarding methodology, researchers from the University of Georgia discussed the utility of employing nonprobability sampling techniques and some of the challenges that may arise. Finally, through a collaboration titled the Education and Research in Agriculture (ERA) project, it was suggested that Senegalese professors have positive attitudes in the classroom but engage in fewer and may lack the self-efficacy needed to utilize more learner-centered instructional strategies. Just a few weeks subsequent to our 2019 AIAEE Annual Conference in Trinidad, collaboration is something that should not be just in the back of our minds, but in the forefront. Meeting new people, rekindling old connections, exploring collaborative possibilities – sometimes the promise of working with a fellow colleague is just what the weary professional needs. I encourage you to read the articles cover-to-cover in this April 2019 edition of JIAEE. Who knows, one of these articles may just spark an idea for collaboration you may want to undertake for yourself! Warm Regards, Kristina D. Hains Kristina D. Hains Executive Editor, JIAEE


7

doi: 10.5191/jiaee.2019.26101

International Youth Development: A Review of Youth – Realities and Challenges for Achieving Development with Equality

Tegan Walker Auburn University

Keywords: Latin America, social inclusion, Extension, youth programming, policy recommendations

Trucco, D., & Ullmann, H. (Eds.). (2016). Youth: Realities and challenges for achieving development with equality. Santiago, Chile: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean. 262 pages. $30.00 paperback, $5.99 electronic book or free PDF download.

Content Overview “Youth: Realities and Challenges for

Achieving Development with Equality” edited by Daniela Trucco and Heidi Ullmann contributes to the call for stronger multidisciplinary approaches to policymaking related to youth in the Latin American and Caribbean region. The publishers, The Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, recognize equality as the ultimate aim of development and young people as essential change agents. Engaging youth in the development process is an essential step for creating an egalitarian society, respecting the rights and needs of youth, and creating comprehensive inclusive policies. Data over 13 years are presented from multiple reputable sources and examined by the editors through socioeconomic quintiles and living areas. The region of Latin American and the Caribbean is defined as inclusive of all Central and South American countries, Mexico, and all island nations and U.S. territories in the Caribbean. The editors

defined youth as representing those aged between 15 and 29. The editors addressed the main challenges of development and inclusion faced by youth within Latin America. Six spheres are presented encompassing the social inclusion of youth: education, employment, health, violence, culture, and participation.

Throughout the book the editors highlighted gaps in various sectors that lead to the social exclusion of youth. A disconnect was found between advances in education and the lack of available opportunities in the labor market. The region overall is reaching higher levels of education, however there are fewer work opportunities available. “Employment is the most pivotal link in the chain of social inclusion for young people” (Trucco & Ullmann, 2016, pp. 45-46). The disconnect between education advancements and employment opportunities continues to be an issue in the region.

A disconnect was also highlighted by the editors in the sphere of health and youth.


8

Many health-related programs for youth are linked to schools which excludes youth outside of the education system. Program implementation is often limited in scope and fails to properly address mental health issues and secondary prevention. The editors emphasized a fundamental flaw in regards to the rights of youth concerning their health. Many countries in the region have a gap between the age of consent for sexual relations and the age requirements to access health services without a parent’s consent. This lack of youth rights leads to youth feeling disempowered and ultimately socially excluded.

Violence was presented as the fourth sphere of social inclusion of youth. Countries in Latin America are at peace with each other, but extreme levels of violence exist within these countries. The region currently has the highest homicide rate in the world. The need to address violence as a phenomenon challenging the youth inclusion processes in development was heavily stressed by the editors. The media reinforce the image of violence as a means for conflict resolution and at times reward violent behavior by presenting it as youthful and manly behavior. The editors recommended the need for policies to integrate peaceful resolution and negotiation strategies into formal and non-formal education settings.

The sphere of culture was centered on social media and its cultural significance. Access to media and digital media were presented as a necessary factor to youth inclusion. The lack of access to media excludes youth from involvement in the culture. The media in general was noted with concern as the media tend to intensify youth in advertisements while at the same time isolate and stigmatize them. This creates an environment where youth socialize among themselves with little outside guidance or presence from adults.

Political participation was stressed by the editors to influence the social inclusion of youth. The age requirement to vote in most of the countries in the region is much younger than the age requirements to run for various offices. The editors connected this to the low levels of political participation and engagement among youth. Lack of trust in institutions and low levels of support for democracy exacerbate this issue.

Evaluation of the Book This book stands apart from other

leading works in the field of youth development in a number of ways. Witt and Caldwell’s (2018) text on youth development blends theory and practice-based information for out-of-school time settings while Hamilton and Hamilton’s (2004) text aims to stimulate and inspire youth development. Trucco and Ullmann (2016) focus specifically on the region of Latin America and the Caribbean. This book presents recommendations for effective youth development policy changes in the region while recognizing that success of youth development programs differ by region. This book also focuses on youth development within specific contexts of health, violence, and political participation. The breadth of data alongside well-presented graphs and figures offered in this book gives the reader a strong understanding of the current views and conditions in the region. The six spheres of social inclusion of youth are explained in depth with the recurring theme of the need for more comprehensive policies. The editors argue the success of policies depend on their breadth of scope and inclusiveness. Policies that fail to broaden the scope could end up doing more harm than good. The need for multidisciplinary policy is well supported, however there are few tangible suggestions on how best to formulate and implement these policies.


9

The editors stress the importance of employment of youth and the need for inclusive policies. Fifty-five percent of youth not in school or employed were found to have roles as caregivers or unpaid domestic workers. The editors fail to mention how the social inclusion of this large percentage of the youth population could be improved by policies. Availability of work opportunities for youth can only be part of the focus in policy reform when a large percentage of youth are working in economically unrecognized areas.

The culture sphere in relation to social media presents access and participation in social media as culturally significant. The negative impacts and consequences of social media however are not addressed. The potential of social media to exacerbate youth exclusion must be included in the conversation about youth and social media.

The political participation sphere was well supported by data and addressed the policy reform needed to increase youth participation. Various categories related to voting activities are presented by the editors; however, the current presence of voting requirement laws in the region are not discussed. Voting requirement or suppression laws impact the social inclusion of youth and their feelings towards the democratic process. The editors clearly present the need to include youth in the process for a representative democracy.

The editors recognize the way youth are understood is a social construct and there is a great need to treat young people with respect. Treatment of youth characterized by transgression and risk which is present in media and current approaches to policies does not contribute to their social inclusion. More attention is needed on treating youth as the social stakeholders they are.

Recommendation of the Book This book and its wealth of data on

youth in the Latin American and Caribbean region and would assist in the creation of multidisciplinary and effective policies on youth development issues. The need for inclusive policies and the potential negative impacts of policies that are not broad in scope are clearly presented throughout the book. This book can be used as a valuable resource when planning youth development programs or recommending policies related to youth development to local governments and policy makers. Extension education administrators throughout the world can use this book as a resource when promoting inclusive and multidisciplinary policies for youth development.

References Hamilton, S. F., & Hamilton, M. A. (Eds.).

(2004). The youth development handbook: Coming of age in American communities. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Witt, P. A., & Caldwell, L. L. (Eds.). (2018). Youth development: Principles and practices in out-of-school time settings (2nd ed.). Champaign, IL: Sagamore-Venture.


10

doi: 10.5191/jiaee.2019.26102

The Influence of an Agricultural Subsidy Extension Program on Smallholder Maize Farmers in Tanzania

Christopher Lameck Tanzania Social Action Funds

Mbeya, Tanzania

Kizito Mwajombe Sokoine University of Agriculture

Morogoro, Tanzania

Scott D. Scheer Ohio State University

Abstract Smallholder farming in Tanzania is a household activity implemented at the subsistence level. The government of Tanzania launched the subsidy program to promote food secure households and shift subsistence farming to business farming. Food insecurity was associated by low rates of fertilizer application and poor seed quality among smallholder farmers due to fertilizer and seed costs which led to an increase in food prices. This study aimed at assessing the impact of the agricultural subsidy program for smallholder maize farmers. Four research objectives focused on agricultural productivity, food security, usage of improved inputs, and farmers’ perceptions of how the program functioned. An ex post facto research design was used with a sample of 120 smallholder farmers. The investigation involved 60 farmers who received subsidies and 60 who did not. The study used an interviewer administered questionnaire. Farmers who received subsidies significantly increased maize production. Comparison of average output before and after subsides shows an increase in number of bags (100 kg) per acre from an average of 5.35 bags to 10.10 bags. Farmers who did not receive subsides produced about the same amount of maize at time one and time two. There was general satisfaction with the functioning of the program, however certain areas need to be improved including that program objectives are followed, ensuring farmers can manage market price of inputs, and enhancing extension services for farmers to produce more surplus.

Keywords: smallholder farmers, maize, Tanzania, extension subsidy program


11

Introduction The economy of Tanzania depends

heavily on agriculture and is the backbone of its economy (Government of Tanzania Publications, 2014). Agriculture alone provides 85% of the total exports and employs about 80% of the work force of the rural population (Cochrane & D'Souza, 2015; Government of Tanzania Publications, 2014). Those employed in agriculture are mainly smallholder farmers cultivating less than one hectare of land (Cochrane & D'Souza, 2015). Farming is a household activity implemented at the subsistence level for smallholder farmers. The government of Tanzania launched an extension agricultural subsidy program as a bridge to shift subsistence farming to business farming and to promote food secure households. Food insecurity was associated with low rate of fertilizer application and poor seed quality among smallholder farmers due to fertilizer and seed costs. These conditions were the major reasons for launching the program.

The extension agricultural program specifically administers subsidies to smallholder farmers through the allocation of vouchers to purchase fertilizers and improved seeds. Select farmers received a subsidy to purchase 10 Kg of improved variety of seeds and 100 Kg of fertilizers in which 50 Kg is for basal fertilizers and 50 Kg for top dressing fertilizers. The price of subsidized inputs is 50% lower than non-subsidized inputs (Druilhe & Barreiro-Hurlé, 2012). Subsidies were justified by being efficient in increasing the use of fertilizers to an optimal level for farmers who have limited knowledge and low ability to purchase inputs and to transfer income to poor farming households. This study aimed at assessing the impact of the agricultural extension subsidies program to smallholder maize farmers.

Theoretical Framework Diffusion of Innovation theory was

used as the theoretical framework to guide this research (Rogers, 2003). The theory helped to explain how smallholder farmers may adopt new innovations of using improved seed and soil fertilizers to increase maize production. Adoption involves the process whereby smallholder farmers take up different agricultural practices through the realization these methods are better than prior farming practices. Diffusion of innovation theory (Rogers, 2003) posits that five factors influence adoption of an innovation: relative advantage (innovation seen as better than current practice), compatibility (new approach is consistent with farmers beliefs and experiences), complexity (level of difficulty to understand), triability (ability to test innovation), and observability (tangible results are evident). Rogers’ theory (2003) states that for an innovation to be adopted, phases are followed of awareness, decision to adopt (or reject), initial use (testing), and continued use. The scope of this investigation falls within these phases for adoption of improved maize seeds and fertilizer application.

Purpose & Objectives The purpose of the study is to assess

the impact of an extension agricultural subsidy program on smallholder maize farmers (primary crop) in the Mbeya District Council of Tanzania. The four research objectives were to:

1. Determine whether agriculturalsubsidies contribute to the smallholderfarmers’ productivity;

2. Examine how subsidizing agriculturalinputs (fertilizer and seed) contributeto farmers’ food security;

3. Investigate what role the extensionprogram contributed to post-programusage of improved inputs; and


12

4. Determine farmers’ perceptions ofhow the extension programfunctioned.

Methods The study employed survey

techniques using purposive sampling of 120 smallholder farmers in areas where the subsidy program operated. The investigation involved 60 farmers who received subsidies and 60 who did not. These farmers were selected from their respective households from four different wards (i.e., 15 smallholder farmers who received subsidies and 15 smallholder farmers who did not). Hence from each ward, 30 smallholder farmers were purposively selected to form the sample used in the study.

The researchers employed two interviewer administered questionnaires to collect data from the respondents. One questionnaire was utilized with farmers who received subsidies and the other with farmers who did not. The questionnaire for farmers who did not receive subsidies, excludes questions about the subsidy program. The survey was conducted by interviewing each head of household or their representative. Questionnaires were given by an interviewer

to address issues related to literacy and reduction of missing information. The questionnaire consisted of items categorized into sections about demographics, agricultural productivity, food security, usage of improved agricultural inputs, and farmers’ satisfaction on the impact of the subsidy program and their attitude toward farming as a business. For instrument reliability, Cronbach’s alpha was used to test for internal consistency and coefficients ranged from α=0.52 to α=0.80. Content validity of the instrument was established with a panel of four experts in this field of study.

Results The first objective examined

agricultural productivity for farmers who participated in the subsidy program and those who did not. Paired sample t-tests indicated a statistically significant difference between the number of bags harvested (100 kg) per acre before subsidies (5.35 bags) and number of bags (100 kg) after subsidies (10.10 bags; t=9.06, p<.0001). There was not a statistical difference in mean harvest scores for farmers who did not receive subsides. See Table 1.

Table 1 Paired Sample t-Tests with Farmer Groups Who Received and Did Not Receive Subsidies

n Mean SD df t

Received Subsidies Number of bags per acre before subsidies – Time 1 60 5.35 3.50 59 9.06***

Number of bags per acre after subsidies – Time 2

60 10.10 6.06


13

Did Not Receive Subsidies Number of bags per acre – Time 1 52 6.26 4.92 51 0.18

Number of bags per acre – Time 2 52 7.01 5.31

Note: *** p<.0001

To determine the effect size of the subsidy program, a Cohen’s d score was calculated (Cohen, 1988). Effect size for Cohen’s d uses the following scale: small effect (d = .20), medium effect (d = .50), and large effect (d = .90 or greater). The subsidy program had a large effect for maize agricultural productivity with a Cohen’s d score of 0.96. The farmers who did not receive the subsidies in comparing maize production from time 1 to time 2 had a small or little effect (d = 0.15).

The second objective addressed how agricultural subsidies contributed to famers’ food security. Ninety percent of farmers who received subsidies believed their food security improved due to their participation in the program. In addition, results indicated most farmers agreed that availability of maize stored in their household makes them feel food secure (90.8% of total sample). Refer to Table 2.

Table 2 Food Security Based on Stored Maize

Received Subsidies Did Not Receive Subsidies Total

f % f % f % Yes 57 95.0 52 86.7 109 90.8

No 3 5.0 8 13.3 11 9.2

Total 60 100.00 60 100.0 120 100.0

Note: f = frequency

The third objective explored how the subsidy program contributed to post-program usage of improved inputs. Both groups were similar in their use of improved inputs (63.4% participants, 58.3% non-participants), however more farmers in the program planned to use improved inputs than farmers who did not participate (78.3%, 66.6% respectively). Refer to Table 3 below.

The fourth objective examined how the subsidy program functioned. Results

showed that farmers reported their agricultural activities generally improved because of their program participation (73.3%, n=44, out of 60). Reasons farmers who stated there was not an improvement in agricultural activities were incomplete package of subsidies, delays in distribution of inputs, longer participation in program required, and inadequate training on good agronomic practices.


14

Table 3 Use of Inputs in 2015 and Plan to Use in 2016 Agricultural Seasons

Group Category Received Subsidies

Did Not Receive Subsidies Total

f % f % f Use of improved inputs in the 2015 ag-season

Yes 38 63.4 35 58.3 73 60.8 No 22 36.6 25 41.7 47 39.2

Total 60 100 60 100 120 100 Plans to use improved inputs in 2016 ag-season

Yes 47 78.3 40 66.6 87 72.5 No 13 21.7 20 33.4 33 27.5

Total 60 100 60 100 120 100

To assess farmers opinions on the functioning of the subsidy program, four-point Likert items were used which ranged from strongly disagree to strongly agree. Farmers’ satisfaction on these items were measured by merging the positive responses of “strongly agree’ and ‘agree’ to indicate a positive opinion. Items were ranked from

high to low according to farmers’ satisfaction of the extension subsidy program (see Table 4). Farmers’ attitudes aligned with use of improved inputs and knowledge has improved about agricultural inputs were the highest ranked items for farmer satisfaction with the program.

Table 4 Farmers’ Opinions on the Functioning and the Impact of the Extension Subsidy Program

Item Responses f Merged Score % Rank

My attitudes are now aligned with the use of improved agriculture inputs

Agree 36 53 88.3 1 Strongly

Agree 17

Farmers’ knowledge about the use of improved agriculture inputs have improved


Agree 13

Extension services were adequately provided to me during subsidies provision


Agree 15

Agriculture inputs subsidies program reached the intended farmers


Agree 5

The objectives of agriculture input subsidies program have been reached


Agree 1


15

Conclusions, Implications & Recommendations

There was an increase in the number of farmers who used fertilizers and improved seeds. The subsidy program contributed to greater maize production for smallholder farmers. Maize is a staple food for this population and with increased production, there was improved food security. Both groups (farmers who did and did not receive subsidies) perceived that the availability of stored maize increases food security. For post-program use of improved inputs, both groups were also similar for initial usage, however more farmers in the program planned to continue to use improved inputs after the program ended than those who did not participate. Almost three-fourths of farmers believed their agricultural activities improved by participating in the extension program.

Ability to produce and sell surplus was assessed to determine whether farmers can produce enough to feed their households and sell part of their produce to generate income. Farmers who received subsidies produced more maize after subsides, and in comparison to farmers who did not receive subsidies. As result, subsidy farmers were able to sell their surplus to generate income. This implies subsidies have contributed to help move farmers from subsistence to business farming.

There are implications for having surplus production which includes getting maize to the market. Most farmers have associated this issue with the following factors: absence of nearby market places, buyers setting own prices, and lack of information about where to get fair market prices. These factors lead to the inability for smallholder farmers to achieve profits in farming activities. For example, the absence

of nearby markets increases transport cost burden to farmers and loss due to inefficient ways of storing maize. Sack storage can cause 30 – 40% loss of maize in Tanzania (Suleiman & Rosentrater, 2015).

The findings of this study have implications for implementing agricultural subsidy extension programs. Similar programs that focus on food security using improved inputs of seed and fertilizer can benefit from utilizing similar outreach education methods to produce positive outcomes. Also, strategies and approaches can be followed to enhance overall functioning and operation of comparable programs.

Recommendations to improve the subsidy program includes better distribution of seeds and fertilizers, along with quality training about agronomic techniques. In the order of priority, farmers suggested the following: subsidies should be provided in a complete package (i.e., improved seeds, basal fertilizers, and top dressing fertilizers); subsidies should be given earlier to catchup with the agricultural calendar (enable farmers to use inputs in a full set as per recommended agronomical practices); consistency in program to ensure farmers receive subsidies for three consecutive years; and monitor farmers who receive subsidies so they use them as intended rather than exchanging vouchers for money. Other recommendations are that subsidies should be provided to support crops based on agro-ecological zone, climate, and farmers preferences rather than dictated by authority.

References Cochrane, N., & D'Souza, A. (2015).

Measuring access to food in Tanzania: A food basket approach. Retrieved from


16

https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/198784/files/eib135.pdf

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Druilhe, Z., & Barreiro-Hurlé, J. (2012). Fertilizer subsidies in Sub-Saharan Africa. Rome: FAO. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/3/a-ap077e.pdf

Government of Tanzania Publications. (2014). Tanzania Economy. Retrieved from https://www.tanzania.go.tz/

Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.

Suleiman, R. A., & Rosentrater, K. A. (2015, July). Current maize production, postharvest losses and the risk of mycotoxins contamination in Tanzania. Paper presented at the 2015 ASABE Annual International Meeting (pp. 1-128). St. Joseph, MI: ASABE.


17

doi: 10.5191/jiaee.2019.26103

Extension Officers’ Adoption of Modern Information Communication Technologies to Interact with Farmers of Trinidad

Lendel K. Narine Utah State University Extension

Amy Harder T. Grady Roberts

University of Florida

Abstract The Ministry Extension struggled to provide adequate services to Trinidadian farmers because of a reliance on top-down methods. Information Communication Technologies (ICTs) have been touted as an effective and efficient way to serve farmers in the Caribbean. This study sought to describe the factors affecting Ministry Extension officers’ decisions to adopt text messaging via Short Messaging Service (SMS) to communicate with farmers. The Diffusion of Innovation theory (Rogers, 2003) guided this study, and data were collected from a census of Extension officers in the Ministry Extension service. Results showed most Extension officers used voice calls and SMS to communicate with farmers. Many Extension officers who did not use ICTs were willing to use multimedia messaging, SMS, electronic mail (email), voice calls, and social media to interact with farmers. Extension officers were accustomed to using text messaging, saw the benefit of using SMS to communicate with farmers, and were confident in their ability to use SMS for farmer interactions. However, results indicated a lacking policy environment for SMS use, and limited support existed from peers and supervisors to use SMS to interact with farmers. Findings showed most Extension officers perceived farmers can use mobile telephones to make calls, send text messages, and use multimedia messaging. This implies Extension officers were aware of the potential for using a variety of ICTs to engage with farmers. However, internal policies and administrative support are critical to their adoption of ICTs for farmer interactions in Extension.

Keywords: communication, extension methods, farmer interactions, Information Communication Technologies, Short Messaging Service


18

Introduction The National Food Production Plan

(2012 – 2015) of the Ministry of Agriculture Land and Fisheries in Trinidad and Tobago indicated a need to improve the competitiveness of domestic producers. The national plan prioritized national food security and the need to increase domestic production, reduce the food import bill, and create productive employment opportunities in the agricultural sector. The national plan guides the mandate of the Extension Division of the Ministry of Agriculture Land and Fisheries in Trinidad, henceforth referred to as Ministry Extension. The Ministry Extension is the dominant provider of extension in Trinidad (Ganpat, 2013). Therefore, the mobilization of the national plan depends on the effectiveness and efficiency of Ministry Extension.

Extension has county offices in all regions of the country (Ganpat, 2013). Extension officers in county offices provide administrative services to farmers, farm visits, and farmers’ training programs. However, with an Extension-to-farmer ratio of 1:600 and reliance on top-down extension methods and traditional information dissemination techniques, the Ministry Extension struggles to provide adequate services to Trinidadian farmers (Ganpat, Webster, & Narine, 2014; Ram, Ganpat, & Narine, 2017; Seepersad, 2003). The adoption of modern extension approaches is essential to addressing the needs of Trinidad’s farmers (Ganpat, Narine, & Harder, 2017; Ganpat, Ragbir, & de Freitas, 2010; Renwick, 2010).

The use of Information Communication Technologies (ICTs) has been touted as an effective and efficient way to serve farmers in the Caribbean (Ganpat & de Freitas, 2010). McNamara, Belden, Kelly, Pehu, and Donovan (2017) defined ICTs as “any device, tool, or application that permits the exchange or collection of data

through interaction or transmission” (p. 3). ICTs include traditional devices such as radio, and modern technologies such as satellite imaging and smartphones. Wright et al. (2016) found extension officers’ adoption of Short Messaging Service (SMS) in Kenya resulted in an increase of service quality and timeliness. According to the World Bank (2017), adoption of ICTs can reduce the overall cost of extension service delivery. Nonetheless, Ministry Extension officers in Trinidad mainly communicate with farmers via traditional farm visits (Ganpat & de Freitas, 2010), and one-way mass media such as radio and television are used to disseminate farming information (Ganpat et al., 2010; Strong, Ganpat, Harder, Irby, & Lindner, 2014).

Farmers’ needs are not met if Extension farm visits are infrequent which is a common occurrence in the Caribbean (Ganpat et al., 2017). Strong et al. (2014) found many Ministry Extension officers used modern ICTs in their daily work routines for communicating with supervisors and enhancing their personal knowledge. However, no evidence of Extension officers’ willingness to use modern ICTs to communicate with farmers has been reported. This study refers to modern ICTs as a technology cluster and is related to the use of mobile telephones for calls, SMS, Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS), social media, Skype, and email. Rogers (2003) stated a technology cluster is “one or more distinguishable elements of technology” that are perceived to be closely interrelated (p. 14). The World Bank (2017) indicated SMS is available on older mobile devices, making it accessible to any individual with a mobile telephone. Therefore, this study prioritizes Extension officers’ perceptions of SMS as an innovation to communicate with farmers.


19

Theoretical Framework & Review of Literature

This study sought to determine Extension officers’ adoption of text messaging to communicate with farmers in Trinidad and was guided by Rogers’ (2003) Diffusion of Innovations theory. Rogers noted the diffusion process involves the innovation, an individual with knowledge of the innovation, another individual without knowledge of the innovation, and the communication channels connecting these individuals. According to Rogers, the underlying nature of an innovation is adoption uncertainty, and diffusion is an uncertainty-reduction process. The innovation itself is of importance to this study. Rogers identified five characteristics of an innovation, in order of predictive power, these are relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, trialability, and observability.

Relative advantage refers to “the degree to which an innovation is perceived as better than the idea it supersedes” (Rogers, 2003, p. 229). Rogers and Shoemaker (1971) noted relative advantage encompasses economic benefits and psychological factors such as social prestige, convenience, and satisfaction. Tornatzky and Klein (1982) stated relative advantage is dependent on the contextual setting, making it a highly subjective factor regarding an innovation’s adoption. The perception of Relative advantage is positively related to the adoption of the innovation (Rogers, 2003).

Compatibility is the “degree to which an innovation is perceived as consistent with the existing values, past experiences, and needs of potential adopters” (Rogers, 2003, p. 240). Compatibility depends on the characteristics of the social system with respect to sociocultural values, beliefs, and adopters’ needs (Rogers & Shoemaker, 1971). It is a

subjective factor of adoption as it depends on the social context (Tornatzky & Klein, 1982). Perceptions of Compatibility are expected to have a positive relationship with the adoption of an innovation (Rogers, 2003).

