SAES-422 Multistate Research Activity Accomplishments Report
Sections
Status: Approved
Basic Information
- Project No. and Title: WERA207 : Agricultural Literacy
- Period Covered: 10/01/2001 to 04/01/2002
- Date of Report: 05/11/2002
- Annual Meeting Dates: 04/25/2002 to 04/27/2002
Participants
McCracken, Vicki vccrake@wsu.edu Washington State University; Frick, Marty uadmf@montana.edu Montana State University; Pals, Doug, aeepals@uidao.edu University of Idaho; Elliot, Jack elliot@ag.arizona.edu University of Arizona; Thompson, Greg greg.Thompson@orst.edu Oregon State University; Spielmaker, Debra debras@ext.usu.edu Utah State University; Hubert, Dan dhubert@cc.usu.edu Utah State University; Swan, Mike mswan@wsu.edu Washington State University; Franklin, Ed eafrank@arizoana.edu University of Arizona; Igo, Carl ci10@swr.edu Southwest Texas University
Minutes-April 26, 2002
Western Region Coordinating Committee for Agricultural Literacy (WCC-207)
Annual Meeting
WestCoast River Inn
Spokane, Washington
Those in attendance: V. McCracken (via conference phone), served as the Administrative Advisor sitting in for David Cox who was not in attendance due to family matters; M. Frick, Chairperson; D. Pals, Secretary; J. Elliot, Vice Chairperson; G. Thompson, D. Spielmaker, D. Hubert, M. Swan. AAAE members present for part of the meeting, E. Franklin and C. Igo.
1. Meeting started at 7:57 p.m. Introductions were made.
2. Minutes of the April 27, 2001 annual meeting held in Carmel, California were reviewed and approved.
3. Agenda for the meeting was discussed. The main items for discussion were a status report and a Plan of Action for the three major objectives approved at the last annual meeting in Carmel.
4. Objective Two M. Frick and D. Spielmaker
Identify those specific components and practices, which correlate with AITC measurable program successes. These would include:
a. Quality and Comprehensive program indicators that delineate program success, and
b. Data collected which supports analysis of successful components and correlates significant impacts with organizational structure, funding practices, and learner outcomes.
Comments:
7 identified an instrument used by the American Farm Bureau Foundation for Agriculture
7 this questionnaire surveyed the AITC State Coordinators and the Key Participants in the National
Agriculture in the Classroom Program.
7 Discussion followed that the questionnaire would need some major revision in order to collect the
data required. This questionnaire will be used as a template from which to build an instrument that will be administered to State AITC programs to satisfy Objective Two
5. Objective One M. Swan and G. Thompson
Development of a process to obtain categories and organize AITC baseline knowledge and data. The information would be assembled in a research report and be used as a benchmark for the remainder of the committees existence and for further research.
Comments:
7 Question How effective are the materials developed by the Ag in the Classroom programs?
A listing of available materials were found in the 2002 Teacher Resource Guide published by the California Foundation for AITC.
7 The successful completion of this objective will be a great accountability piece to ensure funding from potential donors.
7 An important part of this objective is to determine the usage of the materials being used by the AITC programs in the Western Region.
7 A comment relevant to the discussion of this objective was Ag in the Classroom was identified at the Carmel, CA. meeting as the program to be used in the study, realizing that there are other programs and projects addressing the agricultural literacy issue.
6. Objective Three J. Elliot and D. Pals
Determine the significant impacts of AITC measurable program successes, which include:
a. Research outcomes that will serve as a mechanism to develop a model, which results in AITC
changes for success measured by increases in efficiency and program effectiveness.
b. Demonstrated increase in students knowledge and appreciation of agriculture (agricultural
literacy) as it relates to science, technology, society, economics and global issues; resulting in a better informed citizenry, consumers, and a future agriculture workforce ) i.e., business leaders, scientists, educators).
Comments:
7 Measurement of learner outcomes
Kellogg project criterion referenced test is available and is a place to start
- discussion followed on the usefulness of these tests
- we would want to consider testing levels
‘ 5th, 7th, 9th grades etc. as long as we dont conflict with state high stakes testing during the same year.
‘ After some discussion, it was determined that maybe after the end of 5th grade would be appropriate.
‘ It was suggested that the piece with objective two ask what high stakes testing (Mandated testing by Departments of Education) is currently being conducted in the western states and this should be considered when selecting a testing level
‘ Comment: The National AITC program is interested in How the AITC program is delivered may affect the learning outcomes. It was recommended that this research committee consider addressing this concern.
7. The research objective groups are to follow their plan of action and be ready to report back at next years
annual meeting.
8. A question was raised - if the objectives are accomplished what are the possibilities for this committee.
- remaining as a coordinating committee
- convert to a research committee
V. McCraken shared that we need to demonstrate that work we are doing needs to be accomplished by having all states involved. If we keep moving we can be funded as a Regional Research Group.
It was also shared that the National AITC Program is interested in what happens to reflect the entire nation. This would have more value than that of a region. It may also affect funding that may be available for this activity.