Complexity is another attribute of an innovation. In contrast to relative advantage and compatibility, complexity is expected to have a negative relationship with the rate of adoption (Rogers, 2003). Complexity is “the degree to which an innovation is perceived as relatively difficult to understand and use” (Rogers, 2003, p. 257). Rogers said an innovation can be defined on a complexity-simplicity continuum; an innovation tending toward simplicity is more easily adopted. Tornatzky and Klein (1982) argued complexity is theoretically less dependent on the subjective characteristics of a social system. Rogers indicated relative advantage and compatibility are expected to have a stronger relationship with adoption compared to complexity. However, Moonsammy, Narine, Harder, and Rodriguez (2017) found complexity was the most important innovation characteristic affecting Grenadian farmers’ adoption of drip irrigation systems.

Trialability and observability are expected to have comparatively weaker effects on overall adoption compared to relative advantage, compatibility, and complexity (Rogers, 2003). Rogers and Shoemaker (1971) defined trialability as “the degree to which an innovation may be experimented with on a limited basis” (p. 155). Rogers noted trialability can reduce uncertainty and is expected to positively affect adoption. Trialability also allows for re-invention based on the innovation’s appropriateness to the social setting and the adopters’ needs. A high degree of trialability suggests users can modify or re-invent the technology to fit their needs within a specific context (Rogers, 2003).


20

The last attribute of an innovation, observability, was defined as “the degree to which the results of an innovation are visible to others” (Rogers, 2003, p. 258). Rogers noted it may be easier to visually observe innovations with a predominately hardware component because it has a physical or material presence. For example, individuals can easily observe the use of mobile telephones by others in their communities. In contrast, SMS is a software component of the mobile device; a person can own a mobile telephone and not use SMS. Hence, an Extension officer’s use of SMS to communicate with farmers is not easily observed by others. Perceptions of Observability are expected to have a positive relationship with an innovation’s rate of adoption (Rogers, 2003).

Innovations are more likely to be adopted when they are compatible with the existing system (Rogers, 2003). ICT infrastructure in the Caribbean is well-developed and supports widespread access through extensive mobile networks (Ganpat & de Freitas, 2010; Ganpat, et al., 2014; Renwick, 2010; Strong et al., 2014). Ramjattan (2016) found a general deficiency in content appropriate for delivery through ICTs in Trinidad, indicating agricultural factsheets and booklets were mostly available in hard copy format.

Although compatibility exists with respect to infrastructure, cultural compatibility with existing norms is uncertain. ICTs may have lower compatibility with the social system of Extension in Trinidad. In this regard, Extension officers enjoy farm visits because it provides them with an opportunity to spend time away from the office (W. Ganpat, personal communication, February 1, 2018). In addition, Extension officers are compensated for the traveling cost incurred through farm visits. Extension officers may prefer the outdoor aspect of their jobs

because it gives them greater flexibility in their work schedules. Officers’ adoption of mobile ICTs may reduce the need for farm visits, resulting in increased office time, less flexibility in work hours, and decreased benefits from travel reimbursements. Therefore, Extension officers may be concerned about the unintended consequences of adopting modern ICTs. However, these postulations have not been researched. Strong et al. (2014) stated extension officers in the Caribbean regularly used ICTs for personal reasons, chief of which was for personal communication. Extension officers had adequate literacy to use ICTs for interacting with others, but Ganpat, Ramjattan, and Strong (2016) found officers perceived a low level of institutional support from superiors and a lack of enabling policies to use modern extension methods. As such, Caribbean extension officers’ intentions to use the technology to contact farmers was ranked lowest compared to other uses of ICTs (Strong et al., 2014).

With respect to complexity, Strong et al. (2014) explained officers may need specialized training on using ICTs. Samuel et al. (2014) found extension professionals in the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) perceived they had low competence for using ICTs. Communicating with farmers via ICTs may require a different skillset compared to those needed for interactions with colleagues (Strong et al., 2014). Campo, Robinson, Isaac, and Ganpat (2017) reported that a lack of professional training on ICTs was a challenge to the use of such Trinidad.

For relative advantage, Donovan (2017) noted SMS allows extension officers to send personalized information to farmers. Compared to the farm visit approach, this method is cheaper and reduces travel cost (World Bank, 2017). However, Samuel et al. (2014) found extension professionals in


21

CARICOM did not believe ICTs were of very high importance. This implied that Extension professionals are likely to perceive ICTs may not have much relative advantage over traditional methods.

Rogers (2003) found observability positively affected adoption of an innovation. Rogers indicated software innovations are less observable and may have a slower rate of adoption. This study focused on Extension officers’ use of SMS to interact with farmers, i.e. a software innovation. In this regard, observability of SMS is lower compared to innovations with an observable hardware aspect. However, Ntemana and Olatokun (2012) reported observability had the highest impact on teachers’ adoption of ICTs in Lesotho. Further, Schillewaert and Ahearne (2015) indicated ICTs were more likely to be adopted if peers accepted the technology. Therefore, observability may be linked to Extension officers’ perceptions of the social acceptance of ICTs within their professional or work-related social system, i.e. Ministry Extension.

Socio-demographic factors such as age, gender, experience, and education can also affect ICT adoption (Haji, Pezeshki, & Chizari, 2014; Tata & McNamara, 2016). Purnomo and Lee (2010) indicated younger extension officers and those with more formal education were more likely to have positive attitudes toward an ICT program in Indonesia. Women tend to value opportunities to help others (Konrad, Ritchie, Lieb, & Corrigall, 2000), and studies have shown that they are more likely to use ICTs to meet farmers’ information needs (Hadi & Yi-Hsuan, 2010). Ramjattan (2016) similarly reported female Extension officers, officers with diplomas, and those with greater professional experience used ICTs more than other extension personnel in Trinidad.

The Telecommunication Development Sector [ITU-D] (2018) indicated ICT infrastructure is well-developed and active mobile users in Trinidad increased by 21% from 2016 to 2017. Further, Extension officers have adequate levels of ICT literacy, and national policies support ICT use in agriculture (Ganpat et al., 2016; Strong et al., 2017). However, factors influencing Ministry Extension officers’ decisions of whether to adopt SMS to communicate with farmers were unclear. Utilizing the Diffusion of Innovations theory (Rogers, 2003) will allow an assessment of the importance of these factors on Extension officers’ adoption of SMS to communicate with farmers.

Purpose This study sought to describe

Extension officers’ uses of modern ICTs and assess their perceptions of using the Short Messaging Service (SMS) to communicate with farmers. Four objectives supported achieving the study’s purpose:

1. Describe Extension officers’ uses ofmodern ICTs to interact withfarmers;

2. Describe Extension officers’perceptions regarding the attributesof SMS as an innovation forinteracting with farmers;

3. Compare Extension officerperceptions of SMS attributes basedon adopter category;

4. Compare personal characteristics ofExtension officers based on adoptercategory;

5. Describe Extension officers’perceptions towards farmers’abilities to use modern ICTs.

Methods This study followed a causal

comparative design (Ary, Jacobs, Sorensen, & Razavieh, 2009) and relied on data from


22

Extension officers of the Ministry Extension of Trinidad. The target population of this study was Extension officers of the Ministry of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries (MALF) in Trinidad. According to Roberts, Ganpat, Albert, Narine, and Sudeen (2016), approximately 12 frontline Extension officers work in each of the eight counties of Trinidad. Trinidad has an estimated population of 96 frontline Extension officers (W. Ganpat, Dean, Faculty of Food and Agriculture, The University of the West Indies, personal communication, March 11, 2018; J. Ramjattan, Extension officer, MALF, personal communication, March 13, 2018). This study sought to achieve a census of Ministry Extension officers. The survey response rate was 97% with 94 Extension officers responding (n = 94).

Diffusion of Innovation theory guided development of a researcher-made questionnaire to gather data for the study. The Tailored Design Method (Dillman, Smyth, & Christian, 2014) informed item design to ensure content, construct, and face validity. Questions were not double-barrelled and had an exhaustive list of mutually exclusive answer options. For Likert-type items, options on a five-point scale were evenly spaced with a clear mid-point. Further, items were grouped together by constructs to avoid unequal comparisons across different constructs. These measures also increased face validity and ensured consistency in item flow.

A panel of experts with specializations in extension education and questionnaire design reviewed the survey instrument for content and construct validity. Their major recommendations were the addition of items to several constructs, and rewording questions for readability. Next, a pilot study was conducted with a small portion of the population (n = 5) to ensure the instrument’s face validity. Cronbach alphas were determined post-hoc

for internal consistency with data from the census: Compatibility = .71, Complexity = .82, Relative Advantage = .84, Observability = .86, and Trialability = .85. All constructs had an acceptable internal consistency (Field, 2013). The final questionnaire was administered to the target population via face-to-face interviews in May of 2018 by a trained interviewer. The interviewer was an Extension officer assigned to the Plant Pathology Unit of MALF and a doctoral student of The University of the West Indies.

Guided by Rogers (2003) Diffusion of Innovations theory, this study assessed Extension officers’ perceptions of the attributes of text messaging (SMS) as an innovation. The five attributes of text messaging were operationalized in a series of Likert-type items on a five-point scale (Relative advantage = 4 items, Complexity = 4 items, Compatibility = 5 items, Trialability = 4 items, and Observability = 3 items). Response categories for each item were 1 = Strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = Neither agree nor disagree, 4 = Agree, and 5 = Strongly agree. A respondent’s agreement to an item corresponded to his or her perception of the favorability of the innovation’s attribute. As such, the overall construct mean for each innovation attribute was interpreted in regard to Extension officers’ perceived favorability as indicated by the real limits of the scale anchors: 1.00 – 1.49 = very low favorability, 1.50 – 2.49 = somewhat low favorability, 2.50 – 3.49 = moderate favorability, 3.50 – 4.49 = somewhat high favorability, and 4.50 – 5.0 = very high favorability.

The questionnaire also included items about Extension officers’ uses of modern ICTs. Respondents were asked to indicate via a series of Yes/No questions if they used social media, SMS, Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS), voice calls, Skype, and email to communicate with


23

farmers. If their response to any item was “No”, a follow-up Yes/No question inquired about their willingness to use the ICT service for farmer interactions.

Another section of the questionnaire examined Extension officers’ perceptions toward farmers’ abilities to use and willingness to learn about modern ICTs. ICTs examined were using a mobile telephone for calls, social media, SMS, Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS), Skype, and browsing the Internet for agricultural information. The response categories for these questions were Yes, No, or Maybe. The final section of the questionnaire asked Extension officers to indicate their educational levels, years of professional experience, gender, and age.

Given the use of a census, results of this study were presented as descriptive statistics and crosstabulations. Crosstabulations were used to describe the relationships between Extension officers’ perceptions of the attributes of SMS and their adoption of SMS to communicate with farmers.

Census Roughly one-half the population of

Extension officers were male (51%, n = 48),

38 years of age, and had about 12 years of professional experience. Many officers who responded had earned a diploma (46%, n = 41), 25% (n = 22) achieved a bachelor’s degree, 17% (n = 15) earned an associate degree, and a few held a postgraduate degree (12%, n = 11). Almost all Extension officers owned a smartphone (96%, n = 87) and used mobile Internet (96%, n = 87). Many officers also used SMS (95%, n = 85) and MMS (85%, n = 77). In addition, about 85% (n = 79) of respondents stated they used the Internet several times a day.

Results

Objective 1: Extension Officers’ Uses of Modern ICTs to Interact with Farmers

Table 1 provides a descriptive summary of the ICTs that Extension officers used to communicate with farmers. Most officers (88%) contacted farmers through voice calls, and about 64% used SMS. Fewer Extension officers used email (40%), social media (34%), and MMS (34%) to communicate with farmers. Only 6% of officers used video calling to communicate with farmers.

Table 1 Extension Officers’ Use of ICTs to Communicate with Farmers

Rank ICT use %, (n) Yes No

1 Mobile telephones (voice calls) 88 (83) 12 (11) 2 Short Message Service (text without pictures or video) 64 (60) 36 (34) 3 Email 40 (38) 60 (56) 4 Social Media (e.g. Facebook) 34 (32) 66 (62) 4 Multimedia Messaging Service (text with pictures, videos) 34 (32) 66 (62) 6 Video calling (e.g. Skype) 6 (6) 94 (88)

If a respondent did not use the ICT listed in Table 1, a follow-up question was asked about his or her willingness to use the

innovation. Table 2 shows Extension officers’ willingness to use ICTs to interact with farmers. A majority stated they were


24

willing to use MMS (81%), SMS (79%), email (73%), mobile telephones for voice calls (64%), and social media (58%) to communicate with farmers. However, only

43% of Extension officers were willing to use video calling to interact with farmers for that purpose.

Table 2 Extension Officers’ Willingness to Use ICTs to Communicate with Farmers

Rank ICT use n %

Yes No 1 Multimedia Messaging Service (text with pictures, videos) 62 81 19 2 Short Message Service (text without pictures or video) 34 79 21 3 E-mail 56 73 27 4 Mobile telephones (voice calls) 11 64 36 5 Social Media (e.g. Facebook) 62 58 42 6 Video calling (e.g. Skype) 88 43 57

Objective 2: Extension Officers’ Perceptions regarding the Attributes of SMS as an Innovation for Interacting with Farmers

Table 3 shows Extension officers’ perceptions toward items related to the complexity of SMS. Results indicated Extension officers tended to agree SMS had

favorable complexity (M = 4.02, SD = .61). Many Extension officers agreed they had the technical skills to use SMS (92%), they could use SMS to communicate with farmers (94%), SMS could be easily used to communicate with farmers (84%) and using SMS to communicate with farmers is easy (70%).

Table 3 Extension Officers’ Perceptions toward the Favorability of Complexity

Items % SD D N A SA

I have the technical skills needed to use SMS. 1 1 6 54 38 I am fully capable of using SMS to communicate with farmers. 1 2 3 64 30 I think SMS can easily be used to communicate with farmers. 1 10 5 66 18 Using SMS to communicate with farmers is easy. 1 16 13 50 20

Complexity (Mean, SD) 4.02 (.61) Note: SD: Strongly Disagree, D: Disagree, N: Neither Agree or Disagree, A: Agree, SA: Strongly Agree.

Table 4 shows items related to the relative advantage of SMS. Results indicated Extension officers tended to agree SMS had favorable relative advantage (M = 3.78, SD = .79). Most Extension officers agreed SMS can play an important role in serving

farmers (80%), meeting farmers’ needs (75%), improving their relationship with farmers (72%), helping farmers improve their practices (73%), and addressing farmers’ problems faster (68%).


25

Table 4 Extension Officers’ Perceptions toward the Favorability of Relative Advantage

Items % SD D N A SA

SMS can play an important role in effectively serving farmers 0 10 10 55 25 If I use SMS to communicate with farmers, I can better meet their

needs. 2 7 16 60 15

I can improve my relationship with farmers if I use SMS to provide Extension services. 2 10 16 54 18

I believe it is possible to help farmers improve their practices by using SMS. 2 10 15 57 16

If I use SMS to communicate with farmers, I can address their problems faster. 3 17 12 49 19

Relative Advantage (Mean, SD) 3.78 (.79) Note: SD: Strongly Disagree, D: Disagree, N: Neither Agree or Disagree, A: Agree, SA: Strongly Agree.

Table 5 displays respondents’ perceptions toward items related to the trialability of SMS. Results showed Extension officers tended to agree SMS had favorable trialability (M = 3.69, SD = .78).

Most officers agreed they would use SMS to communicate with farmers if given the opportunity (85%), and that many opportunities existed to use SMS to communicate with farmers (72%).

Table 5 Extension Officers’ Perceptions toward the Favorability of Trialability

Items % SD D N A SA

If I get the chance to use SMS to communicate with farmers, I will give it a try. 1 6 8 67 18

There are many opportunities to use SMS when communicating with farmers. 4 10 14 56 16

I was able to try out using SMS to communicate with farmers. 6 19 9 55 11 Trialability (Mean, SD) 3.69 (.78)

Note: SD: Strongly Disagree, D: Disagree, N: Neither Agree or Disagree, A: Agree, SA: Strongly Agree.

Table 6 reflects items related to the observability of SMS. Officers perceived SMS had less favorable observability (M = 3.27, SD = .97) compared to the characteristics of complexity, relative advantage, and trialability. A majority agreed Extension officers used SMS to

communicate with farmers (51%), and farmers used SMS to communicate with officers (53%). However, fewer Extension officers agreed SMS was a common form of communication between Extension officers and farmers (45%).


26

Table 6 Extension Officers’ Perceptions toward the Favorability of Observability

Items % SD D N A SA

Extension officers are using SMS to communicate with farmers. 7 13 21 50 9 Farmers are using SMS to communicate with Extension officers. 5 19 23 47 6 SMS is a common form of communication between Extension

officers and farmers. 10 22 23 38 7

Observability (Mean, SD) 3.27 (.96) Note: SD: Strongly Disagree, D: Disagree, N: Neither Agree or Disagree, A: Agree, SA: Strongly Agree.

Table 7 shows Extension officers’ perceptions toward items related to the compatibility of using SMS for farmer interactions. Extension officers tended to agree less on the favorability of compatibility associated with SMS (M = 3.10, SD = .90). Extension officers did not agree they were encouraged by their

colleagues to use SMS (48%), farmers wanted to communicate with them via SMS (41%), their supervisors encouraged them to use SMS (45%), and Extension policies supported the use of SMS to communicate with farmers (38%).

Table 7 Extension Officers’ Perceptions towards the Favorability of Compatibility

Items % SD D N A SA

I am encouraged by my colleagues to use SMS to communicate with farmers. 6 17 29 38 10

My farmer clientele wants me to use SMS to communicate with them. 4 22 33 34 7

My supervisor encourages me to use SMS to communicate with farmers. 11 23 21 40 5

Extension policy supports the use of SMS to communicate with farmers. 16 29 17 28 10

Compatibility (Mean, SD) 3.10 (.90)

Objective 3: Compare Extension Officer Perceptions of SMS Attributes based on Adopter Category

Table 8 displays the differences between adopters and non-adopters based on Extension officers’ perceptions of the attributes of SMS. Results indicated Extension officers who adopted SMS to communicate with farmers perceived all attributes were more favorable compared to

the non-adopters. However, adopters and non-adopters agreed SMS had somewhat highly favorable complexity, relative advantage, and trialability. In contrast, both adopters and non-adopters perceived SMS had moderate compatibility (Adopters: M = 3.24, SD = .94; Non-adopters: M = 2.83, SD = .85) and observability (Adopters: M = 3.44, SD = .86; Non-adopters: M = 2.96, SD = 1.07).


27

Table 8 Extension Officers’ Perceptions toward SMS Attributes by their Adoption Behavior

Construct Construct Score: M (SD) Adopters Non-adopters

Compatibility 3.24 (.94) 2.83 (.85) Complexity 4.09 (.57) 3.91 (.66) Relative Advantage 3.80 (.71) 3.74 (.93) Observability 3.44 (.86) 2.96 (1.07) Trialability 3.80 (.72) 3.53 (.87)

Objective 4: Compare Personal Characteristics of Extension Officers based on Adopter Category

Table 9 shows the differences between adopters and non-adopters of SMS by Extension officers’ selected personal and professional characteristics. Results

indicated SMS adoption was higher among officers 18 to 30 years old (74%), those with diplomas or associate degrees (61%), and female (74%). SMS adoption was 15% higher for younger Extension officers compared to those older than 46 years, and 20% higher for female Extension officers.

Table 9 Extension Officers’ Personal Characteristics and their Adoption of SMS

Characteristics Level n SMS Adoption (%) Yes No

Age 18 to 30 (25th percentile) 23 74 26 31 to 46 (50th percentile) 48 63 37

> 46 (75th percentile) 22 59 41 Education Diploma/Associate 56 64 36

Degree/Postgraduate 33 61 39 Gender Male 48 54 46

Female 46 74 26

Objective 5: Extension Officers’ Perceptions towards Farmers’ Abilities to Use Modern ICTs.

Table 10 displays officers’ perceptions of farmers’ abilities to use ICTs. Most officers indicated that farmers were able to use mobile telephones for voice calls (96%), send SMS text messages (67%), receive pictures (64%), send pictures (61%), and receive videos from a mobile telephone

(52%). However, less than one-half the number of Extension officers perceived farmers had the ability to use a mobile telephone or computer to browse the Internet for agricultural information, use social media, send videos from a mobile telephone, use email, or use the Internet for video calling.


28

Table 10 Extension Officers’ Perceptions of Farmers’ Abilities to Use ICTs and Related Services

Rank Tasks % (n) Yes No Maybe

1 Use mobile telephones to make calls 96 (90) 1 (1) 3 (3) 2 Send SMS text messages 67 (62) 4 (4) 29 (27) 3 Receive pictures from a mobile telephone 64 (60) 6 (6) 30 (28) 4 Send pictures from a mobile telephone 61 (57) 7 (7) 32 (30) 5 Receive videos from a mobile telephone 52 (48) 6 (6) 42 (39) 6 Use a mobile telephone to browse the Internet

for agricultural information 49 (46) 8 (8) 43 (40)

7 Use a computer to browse the Internet for agricultural information 48 (45) 8 (7) 44 (41)

8 Use social media (e.g. Facebook) 46 (43) 7 (7) 47 (44) 8 Send videos from a mobile telephone 46 (43) 7 (7) 47 (44)

10 Receive emails 42 (39) 13 (12) 45 (41) 11 Send emails 41 (38) 15 (14) 44 (41) 12 Use the Internet for video calling (e.g. Skype) 29 (27) 17 (16) 54 (50)

Table 11 indicates most Extension officers perceived farmers were willing to learn about all the ICT services examined in this study. Many indicated that farmers were willing to learn about using mobile telephones to make voice calls (86%), send and receive pictures from a mobile telephone (71%), use a mobile telephone and computer to browse the Internet for

agricultural information (70%), send and receive videos from a mobile telephone (67% and 66% respectively), and send SMS text messages (66%). Slightly fewer officers indicated that farmers were willing to learn about using social media, sending and receiving emails, and using the Internet for video calling.

Table 11 Farmers’ Willingness to Learn to Use Modern ICTs and Related Services as Perceived by Extension Officers’

Rank Tasks % (n) Yes No Maybe

1 Use mobile telephones to make calls 86 (80) 4 (4) 10 (9) 2 Send pictures from a mobile telephone 71 (66) 2 (2) 27 (25) 2 Receive pictures from a mobile telephone 71 (66) 2 (2) 27 (25) 4 Use a mobile telephone to browse the Internet

for agricultural information 70 (65) 4 (4) 26 (24)

5 Use a computer to browse the Internet for agricultural information 67 (62) 2 (2) 31 (29)

5 Send videos from a mobile telephone 67 (62) 3 (3) 30 (28) 7 Receive videos from a mobile telephone 66 (61) 4 (4) 29 (27) 7 Send SMS text messages 66 (61) 8 (7) 26 (24) 9 Use social media (e.g. Facebook) 59 (55) 7 (6) 34 (32)


29

10 Receive emails 56 (52) 10 (9) 34 (31) 11 Send emails 55 (51) 10 (9) 35 (33) 12 Use the Internet for video calling (e.g. Skype) 50 (46) 8 (7) 42 (39)

Discussion, Conclusions & Recommendations

This study investigated Extension officers’ adoption of SMS and related ICT services to interact with farmers in Trinidad. Strong et al. (2014) indicated officers regularly used modern ICTs for personal reasons. Results of this study showed most officers used voice calls and SMS to communicate with farmers. Furthermore, many Extension officers who were not using ICTs were willing to use multimedia messaging, SMS, email, voice calls, and social media to interact with farmers. Past studies indicated a reliance on top-down extension models in the Caribbean (Ganpat et al., 2017; Ganpat, Ragbir, & de Freitas, 2010; Renwick, 2010). Now, it appears Ministry Extension officers are generally willing to use several forms of modern ICTs, including SMS, to communicate with farmers.

Rogers (2003) discussed the role of relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, trialability, and observability in the innovation-decision process. Extension officers perceived SMS had favorable complexity, relative advantage, and trialability. This suggest Extension officers are accustomed to using ICTs. Although Extension officers used modern ICTs regularly for personal reasons, Strong et al. (2014) noted they may need specialized training in using ICTs for communicating with farmers. Favorable complexity implies officers were confident in their ability to use SMS for farmer interactions. Perceptions of favorable relative advantage and trialability suggest that Extension officers had positive experiences experimenting with SMS to communicate with farmers and saw benefits in using SMS over other methods.

Extension officers’ perceived SMS had lower observability and compatibility. Rogers (2003) noted software innovations are less observable compared to hardware innovations and may have a slower rate of adoption. Similar to Schillewaert and Ahearne (2015), observability was linked to the social acceptance of using SMS to communicate with farmers. However, findings showed Ministry Extension officers were less likely to perceive their peers used SMS to communicate with farmers. Extension officers also perceived SMS was less compatible with their jobs. Results indicated limited support from peers and supervisors to use SMS to interact with farmers. Most perceived a lack of enabling policies existed to encourage SMS use. This may explain officers’ low intentions to use ICTs to contact farmers, as described by Strong et al. (2014). Although mobile infrastructure exists (Ganpat & de Freitas, 2010), the lack of perceived peer and administrative support may be impeding Extension officers’ adoption of SMS for communicating with farmers.

Consistent with Diffusion of Innovations theory (Rogers, 2003), Extension officers who had more positive perceptions toward the favorability of SMS’s compatibility, complexity, relative advantage, observability, and trialability adopted it for farmer interactions. However, personal characteristics also influenced adoption. Similar to Hadi and Yi-Hsuan (2010), results indicated younger officers, those with diploma or associate degrees, and female Extension officers adopted SMS for farmer interactions at a higher rate compared to other officers. Arguably, younger officers may be more familiar with mobile technologies, and were more likely to use


30

such modern ICTs during their diploma or bachelor’s degree program. Venkatesh and Morris (2000) found men’s intention to use technology was affected by their attitudes toward new technology.

Konrad, Ritchie, Lieb, and Corrigall (2000) indicated women valued opportunities to help others, whereas men valued promotional opportunities related to salary increases. However, it is unlikely SMS use results in job advancement due to its perceived low level of support from supervisors. Therefore, males may opt to focus on other aspects of their jobs that yield promotional opportunities, while females use SMS for the intrinsic benefits of helping others, but further research is needed regarding this aspect of the phenomenon. Overall, results suggest the five attributes of an innovation are important in facilitating Extension officers’ adoption of SMS to communicate with farmers.

Extension officers who had more positive perceptions toward the attributes of SMS were more willing to adopt SMS for farmer interactions. Findings showed relative advantage and trialability were most important to officers’ willingness to adopt SMS. Extension officers are very likely to adopt SMS for farmer communications if they understood the benefits of using SMS for such interactions and could experiment with the technology, i.e. more opportunity for observability and trialability (Rogers, 2003). These findings emphasize the need for facilitating Extension policies to speed the adoption process by focusing on all attributes of the innovation (Rogers, 2003).

Ramjattan (2016) indicated a major barrier to ICT use in Extension was officers’ perceptions that farmers had limited capacity to use modern ICTs. However, Internet usage and active mobile users in Trinidad and Tobago increased by 7% and 21%, respectively, from 2016 to 2017 (Telecommunication Development Sector,

2018). Therefore, it is likely Extension officers encountered a greater number of farmers who used mobile ICTs in 2018 compared to 2016. As a result, findings showed most Extension officers perceived that farmers could use mobile telephones to make calls, send text messages, and use multimedia messaging. In addition, most Extension officers indicated that farmers were willing to learn about all of the ICTs and related services examined in this study. Coupled with Extension officers’ confidence in their ability to use ICTs, this suggests a potential exists for Extension to use a mix of ICT technologies to serve farmers in Trinidad (McNamara et al., 2017). Results support the notion that modern ICTs could be used as an alternative method to meet the information needs of the nation’s farmers (Ganpat & de Freitas, 2010).

This study bears major implications for Extension administrators and frontline Extension officers in Trinidad and perhaps other Small Island Developing States with similar contexts. Extension is tasked with mobilizing the National Food Production Plan of the Ministry of Food Production, Land and Marine Affairs. However, Extension is faced with major financial and human constraints which severely limit its ability to meet farmers’ information needs (Ganpat et al., 2015; Seepersad, 2003). With a high Extension officer-to-farmer ratio, it is critical for Extension to explore alternative approaches to serving farmers in Trinidad. Further, a potential exists for Extension to use multimedia messaging and other modern ICTs to meet farmers’ needs. Extension officers can use SMS to respond to farmers’ questions and keep them updated with relevant information in between scheduled farm visits, thereby increasing service timeliness (Wright et al., 2015). This may reduce the need for frequent farm visits, which eases the time constraints of


31

Extension officers and reduce travel costs incurred by Extension (World Bank, 2017).

A need exists to ensure favorable conditions exist for Extension officers’ adoption of modern ICTs to communicate with farmers. Enabling policies and managerial support is needed to improve the compatibility (Rogers, 2003) of using ICTs for farmer interactions. Extension policies should address cost recovery measures to ensure Extension officers are compensated for using their personal devices to communicate with farmers. In addition, financial and human resources are needed to facilitate the conversion of hardcopy educational material to digital content for dissemination through electronic platforms. Extension administrators must be willing to promote ICT use and facilitate social acceptance of the technology. This can be achieved through ICT professional development to communicate the need for, and benefits of using, SMS for communicating with farmers. Extension officers must understand the advantages of using ICTs over traditional methods, and gain support from supervisors and peers to use ICTs for regular interactions with farmers. ICTs are already a critical part of Extension in Trinidad, but a supportive work environment, including changing its norms, is needed to ensure it is effectively adopted to communicate with farmers.

Additional research is needed to explore supervisory support for ICT use as an alternative communication method for Extension in Trinidad. Moreover, other studies could focus on the potential for providing Extension services via other modern ICTs such as smartphone applications and the Internet. Cost-benefit frameworks are needed to determine the net change in service cost, quality, and timeliness of ICT-based extension approaches compared to the traditional farm visit approach. These studies should inform

policy measures to create a facilitative environment for ICT uptake in Trinidad’s agricultural sector.

References Beckford, C. L., & Campbell, D. R. (2013).

Domestic food production and food security in the Caribbean: Building capacity and strengthening local food production systems. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

Campo, K. K., Robinson, A., Isaac, W. P., & Ganpat, W. (2017). Connecting small farmers in the Caribbean to knowledge, networks, and institutions through ICTs. Journal of Agricultural & Food Information, 18(2), 81-95. doi: 10.1080/10496505.2017.1279973

Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D., & Christian, L. M. (2014). Internet, phone, mail andmixed-mode surveys: The tailoreddesign method (4th ed.). Hoboken,NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Donovan, D. (2017). Anytime, anywhere: Mobile devices and services and their impact on agriculture and rural development. In the World Bank (Ed.), ICT in agriculture: Connecting smallholders to knowledge, networks, and institutions (pp. 49-70). Washington, DC: The World Bank. doi:10.1596/978-1-4648-1002-2

Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Ganpat, W. G. (2013). The history of agricultural extension in Trinidad and Tobago. Kingston, Jamaica: Randle.

Ganpat, W., & de Freitas, C. (2010). Caribbean nations. In R. Saravanan (Ed.), ICTs for agricultural extension. Global experiments, innovations and experiences. (pp.


32

45-82). New Delhi, India: New IndiaPublishing Agency.

Ganpat, W., Narine, L. K., & Harder, A. (2017). The impact of farm visits on farmers’ satisfaction with extension: Examining the dependence on individual methods in the Caribbean. Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education, 24(3), 20-35. doi: 10.5191/jiaee.2017.24303

Ganpat, W., Ragbir, S., & de Freitas, C. (2010). The use of information and communication technologies in the modernization of Caribbean agriculture: Focus on agricultural extension. Proceedings of the West Indies Agricultural Economics Conference, Barbados, 28, 111-125. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254385272_The_use_of_information_and_communication_technologies_in_the_modernization_of_Caribbean_agriculture_Focus_on_agricultural_extension

Ganpat, W., Ramjattan, J., & Strong, R. (2016). Factors influencing self-efficacy and adoption of ICT dissemination tools by new Extension officers. Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education, 23(1), 72-85. doi: 10.5191/jiaee.2016.23106

Ganpat, W., Webster, N., & Narine, L. K. (2014). Farmers’ satisfaction with extension services in the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States. Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education, 21(3), 49-62. doi:10.5191/jiaee.2014.21304

Haji, H. Z., Pezeshki, R. G., & Chizari, M. (2014). Factors influencing the use of and attitude of using information and communication technologies (ICTs) in agricultural extension, a

study in the Isfahan province of Iran. International Journal of Agricultural Management and Development, 4(1), 51-60. Retrieved fromhttp://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/210358?ln=en

Konrad, A. M., Ritchie, J. E., Lieb, P., & Corrigall, E. (2000). Sex differences and similarities in job attribute preferences: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 126(4), 593-641. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.126.4.593

McNamara, K., Belden, C., Kelly, T., Pehu, E., & Donovan, K. (2017). Introduction: ICT in agricultural development. In World Bank (Ed.), ICT in agriculture: Connecting smallholders to knowledge, networks, and institutions (pp. 3-12). Washington, DC: World Bank. Retrieved from http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/522141499680975973/ICT-in-agriculture-connecting-smallholders-to-knowledge-networks-and-institutions

Ministry of Food Production, Land and Marine Affairs. (2012). The National food production action plan 2012-2015. Port of Spain, Trinidad: Author. Retrieved from http://www.agriculture.gov.tt/pdf/National%20Food%20Production%20Action%20Plan%202012-2015.pdf

Moonsammy, S., Narine, L. K., Harder, A., & Rodriguez, M. T. (2017). Characteristics affecting the adoption of drip irrigation in northern Grenada. Proceedings of the Association for International Agricultural and Extension Education, Minneapolis, 33, 84-86. Retrieved from https://www.aiaee.org/attachments/ca


33

tegory/177/AIAEE_Proceedings_2017_.pdf

Ntemana, T. J., & Olatokun, W. (2012). Analyzing the influence of diffusion of innovation attributes on lecturers’ attitudes toward information and communication technologies. Human Technology: An Interdisciplinary Journal on Humans in ICT Environments, 8(2),179-197. doi: 10.17011/ht/urn.201211203034

Purnomo, S. H., & Lee, Y. (2010). An assessment of readiness and barriers towards ICT programme implementation: Perceptions of agricultural extension officers in Indonesia. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology, 6(3), 19-36. Retrieved from http://ijedict.dec.uwi.edu/viewarticle.php?id=1004

Ram, D., Ganpat, W., & Narine, L. K. (2017). Management performance of farmers’ groups and its impact on membership: A prerequisite for group sustainability in Trinidad. Journal of Agricultural Extension and Rural Development, 9(10), 239-246. doi:https://doi.org/10.5897/JAERD2017.0893

Ramjattan, J. (2016). Factors influencing the use of extension methods, tools and techniques in Trinidad and Tobago (master’s dissertation). The University of the West Indies: St. Augustine.

Renwick, S. (2010). Current trends in agricultural information services for farmers in Trinidad and Tobago/Caribbean. Proceedings of the IFLA General Conference and Assembly, Sweden, 76, 1-12. Retrieved from

http://conference.ifla.org/past-wlic/2010/85-renwick-en.pdf

Roberts, T. G., Ganpat, W., Albert, B., Narine, L. K., & Sudeen, S. (2016). Agricultural extension officers’ knowledge and perceptions of food security issues in Trinidad and Tobago. Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education, 23(3), 72-84. doi: 10.5191/jiaee.2016.23305

Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed). New York, NY: Free Press.

Rogers, E. M., & Shoemaker, F. F. (1971). Communication of innovations: A cross-cultural approach. New York, NY: Free Press.

Samuel, N., Harder, A., Israel, G., Kumaran, M., Roberts, G., & Sammons, D. (2014). Identifying training needs of extension officers in the Caribbean Community (CARICOM). Proceedings of the Caribbean Food Crops Society, US Virgin Islands, 50, 123-124. Retrieved fromhttp://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/253322/2/CFCS_2014_Vol.%2050%20United%20States%20Virgin%20Islands.pdf

Schillewaert, N., & Ahearne, M. (2015). The effect of information technology on salesperson performance. In M. Moore & R. Moore (Eds), New meanings for marketing in a new millennium. Developments in marketing science (pp. 201). Berlin, Germany: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-11927-4_62

Seepersad, J. (2003). Case study on ICTs in agricultural extension in Trinidad & Tobago. Wageningen, The Netherlands: Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation.


34

Strong, R., Ganpat, W. G., Harder, A., Irby, T. L. & Lindner, J. R. (2014).Exploring the use of informationcommunication technologies byselected Caribbean extensionofficers. Journal of AgriculturalEducation and Extension, 20(5),485-495. doi:10.1080/1389224X.2014.927373

Tata, J. S., & McNamara, P. E. (2016). Social factors that influence use of ICT in agricultural extension in Southern Africa. MDPI Open Access Journal, 6(2). doi: 10.3390/agriculture6020015

Tornatzky, L. G., & Klein, K. J. (1982). Innovation characteristics and innovation adoption implementation: A meta-analysis of findings. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 29(1), 28-43. Retrieved from http://www-management.wharton.upenn.edu/klein/documents/Tornatzky_Klein_1982.pdf

United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean. (2016). Preliminary overview of the economies of Latin America and the Caribbean. Santiago, Chile: United Nations. Retrieved from https://repositorio.cepal.org/bitstream/handle/11362/39559/94/S1501386_en.pdf

Venkatesh, V., & Morris, M. G. (2000). Why don’t men ever stop to ask for directions? Gender, social influence, and their role in technology acceptance and usage behavior. MIS Quarterly, 24(1), 115-139. doi: 10.2307/3250981

Walters, L. M., & Jones, K. G. (2016). Caribbean food import demand: An application of the CBS differential demand system. Journal of Food Distribution Research, 47(2), 19-37.

Retrieved from https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/240767/2/2_Walters.pdf

World Bank. (2017). ICT in agriculture: Connecting smallholders to knowledge, networks, and institutions. Washington, DC: Author. doi:10.1596/978-1-4648-1002-2

Wright, H. J., Ochilo, W., Pearson, A., Finegold, C., Oronje, M., Wanjohi, J.,… & Rumsey, A. (2016). Using ICT to strengthen agricultural extension systems for plant health. Journal of Agricultural & Food Information, 17(1), 23-36. doi: 10.1080/10496505.2015.1120214


35

doi: 10.5191/jiaee.2019.26104

What Courses Do I Need to Teach in Order to Address Food Insecurity in Sub Saharan Africa? A Delphi Study

Carla Andrea Millares Forno Amy E. Boren-Alpizar

Todd Brashears Texas Tech University

Abstract Sub Saharan Africa is a region that has been struggling with food insecurity for decades. Though the percentage of undernourished people in the region has decreased over the last 25 years, the actual number of undernourished people increased by more than forty million. Combatting food insecurity in the region requires an arsenal of skills, knowledge, and abilities across a broad range of disciplines. One way to target food insecurity is through education and capacity building. The purpose of this study was to identify the courses and topics that should be included in a food security (FS) graduate certificate focused on Sub Saharan Africa. Identification of the topics and courses came from faculty and professionals working in the FS field in Sub Saharan Africa. A three-round Delphi technique was conducted to accomplish the purpose of the study with a total of 63 experts. Of the original 101 topics that the expert panel proposed in Round One, 80 reached the level of agreement. Researchers grouped the topics into 28 courses. The final result of the study was 24 courses that reached the level of agreement for determining the main topics and courses that should be included in a graduate certificate focused on FS for Sub Saharan Africa.

Keywords: food security, Delphi, agricultural education, Sub Saharan Africa


36

Introduction The definition of food security (FS)

according to the FAO is “when all people at all times have physical, social and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life.” (2009a p. 1). This is a complex definition and includes four specific pillars: availability, access, utilization, and stability. In order to achieve FS, these four pillars need to be fulfilled (Napoli, 2011).

The third objective of the first Millennium Development Goals (MDG) was to halve the percentage of undernourished people worldwide between 1990 and 2015. This goal was almost achieved in spite of price volatility, unemployment, climatological constraints, and other challenges faced across the globe during this period (United Nations [UN], 2015). Yet in spite of the apparent progress in tackling food insecurity, the number of undernourished people increased between the period of 2013-2015; currently, 810 million people suffer from chronic hunger (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations [FAO], International Fund for Agricultural Development [IFAD], & World Food Programme [WFP], 2015). As a consequence, FS maintains its position as a critical component in enhancing peoples’ quality of life across the globe (FAO, IFAD, & WFP, 2015).

Food Insecurity in Sub Saharan Africa While food insecurity is a global

problem (IFPRI, 2015), the severity of food insecurity varies drastically by region (UN, 2015). Sub Saharan Africa (SSA) and Southern Asia contain more than 60% of the world’s undernourished population (FAO et al., 2015). Although food insecurity in SSA was reduced by more than 30% in the last 25 years, the actual number of undernourished people increased by more than 40 million

(FAO, 2015; UN, 2015). To add to the problem, the state of food security in SSA deteriorated further in 2016, primarily due to conflicts and climatic conditions (FAO et al., 2017). Several factors contribute to SSA’s struggle against food insecurity: meager crop production (Khan et al., 2014), increased prices of essential food staples (Rakotoarisoa, Iafrate, & Paschali, 2011), and rapid population growth – SSA’s population has tripled in just thirty years (World Bank, 2016). It is important to stress that three of the four countries that suffered the worst food crises in 2017 are located in SSA (Nigeria, South Sudan, and Somalia) (United States Agency for International Development [USAID], 2017). While drought has contributed to severe food shortages in SSA, social and political conflict across the region continues to be the leading source of food insecurity in the region (Food Security Information Network [FSIN], 2018; FAO, IFAD, & WFP, 2015).

Though SSA has faced significant hurdles in its path to FS, there have been successes along the way. Most of the SSA sub-regions have reduced the percentage of undernourished people over the last 25 years (FAO, 2015). Western Africa has reduced the number of undernourished people in the region by sixty percent since 1990 - 1992, (FAO, 2015). The Central African Region is the only SSA sub-region that did not reduce its percentage of undernourished people (FAO, 2015). This sub-region saw an increase in the number of food insecure people within its borders, primarily due to civil crises and lack of security.

In response to the overall food insecurity levels in the SSA region, and to address the second Sustainable Development Goal proposed by the UN to “end hunger, achieve FS and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture” (UN, n.d.), different organizations have begun exploring integrated approaches to address food


37

insecurity more comprehensively (FAO, IFAD, & WFP, 2015). Several studies have demonstrated a close relationship among food insecurity, poverty, and education (FAO et al., 2017). Thus, intentionally integrating formal education into a FS strategy is such a comprehensive approach.

Gasperini (2000; 2009) argues that education is critical for achieving FS because it increases the economic capacity of the country. By enhancing people’s skills in disciplines related to FS, a region can more readily address the complexity of the problem (Nordin, Boyle, & Kemmer, 2013). Investing in skills and technical knowledge is fundamental for the overall development of a region (United Nations Environment Programme, n.d.). Thus, preparing graduates with contextually relevant agricultural understanding is crucial for providing the population with the tools to not only improve the economy but to sustainably produce enough food to eradicate food insecurity (Nordin et al., 2013). Higher education is essential for achieving food security because it provides professionals with skills and expertise on the topic.

It provides graduates with research skills to find innovative solutions to complex phenomena such as food insecurity (Retta & Desse, 2011) and it provides tools to transfer innovations and knowledge to those who need it most. It also strengthens agricultural extension efforts and can enhance the overall productivity of the region (Retta & Desse, 2011).

The curriculum focused on teaching FS to graduate students will enable them to engage in leadership positions within organizations, public services, and different disciplines related to FS in order to address this complex, multi-disciplinary challenge.

Conceptual Framework This study used the Course

Development Process as a conceptual framework (Graves, 2000); specifically, Graves’ Need Assessment Cycle (Figure 1). The cycle presents the six steps to evaluate a specific need. The study will be focused on the first four steps of the Need Assessment Cycle.

Figure 1. Adaptation of the Need Assessment Cycle.

(1) Decide what information to gather andthe reasons why. This was achieved whenthe researchers defined the importance ofproviding a graduate certificate to address

food insecurity in SSA. The second and third step, (2) decide when, from whom, and how to gather it and (3) gather information, were accomplished through the Delphi

1. Decide whatinformation togather and why

2. Decide when,from whom, andhow to gather it

3. Gatherinformation

4. Interpret it 5. Act on it6. Evaluate theeffects of the

action


38

technique. Finally, the fourth step: (4) interpret it, was achieved through the researchers’ analysis.

Purpose & Objectives The purpose of this research was to

determine the topics and courses that stakeholders in SSA believe necessary to address food insecurity in the region. The topics and courses suggested by the experts are a fundamental inside view of the FS phenomenon in the region. Building a distance-delivered graduate certificate on FS based on what local experts deem important will ensure local perspectives in the region are heard. This study will be guided by the following objectives:

1. Identify the topics that should beincluded in a graduate certificatefocused on Sub Saharan Africa; and

2. Determine the courses that should beincluded in a graduate certificatefocused on Sub Saharan Africa.

Methodology The purpose of the study was

accomplished through a Delphi technique. A Delphi technique is a recognized method of group facilitation often used to determine consensus among a panel of experts about a specific topic (Hsu & Sandford, 2007; Turoff, 1970). This iterative process consists of a systematic series of phases in which experts are asked their opinions regarding a specific topic, the results of which are summarized and fed back to the experts in subsequent rounds of questioning until consensus is reached (Hasson, Keeney, & McKenna. 2000; Sackman, 1975).

In this study, results were gathered through a Three-Round Delphi, which included 63 experts representing all the regions from SSA.

Panel of Experts Experts who participated in this

study belonged to academia, industry, governmental organizations, and non-governmental organizations in SSA. The selection of the panel was made through a nomination process in which experts from the United States with experience in food security and SSA nominated individuals with expertise on the topic and the region. Then, a snowball sample was used to expand the group of experts. There was at least one expert from each of the following regions: West Africa, Central Africa, Southern Africa, and East Africa.

The panel of experts received an invitation email where they were informed about the purpose of the study and the steps that the study comprehended. They had the option to refuse to participate or to leave the study at any time if they felt uncomfortable in any circumstances. Sixty-three experts from the Sub Saharan region agreed to participate in the study.

Round one. Following recommendations in the literature (Turoff, 1970) a single question was asked to the panel of experts via email: Which course topics should be included in a distance-delivered graduate certificate focused in FS? Of the 63 experts who agreed to participate, 52 responded to the question for a total response rate of 83%. Responses were reviewed to reduce duplication and sorted within the four dimensions of FS and a general/others category.

Round two. Based on the topics identified on Round One, a Likert scale from Strongly Disagree (1) to Strongly Agree (4) was developed. This instrument was sent to the panel of experts who completed the first round of the study. Consensus for inclusion was considered to be reached when at least 75% of the panel indicated ‘agree’ or ‘strongly agree’ on the Likert scale (Akers, Vaughn & Lockaby, 2001). The topics that


39

did not reach at least 75% agreement were discarded. This instrument was sent to the 63 initial participants. Experts then ranked the topics based on their importance. Fifty-four experts responded to the instrument for a total response rate of 86%.

Round three. Topics that reached consensus in Round Two were grouped by the researchers into courses. The courses listed were organized in alphabetical order and returned to the panel of experts with the request to score each course on a 10-point Likert-type scale according to the importance from 1 = Not important and 10 =

Essential. The same criterion of inclusion (a minimum of 75% of agreement) was used. Round Three was sent to the 54 experts who completed phase two of the study. Forty-three experts responded to the instrument for a total response rate of 80%.

The size of the panel and its diversity were key to achieve reliability and validity in this study (Hasson et al., 2000; Ludwig, 1997).

Results The results of the Delphi Study are

summarized in Figure 2:

Figure 2. Three-Round Delphi Study Design.

The result of this research was a list of courses and topics reflecting the principal issues that need to be taught in the region in order to address food insecurity.

Round one. In Round One, experts provided 364 topics. After reducing duplicates, Round One provided researchers with a list of 101 topics that were divided into the following categories: Access (6), Availability (23), Utilization (27), Stability (12), and General/Others (33).

Round two. The 101 topics were sent to the panel of experts. Eighty topics reached the level of agreement and 21 topics

were eliminated because they did not reach the agreement level. The topics with the highest level of agreement are: Food supply and demand at multiple levels (M = 3.77, SD = .54), Climate smart agriculture (M = 3.72, SD = .49), Strategies to improve FS (M = 3.67, SD = .47), Household livelihood and food insecurity (M = 3.66, SD = .55), Value chain (M = 3.64, SD = .48), Globalization and FS (M = 3.62, SD = .52), Post-harvest practices (M = 3.60, SD = .59), Water in production (M = 3.57, SD = .57), Climate change (M = 3.57, SD = .63), Pillars of FS (M = 3.55, SD = .53) (Table 1).