9. The meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Douglas A. Pals, Secretary
Western Region Coordinating Committee for Agricultural Literacy (WCC-207)
Annual Meeting
WestCoast River Inn
Spokane, Washington
Those in attendance: V. McCracken (via conference phone), served as the Administrative Advisor sitting in for David Cox who was not in attendance due to family matters; M. Frick, Chairperson; D. Pals, Secretary; J. Elliot, Vice Chairperson; G. Thompson, D. Spielmaker, D. Hubert, M. Swan. AAAE members present for part of the meeting, E. Franklin and C. Igo.
1. Meeting started at 7:57 p.m. Introductions were made.
2. Minutes of the April 27, 2001 annual meeting held in Carmel, California were reviewed and approved.
3. Agenda for the meeting was discussed. The main items for discussion were a status report and a Plan of Action for the three major objectives approved at the last annual meeting in Carmel.
4. Objective Two M. Frick and D. Spielmaker
Identify those specific components and practices, which correlate with AITC measurable program successes. These would include:
a. Quality and Comprehensive program indicators that delineate program success, and
b. Data collected which supports analysis of successful components and correlates significant impacts with organizational structure, funding practices, and learner outcomes.
Comments:
7 identified an instrument used by the American Farm Bureau Foundation for Agriculture
7 this questionnaire surveyed the AITC State Coordinators and the Key Participants in the National
Agriculture in the Classroom Program.
7 Discussion followed that the questionnaire would need some major revision in order to collect the
data required. This questionnaire will be used as a template from which to build an instrument that will be administered to State AITC programs to satisfy Objective Two
5. Objective One M. Swan and G. Thompson
Development of a process to obtain categories and organize AITC baseline knowledge and data. The information would be assembled in a research report and be used as a benchmark for the remainder of the committees existence and for further research.
Comments:
7 Question How effective are the materials developed by the Ag in the Classroom programs?
A listing of available materials were found in the 2002 Teacher Resource Guide published by the California Foundation for AITC.
7 The successful completion of this objective will be a great accountability piece to ensure funding from potential donors.
7 An important part of this objective is to determine the usage of the materials being used by the AITC programs in the Western Region.
7 A comment relevant to the discussion of this objective was Ag in the Classroom was identified at the Carmel, CA. meeting as the program to be used in the study, realizing that there are other programs and projects addressing the agricultural literacy issue.
6. Objective Three J. Elliot and D. Pals
Determine the significant impacts of AITC measurable program successes, which include:
a. Research outcomes that will serve as a mechanism to develop a model, which results in AITC
changes for success measured by increases in efficiency and program effectiveness.
b. Demonstrated increase in students knowledge and appreciation of agriculture (agricultural
literacy) as it relates to science, technology, society, economics and global issues; resulting in a better informed citizenry, consumers, and a future agriculture workforce ) i.e., business leaders, scientists, educators).
Comments:
7 Measurement of learner outcomes
Kellogg project criterion referenced test is available and is a place to start
- discussion followed on the usefulness of these tests
- we would want to consider testing levels
‘ 5th, 7th, 9th grades etc. as long as we dont conflict with state high stakes testing during the same year.
‘ After some discussion, it was determined that maybe after the end of 5th grade would be appropriate.
‘ It was suggested that the piece with objective two ask what high stakes testing (Mandated testing by Departments of Education) is currently being conducted in the western states and this should be considered when selecting a testing level
‘ Comment: The National AITC program is interested in How the AITC program is delivered may affect the learning outcomes. It was recommended that this research committee consider addressing this concern.
7. The research objective groups are to follow their plan of action and be ready to report back at next years
annual meeting.
8. A question was raised - if the objectives are accomplished what are the possibilities for this committee.
- remaining as a coordinating committee
- convert to a research committee
V. McCraken shared that we need to demonstrate that work we are doing needs to be accomplished by having all states involved. If we keep moving we can be funded as a Regional Research Group.
It was also shared that the National AITC Program is interested in what happens to reflect the entire nation. This would have more value than that of a region. It may also affect funding that may be available for this activity.
9. The meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Douglas A. Pals, Secretary
Accomplishments
The 2002/2003 WCC207 action plan is: That the three groups of committee members (2 per objective) develop a set of ways and means and a timeline related to satisfying their objective (see objectives below). The ways and means are to be submited by July 1, 2002. The minimum timeline should run through next
April in time for our next meeting.
Objective #1 Baseline Know and Data
Thompson, G,
Swan, M.
Objective #2 AITC Components & Practices
Frick, M.J.
Spielmaker, D.
Objective # 3 Measurement of Learner Outcomes
Pals, D.
Elliot. J.
Remember: According to our Appendix B, the committee is to develop a series of research reports that focus on the expected outcomes listed above.
April in time for our next meeting.
Objective #1 Baseline Know and Data
Thompson, G,
Swan, M.
Objective #2 AITC Components & Practices
Frick, M.J.
Spielmaker, D.
Objective # 3 Measurement of Learner Outcomes
Pals, D.
Elliot. J.
Remember: According to our Appendix B, the committee is to develop a series of research reports that focus on the expected outcomes listed above.