24 Courses

28 Courses80 Topics101

Topics364

Responses

Round One Round Two Round Three


40

Table 1 Topics Ranked in Round Two Topic M SD Level of

Agreement Food supply and demand at multiple levels 3.77 0.54 94.6 Climate smart agriculture 3.72 0.49 93.0 Strategies to improve FS 3.67 0.47 91.8 Household livelihood and food insecurity 3.66 0.55 91.5 Value chain 3.64 0.48 91.0 Globalization and FS 3.62 0.52 90.5 Post-harvest practices 3.60 0.59 90.0 Water in production 3.57 0.57 89.3 Climate change 3.57 0.63 89.3 Pillars of FS 3.55 0.53 88.8 Food production systems 3.54 0.57 88.5 Measuring FS with indicators 3.53 0.54 88.3 Land 3.51 0.6 87.8 Urban-rural linkage and FS 3.51 0.66 87.8 Basic concepts, terms, and definition in FS 3.51 0.54 87.8 Challenges to achieving FS 3.51 0.57 87.8 Seed 3.46 0.63 86.5 Gender in FS 3.45 0.69 86.3 Cash crop cultivation vs. staple crop cultivation 3.43 0.66 85.8 Food safety 3.43 0.63 85.8 Indigenous food systems 3.43 0.66 85.8 Value addition 3.42 0.66 85.5 Global and regional patterns of FS 3.42 0.63 85.5 Research methods 3.40 0.71 85.0 Urbanization and effects in FS 3.40 0.56 85.0 Crop production systems 3.37 0.83 84.3 Disaster preparedness and management 3.36 0.75 84.0 Role of NGOs, industry, and international organism in FS 3.36 0.62 84.0 Food and nutrition policies 3.34 0.73 83.5 Nutrition for vulnerable groups 3.34 0.78 83.5 Community participation 3.34 0.61 83.5 Consequences of FS 3.34 0.75 83.5 Interventions in FS 3.34 0.73 83.5 Rural development 3.34 0.73 83.5 Natural resources management 3.32 0.69 83.0 Utilization coping strategies 3.32 0.77 83.0 Sustainable development 3.31 0.75 82.8 Production 3.30 0.70 82.5 Biotechnology in FS 3.30 0.77 82.5 Agricultural extension 3.29 0.66 82.3 Sustainable development goals 3.29 0.82 82.3 Food quality 3.28 0.68 82.0


41


Agreement Human nutrition 3.28 0.76 82.0 Technology 3.27 0.71 81.8 Factors influencing choice in agriculture practices 3.26 0.77 81.5 Food and health 3.26 0.70 81.5 Water 3.26 0.85 81.5 Food processing 3.25 0.61 81.3 Human diseases and FS 3.25 0.72 81.3 Agro-ecology 3.23 0.77 80.8 FS a trans-disciplinary and cross-cultural issue 3.21 0.79 80.3 Program planning and implementation 3.21 0.72 80.3 Diseases in agriculture 3.19 0.89 79.8 Nutritional status and assessment 3.19 0.79 79.8 Access to capital 3.18 0.73 79.5 Macro and micronutrients requirements in human health 3.17 0.82 79.3 Sustainable utilization of animal resources 3.16 0.75 79.0 Food standards 3.15 0.66 78.8 Food waste 3.13 0.68 78.3 Rights to food 3.13 0.85 78.3 Aquaculture 3.11 0.69 77.8 Hunger 3.11 0.90 77.8 FS between regions 3.10 0.77 77.5 Economics 3.09 0.76 77.3 Pros and cons of modern livestock production systems 3.09 0.73 77.3 Program evaluation 3.09 0.76 77.3 Program monitoring 3.09 0.76 77.3 Soil 3.08 0.82 77.0 Food consumption 3.06 0.79 76.5 Communications 3.06 0.83 76.5 Horticulture and urban horticulture 3.04 0.81 76.0 Actor mapping in food marketing systems 3.04 0.87 76.0 Impact of food additives in FS 3.02 0.94 75.5 Food prices 3.02 0.86 75.5 Poverty 3.02 0.76 75.5 Weather and stress tolerant biotic and abiotic factors 3.00 0.94 75.0 Fruit crop processing 3.00 0.71 75.0 Water quality monitoring 3.00 0.82 75.0 Entomology 2.98 0.92 74.5 Environmental studies 2.98 0.81 74.5 Fisheries management 2.96 0.64 74.0 Food culture 2.96 0.80 74.0 Food miles and ecological footprint of food 2.94 0.76 73.5 International laws and policies 2.91 0.81 72.8


42


Agreement Weeds 2.83 0.95 70.8 Terrorism and conflict in FS 2.83 1.00 70.8 Education 2.83 0.87 70.8 Exports 2.77 0.92 69.3 Theories of development 2.77 0.85 69.3 Contaminants 2.75 0.87 68.8 Genetics 2.74 0.95 68.5 Biometry 2.74 0.95 68.5 Population theories 2.72 0.81 68.0 Dietary reference level 2.70 0.86 67.5 Human migration 2.70 0.79 67.5 Energy intake thresholds 2.66 0.89 66.5 Agricultural microbiology 2.64 0.80 66.0 Impact of monetization title II 2.64 0.89 66.0 Energy 2.58 0.76 64.5 Note: Four-point Likert scale from 1 = Strongly Disagree to 4 = Strongly Agree

The topics that reached the level of agreement were divided into the following categories: Access (6), Availability (17), Utilization (21), Stability (7), General/Others (29). These 80 topics were grouped into 28 possible courses that were ranked in order of importance by the panel of experts in Round Three.

Round three. From the 28 courses, 24 reached the level of agreement (Table 2). The highest rated courses included: Value Chains in FS (M = 9.21), Water Issues (M = 9.15), Crop Production (M = 8.95), Effects

of Climate Change on FS (M = 8.93), Human Nutrition (M = 8.84), Food Production Systems (M = 8.61), Food Safety (M = 8.53), Measuring and Analyzing FS with Indicators (M = 8.53), Technological Change in FS (M = 8.52), Sustainability (M = 8.48).

The four courses that did not reach the level of agreement were: Plant Technology (M = 7.24), Plant Diseases (M = 7.12), Smart Regional Design (M = 6.95), and Introduction (M = 5.90).

Table 2 Courses and Topics Sent to The Panel of Experts in Round Three

Course and Topic M Level of Agreement

Value Chain in FS Actor mapping in food marketing systems Food supply and demand at multiple levels (rural, urban, and regional) Value addition Value chain

9.21 92.14

Water Issues 9.15 91.46


43



Water (management and conservation) Water in production (harvesting techniques and saving irrigation technologies) Water quality monitoring

Crop Production Crop production systems (plant breeding, plant nutrition, plant physiology, plant pathology, plant protection, and production) Traditional crop diversity Cash crop cultivation vs. staple crop cultivation Production (techniques, interdisciplinary approach, intensification, industrial, constraints, and early maturing crop varieties)

8.95 89.52

Effects of Climate Change in FS Climate change (causes, impact, mitigation, and adaptation) Climate-smart agriculture)

8.93 89.30

Nutrition Food and health Food and nutrition policies

8.84 88.37

Food consumption Household livelihood food insecurity (survival thresholds) Human nutrition Hunger Macro and micronutrients requirements in human health Nutrition for vulnerable groups (food insecurity, children, immunosuppressed people, elderly) Nutritional status and assessment

Food Safety Food quality Food standards (local & global) Food safety

8.53 85.35

Measuring and Analyzing FS with Indicators Measuring FS with indicators Poverty Household livelihood food insecurity (Evaluation) Utilization of coping strategies

8.53 85.35

Technological Change in FS Communications (Intercultural and behavioral change) Factors influencing choice in agriculture practices Technology (dissemination, useful)

8.52 85.24

Sustainability Sustainable development Agro-ecology

8.48 84.76


44



Natural resources management Animal Production Systems

Pros and cons of modern livestock production systems Sustainable utilization of animal resources

8.46 84.63

FS Policies Land (Management, access, planning, use) Rights to food Seed (Systems, access, and availability)

8.44 84.42

Research Methods Research methods

8.38 83.81

Food Processing Fruit crop processing Impact of food additives in FS Post-harvest practices (Storage, handling of products, management, technologies, waste)

8.37 83.72

Future of FS Challenges to achieving FS New developments in FS Strategies to improve FS

8.33 83.26

Sustainable development goals Rural Development

Agricultural extension Community participation Indigenous food systems Rural development

8.26 82.56

Capital in FS Access to capital Economics Food prices

7.83 78.29

Aquaculture Aquaculture

7.74 77.38

Human Diseases and FS Human diseases and FS

7.72 77.21

Horticulture Horticultural and urban horticulture

7.68 76.83

Program Planning and Evaluation Program evaluation Program monitoring Program planning and implementation

7.67 76.74

Soils Soils (quality, types, erosion, conservation, sampling, fertility)

7.56 75.61

Food waste 7.52 75.24


45



Food waste Plant Technology

Biotechnology in FS Weather and stress tolerant biotic and abiotic factors

7.24 72.44

Plant Diseases Diseases in agriculture (horticulture, food crop, economic importance)

7.12 71.22

Smart Regional Design Disaster preparedness and management Urbanization and effects in FS Urban-rural linkage and FS

6.95 69.51

Introduction Consequences of FS FS a trans-disciplinary and cross-cultural issue FS between regions Global and regional patterns of FS Globalization and FS Household livelihood and food insecurity (causes, protection, strengthening, response) Interventions in FS Pillars of FS (availability, access, utilization, stability) Role of emergency aid, co-operatives, NGOs, agro-industries, and international organizations in FS

5.90 58.97

Note: 10-point Likert-type scale from 1 = Not important to 10 = Essential.

After Round Three was completed the courses were divided into the following categories: Availability (6), Access (2), Utilization (4), Stability (3), and General/Others (7). The courses selected by the experts are listed in Figure 3 (see Figure 3 below).

Conclusions, Recommendations & Implications

Objective one sought to identify the topics that should be taught in a graduate certificate focused on FS for Sub Saharan Africa. The panel of experts agreed on 80 topics that should be taught. Most of the topics selected were general topics because they covered more than one pillar of food security. The fact that the general category

was the most prevalent indicates that food insecurity needs to be targeted in a more holistic way (Spiertz, 2012). A study developed by Frelat and collaborators (2016) reflects the importance of multi-sectoral policies that take into consideration all the components of FS to improve outcomes for food insecure populations.

The second and third categories with the highest number of topics were availability and utilization. This is not surprising considering the lack of available food in many parts of SSA due to climatic constraints and civil unrest, as well as limited access to information on topics related to food security, such as sustainable agricultural practices and proper nutrition (Frelat et al., 2016). A considerable portion


46

of the population of SSA is still experiencing undernutrition, and the lack of dietary diversity is a major factor in the

ongoing battle against malnutrition (FAO, 2015).

Figure 3. Courses Included in the Curriculum.

The second objective of this study sought to determine the courses that should be included in a graduate certificate focused on FS for Sub Saharan Africa. The courses that reached the level of agreement among the experts are: (1) Value Chains in FS, (2) Water Issues, (3) Crop Production, (4) Effects of Climate Change in FS, (5) Nutrition, (6) Food Production Systems, (7) Food Safety, (8) Measuring and Analyzing FS with Indicators, (9) Technological Change in FS, (10) Sustainability, (11) Animal Production Systems, (12) FS Policies, (13) Research Methods, (14) Food Processing, (15) Future of FS, (16) Gender in FS, (17) Rural Development, (18) Capital in FS, (19) Aquaculture, (20) Human

Diseases and FS, (21) Horticulture, (22) Program Planning and Evaluation, (23) Soils, (24) Food Waste.

Most of these courses are aligned with the Malabo Declaration on Accelerated Agricultural Growth and Transformation for Shared Prosperity and Improved Livelihoods (African Union Commission, 2014). This Declaration was build based on the lessons learned from other programs focused on agriculture and FS developed in the region (African Union Commission, 2014).

The courses Value Chains in FS and Food Waste belong to the FS pillar of access. The Malabo Declaration states the importance of improving the access to quality and affordable food for the

Availability

•Crop Production•Food Production Systems•Animal Production Systems•Aquaculture•Horticulture•Soils

Access •Value Chain in FS•Food Waste

Utilization

•Water Issues•Nutrition•Food Safety•Human Diseases and FS

Stability•Effects of Climate Change in FS•Sustainability•FS Policies

Cross-Cutting

•Measuring and Analyzing FS with Indicators•Technological Change in FS•Future of FS•Gender in FS•Rural Development•Capital in FS•Program Planning and Evaluation


47

population of Sub Saharan Africa. Improving access to food and quality of food involves several components such as geographical access and the purchasing power (FAO, 2015).

The courses Water Issues, Nutrition, Food Safety, Food Processing, and Human Diseases and FS are courses that belong to the utilization pillar. Twenty-three percent of the population in Sub Saharan Africa is undernourished (FAO et al., 2017). The region has developed several strategies to target undernutrition in the utilization pillar. The Africa Regional Nutrition Strategy aims to strengthen three specific conditions in order to achieve nutrition: access to nutritious food, access to adequate water and sanitation for human health, and understanding adequate maternal and child care practices (African Union, 2015). In 2011 the region implemented the Agriculture Nutrition Capacity Development Initiative with the aim of reducing malnutrition and improving food safety (FAO, 2017). These initiatives will need trained professionals with a comprehensive understanding of food security in order to succeed.

The courses Crop Production, Food Production Systems, Animal Production Systems, Aquaculture, Horticulture, and Soils belong to the availability pillar of FS. It is essential to take into consideration not just the quantity of food produced in the region, but also the quality. Food availability has improved in more than 10% in the last 20 years, and several initiatives specifically target food availability in the region (FAO, 2015). The overall dietary intake improved in all regions, however, central Africa, due to the political and social instability, currently presents even lower levels of dietary intake than in the 1990-1992 period (FAO, 2017). Furthermore, food imports are a current issue throughout SSA because the region imports a high quantity of foodstuffs

creating a dependency on external markets (FAO, 2017).

The courses Effects of Climate Change in FS, Sustainability, and FS Policies belong to the stability pillar of FS. It is necessary to ensure political stability in the region and propose food security policies beneficial for all the population in order to reduce food insecurity in a sustainable way (FAO, 2017). Some experts predict that the region will face a reduction of the crop production, soil erosion, and higher market prices, and as a result, food insecurity will increase even more (Thompson, Berrang-Ford, & Ford, 2010). In the face of the many challenges facing the SSA region, preparing graduates with the necessary tools to confront these challenges and enhance food security in the region (Thompson et al., 2010).

The courses Measuring and Analyzing FS with Indicators, Technological Change in FS, Research Methods, Future of FS, Gender in FS, Rural Development, Capital in FS, and Program Planning and Evaluation are cross-cutting courses. Most of the initiatives developed to improve food security in the region in recent years have an active component of monitoring and evaluation (FAO, 2017). As such, it is fundamental that professionals acquire the abilities necessary to evaluate regional initiatives. The Malabo Declaration states the importance of accountability in all the projects and programs; this statement is closely related to the course chosen by the experts: Program Planning and Evaluation.

Gender plays a key role in food security. Several studies are supporting the positive role of women empowerment in food security (FAO et al., 2017). There are numerous advantages to household food security when women’s participation in decision-making and productive pursuits is increased (FAO et al., 2017). Enhancing opportunities for women to generate income


48

can improve their families’ access to better nutrition, health, and education (Gödecke, Stein, & Qaim, 2018; FAO, 2009b). Education of women opens employment opportunities for them in a variety of sectors, creating an additional safety net for their families and significantly reducing chronic hunger (Gödecke et al., 2018; Mwaniki, 2006). Finally, empowering women can have a positive impact on agriculture, since women play important roles along the value chain of many agricultural commodities, but lack access to many educational and other opportunities to enhance productivity (Agricultural Development Economics [ESA] & Doss, 2011). Professionals working in food security need to understand the complexity of gender issues to help improve women’s economic participation, reduce discrimination, and increase household food security levels (FAO et al., 2017). It is essential to have a gender component in an educational curriculum geared toward food security.

The cross-cutting courses can be adapted for use in each of the four pillars of food security. These courses meant to provide graduate students with skills necessary to develop quality research and comprehensively evaluate and implement the programs and projects to address food security. Food security is a multi-disciplinary challenge and providing graduate students with cross-cutting courses will facilitate an integrated approach to addressing the challenges of achieving food security.

This study used Graves’ Need Assessment Cycle as a conceptual framework. Following the cycle, researchers were able to decide what information to gather, how to gather it, and how to interpret the information to create a comprehensive curriculum for food security in Sub Saharan

Africa. The next step in the cycle is to implement the curriculum.

The development of the curriculum and its content requires faculty who possess the necessary skills and knowledge to teach the courses and have an impact on the students. Faculty need to focus on the region and have expertise in the region to provide graduate students with the most relevant content.

As recommended in previous studies, this study can serve as the base for future studies focused on food insecurity and the region’s education (Millares Forno, Brashears, Baker, Boren, & Carpio, 2016). At the same time, it is essential that master’s degrees in food security cover the four pillars of food security and provide courses able to integrate all the ideas.

It is recommended to do a comparative global study to show the specific courses deemed as necessary by local experts in each region of the world to address global food insecurity more effectively.

Future research can explore the courses focused on the specific pillars of food security. Different research techniques can be examined to complement the results of this study.

References African Union Commission. (June 26,

2014). The Malabo declaration on accelerated agricultural growth and transformation for shared prosperity and improved livelihoods.

African Union (2015). Africa regional nutrition strategy 2015-2025. Retrieved from https://au.int/sites/default/files/pages/32895-file-arns_english.pdf

Agricultural Development Economics [ESA] & Doss, C. (2011). The role of women in agriculture. [Adobe Digitals Edition version]. Retrieved


49

from http://www.fao.org/docrep/013/am307e/am307e00.pdf

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations [FAO]. (2017). Regional overview of food security and nutrition in Africa 2016: The challenges of building resilience to shocks and stresses. Accra.

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations [FAO]. (2015). African FS prospects brighter than ever. [Adobe Digitals Edition version]. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/3/a-i4635e.pdf

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations [FAO]. (2009a, November 16-18). World Food Summit. FAO. Rome.

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations [FAO]. (2009b). Bridging the gap. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/3/a-i1243e.pdf

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations [FAO], International Fund for Agricultural Development [IFAD], & World Food Programme [WFP]. (2017). The state of food security and nutrition in the world: Building resilience for peace and food security [Adobe Digitals Edition version]. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/3/a-I7695e.pdf

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations [FAO], International Fund for Agricultural Development [IFAD], & World Food Programme [WFP]. (2015). The state of food insecurity in the world: Meeting the 2015 international hunger targets: Taking stock of uneven progress [Adobe Digitals Edition version]. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/3/a-i4646e.pdf

Food Security Information Network (FSIN). (2018). Global report on food crises

2017. Retrieved from https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/wfp291271.pdf.

Frelat, R., Lopez-Ridaura, S., Giller, K. E., Herrero, M., Douxchamps, S., Djurfeldt, A. A., ... & Rigolot, C. (2016). Drivers of household food availability in African Nutrition Strategy based on big data from small farms. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(2), 458-463.

Gasperini, L. (2000). From agricultural education to education for rural development and FS: All for education and food for all. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/ERP/2013/link_Virtual_pub/pub_40.pdf

Gasperini, L. (2009). Technical and vocational education and training and rural development. In Maclean, R., Wilson, D., (Eds.). International handbook of education for the changing world of work (pp. 721 – 734). Dordrecht: Springer.

Gödecke, T., Stein, A. J., & Qaim, M. (2018). The global burden of chronic and hidden hunger: Trends and determinants. Global Food Security, 17, 21-29.

Graves, K. (2000). Designing language courses: A guide for teachers. New York: Heinle & Heinle.

Hasson, F., Keeney, S., & McKenna, H. (2000). Research guidelines for the Delphi survey technique. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 32(4), 1008-1015.

Hsu, C. C., & Sandford, B. A. (2007). The Delphi technique: Making sense of consensus. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 12(10), 1-8.


50

International Food Policy Research Institute [IFPRI]. (2015). Global Hunger Index: Armed conflict and the challenge of hunger [Adobe Digital Edition version]. Retrieved from http://ebrary.ifpri.org/utils/getfile/collection/p15738coll2/id/129681/filename/1 29892.pdf

Khan, Z. R., Midega, C. A., Pittchar, J. O., Murage, A. W., Birkett, M. A., Bruce, T. J., & Pickett, J. A. (2014). Achieving food security for one million Sub-Saharan African poor through push–pull innovation by 2020. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 1-11.

Ludwig, B. (1997). Predicting the future: Have you considered using the Delphi methodology. Journal of extension, 35(5), 1-4.

Millares Forno, C.A., Brashears, T., Boren, A.E. Baker, M., & Carpio, C. (2016). Critical action inquiry for the establishment of a global food security graduate certificate in Latin America and the Caribbean at Texas Tech University: A Delphi study. Master’s Thesis. Texas Tech University.

Mwaniki, A. (2006). Achieving food security in Africa: Challenges and issues. UN Office of the Special Advisor on Africa (OSAA). [Adobe Digitals Edition version]. Retrieved from http://www. un. org/africa/osaa/reports/Achieving% 20Food% 20Security% 20in% 20Africa-Challenges% 20and% 20Issues. Pdf.

Napoli, M. (2011). Towards a Food Insecurity Multidimensional Index (FIMI), FAO, Rome.

Nordin, S. M., Boyle, M., & Kemmer, T. M. (2013). Position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics: Nutrition security in developing nations: Sustainable food, water, and health. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, 113(4), 581-595.

Rakotoarisoa, M., Iafrate, M., & Paschali, M. (2011). Why has Africa become anet food importer? FAO.

Retta, N. & Desse, G. (2011) Role of higher education in reducing food insecurity in Africa. Higher Education in the World, 4, 62–64.

Sackman, H. (1975). Delphi critique: Expert opinion, forecasting, and group process. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

Spiertz, H. (2012). Avenues to meet FS. The role of agronomy on solving complexity in food production and resource use. European Journal of Agronomy, 43, 1-8.

Thompson, H.E., Berrang-Ford, L., & Ford, J.D. (2010). Climate change andfood security in Sub-Saharan Africa:A systematic literature review.Sustainability, 2, 2719-2933.

Turoff, M. (1970). The design of a policy Delphi. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2(2), 149-171.

United Nations Environment Programme [UNEP]. (n.d.). National mechanisms and international cooperation for capacity building. Retrieved from http://www.unep.org/documents.multilingual/default.asp?DocumentID=52&ArticleID=87&l=en

United Nations [UN]. (2015). The Millennium Development Goals Report 2015 [Adobe Digitals Edition version]. Retrieved from http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/2015_MDG_Report/pdf/MDG%202015%20rev%20(July%201).pdf


51

United Nations [UN]. (n.d.). Goal 2: End hunger, achieve FS and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture. Retrieved from http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/hunger/

United States Agency for International Development [USAID]. (Sep 24, 2017). U.S. humanitarian assistance for countries facing famine in 2017. Retrieved from https://www.usaid.gov/documents/1866/us-humanitarian-assistance-countries-facing-famine-2017

World Bank. (2016). Sub-Saharan Africa data. Retrieved from http://data.worldbank.org/region/sub-saharan-africa


52

doi: 10.5191/jiaee.2019.26105

Using Non-Probability Sampling Methods in Agricultural and Extension Education Research

Alexa J. Lamm Kevan W. Lamm

University of Georgia

Abstract Understanding what the public thinks can guide how to target international agricultural and extension education interventions. Public opinion data can also provide insights into how the agricultural and natural resource industry communicates about emerging technologies and practices. However, the use of cellphones and the Internet have greatly reduced response rates to antiquated methods of public opinion data collection and the research world must alter its approach in response. The use of nonprobability sampling techniques has increased dramatically in public opinion research the past five years and more recently within agricultural and extension education research. To keep up with these trends, agricultural and extension education researchers must know the nuance associated with the use of nonprobability sampling techniques and how to mitigate some of the issues that may arise as a result.

Keywords: public opinion, non-probability sampling, weighting, quota sampling


53

Introduction The world is changing with new

technologies impacting the way people interact and communicate with one another (Ruggiero, 2000). Technological change has resulted in the use of new mediums for interaction, specifically the increased use of cell phones and ready access to the Internet. In 2018, 95% of Americans owned a cellphone of some kind and 77% owned smartphones with access to the Internet in their hand (Pew Center for Research, 2018). In addition, there has been a dramatic decline in the number of landlines in the home. The National Center for Health Statistics reported that as of December 2016 over half of American households did not have a landline (Blumberg & Luke, 2017). In addition, Americans are faced with increased demands on their time and have become more selective about when and how they can be contacted. An increase in the number of unsolicited telephone calls has resulted in people employing more sophisticated technology for screening their calls (e.g., voice mail, caller identification, call blocking and privacy managers).

Due to the ready access to the Internet, Americans use of mail services has also changed. The U.S. Postal Service has seen a dramatic decrease in First Class mail exhibited by a 28% decrease in First-Class mail revenue from 2007 to 2017 (United States Postal Service, 2018). The U.S. Postal Service projects the volume to continue to decline as Americans become less reliant upon, and responsive to, hard-copy mail versus digital communication methods such as e-mail and social media.

The changes in the way people communicate has dramatically impacted research sampling methods; especially probability-based methods that are reliant on random digit dialing and using randomly selected addresses to mail surveys. As early as 2013, Baker et al. (2013) reported that

relying on landlines for research purposes may not be a true representation of a probability sample because of the differences in individuals who have a landline and those who do not. Now, pure access to a landline is impacting the use of random digit dialing as a sampling process. For those that do have landlines or if a researcher is able to access random cell phone numbers, Americans’ avoidance of unsolicited calls has resulted in fewer people participating in telephone survey research. As a consequence, response rates have declined over the past decade to the point that nonresponse error and coverage error are a major concern (Baker et al., 2013). While researchers will not argue that probability sampling is ideal, we are now tasked with the challenge of collecting data from target audiences through new means (Baker et al., 2013; Hovland, 1959; Ruggiero, 2000).

The trends and observations associated with the United States are readily evident around the globe. From public perceptions of agricultural water use in a single state in the Southern United States (Lamm, Beattie, & Taylor, 2018) to public perceptions and support of locally grown food in Taiwan (Huang & Lamm, 2017), the importance of understanding how the public perceives issues is evident. Agricultural and extension educators are being increasingly called upon to not only describe and evaluate programs from a descriptive perspective, but also to describe the impacts of programs amongst participants and beyond (Lamm & Lamm, 2018). However, despite the need to show such impacts, one of the critical entry conditions to document change is absent, specifically, baseline measures. Baseline measures, particularly of a general public that is intended to be the ultimate beneficiary of educational interventions or training programs, is an invaluable tool for contemporary educators


54

and Extension professionals (Rossi, Lipsey, & Henry, 2018).

Non-Probability Sampling Defined Internet research has become

increasingly popular due to researchers being able to reach millions of respondents online through the use of opt-in panels. Opt-in panels are groups of people that are recruited (typically by a marketing or research firm) to participate in studies through the Internet using computer-mediated survey software (Baker et al., 2013). They are often incentivized in some way for their participation. Most often this comes in the form of points an individual earns for participating in a study. Over time their points aggregate and they can cash them in for a prize, such as a gift card.

Opt-in study participant recruitment is a form of convenience sampling, also known as river sampling (Baker et al., 2013). It is important to immediately recognize that non-probability sampling is not random. People have to be willing to opt-in or sign up to be a part of a pool of individuals that may be contacted when a group needs respondents.

In recent years, the number of web-based surveys being employed to answer international agricultural and extension education research questions has increased dramatically with non-probability sampling becoming much more common. Access to the Internet, and the relatively low cost of conducting web surveys are contributing to the proliferation of surveys being conducted online. For example, Kumar Chaudhary, Lamm, and Warner (2018) used non-probability techniques to collect data from individuals using large amounts of water to gain an understanding of why they are not interested in conserving and how to deliver extension programs that will resonate and alter behavior. Beattie, Lamm, Rumble, and Ellis (2018) used non-probability sampling

to gain an understanding of how the public thinks about and makes decisions regarding agricultural and natural resource technologies such as genetic modification. Ali, Ramey and Warner (2018) used the technique to explore the idea of personal norms and its effect on the conservation of water amongst the general public. Qu, Lamm and Rumble (2017) explored how to market blueberries to a local audience by testing different messages with a target population of those living in the eastern U.S. and Holt, Rumble, Telg and Lamm (2015) explored what messages are the best to reach specific audiences by integrating an experimental design into an online survey that generated a non-probability sample of the general public.

Non-probability online sampling techniques can be subject to significant biases resulting from under coverage and nonresponse. Not everyone has Internet access and there are significant demographic differences between those who do have access and those who do not. Individuals with lower incomes, less education, living in rural areas, or age 65 and older are underrepresented. For example, someone living in a rural area with dial-up Internet is probably not going to sign up or spend the time it would take them to complete a survey through a dial-up connection.

Non-probability sampling also allows for selection bias to occur based on the type of person that would opt-in to complete a survey online. As in any type of survey research there will be selection bias and it is up to the researcher to accept and/or minimize the effects. A similar effect is true for probability sampling using random digit dialing or mailed surveys. A certain type of person is willing to answer a phone survey or a mail survey just as specific individuals will be attracted to signing up for an online panel. Recognizing all social science sampling techniques introduce bias, it is the


55

employment of the appropriate techniques to minimize its effect that can assist in getting the best population estimates possible to answer the research questions at hand.

Overcoming the Limitations of Using Non Probability Sampling

Despite concerns, research has shown that non-probability samples have yielded results that are as good as, or even better than, probability-based samples when the appropriate techniques are employed to overcome its limitations (Abate, 1998; Twyman, 2008; Vavreck & Rivers, 2008). Non-probability online sampling methods are most often used to make population estimates (Baker et al., 2013). When trying to make population estimates, it is imperative the population of interest is clearly defined demographically prior to data collection and the identification of respondents.

Using the United States (U.S.) voting public as an example, we would need to identify who makes up the voting public. We know they are 18 years of age or older and reside in all 50 states. The U.S. Census Bureau (2010) tells us there are 234,564,071 Americans over the age of 18, as of the last U.S. Census conducted in 2010. The U.S. Census also identifies that 48.5% of them are male and 51.5% are female. In addition to sex, we can use the U.S. Census data to identify demographic breakdowns for race, ethnicity, age, educational attainment and many other characteristics of our population of interest. In addition, we can use rural-urban continuum codes, based on Zip codes of respondents, to determine geographic location and the level of rurality within their environment. Questions pertaining to the demographic characteristics of interest must be included in the survey to obtain the data necessary to ensure your sample is representative.

Quota Sampling In the best case scenario, quota

sampling is used. Quota sampling is a non-probability sampling technique where the sample of individuals obtained matches the proportions of individuals for the entire population of interest (Moser & Stuart, 1953). Quotas are set up in advance to ensure the ability to obtain the best representation of your population. In the case of trying to reach the U.S. voting public, the questions pertaining to demographic breakdowns would be asked first so that, as your survey runs online, data is collected about who is entering the survey. Once a quota is reached, such as you have obtained enough white male respondents with a bachelors degree living in an urban environment, a new individual coming in to complete the survey who meets those same criteria would be automatically rejected from completing the survey.

Quota sampling is especially important if you have a very specific targeted group of individuals for your research study and do not necessarily know their demographic breakdown in advance. For example, if you are interested in obtaining a sample of homeowners in a specific geographic region that use irrigation to water their landscape to ask them how they make their watering decisions you would need to have the following quotas set before your data collection begins: the geographic location they reside in, whether or not they own their home and if they have an irrigation system. You may even want to ask them if they control that irrigation system or if someone else controls it such as a homeowner’s association or a landscape management company. Since you do not have a demographic breakdown for the target audience, you will be completely reliant upon the quota sampling and need to recognize that sampling bias may be introduced.


56

Weighting Weighting is another method for

fine-tuning your data to be sure it matches the characteristics of your population of interest as closely as possible. There will be times when demographic elements within your sample are overrepresented or underrepresented and weighting ensures their responses are taken into consideration at the appropriate level when inferential statistics are run on the dataset (Baker et al., 2013). Weighting provides a more accurate account for the perceptions and values associated with specific demographic characteristics within your population of interest (Pasek, 2015).

In an unweighted dataset every respondent has the same amount of weight when aggregated. In essence, an unweighted dataset assumes everyone is the same. Therefore, if a weight were assigned, everyone would have a weight of one. Each response would be multiplied by a one to obtain the weighted response, with an outcome of every respondent’s original response matching their weighted response.

Unfortunately, we are not always able to obtain a dataset that matches our population of interest exactly. We will use our U.S. voting public scenario again as a fictitious example for illustrative purposes. In the hypothetical dataset we find we have a Hispanic male respondent. His answers, unweighted, count as a 1.00, just like any other respondent. However, we have found the Hispanic population is slightly overrepresented in our sample – we have more than needed. As a result, all Hispanic responses in the sample are weighted, or multiplied, by .93 instead of a 1.00. We then discover that male respondents were slightly underrepresented in our sample. This same respondent, because he is male, needs to have more representation. Therefore, his response is weighted with an additional .04, as is every other male respondent in the

dataset. Consequently, once the .04 is added to the original .93 a total weighting score of .97 is calculated. The same over, or under, adjustments are made for any demographic variable that is measured, and of which we have census values to compare against. While weighting is based on simple math and can be done by hand, computer programs have systems for automatically setting up weights based on multiple demographic characteristics.

Weighting is a necessary step in ensuring your sample is truly representative of your population of interest and should be taken seriously to ensure the reliability of your results. Quota sampling and weighting should go hand in hand as it is ideal to get as demographically close as possible to your population of interest and then weight to make up for minor discrepancies. However, there are times when weighting is not possible, such as the homeowner example provided above. If there is no recognizable, reputable source of a demographic profile that can be weighted against, the researcher should acknowledge this limitation and discuss how quota sampling was used to ensure the sample was as representative as possible.


The agricultural industry is at the forefront of public opinion and discourse. There are few concerns more pressing and personal than the food we eat and the sustainability of the natural environment. While for some members of the global public the greatest concern may be making sure they have enough to eat; for others, the cultivation and management practices associated with how the food was grown and harvested is of more concern. Therefore, the perceptions of the general public around the globe related to the agricultural industry is of critical importance.


57

Agricultural educators and extension educators are uniquely positioned to contribute and add value to the interface between the agricultural industry and the public. Sitting at the nexus between these two groups, agricultural and extension educators are uniquely positioned to serve as a bridge between interests. From a public perspective, if agricultural and extension educators can accurately measure perceptions, trends, interests, and other indicators of interest they can better prepare educational interventions. Critical needs, such as effective science communication practices, should be informed by what the empirical needs of the public are, not what they are believed to be.

Similarly, from an agricultural perspective, agricultural and extension educators can serve as a reliable source of public perception data that might otherwise be unavailable. The intent of such data is to drive and inform the actual upstream practices that will be ultimately evaluated at the market level. The more the agricultural industry can use empirical data to drive decisions, the more potential the decisions will be viewed as adding value by the public.

Although general public surveying has been around for decades the rate of technological change has made many of the previous techniques basically irrelevant (Baker et al., 2013). However, along with technology changes new opportunities have emerged. Online nonprobability opt-in sampling constitutes a third-wave of technology breakthroughs in sampling following previous breakthroughs using postal mail and later the landline telephone. This approach is one that provides both flexibility and scale around the globe. Almost anywhere there is a group of individuals with sufficient access to the Internet, nonprobability opt-in sample data may be available. Using the data in a

thoughtful manner, and making sure to follow recommendations such as quota sampling and weighting, can help to ensure agricultural and extension educators are well positioned to capitalize on this emerging technique and wrestle with research questions that would have otherwise gone unanswered.

References Abate, T. (2008). Accuracy of online surveys

may make phone polls obsolete. The San Francisco Chronicle, D1.

Ali, A., Ramey, & Warner, L. A. (2018). Exploring the effect of personal norms and perceived cost of water on conservation. Journal of Agricultural Education, 59(3), 169-184. doi: 10.5032/jae.2018.03169

Baker, R., Brick, J. M., Bates, N. A., Battaglia, M., Couper, M. P., Dever, J. A., et al. (2013). Report of theAAPOR task force on non-probability sampling. AmericanAssociation for Public OpinionResearch. Retrieved fromhttp://www.aapor.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Reports1&Template=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=5963

Beattie, P. N., Lamm, A. J., Rumble, J. N., & Ellis, J. D. (2018). Identifying generational differences to target extension programming when discussing genetic modification. Journal of Agricultural Education, 59(3), 154 - 168. doi: 10.5032/jae.2018.03154

Blumberg, S. J., & Luke, J. V. (2017). Wireless substitution: Early release of estimates from the national health interview survey July – December 2016. National Center for Health Statistics. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhis/earlyrelease/wireless201705.pdf


58

Huang, P. & Lamm, A. J. (2017, April). Factors influencing public perceptions and support of locally grown food in Taiwan. Presentation given at the Association for International Agricultural and Extension Education annual meeting, Minneapolis, MN.

Holt, J., Rumble, J. N., Telg, R. & Lamm, A. J. (2015). The message or the channel: An experimental design of consumers’ perceptions of a local food message and the media channel used to deliver the information. Journal of Applied Communication, 99(4), 6 – 19.

Hovland, C. I. (1959). Reconciling conflicting results derived from experimental and survey studies of attitude change. American Psychologist, 14(1), 8-17.

Kumar Chaudhary, Lamm, A. J., & Warner, L. A. (2018). Using cognitivedissonance theory to theoreticallyexplain water conservationintentions. Journal of AgriculturalEducation, 59(4), 194-210. doi:10.5032/jae.2018.04194

Lamm, A. J., Beattie, P. N., & Taylor, M. R. (2018). Evaluating public perceptions of agricultural water use by regions to guide extension programming. Journal of Southern Agricultural Education Research, 68. Retrieved fromhttp://www.jsaer.org/pdf/Vol68/2018_010%20formatted%20to%20print

Lamm, A. J., & Lamm, K. W. (2018). Considering an appreciative approach to international extension evaluation. Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education, 25(4), 74-82. doi: 10.5191/jiaee.2018.25406

Moser, C. A. & Stuart, A. (1953). An experimental study of quota sampling. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A, 116(4), 349-405. Doi: 10.2307/2343021

Pasek, J. (2015). When will nonprobability surveys mirror probability surveys? Considering types of inference and weighting strategies as criteria for correspondence. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 28(2), 269-291. doi: 10.1093/ijpor/edv016

Pew Research. (2018). Mobile phone ownership over time. Mobile Fact Sheet. Washington DC: Pew Research Center. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheet/mobile/

Qu, S., Lamm, A. J., & Rumble, J. N. (2017). Marketing power berries: An importance-performance analysis of blueberry attributes. Journal of Applied Communications, 101(3). doi: 10.4148/1051-0834.1842

Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W., & Henry, G. T. (2018). Evaluation: A systematic approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Ruggiero, T. E. (2000). Uses and gratifications theory in the 21st Century. Mass Communication & Society, 3, 3-37.

Twyman, J. (2008). Getting it right: Yougov and online survey research in Britian. Journal of Elections, Public Opinions and Parties, 18, 343-354.

United States Postal Service. (2018). A new reality: Correspondence mail in the digital age. Office of Inspector General Report number RARC-WP-18-004. Retrieved fromhttps://www.uspsoig.gov/sites/default/files/document-library-files/2018/RARC-WP-18-004.pdf


59

Vavreck, L., & Rivers, D. (2008). The 2006 cooperative congressional election study. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties, 18(4), 355-366.


60

doi: 10.5191/jiaee.2019.26106

Group Cohesion and Application of Best Horticultural Farming Practices among Farmer Groups in Meru County, Kenya

Raphael Mwiti Gikunda David E. Lawver

Texas Tech University

Abstract This study illuminates the power of farmer groups as avenues for mobilizing farmers around a common objective, thus adds to the knowledge base of extension education. A quantitative approach involving the use of a correlational research design was adopted to describe the association between group cohesion and application of BHFP. The target population was 1950 farmers from 35 farmer groups. Stratified random sampling was used to select a sample of 112 farmers from the population. Data were collected by use of a self-administered structured questionnaire developed by the researcher. Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) was used for data analysis, which involved both descriptive and inferential statistics. According to the results, most (70.5%) of the farmers felt that the level of cohesion among members of their groups was very high. Pearson correlation test indicated that there was a weak negative significant correlation between group size and level of cohesion (r = -.27, N =112, p <.05) and a positive moderate significant correlation between group cohesion and application of BHFP (r =.39, N =112, p <.05). The level of application of BHFP was high with the majority of the farmers (75.9%) scoring between 71 and 75 out of 75 points. It was concluded that group cohesion is related to the application of BHFP. However, there is a need for the group managers to limit the group sizes to maintain a high level of cohesion, and sustain a conducive environment that triggers a team climate that supports the application of BHFP.

Keywords: Best horticultural practices, farmer groups, cohesion, group size


61

Introduction Kenya is a chief horticultural

produce exporter in sub-Saharan Africa where the sector generates over $300m Kenyan shillings (Ksh) ($3m USD) in foreign exchange per year and employs approximately 4.5m people (HCDA, 2014). Horticultural production’s contribution to Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per horticultural category in 2014 was roughly 30-32% for each category: Vegetables(31.8%), Fruit (30.3%), and Flowers(29.7%), while the rest was from medicinaland nut crops. The leading crops in terms ofproduction and value are Irish potatoes,tomatoes, cabbage and kale for localmarkets and fresh beans, snow peas andAsian vegetables for the export market.Major fruits include avocados, mangoes,bananas, pineapples and passion fruit.Flowers are grown mainly for the exportmarket. The major horticultural producingcounties in Kenya are Nyandarua, Meru,Narok, Nyeri, Bomet, Kirinyaga, ElgeyoMarakwet and Uasin Gishu (Kenya NationalBureau of Statistics, 2015).

The main problems besetting the sector are the unavailability of funds and inadequate access to affordable credit for horticultural farmers. Other challenges include non-compliance with health or safety standards and low application of key inputs. The cost of agro-chemicals continues to rise steadily making them inaccessible to many horticultural farmers thereby increasing the unit cost of production. In addition, the transport of horticultural produce from the farms to the markets/collection centers is costly because of poor physical infrastructure such as roads. Certain areas of horticultural production are not supplied with electricity making it difficult for the farmers to invest in cold storage facilities, irrigation, and agro-processing (HCDA, 2014). Rural farmer organizations can be a means to overcome

these constraints especially those faced by individual smallholder farmers. According to Marsh, (2003) farmer groups are crucial organizations for the empowerment, poverty mitigation and improvement of farmers’ lives.

Bhuyan, (2007) indicates that farmer group’s aid in the provision of services such as extension, farm inputs, farm implements, credit facilities, and the marketing of members’ farm produce. Bibby & Shaw (2005) posit that farmer groups are based on the fact that a group of farmers can achieve targets more easily than any of them can do individually. Farmers form farmer organizations for their own common benefits. Ofuoku and Urang (2009) found that 91.7% of farmers subscribed to farmer groups in order to access agricultural extension service.

Mthembu (2008) indicates that the success of farmer groups’ activities depends on the level of cohesion of its members. According to Ofuoku and Chukwuji (2012), cohesion is as an interpersonal attraction among members of a group. Lott and Lott, (2001) found that cohesiveness is greater when the goals of the group match with those of members. The level of cohesion varies from one group to another based on the level of commitment of the members. In cases where members feel more strongly attached to the groups, they have a greater sense of commitment to the achievement of goals since they would want the groups to succeed. One of the major characteristics of unified group is the commitment to group activities. Ofuoku and Chukwuji (2012) opines that a unified commitment demonstrates itself as group members’ willingness to do all that needs to be done to ensure that the team succeeds in its mission. Very few studies have been conducted to determine the relationship between group cohesion and application of agricultural practices. Zaccaro and McCoy (1988) in


62

their study to assess task cohesion, interpersonal cohesion, and performance processes found a strong association between group cohesion and performance. Nyangena (2004) in his study found a strong relationship between trust and evidence of increasing application of conservation practices. Previous studies on the relationship between cohesion and performance have reported divergent results. Some have reported positive and others negative relationships. The relationship between cohesion and performance is more positive and stronger in smaller group than in larger groups. Evans and Dion (2012) also observed a positive relationship between the two variables. A study by Dyaram and Kamalanabhan, (2005) reported a negative relationship between cohesion and performance. A study by Soboroff (2012) provided evidence that group size affects the development of member's perceptions of trust, commitment, and cohesion when people work together on joint tasks. The paucity of empirical data on the role of farmer group cohesion in the application of BHFP in Sub-Saharan Africa establishes a gap in research that necessitated this investigation.

Theoretical Framework This study was grounded on

relational cohesion theory, which indicates that frequent exchanges between people result in positive emotions which make them cohesive (Lawler & Yoon, 1996) as illustrated in Figure 1. The theory was developed to explain how people involved in exchange relations become committed to their relationship. Cohesion among members has come to play a significant role in the study of group dynamics. There are five key elements to a cohesive team; trust, health conflict, commitment, accountability and

results focus. Various researchers have studied cohesion to understand the factors that determine the development of cohesion and how an increase or decrease would affect the performance of the groups (Stogdill, 1972). Group decision, identity, goal attainment, and member satisfaction are all dependent on the level of cohesiveness of members in a given group (Ofuoku & Urang, 2009).

Relational cohesion theory indicates that group unity contributes to positive group practices such as sharing information and performance of group activities (Lawler & Yoon, 1996). The main reasons why cohesion enhances performance in groups is that there is an increased drive to perform better in the group, partially due to rules and regulations that govern group projects. Commitment to group activities resulting in high levels of participation leads to good performance and this occurs in groups where members are united. Research has shown that high task commitment significantly correlates to greater performance in groups (Lawler, Thye, & Yoon, 2008). Another reason why cohesive groups perform better is due to enhanced communication and trust that facilitates effective information sharing creating a bank of resources that can be used to solve group problems. In cohesive groups, members are mutually reliant on each other creating interdependency among them (Lawler, 1992). However, this theory indicates that an increase in the size of the group’s results in less trust among members, less commitment and thus reduced cohesion hence affecting the performance of the groups (Soboroff, 2012). This can be taken to mean that horticultural farmer groups with smaller membership will apply the best horticultural practices more than those groups with a large number of members.


63

Figure 1. Theoretical Model for the Theory of Relational Cohesion. Source: Adapted from Lawler & Yoon (1996)

Purpose & Objectives The overall goal of this research was

to analyze the relationship of farmer group's cohesion on the application of BHFP. The research objectives were:

1. To describe the level of applicationof BHFP among farmer groups

2. To examine the association betweengroup sizes and degree ofcohesiveness of the farmer groups

3. To determine the associationbetween group cohesion andapplication of BHFP

Methods The study was conducted in Meru

County involving horticultural farmer groups. The County is located in the Eastern part of Kenya and has an altitude ranging between 300 to 5199 meters. A correlational research design was utilized to address the study objectives. Fraenkel and Wallen (2010) describe a correlational research design as research that involves collecting data in order to determine the degree to which an association exists between two or more variables. This study focused on establishing the association between; group

sizes and cohesion, and group cohesion and application of good horticultural practices. Prior to study implementation, the proposal was submitted to the Human Research Protection Program (HRPP) for approval by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) to ensure that it was conducted in accordance with all federal, institutional, and ethical guidelines.

The target population was comprised of members of 35 horticultural farmer groups in Meru County. Stratified random sampling was used to select a sample of 112 smallholder farmers from a list of 1950 members. The study sample was considered adequate as Fraenkel, Wallen, and Hyun (2015) suggested that a sample with a minimum number of 100 subjects is adequate for descriptive studies. The population was stratified into 35 farmer groups and then a simple random sample was selected from within each stratum (group). Randomizing involved assigning farmers in a group numbers and picking the required subsample from a pool of the group members (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2010). The researcher used a self-developed questionnaire as a means of data collection. Polit and Hungler (1997) define a

Exchanges (Agreement Frequency)

Positive emotion

Cohesion

Healthy conflict

Results focus

Commitment

Accountability

Trust


64

questionnaire as a tool for collecting information from respondents about attitudes, knowledge, beliefs, and feelings. A semi-structured instrument with both open and closed ended items was used as a means of data collection. The questionnaires were completed in the presence of enumerators to ensure that all issues that needed clarification were dealt with immediately. The questionnaires were administered on a market day at the market centers to easily locate the sampled farmers. Since all the 112 questionnaires were completed and returned, the sample return size was considered adequate at 95% confidence interval, t =1.96 (Bartlett, Kotrlik, & Higgins, 2001).

The independent variable was group cohesion, a continuous variable attained through a summated score of eight items measured using a 5-point Likert-type scale items (1= strongly disagree, 2= disagree, 3= Neutral, 4 = agree and 5 = strongly agree). The eight items capture information related to participation in group activities, subscription, attendance of group meetings, togetherness, group goals, commitment and level of trust in the group, all positively coded. Each item is worth 5 points (ranging from 1 to 5) and therefore, the total score for the eight items can range from eight to 40. The higher the score of cohesion the higher the level of cohesion in the group. The dependent variable was the application of best practices: a continuous variable (ratio) measured using a summated score of 16 horticultural practices with a five-point Likert-type scale (1 = Never, 2 = Rarely, 3 = Occasionally, 4 = Frequently, 5 = Always). The application score was defined as the total of the responses for 15 items on the five-point Likert scale. The total score on this instrument can range from 15 being the lowest level of application to 75 being the highest level of application.

Peers and a panel of experts composed of agricultural education faculty

members checked the instrument for face, construct and content validity. A pilot test was conducted involving 30 members of horticultural farmer groups from Tharaka Nithi County. The study sample was selected from a known list of farmers. The questionnaires were administered to the selected farmers during produce collection days to achieve a high response rate. This enabled the researchers to attain a 100% response rate because all the 112 questionnaires that had been distributed to selected sample were completed and returned. The reliability of the research instrument was checked by computing the Cronbach’s Alpha of the measures. The alpha value of group cohesion was .85 and that of BHFP variable was .80. Nunnally and Bernstein (1994) stated that a value of 0.70 is adequate for the early stages of research, but basic research should require a reliability coefficient of 0.80 or higher. Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) version 24 was used to compute percentages and frequencies, and to run statistical tests. Pearson correlations were calculated to determine relationships between variables.

Results The results indicated that most of the

horticultural farmers (85.5%) owned between 1.5 and 3 acres, and many (85.7%) were between 20 and 50 years old. A majority of the farmers (51.8%) had completed a secondary education and 76.8% were male. Their annual farm income ranged from 50,000 to 400,000 Ksh ($500-4,000 USD), although the majority (72.3%) earned between $50,000 and 150,000 Ksh ($500-1,500 USD). Almost half (46.4%) of the groups had been in existence for 4 years and above, and in most cases (59.8%) meetings were held once a month.


65

Level of Cohesion among the Horticultural Groups

The level of cohesiveness of the horticultural groups was evaluated using a five-point Likert-type scale where one meant strongly disagree and 5 strongly agree. The mean score and standard deviations of the responses for each statement were then computed as presented in Table 1. A majority of the farmers reported that they actively participated in in-group activities (M = 4.57, SD =.68), paid group subscriptions in good time (M = 4.63, SD =.48), rarely missed group meetings (M = 4.58, SD =), and enjoyed working with

other members (M = 4.65, SD =.53). The farmers further noted that they valued the contributions of other members of the group (M = 4.63 SD =.65) and their groups were united in trying to reach its goals (M = 4.48, SD =.85). They also pointed out that they were happy with their groups’ level of commitment to the activities engaged in (M = 4.22, SD =1.16), and group members had a lot of trust for each other (M = 4.16, SD =1.20). The mean responses of cohesion elements range from 4.17 to 4.65 meaning that there was a high level of cohesion among members of the groups.

Table 1 Level of Cohesion among Horticultural Groups’ Members (N=112) Group cohesiona M SD I enjoy working with others in the in the group 4.65 .53 I value the contributions of other members of the group 4.63 .65 I pay the group subscriptions in good time 4.63 .48 I rarely miss the group meetings 4.58 .68 I actively participate in the group activities 4.57 .68 My group stick together in order to ensure good performance 4.48 .85 Our groups level of commitment towards group activities is good 4.22 1.16 Our group members have a lot of trust for each other 4.17 1.20

Note: a = 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2=Disagree, 3 = Neither Agree or Disagree, 4 = Agree, 5= Strongly Agree

Application of BHFP A variety of BHFP have been

developed based on European Retailer Produce Working Group Good Agricultural Practices (EurepGAP) (FAO, 2010). These practices were developed by the food industry, farmer organizations, governments, and NGOs, aiming to improve the safety and quality of horticultural produce (Campbell, 2005). EurepGAP standards are a set of practices applied to production, harvesting, processing, and transportation of food to ensure its safety and quality (Zoss & Pletziger, 2007). There have been concerted efforts in Meru County by private and public sector extensionists to disseminate good horticultural practices to address produce contamination and meet to EurepGAP

standards. The study assessed the level of application of these practices among members of horticultural groups in Meru County and the results are presented in Table 2. The study established that there was the high level of application of horticultural crops among members in the farmer groups. Most of the farmers (M = 4.88) avoided production of horticultural crops near potential harmful substances so as not to contaminate the produce. They also applied the right amount of organic manure (M = 4.87), and/or inorganic fertilizers at the right time using appropriate methods (M = 4.80), to achieve high crop yield. Applying fertilizer at the right time increases yields, decreases nutrient losses, improves nutrient


66

use efficiency and avoids damage to the environment.

It also emerged from the findings that the farmers considered animals to be vehicles for contamination with pathogenic organisms (M = 4.85) and therefore, restricted their movement to specific areas in the farm. They also stated that they protected their fresh produce from any form of contamination; dust, rain or sunburn (M = 4.83) and cleaned the storage areas before harvest (M = 4.89) to ensure that the produce was safe for consumption. Regarding pest control, farmers indicated that they applied various methods such as

crop rotation, biological or integrated control methods to prevent the build-up of pests (M = 4.72). A majority maintained soil by applying mulch or growing cover crops to minimize soil erosion losses by wind or water (M = 4.41). In order to avoid contamination of the produce, most farmers used clean clothes and gloves when harvesting (M = 4.53) as well as clean containers when handling the produce (M = 4.97). They prevented the damaging of produce through careful handling (M = 4.96) at the farm and while being transported to the market.

Table 2 Application of Best Horticultural Farming Practices (N =112) Field Hygiene Practicesa M SD I avoid production of horticultural crops near potential harmful substances 4.88 .42 I apply the right amount of organic manure using appropriate methods 4.87 .49 I consider animals vehicles for contamination with pathogenic organisms 4.85 .62 I protect the fresh produce from any form of contamination (dust or rain or sunburn)

4.83 .57

I apply the right amount of inorganic fertilizers at the right time using appropriate methods

4.80 .72

I prevent the build-up of pests by crop rotation or biological or integrated control methods

4.72 .65

I maintain soil cover to minimize soil erosion losses by wind and water 4.41 .82 Harvesting Hygiene Practicesb I prevent overfilling of produce in the harvesting containers 4.98 .13 I use clean containers for harvesting 4.97 .21 I prevent the damaging of produce due to rough handling 4.96 .28 I harvest crops using the correct maturity index 4.94 .31 I clean the areas for storing fresh horticultural crops before harvest 4.89 .49 I harvest crops using appropriate techniques 4.81 .66 I use clean clothes and gloves when harvesting 4.79 .52 I harvest the produce at the right weather conditions 3.83 1.23

Note: a, & b = 1= Never, 2= Rarely, 3= Occasionally, 4 = Frequently, 5 = Always

The most crucial handling point of horticultural produce is harvesting which is the starting point for postharvest management. This is because once the crop has been harvested the quality cannot be enhanced; only retained at best maturity

condition. The results indicated that the crops were harvested using appropriate techniques (M = 4.81), correct maturity level (M = 4.94), and right weather conditions (M = 3.83) to ensure that they were of good quality. The items standard deviations


67

ranged from .13 to 1.23. This implies that there was not much variation in the level of application of BHFP among the farmers.

BHFP Application Scores An application score for each

individual respondent was computed using the Likert-type scale items in Table 2. The score involved 15 BHFP and thus the total score for the 15 practices can range from 15

to 75 points. Figure 2 illustrates the BHFP application score for the farmers. The scores ranged from 45 to 75 with a mean score of 71.54. The majority of the farmers (75.9%) scored between 71 and 75 points out of a possible total of 75. This implied that the level of application of the BHFP was high among the farmers.

Figure 2. Distribution of Respondents Based on Application Score (N =112).

Group Sizes and Level of Cohesion The second objective sought to

examine the correlation between group size and level of cohesiveness. Table 3 presents the range of group sizes of the horticultural groups. The results indicated that the

majority (45.5%) of the farmer; groups had sizes of between 25 members to 54 members. The mean group size was 74.96 and this shows that most of the farmer groups were small-sized.

Table 3 Group Sizes (N =112) Number of members Frequency Percentage

25 – 54 51 45.5 55 – 84 15 13.4 85 – 114 26 23.2 115 – 144 0 0 145 – 174 20 17.9

Note. M =74.96

1 3 1 319

85

020406080

100

45 -50 50 - 55 56 - 60 61 - 65 66 -70 71 - 75Application scores

Freq

uenc

y


68

Null hypothesis: There is no significant association between sizes and the level of cohesiveness among horticultural groups.

Table 4 shows the correlation between group sizes and their level of cohesiveness. The results of the Pearson correlation test indicated that there was a weak negative significant correlation between the two variables (r = -.27, N =112, p < .05). Since the p-value was less than the

alpha level of .05, the null hypothesis was rejected signifying that there was a significant association between the two variables. This, therefore, implies that as the group sizes increased the level of cohesiveness decreased. According to Ratner, Dotsch, Wigboldus, Knippenberg, and Amodio (2014), the dynamics of the groups varied based on their sizes in that small groups are easier to manage than big groups.

Table 4 Correlation between Group Size and Level of Cohesion (N = 112) Variables 1 2 1. Group sizea - -.27* 2. Cohesionb -.27* -

Note: a=scale of 1 = 25-54, 2= 55-84, 3= 85-114, 4= 115–144, 5= 145-174, b= 8 – 40, * p < .05

Group Cohesion and Application of BHFP

Objective three sought to determine the association between group cohesion and application of BHFP. It was hypothesized that group cohesion does not significantly influence the application of BHFP. Table 5 presents the relationship between group cohesion and application of horticultural practices. The results showed a moderate positive association between group cohesion and field hygiene (r =.34) and cohesion and harvesting hygiene (r =.37). Overall, there was a significant moderate, positive association between group cohesion and application of appropriate horticultural practices, r =.39, N =112, p < .05 as

interpreted by Davis (1971). This implied that an increase in a group cohesion by one unit increased the level of application of BHFP by 0.39 units. The findings confirm those of Ofuoku and Agbamu, (2012) who found a strong positive correlation between group cohesion and application of climate change mitigation measures. Okorley, Adjargo, & Bosompem, (2014) reported that other than adoption of introduced techniques groups can have positive impacts on the social and economic growth of the farmers.

Null hypothesis: There is no significant association between group cohesion and application of BHFP by Farmer Groups.

Table 5 Association between Group Cohesion and Application of BHFP (N =112) Variables 1 2 3 1. Group cohesiona - - - 2. Field hygiene practicesb .34* - 3. Harvesting hygiene practicesc .37* .66* - 4. Field and harvesting practices .39* .93* .89*

Note: a = scale of 8-40, b = 7-35 c = 8-40, d=15-75, * p <.05


69

Conclusions & Recommendations Overall, there was a high level of

application of BFHP by farmers in groups because they had a common vision that bound them together. The vision of the farmers was to increase their production levels as they strive to produce fruits and vegetables of high quality that offers best customer satisfaction. Farmers saw the need of field hygiene because the production of crops away from potentially harmful substances emerged as the topmost applied field practice while soil cover maintenance was the least field practice. Prevention of overfilling and use of clean containers emerged as the topmost applied harvesting hygiene practices whereas harvesting of produce at the right weather conditions was the least practiced. An increase in the application rates of the least practiced BHFP could be achieved through farmers training on soil management and issues of perishability. The study recommends continuous evaluation and adjustments of the BFHP to improve the quality of the produce in line with the changing local and global market requirements (FAO, 2010) particularly EurepGap since significant amount is exported to Europe.

The high rate of BHFP application may have been contributed by high level of cohesion that existed among members of the farmer groups among other factors such as economies of scales that farmers enjoy in groups (Ofuoku & Urang, 2009), easier access to extension services, farm inputs, farm implements, credit facilities, and the marketing of members’ farm produce (Bhuyan, 2007). The level of cohesion among farmers in horticultural groups was high possibly due to the small sizes of the groups. This confirms the notion of the relational cohesion theory (Lawler & Yoon, 1993). The groups’ cohesiveness was also enhanced by the unity that prevailed among the groups' members, the ability of farmers

to value the contributions of others in the group, and level of commitment that existed between them. Small groups are said to be more cohesive than larger groups (Soboroff, 2012). The horticultural groups were of small sizes and thus members had constant face-to-face contacts among them. In large groups, the possibility of interaction among members is less. Secondly, as the number of members in a group increases, it becomes more challenging to get the group to agree on common goals and activities and expression of disagreement and dissatisfaction increases. The small size of the farmer groups thus possibly influenced the level of cohesion among members, which in turn boosted the level of application of best horticultural practices among farmers in the groups (Lawler & Yoon, 1993).

There is a need for the group managers to limit the group sizes to maintain a high level of cohesion and also sustain a conducive environment that allows mutual respect and support which in turn enhances a team climate (Widmeyer, Lawrence, & Carron, 1990). There must be closer contact between members and their leaders to promote team interaction. Strong government support is needed to empower the group leaders with necessary skills including knowing how to develop a shared vision, defining common objectives (Davis, Franzel, Boa, Romney, & Harris, 2013) building mutual trust and resolving conflict, all which are geared toward achieving a sustained cohesion among the farmers in groups. A key implication of this study is that positive outcomes are associated with membership in farmer groups as evidenced by higher best farming practices scores. The study focused on the cohesion of horticultural groups in Meru County. A comparative study involving farmer groups producing other crops and in other regions of the country would be crucial. The study


70

established that the higher the level of cohesion in a farmer group the higher the level of application of BHFP among the members. Therefore, we recommend building and use cohesive farmer groups as a strategy to promote the adoption of BHFP by extension agents.

References Bartlett, J., Kotrlik, J., & Higgins, C. (2001).

Organizational research: Determining appropriate sample size in survey research. Information Technology, Learning, and Performance Journal, 19(1), 43-50.

Bhuyan, S. (2007). The people factor in cooperatives: An analysis of members’ attitudes and behaviour. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 55(3), 275-298. doi:10.1111/j.1744-7976.2007.00092.x

Bibby, A., & Shaw, L. (2005). Making a difference: Cooperative solution to global poverty. Manchester, UK: Cooperative College for the Department of International Development.

Campbell, H. (2005). The rise and rise of EurepGap: European (re)invention of colonial food relations. International Journal of Sociology of Food and Agriculture, 13(2), 1-19.

Carron, A. V., & Spink, K. S. (1993). Team building in an exercise setting. The Sport Psychologist, 7, 8–18.

Davis, K., Franzel, S., Boa, E., Romney, D., & Harris, T. (2013). A framework for analyzing "best-fit" practices in extension. Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education, 20(2), 81-81. doi:10.5191aiaee.org

Dyaram, L., & Kamalanabhan, T. (2005). Unearthed: The other side of group cohesiveness. Journal of Social

Science, 10(3), 185-190. doi:10.1080/09718923.2005.11892479

Evans, C. R., & Dion, K. L. (2012). Group cohesion and performance a meta-analysis. Small Group Research, 43(6), 690-701. doi:10.1177/1046496412468074

FAO. (2010). The state of food insecurity in the world. Rome: Food and Agriculture Oraganization of United States.

Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2010). How to design and evaluate research in education (7th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2015). How to design andevaluate research in education (9thed.). New York, NY: McGraw-HillEducation.

Horticultural Crops Development Authority. (2014). Horticulture validated report. Nairobi: HCDA.

Jung, Y., Jang, H., & Matthews, K. (2014). Effect of the food production chain from farm practices to vegetable processing on outbreak incidence. Microbial Biotechnology Journal, 7(6), 517-527. doi:10.1111/1751-7915.12178

Kenya National Bureau of Statistics. (2015). Economic survey 2015. Nairobi: KNBS.

Krejcie, R., & Morgan, D. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30, 607-610.doi:10.1177/001316447003000308

Lawler, E. J., & Yoon, J. (1996). Power and the emergence of commitment behavior in negotiated exchange. American Sociological Review, 58, 465-481. doi:10.2307/2096071


71

Lawler, E., Thye, S., & Yoon, J. (2008). Commitment in structurally enabled and induced exchange relations. Social Psychology Quarterly, 69(2), 183-200. doi:10.1177/019027250606900204

Lott, A., & Lott, B. (2001). Learning theory approach to interpersonal attitudes. Greenwald, New York: Academic Press.

Marsh, R. (2003). Working with local institutions to support sustainable livelihoods. Rome: FAO, Rural Development Division.

Mthembu, N. (2008). Perceptions of barriers to market participation among three farmer groups in rural KwaZulu-Natal. (Unpublished master's dissertation). University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg.

Mullen, B., & Copper, C. (1994). The relation between group cohesiveness and performance: Integration. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 210-227. doi:10.1037//0033-2909.115.2.210

Nyangena, W. (2004). Essays on soil conservation, social capital and technology adoption (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Gothenburg University, Gothenburg.

Ofuoku, A., & Agbamu, J. (2012). Influence of farmers’ group cohesion on adoption of climate change adaptation strategies in Delta State, Nigeria. Global Journal of Science Frontier Research, 12(6), 29-35.

Ofuoku, A., & Chukwuji, C. (2012). Farmers’ groups growth trend in Delta State, Nigeria. Global Journal of Science Frontier Research, 12(3), 62- 68.

Ofuoku, A., & Urang, E. (2009). Effect of cohesion on loan repayment in farmers’ cooperative societies in Delta State, Nigeria. International

Journal of Sociology and Anthropology, 1(4),, 070-076. doi: 10.5897/IJSA

Okorley, E., Adjargo, G., & Bosompem, M. (2014). The potential of Farmer Field Schools in cocoa extension delivery. Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education, 21(2), 32-44. doi:10.5191/jiaee.2014.20203

Polit, D., & Hungler, B. (1997). Essentials of nursing research. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven.

Ratner, K. G., Dotsch, R., Wigboldus, D. H., van Knippenberg, A., & Amodio, D. M. (2014). Visualizing minimalingroup and outgroup faces:Implications for impressions,attitudes, and behavior. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology106 (6), 897-911.doi:10.1037/a0036498

Stogdill, R. (1972). Group productivity, drive, and cohesiveness. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 26-43. doi:10.1016/0030-5073(72)90035-9

Tuckman, B. W. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63, 384-399. doi:10.1037/h0022100

Widmeyer, W. N., Brawley, L. R., & Carron, A. V. (1990). The effects of group size in sport. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 12(2), 177-190.

Zaccaro, S. J., & McCoy, M. C. (1988). The effects of task and interpersonal cohesiveness on performance of a disjunctive group task. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18, 837- 851. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1988.tb01178.x


72

Zoss, M., & Pletziger, S. (2007). Linking African vegetable smallholders to high value markets: Potentials and constraints in smallholders’ integration into GLOBALGAP-certified and/or domestic African high-value supply-chains. Paper presented at the International Agricultural Research for Development Conference. Witzenhausen, Germany: University of Kassel-Witzenhausen.


73

doi: 10.5191/jiaee.2019.26107

Self-Perceived Readiness of Haitian Agricultural University Students to enter the Workforce: A Call for Curriculum Reform

T. Grady RobertsUniversity of Florida

Absalon Pierre Anne C. Gilot

University of Florida AREA Project Pétionville, Haiti

J. C. BunchUniversity of Florida

Abstract The country of Haiti has faced chronic food insecurity for decades. Increasing domestic food production has been identified as a key part of the solution, but this requires building human capacity, especially related to agricultural extension and research. Haiti’s agricultural universities can be key players in this process. The purpose of this study was to explore the self-perceived readiness of Haitian agricultural university students to enter the workforce. Results revealed students had a wide variety of career aspirations and appreciated the breadth of the agronomy engineer degree. Students also expressed favorable opinions about their preparedness for the job market but felt pessimistic about finding a job. Students valued the importance of research and felt prepared to lead a research project. Finally, students thought all 17 Global Forum for Rural Advisory Services (GFRAS) New Extensionist competency areas were important. Recommendations for additional research and practice are provided.

Keywords: Haiti, agriculture, higher education, research, extension


74

Introduction The country of Haiti has faced

chronic food insecurity for decades (von Grebmer et al., 2016). Haiti’s challenges are attributed to an assortment of complicated internal and external pressures (USAID, 2017). A variety of international development initiatives have sought to address this complex situation and increasing domestic food production has been identified as a key part of the solution (USAID, 2017). However, sustainably increasing domestic food production is not a simple task. Scientific breakthroughs alone are not sufficient to lead to change; building human capacity is equally important (FAO, 2002).

Education and extension services have been previously identified as key institutions to developing the human capacity needed to address food insecurity (FAO, 2002). Educational institutions are tasked with developing the workforce across the value chain, from workers with basic skills all the way to workers for scientific and professional positions (Asenso-Okyere, Davis, & Aredo, 2008). Extension services typically provide technical advisory services to growers and assist with the transfer of new technologies (GFRAS, 2012). Agricultural universities play a key role in the capacity building system because their graduates become researchers and extensionists (Asenso-Okyere et al., 2008). In other words, they have the potential to create solutions to Haiti’s problems and then get those solutions in the hands of the people who need it most. However, the preparedness of graduates of Haiti’s agricultural universities is not known.

Theoretical Framework This study was conducted using a

competency-based professional education framework (Mulder, 2014). Under such a framework, we assumed that educational

programs should help students acquire a set of competencies which meet requirements for the jobs they seek. Using this approach allows for assessing an educational program or system (Mulder, 2014).

A competency framework specific to Haiti’s agricultural universities does not exist. Based on the literature, we began with the assumption that graduates need competence in the soft skills (Bennett, Dunne, & Carré, 1999; Crawford, Lang, Fink, Dalton, & Fielitz, 2011; Harvey, 2000). Next, based on our interest in students’ competence for research and extension, we used the steps in the scientific process (Ary, Jacobs, & Sorenson, 2010) and the Global Forum for Rural and Advisory Services (GFRAS) New Extensionist competency framework (GFRAS, 2016) to begin our inquiry. The GFRAS New Extensionist competencies were organized in the categories of (a) adaption to change, (b) adult learning, (c) agricultural entrepreneurship, (d) agricultural systems, (e) behavior change, (f) communication, (g) community organizing, (h) critical thinking, (i) gender issues inagriculture, (j) leadership; professionalethics, (k) program implementation, (l)program monitoring and evaluation, (m)program planning, and (n) youth issues inagriculture.

Previous research on this topic is very limited. (Pierre, Calixte, Moore, Bunch, & Roberts, 2018) previously looked at this from the perspective of the university professors. They found faculty thought the most important GFRAS competency areas were (a) adaption to change, (b) agricultural systems, (c) communication, (d) professional ethics, and (e) program monitoring and evaluation. Additionally, they thought it was somewhat important to have competence in (a) agricultural entrepreneurship, (b) behavior change, (c) community organizing, (d) critical thinking,


75

(e) leadership, (f) program implementation,and (g) program planning. They believed theleast important competency areas were: (a)adult learning, (b) gender issues inagriculture, and (c) youth issues inagriculture. Beyond the New Extensionistcompetencies (GFRAS, 2016), facultybelieved it was important for students tohave: (a) research skills, (b) the ability to beself-directed, and (c) the ability to work inteams.

Other research focused on extension and higher education in the Caribbean. Harder, Ganpat, Moore, Strong, and Lindner (2013) focused on identifying professional development needs of extension officers in the Caribbean (Belize, Granada, and Saint Lucia). They found the greatest needs for professional development were in the areas of program planning and evaluation. They did, however, note some variation between countries in the Caribbean. Hurst et al. (2015) explored the formal agricultural education system in Trinidad. Of relevance to the current study, they found that the curriculum at the higher education level varied from very technical to very theoretical, based on the university. The researchers also noted there was very little interaction or collaboration between higher education institutions. Additionally, Hurst et al. found negative perceptions of agriculture was a barrier for people choosing to enter the agricultural workforce.

Outside the Caribbean, other researchers examined higher education in general. Bennett et al.’s (1999) work synthesized research from around the world. They used the term generic skills to describe a set of competencies needed by graduates regardless of their discipline and career path. They organized their competencies in four categories: (a) management of self, (b) management of others, (c) management of information, and (d) management of task. In Europe, Harvey (2000) described a situation

where employers often seek to hire graduates from what would seem as unrelated disciplines. He went on to say the reason why is that employers most desire competence in communication, interpersonal, and teamwork in graduates. A similar situation exists in the United States for agricultural universities. Crawford et al. used the term soft skills (2011) and their research organized these skills in seven clusters: (a) communication, (b) decision making/problem solving, (c) self-management, (d) teamwork, (e) professionalism, (f) experiences, and (g) leadership.

Purpose This study was part of a larger study

funded by USAID focused on examining the ability of Haitian agricultural universities to supply work-ready graduates. Previous research examined this from the perspective of university faculty (Pierre, Calixte, Moore, Bunch, & Roberts, 2018). Concurrent research considered the perspectives of employers. This study focused on identifying the perceptions of Haitian agricultural university students. Four research questions guided the inquiry:

1. What are students’ career aspirations?2. How prepared do students generally feel

to enter the workforce?3. How do students perceive their abilities

to apply research skills?4. How do students perceive their abilities

in the GFRAS competency areas?

Methodology This study was conducted under a

theoretical lens of social constructionism (Schwandt, 2000). This was deemed appropriate because student perceptions were socially constructed as they progressed through their respective programs. Accordingly, focus groups were determined to be the best approach to answer our research questions. All research activities


76

were approved by the University of Florida IRB.

Participants The target population was students

who graduated within the last two years or were about to graduate from the six main agricultural universities. The universities were: (a) Université d’Etat d’Haiti - Faculté d'Agronomie et de Médecine Vétérinaire (FAMV), (b) American University of the Caribbean (AUC), (c) Université Caraïbe (UC), (d) Université Notre Dame d’Haïti (UNDH), (e) Université Quisqueya (UNIQ), and (f) Université Episcopale d'Haïti (UNEPH). Deans at each university were asked to identify students. To minimize any impact from gender, we conducted separate focus groups with male and female students from each university. A total 12 focus groups were conducted, with a total of 97 students participating. Students were all in agronomy engineer programs. Focus group sizes ranged from 8 to 13 for males and from 4 to 7 for females. In total, 63 males and 34 females participated in the study. Based on the order in which the focus groups were conducted, each university was assigned a number (U1, U2, etc.) and male focus groups were denoted with a M and female with a F. Data are reported based on the focus group in which a theme was observed.

Data Collection Focus groups were conducted in

French and participants were allowed to respond in French or Creole by a Haitian-American member of the research team. Focus groups were conducted on each campus at times which were convenient for students. Focus groups were audio-recorded and a Haitian research assistant was also present to take notes. The focus group guide was developed based on our theoretical framework and included 18 questions with

follow-up probes. A list of the GFRAS competency areas was either written on the board or provided to students on papers for reference. Focus groups lasted between 90 and 120 minutes.

Data Analysis Following each focus group, the

research assistant summarized the audio recording and field notes to create a summary file for each focus group (Merriam, 1998). These summary files also included details about each focus group, thus establishing an audit trail (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). The second Haitian researcher compared the summary file for each focus groups with the recordings and field notes to establish trustworthiness in the data (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). The second researcher then conducted thematic analysis (Boyatzis, 1998) of each summary file. Initial coding included emergent codes to address research questions 1 and 2 and a blend of emergent and a priori codes from our theoretical framework (Ary et al., 2010; GFRAS, 2016) to address research questions 3 and 4. This process yielded 12 summary files with initial codes. Next, the second Haitian researcher conducted an additional analysis of the 12 summary files to organize the initial codes into an overall set of themes and sub-themes (Boyatzis, 1998). This was conducted in French and then translated to English. Peer debriefings were conducted with an American researcher throughout the process to ensure the quality of the analysis (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). The final analysis/results were shared back with the original researcher who conducted the focus groups as an additional layer of peer debriefing (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).

Subjectivity Statement This research was conducted as a

part of a USAID project focused on enhancing the Haitian capacity for


77

agricultural research and extension. The research team has four members, two of which are employed by the project and two are Co-PIs on the project. The first Haitian-American researcher is a female who studied in the U.S. Her professional expertise is in monitoring and evaluation methods. The second Haitian researcher is a male who holds a PhD in agricultural higher education and previously worked at one of the universities in this study. The third researcher is an American male who is a professor of agricultural education who has worked throughout the Caribbean. The fourth researcher is also an American male and is an assistant professor of agricultural education who has also worked in the Caribbean and Latin America. Collectively, this group of researchers believes in the power of education and the importance of higher education as a tool for addressing food insecurity. Only the second Haitian researcher had a prior relationship with any of the universities.

Results

Career Aspirations Students had a wide variety of career

aspirations. In five of the focus groups, students mentioned starting a farm (U1-F; U2-M; U3-F; U5-F; U6-M), helping farmers (U1-M; U1-F; U4-M; U4-F; U6-F), increasing national level food production (U2-F; U3-M; U4-F; U6-M; U6-F), and improving the environment (U2-F; U3-M; U4-M; U6-M; U6-F) were their most sought after career aspirations (see Table 1). In addition, four focus groups had students who expressed the desire to work in a field in which they could improve local communities (U4-M; U5-M; U6-M; U5-F). The thought of gaining any type of employment was mentioned in three of the focus groups. A career in research or extension was mentioned by three of the focus groups, while two focus groups mentioned having aspirations to becoming an educator or trainer. Interestingly, continuing education was mentioned in three of the male focus groups, but not in the female focus groups (U1-M; U2-M; U4-M). Finally, becoming an entrepreneur was brought up in two focus groups (U2-F; U4-M; see Table 1).

Table 1 Career Aspirations of Graduates

Career Goal Number of

Focus Groups Start a farm 5 U1-F; U2-M; U3-F; U5-F; U6-M To help farmers 5 U1-M; U1-F; U4-M; U4-F; U6-F Increase agricultural production 5 U2-F; U3-M; U4-F; U6-M; U6-F Improve environmental practices 5 U2-F; U3-M; U4-M; U6-M; U6-F Improve communities 4 U4-M; U5-M; U6-M; U5-F Continue education 3 U1-M; U2-M; U4-M Gain employment 3 U1-M; U2-M; U5-F Research or Extension 3 U1-M; U3-M; U6-M Education and Training 2 U2-F; U4-M Become an entrepreneur 2 U2-F; U4-M

Note: N = 12 focus groups


78

Preparation for Employment Preparedness

Students expressed favorable opinions about their preparedness for the job market. One group of students appreciated the breadth of their program, learning not only about agriculture, but other subjects (U4-F). Students also shared how their program helped them understand the variety of skills needed for career success (U6-M). Students indicated they were prepared to think, analyze, and question like engineer agronomists (U6-F). Another group of students were very positive about their preparation, indicating they had learned more than needed to work in the field (U1-M).

Theory and reality. Students expressed mixed opinions about the connection between theories they learned in class and the reality in the field. Students in one group said some of their courses are very practical, while others are too theoretical (U1-F). They went on to suggest there is no oversight of what is taught, and the deans do not know what is happening in each class (U1-F). Students in crop sciences at one university explained they were taught about large scale cropping systems based on practices in France, but this did not match the reality in Haiti (U3-M). One student estimated what he had learned only matched about 50% of the reality in the field (U2-M). One student shared there was not necessarily a mismatch between his coursework and the reality in the field, rather “we have only a brief view in the courses while the field asks a lot” (U3-M). Another group of students appreciated the breadth of courses they took but acknowledged many of the courses did not match the reality (U4-F).

Other groups of students were very complimentary about what they had learned. One group of students (U1-M) felt their courses were excellent and aligned with the realities in the field. Students in another

focus group believed that the natural resource program at their university closely matched the realities in the field (U3-M). Students at another university shared how their time living at the teaching farm helped them understand the realities in the field. One student said,

at the end, we know better the importance and the techniques of production, particularly during our two years living on our academic farm. We are much more prepared to work with NGOs and face with the problems of this sector. (U2-F)

Yet another group of students (U5-M) thought their classes adequately prepared them for the realities sector.

Practical experience. Students expressed a desire to have more practical experiences in their degrees. A student in one of the focus groups thought it would be great to have some practical experience connected with each class (U3-F). Students in another focus group specifically wanted more experience working directly with farmers (U5-F). They said that a lecture cannot replace direct interaction with people. Students in one focus group shared the quality of the practical experiences is also important. The importance of internships and other field experiences was expressed by one group of students (U6-F), but they went on to express frustration because many classes that could have these experiences do not (U6-F). Even if they do have these kinds of experiences. one student said, “we learned nothing because they are not well organized” (U6-F).

Pride. Students were proud of what they learned from their universities. Students from one university said “Our college of agriculture gives us a standard formation, training, more or less international. When we go to the USA and France, we are comfortable” (U4-M). Another student said “the sciences are the same in every part of


79

the world. The job market is really competitive. Therefore, we have to be always on the ball. The field or the market is the court that will judge us” (U1-M).

Personal responsibility. Students in three of the focus groups acknowledged a personal responsibility in ensuring they had the necessary skills for their future careers. One student shared that she must do some personal research to understand the background of an issue because the realities in the field do not always match the theories learned in class (U1-F). A student in a different focus group also emphasized the importance of personal research to fill in gaps not learned in class (U3-F). Yet another student explained that the courses may not match the realities in the field, but that gap could be closed by personally initiating activities and research (U4-F). One student asserted “We have to make our own research to have some practice” (U6-F). A student at a different university explained that she liked the opportunities to go out in the field because it allowed her to take responsibility for her own learning (U5-F). One student summed it up by saying “by the mercy of the Internet, we can complete what we miss” (U6-F). Another group of students said their university is good about providing the basic concepts, but they must volunteer to gain practical experience using the concept (U1-M).

Job opportunities. Students are not optimistic about finding employment after graduation. One group of students estimated that only about 12% find a job after graduation (U1-M).

Research Skills Importance of research. Students

valued the importance of research. Students in Focus group U4-F expressed that research has a positive impact because it helps to improve something and solve problems. Another group of students (U2-F)

considered research as an important skill to address problems. In contrast, a student in Focus Group U4-M said that some people do not even believe in the importance of research in Haiti.

Leading a research project. Students felt prepared to lead a research project. Students in Focus Group U3-M thought they are ready to implement or apply research in their future work. Focus Group U4-F also believed they can lead a research project. The male students at the same institution (U4-M) thought the same in terms of research and extension for development. Students from U2-M said that they can do some research, but still need support or coaching.

Learning research skills. A variety of courses and experiences helped students learn research skills. Students in U3-M believed that their final research project (memoire) was an important tool for developing their research skills. Students in that same focus group who were currently conducting their memoire research agreed. Focus group U4-M also agreed but felt because a final project (a memoire) was not required at their university that they were not as prepared to do research. They further expressed concern that they did not have tools and materials necessary to implement a research project. Students in U1-M referenced specific courses in research methodologies and biometry gave them the skills to conduct qualitative and quantitative research. Students in U2-M discussed a research methods course that helped them to do research and to interpret data.

Specific research skills. Students highlighted a handful of their specific research skills. Students in Focus Group U3-M felt comfortable judging the quality of research conducted by others. They also felt comfortable using the Internet to search for quality research information. Depending on their specialization, they felt comfortable in


80

quantitative methods, qualitative methods, or both. Focus Group U4-F indicated they feel competent in both quantitative and qualitative methods. Focus Group U1-M felt they can design a study, collect data, analyze data, and interpret results.

Extension Competencies Overall importance. Students

thought it was important for them to have some level of competence in all the GFRAS competency areas. The majority of U4-F thought all 17 GFRAS competency areas are very important, particularly critical thinking and gender in agriculture. Although a few students did not think critical thinking and adult learning were quite as important. Students from U2-F felt all the competences were very important, although they expressed slightly less importance for adaptation to change and critical thinking. Students from U1-M specifically noted competence in leadership, ethics, and adaptation to change are critical for their career. However, students in U2-M did not think adaptation to change, adult learning, behavior change, critical thinking, and project implementation were as important as the other competencies.

Planning, implementing, and evaluating programs. Students felt varying levels of competence in planning, implementing, and evaluating extension programs. Students in U3-M felt prepared to implement programs, specifically referencing environmental education programs. Similarly, students in U2-F thought that they are ready to implement, develop, and evaluate program. Students in U4-M and U2-M expressed partial comfort in planning, delivering, and evaluating programs. U4-M felt most comfortable in identifying and developing the objectives for programs. Whereas students in U2-M felt most competent in delivering and evaluating programs. Students in U4-F expressed a

desire to plan, deliver, and evaluate education programs, but felt they would need some assistance to do so.

Students shared some specific courses and experiences they thought helped them develop program planning, delivery, and evaluation competence. Students in U2-F discussed courses in project management, agrarian systems, extension, and rural sociology. They shared these classes helped them learn to identify a problem, working with different people to deliver a program, and being a program leader. Their male peers (U2-M) agreed that some courses like project management, extension, aquaculture, marine resources, and methods courses gave them skills in program planning, delivery, and evaluation.

Leadership and leading change. Students felt prepared to lead change with various groups of people. U4-M felt prepared to be a leader of change and are ready to implement and manage change. They went on to share they felt equally comfortable working with people across social strata, age, and gender. Students from U3-M thought they are all leaders ready to work with all kinds of people. Students in U4-F shared they currently work under supervision from someone else, but they are prepared to be leaders and make decisions because of what they learned at U4. Students in U2-M felt very prepared to lead change and capable of influencing all kinds of people (youth, women, adults). As an example, one student shared “there are some people who used to send their garbage in the streets, but with some methods that make them aware of the problem and a good communication, he finished by having their behavior changed.”


81


Career Aspirations Students had a wide variety of career

aspirations and appreciated the breadth of the agronomy engineer degree. The most common career goals were (a) starting a farm, (b) helping farmers, (c) increasing national level food production, and (d) improving the environment. Working in extension, research, education, or training were not frequently mentioned. It is also interesting to note that only male students aspired to continue their education.

These conclusions are similar to previous research. (Pierre, Calixte, Moore, Bunch, & Roberts, 2018) showed Haitian professors were not optimistic about students’ potential to find a job related to their degree. The diversity in career aspirations expressed by students reveals students may be thinking broadly about how they might apply what they learned in their degree. Most focus groups had students who wanted to work in agriculture and many expressed an altruistic desire to improve the conditions in their country. A similar desire to make a difference was noted in workers in various extension and advisory services in Haiti (Albert, Roberts, & Harder, 2017).

We recommend that the Haitian universities follow up with graduates to gain a better understanding of the types of positions graduates are taking. This information could be used to adjust the curricula and experiences at each university. Additional research should explore why only male students expressed a desire to continue their education. Research should also explore why so few students mentioned careers in extension, research, education, or training. Many of the career aspirations mentioned (e.g. helping farmers, improving food production, improving communities) imply activities related to extension,

research, education, and training. Do students not understand these career options?

Work Preparedness Students generally expressed

favorable opinions about their preparedness for the job market. However, students expressed mixed opinions about the connection between the theoretical learning at their universities with the practical reality in the field. Students expressed a greater desire for more practical experiences as a part of their degree. Despite these short-comings, students expressed pride in their respective universities and acknowledged a level of personal responsibility in making sure they were prepared for the job market. Unfortunately, students were very pessimistic about finding a job directly related to their degree.

These conclusions are largely consistent with previous research. Many focus groups of students noted the disconnect between theoretical instruction and field realities. This aligns with Hurst et al.’s (2015) finding of differing levels of practical instruction at universities. In the same vein, students also expressed a desire to have more practical experiences included in their degree. This fits with what Crawford et al. (2011) found in the United States. Pride in their institutions is congruent with what Albert et al. (2017) found with extension workers. Taking personal responsibility was previously noted by Bennett et al. (1999) and Crawford et al. Additionally, professors also thought it was important for students to be self-directed (Pierre, Calixte, Moore, Bunch, & Roberts, 2018). Finally, the pessimistic job outlook by students was shared with their professors (Pierre, Calixte, Moore, Bunch, & Roberts, 2018).


82

We recommend Haitian universities explore the potential to integrate more practical and field experiences in their curricula. Institutional pride and personal responsibility seem to have great potential as motivators for students. Further research is recommended to explore how these (and other) motivators might influence academic success and career development. The pessimistic job outlook noted by students (and professors in the previous study) is problematic. Considerable resources (human and financial) are invested in higher education. Further research should examine the underlying conditions that contribute to this situation. This may yield curricula and policy changes at the universities. Additional research should also examine alumni of the universities to explore where they are working, the types of jobs they hold, and the extent to which they believe the universities gave them the competencies needed for success.

Research Competencies Students valued the importance of

research. They also felt capable of leading a research project. Most students valued the importance of their memoire (thesis) in helping develop their research skills. Although some students noted a lack of resources at their university to learn how to do research. The specific research skills possessed by students varied. Students generally felt comfortable using the Internet to find research and being able to judge the quality of previous research. Depending on the university and specific program within the university, students believed themselves to be competent in quantitative and qualitative research methods.

These conclusions are consistent with previous research. Professors also valued the importance of students learning research skills (Pierre, Calixte, Moore, Bunch, & Roberts, 2018). van Crowder,

Lindley, Bruening, and Doron (1998) also emphasized the importance of developing skilled agricultural researchers in developing countries.

Perceived competence and actual ability do not necessarily align. Further research could use content analysis of the memoires to determine the specific methodologies used and the level of rigor applied. Additionally, as noted by (Pierre et al., 2018), most Haitian faculty are educated at the M.S. level. The research capability of the professors is also unknown. Additional research could explore this issue. Further research could also follow up with graduates working in the field to see what research skills are needed most. This could allow for universities to adjust curricula.

Extension Competencies Students thought all 17 GFRAS

competency areas were important, although adult learning, behavior change, and critical thinking were viewed as slightly less important in some of the focus groups. In addition to perceived importance, we sought to determine their perceived competence. Students felt varying levels of competence in planning, implementing, and evaluating extension programs. In contrasts, students generally felt prepared to lead change with various groups of people, which encompasses communication, leadership, adaptation to change, behavior change, adult learning, gender, and youth.

This partially contradicts what their professors said (Pierre, Calixte, Moore, Bunch, & Roberts, 2018). Professors thought (a) adult learning, (b) gender issues in agriculture, and (c) youth issues in agriculture were not that important for students to master. Otherwise results were similar. The GFRAS competency areas overlap the soft skills discussed earlier. As such, the importance of communication, leadership, ethics, critical thinking, and


83

leadership is consistent with other work around the world (Bennett et al., 1999; Crawford et al., 2011; Harvey, 2000).

It is important to note that our use of the GFRAS competency framework provided a general glimpse at what students perceived. A more detailed understanding could be accomplished by using a more in-depth assessment of extension competencies like the 38 specific skills assessed by Harder et al. (2013). Additional research could also explore the differences between faculty and students on adult learning, gender, and youth. Universities can look for opportunities to integrate some of the extension competencies in their curricula, especially the ones that align with other soft skills.

References Albert, B., Roberts, T. G., & Harder, A.

(2017). Career development influences of employees working in Haiti’s agricultural extension and advisory services. Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education, 24(2), 107-121. doi: 10.5191/jiaee.2017.24208

Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., & Sorensen, C. (2010). Introduction to research in education (8th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.

Asenso-Okyere, K., Davis, K., & Aredo, D. (2008). Advancing agriculture in developing countries through knowledge and innovation: Synopsis of an international conference. Washington, DC: IFPRI. Retrieved from http://ebrary.ifpri.org/cdm/ref/collection/p15738coll5/id/855

Bennett, N., Dunne, E., & Carré, C. (1999). Patterns of core and generic skill provision in higher education. Higher Education, 37(1), 71-93.

Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3448047

Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Crawford, P., Lang, S., Fink, W., Dalton, R., & Fielitz, L. (2011). Comparative analysis of soft skills: What is important for new graduates? Washington, DC: Association of Public and Land-grant Universities.

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). (2002). Anti-Hunger Programme: Reducing hunger through agriculture and rural development and wider access to food. Rome: FAO. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/tempref/docrep/fao/004/y7151e/y7151e00.pdf

Global Forum for Rural Advisory Services. (2012). Building knowledge systems in agriculture: Five key areas for mobilizing the potential of extension and advisory services. Lindau, Switzerland: IFPRI. Retrieved from http://ebrary.ifpri.org/utils/getfile/collection/p15738coll2/id/127546/filename/127757.pdf

Global Forum for Rural Advisory Services. (2016). The New Extensionist learning kit. Retrieved from https://www.g-fras.org/en/157-the-new-extensionist#learning-kit

Harder, A., Ganpat, W., Moore, A., Strong, R., & Lindner, J. R. (2013). An assessment of extension officers’ self-perceived programming competencies in selected Caribbean countries. Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education, 20(1), 33-46. doi: 10.5191/jiaee.2013.20103

Harvey, L. (2000). New realities: The relationship between higher education and employment. Tertiary


84

Education and Management, 6(1), 3-17. doi:10.1080/13583883.2000.9967007

Hurst, S. D., Conner, N. W., Stripling, C. T., Blythe, J., Giorgi, A., Rubenstein, E.,… & Roberts, T. G. (2015). An exploration of the formal agricultural education system in Trinidad and Tobago. Journal of Agricultural Education, 56(1), 141-154. doi: 10.5032/jae.2015.01141

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Mulder, M. (2014). Conceptions of professional competence. In S. Billett, C. Harteis, & H. Gruber (Eds.), International handbook of research in professional and practice-based learning (pp. 107-137). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-94-017-8902-8_5

Pierre, A., Calixte, M. C., Moore, K., Bunch, J. C., Koenig, R., Delva, L., & Roberts, T. G. (2018). Haitian agricultural faculty preparation for their academic roles. Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education, 25(1), 24-38. doi: 10.5191/jiaee.2018.25103

Pierre, A., Calixte, M. C., Moore, K., Bunch, J. C., & Roberts, T. G. (2018). Haitian faculty perceptions of students’ competence at graduation: An opportunity for curricula modification. Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education, 25(3), 20-32. doi: 10.5191/jiaee.2018.25302

Schwandt, T. A. (2000). Three epistemological stances for qualitative inquiry. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 189-213). Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.

USAID. (2017, March). Agriculture and food security: Fact Sheet. Port au Prince, Haiti: USAID-Haiti. Retrieved from https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1862/FINAL_Food_Security_March_2017.pdf

van Crowder, L., Lindley, W. I., Bruening, T. H., & Doron, N. (1998).Agricultural education forsustainable rural development:Challenges for developing countriesin the 21st century. Journal ofAgricultural Education andExtension, 5(2), 71-84. doi:10.1080/13892249885300201

von Grebmer, K., Bernstein, J., Prasai, N., Amin, S., Yohannes, Y., Nabarro, D.,… & Patterson, F. (2016). Synopsis: Global hunger index, getting to zero hunger. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute IFPRI. doi: 10.2499/9780896292284


85

doi: 10.5191/jiaee.2019.26108

Senegalese Professors’ Intention to Engage in Learner-Centered Instructional Strategies in Agriculture Courses

James C. Anderson II University of Georgia

Ibukun D. Alegbeleye Virginia Tech University

Wangui C. Gichane World Bank

Azenegashe O. Abaye Virginia Tech University

Abstract The Senegalese agricultural sector suffers from an inadequate number of skilled workers. On January 24, 2011, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) launched the Education and Research in Agriculture (ERA) project to increase the number of skilled workers entering the agriculture supply pipeline. To achieve this goal, ERA provided professors with materials, resources, and the knowledge for incorporating learner-centered strategies in their curriculum. The purpose of this study is to describe the intentions of Senegalese agriculture professors in engaging in learner-centered instructional strategies. The theoretical framework guiding this study is Ajzen’s (1991) Theory of Planned Behavior, which identifies predictors that leads to an individual’s intention to engage in a certain behavior. Data were collected using survey questionnaire. Agriculture professors (n = 40) from three public universities and two training institutes affiliated with the universities completed the survey questionnaire. Purposive sampling was used to select professors from schools that had close involvement with the USAID-ERA project. Findings suggest that Senegalese professors are engaging or intend to engage in a few learner-centered (LC) instructional strategies; have a positive attitude but still suffer from cognitive dissonance; have some challenges with subjective norms; and lack adequate self-efficacy that is necessary for engaging in LC instructional strategies. Continuous trainings that delineate the positive outcomes of engaging in LC instructional strategies is recommended to resolve the cognitive dissonance that many still have. We recommend future studies to investigate the degree of influence as measured by attitude, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control.

Keywords: Senegalese professors, higher education, training and development, learner-centered instruction


86

Introduction Higher education in Senegal, like

many other African countries, faces a variety of challenges that range from limited access to institutions to a strict and structured curriculum that leaves little room for teacher agency (Bravo-Ureta, Maas, Diouf, & Ndoye, 2012; Erbaugh, Crawford, & Adipala, 2009; Teferra, 2004). According to Bravo-Ureta et al. (2012), the Senegalese agricultural sector suffers from a shortage of skilled workers due to inadequate education. Current methods of instruction, classroom structure, and curriculum have contributed to the lack of technical skills in the workforce (Horst, 2016).

The prevalent method of instruction in Senegalese institutions of higher education is the traditional teacher-centered (TC) lecture strategy, which was passed down by colonial France (Horst, 2016). However, while developed countries like France have moved beyond passive strategies and are engaging in more learner-centered (LC) instructional strategies, developing countries like Senegal are still engaging in more TC strategies. A TC strategy is an efficient way to instruct multiple learners through information memorization; however, this autocratic ‘one method fits all’ approach is insensitive to the various learning needs of students (Brown, 2003). As more educators ascribe to the philosophy that students’ learning needs are diverse and instructional strategies should reflect various learning styles (Faitar, 2011), many developing countries have yet to make the transition, even with more instructional training being implemented in these countries.

There are different definitions for LC instructional strategies, which is indicative of its many forms (Baeten, Kyndt, Struyven, & Dochy, 2010). However, the central theme is that a LC instructional strategy should be collaborative, activity-based, less

rigid, and adapted to the needs of students (Ginsburg, 2010; Horst, 2016; Prince, 2004). Many studies have looked at different forms of LC instructional strategies, and findings are mixed. While there is evidence to suggest that LC instructional strategies lead to improved performance, some studies have reported no significant relationship between some forms (e.g., cooperative learning) and individual learning outcomes (Hanze & Berger, 2007; Krause, Stark, & Mandl, 2009). Rather, these studies have reported a direct relationship between LC instructional strategies and increased self-efficacy, autonomy, perceived competence, motivation, and engagement (Anderson, 2013; Cheang, 2009; Dunlap, 2005), which ultimately leads to improvements in academic performance and higher cumulative grade point averages (Carroll et. al., 2009; Yusuf, 2011). McCombs, Daniels, and Perry (2008) found that students’ perceptions of their teacher’s LC practices were significantly related to their motivation for learning.

LC teaching practices have also been linked to promoting psychological safety and a supportive learning environment for students (Zumbrunn, McKim, Buhs, & Hawley, 2014). Many studies have shown that a supportive classroom environment predicts students’ sense of belonging, which in turn predicts their motivation to learn, engagement and performance (Connell & Wellborn, 1991; Zumbrunn et al., 2014). These results lead us to the conclusion that some learner-centered approaches directly impact performance in ways that can be measured in the short-term while others impact performance that must be measured over an extended period of time.

Despite the documented benefits of LC instructional strategies, the majority of Senegalese professors still engage in the traditional TC strategies (Ahmed, 2013; Brown, 2003). While many factors could


87

cause this lack of adoption, teachers’ self-efficacy is one factor that has been widely studied related to teachers’ intentions. Several studies have reported that teachers’ self-efficacy have been identified to affect teachers’ motivation to adopt new teaching methods, especially in cases where there is already a positive attitude (Althauser, 2018; Caraway, Tucker, Reinke, & Hall, 2003; Silm, Tiitsaar, Pedaste, Zacharia, & Papaevripidou, 2017). Silm et al. (2017) found teachers’ unwillingness to engage in inquiry-based learning (IBL) was due to low self-efficacy as a result of a lack of requisite knowledge that is necessary to implement the instructional strategy in their classrooms. However, they found that targeted training with subsequent support improved self-efficacy and a readiness to adopt IBL. Similarly, Althauser (2018) found a significant difference in preservice elementary teachers’ self-efficacy in teaching mathematics as a result of participating in an elementary methods course than those who had not had such training.

Senegalese professors’ engagement in more TC strategies has negative implications for the quality of education and ultimately the quality of their graduates. Due to the high demand for skilled workers in the Senegalese agricultural sector, it behooves professors to employ a variety of instructional strategies that would meet the learning needs of the students as well as address the competencies of the industry in order to guarantee a capable workforce (Bravo-Ureta et. al., 2012). Accordingly, the purpose of this study was to explore the intentions of Senegalese agriculture professors involved in the USAID-ERA project to engage in LC instructional strategies in an effort to identify opportunities for exploration and investment related to international agricultural education and training.

Theoretical Framework The theoretical framework guiding

this study is Ajzen’s (1991) Theory of Planned Behavior – an extension of the Fishbein and Ajzen’s Theory of Reasoned Action. Ajzen’s theory predicts an individual’s intention of engaging or performing in a certain behavior by measuring three factors– attitude, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control (see Fig. 1).

Three types of beliefs serve as the antecedents to the interrelated constructs of attitude, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control, which shapes one’s intention and thus behavior. The three beliefs are: behavioral beliefs about the likely outcome of performing a behavior, thus shaping one’s attitude; normative beliefs about the attitude or expectations of important referents in one’s social environment about the behavior that lead to subjective norms; and control beliefs about the presence of factors that may hinder or facilitate performance of the behavior that forms one’s perceived behavioral control (Ajzen, 2012; Patterson, 2009). Accordingly, the more favorable one’s attitude and subjective norms are, and the more enabling one’s perceived behavioral control is; then the stronger one’s intention to perform a behavior would be (Ajzen, 1991, 2012; Underwood, 2012).

In this study, perceived behavioral control is conceptualized as self-efficacy, since this is within the context of teaching and learning (Ajzen, 2012; Fishbein & Capella, 2006; Macfarlane & Wolfson, 2013). The belief that one possesses the resources, skills, and abilities necessary to perform a behavior will lead to self-efficacy, which in turn will lead to intention (Fishbein & Capella, 2006). Moreover, there is evidence to suggest that increased self-efficacy directly predicts increased persistence and performance in a behavior


88

(Ajzen, 2012; Bandura & Locke, 2003). Teachers that are confident in their ability to effectively perform a behavior, will most likely persist in performing that behavior,

thereby increasing the likelihood of its performance.

Figure 1. Theory of Planned Behavior and its component parts (adapted from Fishbein & Capella, 2006).

Although these three components influence an individual’s intentions to engage in, perform or act on the behavior in question, it is important to note that these three factors do not guarantee actual behavioral performance. However, knowing one’s intentions toward a behavior is the best predictor of actual behavioral performance (Ajzen, 1991; Bunch, Blackburn, DanJean, Stair, & Blanchard, 2015). According to this theory, professors will have greater intentions to use LC instructional strategies if they: 1) have positive attitudes toward engaging in LC instructional strategies (attitudes); 2) receive positive reinforcement from important referents in their environment to engage in these methods (subjective norms); and 3)

believe that they are capable of effectively performing the behavior (self-efficacy).

Research Objectives On January 24, 2011, the United

States Agency for International Development (USAID) launched the USAID’s Education and Research in Agriculture (USAID-ERA) project, consistent with the Feed the Future (FTF) strategic plans. “Within the FTF strategic plan, ERA contributes to increased human-resource capacity by assisting Senegalese Agriculture Education, Training, and Research (AETR) Institutions” (USAID, 2014, p. 3). Currently, higher education institutions frequently contract part-time professors known as vacataires to teach specific subject areas, limiting the amount of


89

contact students have with full-time faculty. However, as the decision-makers related to the curriculum and instructional strategies that are normalized within the institution, the USAID-ERA project has focused on efforts to increase the amount and quality of instructional contact full-time professors have with students. To achieve this, the USAID-ERA project provided professors with materials, resources, and the knowledge for incorporating more learner-centered approaches in their curriculum. This study assessed the intentions of the professors trained to utilize the resources and instructional strategies in their agricultural classes. The research objectives that guided the study were to describe (a) the descriptive characteristics of Senegalese professors; (b) professors’ attitude towards LC instructional strategy; (c) the subjective norms that may hinder/encourage the effective adoption of LC instructional strategy; and (d) how professors’ self-efficacy may affect their adoption of LC instructional strategy.

Methods Data were collected using a 55-item

survey questionnaire that explored Senegalese agriculture professors’ intention in engaging in LC instructional strategies. Using the Theory of Planned Behavior (Ajzen, 1985, 1991), a 4-part survey questionnaire was constructed; it ranked responses on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from ‘1-Strongly disagree, 3-Neutral, and 5-Strongly agree’; dichotomous “yes” and “no” questions; ranking questions; and close-ended responses. Professors were asked to rank their level of agreement on questions from four sections. The first section measured the descriptive characteristics of professors. Professors were asked about their demographic and teaching background. It included ranking questions that determined professors’ role at

their respective institutions; close-ended questions on courses they currently taught; average class sizes; and teaching experience.

In the second section, professors were asked to identify current teaching and learning strategies, as well as major challenges (pedagogical or material) currently faced using a dichotomous “yes” and “no” questions and close-ended questions. It also measured professors’ attitude towards LC strategies. We used a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from ‘1-Good, 3-Neutral, and 5-Bad’ to assess professors’ attitudes towards more learner-centered methods. The third section measured the social pressures that professors felt from their peers, administration, and institution in incorporating new learner-centered practices. They were asked to indicate the level of agreement with statements about their social environment from 1-Strongly agree and 5-Strongly disagree. In the last section of the questionnaire, professors were asked about their perceived confidence (self-efficacy) in applying LC instructional strategies into their curriculum. Responses were measured on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from ‘1-Strongly disagree, 3-Neutral, and 5-Strongly agree’.

The questionnaire was developed in English and reviewed for construct and face validity (Pedhazur & Schmelkin, 1991) by a panel of four experts in education, international development, Senegalese culture, and instrumentation. Test-retest reliability was conducted with 11 doctoral students in agriculture using a 7-day time interval (Pedhazur & Schmelkin, 1991). Coefficients of stability ranged from .78 to 1.0, with allocation of time being the lowest and teaching tools used being the highest. Finally, the questionnaire was translated into French and reviewed for accuracy by a French-speaking Senegalese and a native English-speaking professor fluent in French.


90

The paper version of the questionnaire was administered in person in Senegal to agriculture professors (n = 40) at three public universities: Cheikh Anta Diop University of Dakar (UCAD), Assane Seck University of Ziguinchor (UASZ), Gaston Berger University of Saint Louis (UGB); and two training institutes affiliated with the university: National Advanced School for Agriculture (ENSA) and Institute for Advanced Rural and Agricultural Training (ISFAR). The purposive sample consisted of a census of the full-time professors that were currently teaching agriculture-related courses in a formal classroom environment in at least 1 of the 5 Senegalese partner institutions who were trained through the USAID-ERA project. Frequencies were tallied for each of the 55 items and analyzed

for trends in attitude, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control.

Findings

Professors’ Descriptive Characteristics The sample of professors included

35 males and five females (see Table 1), with equal representation of 20 participants coming from the training institutes ENSA and ISFAR and the universities UCAD, UGB, and UASZ. The average years of teaching experience ranged from 5 years to 23 years, with males reporting an average of four years more teaching experience than females. Finally, the average class size greatly varied between the institutions with UCAD (n = 238) reporting the largest average class size and ENSA and ISFAR (n = 37) tied for the smallest average class size.

Table 1 Demographic Information for the Senegalese Agriculture Professors (n = 40)

UCAD UGB UASZ ENSA ISFAR Male 10 4 2 7 12 Female 3 1 0 1 0 Avg. Years Teaching 17 11 5 13 23 Avg. Class Size 238 75 50 37 37

Table 2 provides a summary of the teaching tools/strategies professors reported using to accommodate different learning styles. Approximately 98% (n = 39) of the professors indicated that they used hands-on activities or visual aids such as charts, graphs, and maps. Additionally, 95% (n = 38) reported using lectures and/or

PowerPoint presentations and approximately 93% (n = 37) used discussions in the classroom. Conversely, the four tools/strategies used least were role-play scenarios (n = 4), audio lectures (n = 10), multi-media presentations (n = 13), and oral lecture summaries by students (n = 17).

Table 2 Teaching Tools/Strategies Used by the Senegalese Agriculture Professors (n = 40) Teaching Tools Yes No N/A Hands-on activities 39 1 0 Charts/graphs/maps 39 0 1 Lectures/PowerPoint Presentations 38 1 1 Discussions 37 1 2


91

Field Trips 29 7 4 Oral lecture summaries by the professor 25 8 7 Using bold colors 24 8 8 Oral lecture summaries by students 17 13 10 Multi-media presentations 13 15 12 Audio lectures 10 19 11 Role-play scenarios 4 21 15

The professors were also asked about what teaching techniques they felt were most effective in facilitating the learning process of students (see Table 3). This allowed for a comparison between techniques frequently used versus those perceived to be the most effective to see if there were any discrepancies. Although none of the techniques received over 50%

agreement, the techniques identified as most effective were lectures/PowerPoint presentations (n = 19), group problem solving scenarios (n = 15), discussions (n = 15), and practical work (n = 9). Conversely, techniques that were more student led, such as case studies, group work, and individual research had lower frequencies.

Table 3 Professors’ Perceptions on Effective Teaching Strategies (n = 40) Teaching Techniques Frequency Percentage Lecture/PowerPoint presentations 19 47.5 Problem-solving in groups 15 37.5 Discussions 15 37.5 Practical work 9 22.5 Problem-based learning 4 10.0 Case studies 2 5.0 Mentoring/coaching 2 5.0 Group work 2 5.0 Individual research 2 5.0 Videos and video presentations 1 2.5 Individual research on a topic 1 2.5

At the two training institutes, ENSA and ISFAR, half of the professors (n = 10) indicated a lack of equipment and materials (e.g. projectors, microscopes, etc.) as the primary constraint in teaching. Additional constraints mentioned by more than one professor were electricity outages and poor internet connection (n = 9), rigid course structure and class schedules (n = 3), and

inadequate pedagogical materials (n = 2). At UCAD, UGB, and UASZ, more than one professor indicated that the primary constraints in teaching were a lack of adequate materials and resources (n = 9) and large class sizes (n = 8). Table 4 lists the other constraints identified by the professors that impede on their ability to employ LC instructional strategies.


92

Table 4 Perceived Contraints in Current Teaching Practices by Institution (n = 40) Institution Constraints University of Cheikh Ants Diop (UCAD)

Large class-sizes Lack of infrastructure (classrooms, lab rooms) Frequent student strikes Inadequate time allocated to teaching Large student populations Shortage of full-time professors Lack of teachers and course evaluations Inefficient student assessment techniques Lack of materials and tools to facilitate teaching and learning Poor internet connection Few pedagogical workshops and trainings on instructional practices

Gaston Berger University (UGB)

Frequent student strike Few materials and tools to facilitate teaching Few field-sites and demonstration plots Lack of infrastructure (classrooms, lab rooms) Few library resources on agricultural sciences Large class-sizes Large student populations Shortage of full-time professors Lack of student participation during courses Lack of pedagogical training workshops and seminars Lack of teaching, lab, and office space Poor internet connection Limited funds to purchase materials

Assane Seck University of Ziguinchor (UASZ)

Frequent student strikes Lack of materials and equipment to facilitate teaching and learning Few available classrooms to teach or conduct LC methods Large class sizes Large student populations Poor internet connection Lack of teacher evaluations Tardy or absent professors

National Advanced School for Agriculture (ENSA)

Teaching time Lack of materials to facilitate teaching and learning Lack of classrooms (Infrastructure is limited) Lack of transportation to field sites Large class sizes Frequent power outages Limited funds to buy resources and materials Shortage of full-time professors


93

Institute for Advanced Rural and Agricultural Training (ISFAR)

Lack of materials to facilitate teaching and learning Unmotivated students Rigid course structure Resistance of students to LC approaches Lack of available classroom space

Attitudes toward Learner-Centered Strategies

Approximately 83% of the respondents (n = 33) reported that employing different teaching strategies to teach students would be good. Similarly, slightly over half of the professors (n = 22) believed that shifting from teacher-centered to learner-centered strategies would be good, and 65% of them (n = 26) believed, given the necessary training and support, using different teaching styles in their course would be good. In addition, 80% of professors (n = 32) reported that collaborating with other faculty members at their department and institution would be good. However, less than half of the professors believed that changing the way agriculture is taught in their institution (n = 19) as well as allowing students to takecontrol and responsibility for their learning(n = 17) would be good.

Institutional Environment & Social Climate

The majority of the professors agreed that their university was a good place to work (n = 28) and supports efforts from faculty to develop learner-centered strategies (n = 22). The respondents were evenly divided on whether or not they felt free to express their opinions about their teaching strategies without worrying about negative results from other faculty members (n = 20). However, less than half agreed that the administration discussed innovative teaching techniques (n = 14) and felt free to express their opinions about teaching styles to their school’s administration without worrying

about negative consequences (n = 12). Moreover, some feared repercussions from administrators (n = 16) or other faculty members (n = 12) for expressing their opinions about teaching strategies. Additionally, less than one-fourth of the professors (n = 9) agreed that their school’s administration provided them with the resources that are required for developing learner-centered teaching, while about half (n = 19) disagreed.

Finally, a majority of the professors (n = 31) agreed that their university approval of their teaching strategy is important to them and believed they had control over the decision to use different teaching and learning styles (n = 21). Conversely, several professors (n = 7) believed it was out of their control. Less than half of the professors (n = 18) also reported that designing their teaching and learning styles is entirely up to them, while almost an equal amount (n = 14) disagreed. Notwithstanding, only one-third of the professors (n = 13) agreed that their institution makes it easy for them to use other teaching styles, while slightly less (n = 11) disagreed.

Self-efficacy of Professors in Engaging in LC Strategy

Almost half of the professors indicated limiting perceived behavioral controls as operationalized by self-efficacy. More specifically, approximately 58% of the professors (n = 23) agreed that they are confident enough to use more LC instructional strategies in their curriculum, while 40% (n = 16) disagreed; and only 31% of the professors (n = 12) agreed that they


94

know enough about LC strategies to implement them in their curriculum, while about 43% disagreed (n = 17).


The purpose of this study was to explore the intentions of Senegalese agriculture professors to engage in LC instructional strategies in an effort to identify opportunities for providing insights on areas of exploration and investment related to international agricultural education and training. The sampling technique used in this study does not allow for the generalization of the following findings and conclusions, but they can be useful as a point of reference in future studies. Similarly, all programmatic recommendations are limited to the sample, but may be considered for implimentation in similar settings.

The findings indicated that while many of the professors were incorporating some forms of LC instructional strategies such as hands-on activities and group discussions in their courses, very few of them engaged in less conventional methods like role playing, audio lectures, and use of multimedia. The respondents overwhelmingly indicated they favored employing the traditional TC instructional strategy of lecture with a PowerPoint presentation or other visuals when teaching students, despite seeing the value of LC instructional strategies like independent research studies, group case studies, and mentoring. However, while the professors indicated many favorable beliefs to LC instructional strategies, they also had unfavorable beliefs that impacted their attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral controls. According to the literature, unfavorable beliefs ultimately decrease the likelihood that they would

employ new instructional strategies, which was evident in the findings.

More specifically, the professors indicated that they grappled with subjective norms due to perceived lack of support for making changes within their institutions. The beliefs that formed these negative subjective norms were a lack of contextual modeling from referent colleagues, systemic issues with inadequate resources and infrastructure, and perceived lack of student compliance. This supports researches that identified inadequate resources as a major challenge in switching to a more LC strategy (Bravo-Ureta et al., 2012). When there are inadequate resources to support instructors in improving their teaching methods, it is easy to revert to the more traditional teaching methods. Additionally, unless these professors perceive that important referents in their institutions and relevant stakeholders are supportive of employing LC instructional strategies, they are less likely to engage in them (Ajzen, 1991, 2012; Underwood, 2012).

In addition, they indicated that although they had a positive self-concept about their teaching, they lacked the self-efficacy required to engage in LC instructional strategies (Magno, 2007), which in turn is due to an actual limiting behavioral control of inadequate training and a lack of skills to implement the strategies. The lack of self-efficacy is particularly significant in Senegalese institutions of higher education because of the hierarchical structure of the African culture, which expects professors to have all the answers, thereby placing an enormous burden on them not to fail (Mashiya, 2011). Therefore, unless Senegalese professors are sure of their capability to implement the LC strategy and have the proper infrastructure and resources, they will not engage in it despite knowing its benefits (Caraway, Tucker, Reinke, & Hall, 2003). It is only in


95

the presence of such control factors like knowledge, skill, and resources that perceived behavioral control predicts the performance of a behavior (Fishbein & Capella, 2006).

Overall, the findings provide evidence that although these Senegalese professors have positive attitudes toward LC instructional strategies, some cognitive dissonance exists due to challenges with subjective norms and perceived behavioral controls. As a result, the respondents lack the intent to employ new strategies because they are uncertain of the likely outcome and their ability to facilitate the strategies with fidelity. The non-performance of more LC instructional strategies and lack of intent to perform them in the future supports Ajzen’s theory that the less favorable one’s beliefs about the likely outcome of performing a behavior are, the weaker one’s intention of performing such a behavior would be and thus the absence of that behavior (Ajzen, 2012).

Accordingly, we recommend substantive and continuous trainings to increase the fidelity of employing LC instructional strategies within the partner intuitions in order to resolve the cognitive dissonance that exists. Previous studies have shown that first-hand, immersive experiences with other professionals positively impact behavioral beliefs and attitudes about engagement, leading to increased intent to participate (Harder, Lamm, Ganpat, & Linder, 2011; Sewell et al., 2017). These trainings should also improve their self-efficacy as well as their actual behavioral control (skills and knowledge). Moreover, since these findings suggest that these Senegalese professors lack adequate resources that are necessary for employing LC instructional strategies, an added incentive would be to provide instructional resources to the trained professors that make implementing these

strategies more feasible. We believe that with proper training and adequate resources, once the early majority of professors begin to adopt LC instructional strategies, there will be a positive change in subjective norms (Mukembo, Uscanga, Edwards, & Brown, 2017), encouraging the late majority and laggards to also engage in LC instructional strategies (Rogers, 2010; Shelburne et al., 2017).

Finally, we recommend the replication of this project in Senegal and other countries within Africa. We also recommend extending this study to investigate (a) how professors internalize LC instructional strategies, which empower students to take control of their education, in the context of African cultural norms and (b) the degree of influence attitude, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control has on the intention to employ and actual use of LC instructional strategies in Senegalese classrooms.

The strategies used to train Senegalese agriculture students directly impact the quality of Senegalese agriculture graduates produced, and consequently the development of the Senegalese agricultural industry and the viability of communities that rely on this industry. With the employment of more LC instructional strategies that address the needs of diverse learners, we expect the quality of graduates to improve. However, professors will not engage in these new strategies without proper training and resources. To this end, this line of inquiry has major implications for international agricultural and extension education by way of providing insights concerning areas of exploration and investment by development agencies and NGOs that are interested in implementing capacity building programs.


96

References Ahmed, A. K. (2013). Teacher-centered

versus learner-centered teaching style. Journal of Global Business Management, 9(1), 22-34.

Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: a theory of planned behavior. In J. Kuhl & J. Beckmann (Eds.), Action control: From cognition to behavior (pp. 11-39). Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, NewYork Tokyo. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-69746-3_2

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211. doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T

Ajzen, I. (2012). Martin Fishbein’s legacy: The reasoned action approach. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 640(1), 11-27. doi: 10.1177/0002716211423363

Althauser, K. L. (2018). The emphasis of inquiry instructional strategies: Impact on preservice teachers' mathematics efficacy. Journal of Education and Learning, 7(1), 53-70.

Anderson, J. C. (2013). An exploration of the motivational profile of secondary urban agriculture students. Journal of Agricultural Education, 54(2), 205-216. doi:10.5032/jae.2013.02205

Baeten, M., Kyndt, E., Struyven, K., & Dochy, F. (2010). Using student-centered learning environments to stimulate deep approaches to learning: Factors encouraging or discouraging their effectiveness. Education Research Review, 5(3), 243-260. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2010.06.001

Bandura, A., & Locke, E. A. (2003). Negative self-efficacy and goal effects revisited. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(1), 87-99. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.1.87

Bravo-Ureta, B., Maas, A., Diouf, I., Ndoye, A. (2012). Agricultural education,research and extension: An analysisof human capital needs in Senegal,ERA Project. Retrieved fromhttp://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/pbaaa116.pdf.

Brown, K. L. (2003). From teacher-centered to learner-centered curriculum: Improving learning in diverse classrooms, Education, 124(1), 49-54.

Bunch, J.C., Blackburn, J.J., DanJean, S., Stair, K.E., & Blanchard, L.D. (2015). Examining Louisiana state university college of agriculture students’ perceived motivators and barriers to participation in international experiences. Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education, 22(3), 69-82. doi:10.5191/jiaee.2015.22305

Caraway, K., Tucker, C. M., Reinke, W. M., & Hall, C. (2003). Self-efficacy, goal orientation, and fear of failure as predictors of school engagement in high school students. Psychology in the Schools, 40(4), 417-427. doi: 10.1002/pits.10092

Carroll, A., Houghton, S., Wood, R., Unsworth, K., Hattie, J., Gordon, L., & Bower, J. (2009). Self-efficacy and academic achievement in Australian high school students: The mediating effects of academic aspirations and delinquency. Journal of Adolescence, 32(4), 797-817. doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2008.10.009

Cheang, K. I. (2009). Effect of learner-centered teaching on motivation and learning strategies in a third-year


97

pharmacotherapy course. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 73(3), 42. doi: 10.5688/aj730342

Connell, J. P., & Wellborn, J. G. (1991). Competence, autonomy and relatedness: A motivational analysis of self-system processes. In M. Gunnar & L. A. Sroufe (Eds.), Minnesota symposium on child psychology: Self-processes and development (pp. 43-78). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Dunlap, J. C. (2005). Problem-based learning and self-efficacy: How a capstone course prepares students for a profession. Educational Technology Research & Development, 53(1), 65-83. doi: 10.5688/aj730342

Erbaugh, J. M., Crawford, E., & Adipala, E. (2009). Strengthening faculties of agriculture in Africa through collaborative post-graduate degree training. Proceedings of the 25th Annual Meeting of the Association of International Agricultural and Extension Education (pp. 194-204). San Juan, P.R.: InterContinental San Juan Resort.

Faitar, G. M. (2011). Building culturally responsive classrooms. International Journal of Educational Policies, 5(1), 5-14.

Fishbein, M., & Capella, J. N. (2006). The role of theory in developing effective health communications. Journal of Communication, 56, S1-S17. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00280.x

Ginsburg, M. B. (2010). Improving educational quality through active-learning pedagogies: A comparison of five case studies. Educational Research, 1(3), 62-74.

Hanze, M., & Berger, R. (2007). Cooperative learning, motivational effects, and student characteristics: An experimental study comparing cooperative learning and direct instruction in 12th grade physics classes. Learning and Instruction, 17(1), 29-41. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.11.004

Harder, A., Lamm, A. J., Ganpat, W., & Lindner, J. R. (2011). An examination of Trinidad extension officers’ behavioral beliefs and intent to participate in an international extension experience. Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education, 18(3), 22-34. doi:10.5191/jiaee.2011.18302

Horst, F. (2016). The long shadows of Spanish and French colonial education. Kyklos, 69(1), 32-64. doi: 10.1111/kykl.12102

Krause, U.M, Stark, R., & Mandl, H. (2009). Effects of cooperative learning and feedback on e-learning in statistics. Learning and Instruction, 19(2), 158–170, doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.03.003

MacFarlane, K., & Wolfson, L. M. (2013). Teacher attitudes and behavior toward the inclusion of children with social, emotional, and behavioral difficulties in mainstream schools: An application of the theory of planned behavior. Teaching and Teacher Education, 29, 46-52. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2012.08.006

Magno, C. (2007). The role of teacher efficacy and characteristics on teaching effectiveness, performance, and use of learner-centered practices. The Asia Pacific Education Researcher, 16(1), 73-90.

Mashiya, N. (2011). IsiZulu and English in KwaZulu-Natal rural schools: How teachers fear failure and opt for


98

English. South African Journal of Childhood Education, 1(1), 19-31. doi:10.4102/sajce.v1i1.71

McCombs, B., Daniels, D., & Perry, K. (2008). Children's and teachers' perceptions of learner-centered practices, and student motivation: Implications for early schooling. The Elementary School Journal, 109(1), 16-35. doi:10.1086/592365

Mukembo, S. C. Uscanga, J. M., Edwards, M. C., Brown, N. R. (2011).Increasing female enrollment foragricultural programs in sub-SaharanAfrica: What motivates women topursue careers in agriculture?Journal of International Agriculturaland Extension Education, 24(1), 17-33. doi:10.5191/jiaee.2017.24104

Patterson, R. R. (2001). Using the theory of planned behavior as a framework for the evaluation of a professional development workshop. Microbiology Education, 2, 34-41.

Pedhazur, E. J., & Schmelkin, L. P. (1991). Measurement, design, and analysis: An integrated approach. New York: Psychology Press.

Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223–231. doi: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x

Rogers, E. M. (2010). Diffusion of innovations. New York: Simon and Schuster, Inc.

Sewell, A. M., Hartnett, M. K., Gray, D. I., Blair, H. T., Kemp, P. D., Kenyon, P. R.,… & Wood, B. A. (2017).Using educational theory andresearch to refine agriculturalextension: Affordances and barriersfor farmers’ learning and practicechange. Journal of AgriculturalEducation and Extension, 23(4),

313-333. doi:10.1080/1389224X.2017.1314861

Shelburne, I., Lawver, D. E., Fraze, S., Ulmer J., Stephenson, C., & Magogo J. (2017). Adoptive behaviors offarmers after training and their subsequent diffusive behaviors in Uasin Gishu County, Kenya. Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education, 24(1), 74-89. doi: 10.5191/jiaee.2016.24109

Silm, G., Tiitsaar, K., Pedaste, M., Zacharia, Z. C., & Papaevripidou, M. (2017).Teachers' readiness to use inquiry-based learning: An investigation ofteachers' sense of efficacy andattitudes toward inquiry-basedlearning. Science EducationInternational, 28(4), 315-325.

Teferra, D., & Altbach, P. G. (2004). African higher education: Challenges for the 21st century. Higher Education, 47(1), 21-50. doi: 10.1023/B:HIGH.0000009822.49980.30

Underwood, P. R. (2012). Teacher beliefs and intentions regarding the instruction of English grammar under national curriculum reforms: A theory of planned behavior perspective. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(6), 911-925. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2012.04.004

USAID. (2014). Mid-term evaluation: USAID/Senegal’s education and research in agriculture project (USAID/ERA). Retrieved from: http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/pbaaa116.pdf

Yusuf, M. (2011). The impact of self-efficacy, achievement motivation, and self-regulated learning strategies on students’ academic achievement. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 15, 2623–2626. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.158


99

Zumbrunn, S., McKim, C., Buhs, E., & Hawley, L. R. (2014). Support, belonging, motivation, and engagement in the college classroom: A mixed method study. Instructional Science, 42(5), 661-684. doi: 10.1007/s11251-014-9310-0


100

Manuscript Submission Guidelines

The JIAEE is the official refereed journal of the Association for International Agricultural and Extension Education (AIAEE). General Requirements Microsoft Word files only may be submitted. All manuscripts must indicate the type of article—Feature; Commentary; Tools of the Profession and Book Review—on the title page of the manuscript. All articles must be submitted online at http://jiaee.expressacademic.org/login.php Manuscripts cannot be published or be under consideration for publication in another journal. The Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education (JIAEE) follows the standards set forth in the Publication Manual of the American Psychology Association (6th ed.). Online manuscript submission guidelines are posted at http://www.aiaee.org/guidelines.html. Authors must follow these formatting requirements prior to submitting manuscripts to the JIAEE. Feature Articles A feature article reports the findings from a fully investigated study. Conceptual/Theoretical and Methodological manuscripts are also encouraged as submission for feature articles. A title page with manuscript title, authors’ names, institutions, and city/state/country is required. The manuscript must include an Abstract (a succinct idea of the article’s content) not exceeding 250 words, followed by 5-7 Keywords (selected from a list of topics available on the submission log on page), Introduction, Theoretical/Conceptual/Operational Framework, Purpose and Objectives, Methods, Findings/Results, Conclusion, Recommendations/Implications, and References, or similar appropriate headings. There is no fee charged for submitting a feature article. Feature articles cannot be longer than 20 double-spaced (12-point font) pages (not including title page) with one-inch margins on all sides, excluding references. Research Notes A research note is a concise but complete description of a limited investigation that will not be included in a later manuscript. A title page with manuscript title, authors’ names, institutions, and city/state/country is required. The manuscript must include an Abstract (a succinct idea of the article’s content) not exceeding 250 words, followed by 5-7 Keywords (selected from a list of topics available on the submission log on page). There is no fee charged for submitting a research note. Research notes should be no longer than 10 double-spaced (12-point font) pages (not including title page) with one-inch margins on all sides, excluding references. Page Fees There is no submission charge for the manuscript, but there will be a $10.00/publication page ($20.00 for non AIAEE members) fee assessed to the corresponding author if accepted for publication after the peer review process.

volume 26, issue 1 april 2019 jiae › attachments › category › 185 › jiaee 26(1... ·...

Documents