and abilities of agricultural and extension education graduate students in ... second in four knowledge categories; Systems Skill ranked sixth in seven skill .... The ability to quickly make sense of information that seems to be without meaning or.
Volume 10, Number 1
DOI: 10.5191/jiaee.2003.10107
A Cross-National Study of Agricultural and Extension Education Competencies James R. Lindner, Kim E. Dooley, and Gary J. Wingenbach Texas A&M University Contributing Researchers Theresa Murphrey Texas A&M University Lynn Jones Iowa State University David Dolly Trinidad Mohammad Chizari Tehran, Iran Angel Berrio, PhD. Venezuela Eduardo Delgado Venezuela Paul Kibwika Kampala, Uganda
Matt Baker Texas Tech University Tanvir Ali Faisalabad, Pakistan Elbert Johnson Trinidad Yei Fei Su Taipei, Taiwan, ROC Ahmad Shukri Al-Rimawi Jordon Erasmo Gutierrez Ornelas Ulipas, Mexico David Wissink Papua New Guinea
Larry E. Miller The Ohio State University Festus Annor-Frempong University of Cape Coast Ghana Dunstan Campbell Trinidad Ben Stevens South Africa Gordana Kranjac-Berisavljevic Ghana, West Africa Pamela I'Anson Western Australia
Abstract The purpose of this research was to explore and describe perceived academic knowledge, skills, and abilities of agricultural and extension education graduate students in cross-national settings to ascertain if the rankings of variables were consistent by country. Using a Web-based questionnaire, data were collected from 23 countries. One hundred and sixty-six graduate students participated in the study. The findings showed that most perceived competency rankings varied by country. The rankings of five competencies tended to be consistent with respect to national settings: Applications Knowledge ranked second in four knowledge categories; Systems Skill ranked sixth in seven skill categories; Technical Skill ranked seventh in seven skill categories; Communication Abilities ranked first in four ability categories; and Attentiveness & Quantitative Abilities ranked fourth in four ability categories. Recommendations include increased professional conversations about agricultural and extension education graduate student competencies in cross-national contexts and further study. Introduction A successful agricultural and extension education student and graduate in any country will draw on a variety of academic fields, knowledge bases, and contextual applications to achieve his or her personal and professional goals (Lindner, Dooley, & Murphy, 2001). Further, he or she will rely on a unique bundle of knowledge, skills, and abilities that are acquired and strengthened through life experiences and education to achieve his or her personal and professional goals. Graduate school is an opportunity for students to gain not only new knowledge, but also acquire and strengthen Spring 2003
skills and abilities needed to be professionally successful. Knowledge is a body of information (Buford, & Lindner, 2002) supported by professionally acceptable theory and research, which students use to perform effectively and successfully in a given setting. Skill is a present, observable competence to perform a learned psychomotor act. Effective performance of skills requires application of related knowledge and facilitates acquisition of new knowledge. Ability is a present competence to perform an observable behavior or a behavior that results in observable outcomes. Collectively, knowledge, 51
Volume 10, Number 1
skills, and abilities are referred to as competencies. In agricultural and extension education, numerous studies in the United States have been conducted to investigate specific student competencies within specific contexts. Place and Jacob (2001) found that Extension employees needed resource management competencies such as time management, workplace, and stress management to be effective. McCormick and Whittington (2000) found that students needed well-developed abilities to think critically at higher levels of cognition. Dyer and Osborne (1996) found that problem-solving skills are needed and could be taught to agricultural education students. Goecker (1992) stated that agricultural education graduate students needed, but did not possess, very high levels of teaching and learning competencies to be effective and productive professionals. Timko, Linhardt, and Stewart (1991) showed that international graduate students have particular challenges with respect to communication and social competencies. Henderson and Shibano (1990) found that international graduate students had high levels of knowledge acquisition in teacher education preparation, research methods and techniques, and program development. Findlay (1992) found agricultural education teachers acquired high levels of competencies through formal education, on-thejob experience, and self-directed study. Lower levels of competency acquisition were achieved through teaching internships and laboratory experiences. Lindner, Dooley, and Murphy (2001) noted that doctoral students’ low levels of knowledge, skills, and abilities might result in frustration, de-motivation, delayed learning, and ultimately failure. Various competencies needed by agricultural and extension education graduates to be professionally successful in a given field have been identified in the literature. Little research, however, has focused on the compilation of unique competencies possessed by agricultural and extension education graduate students in a cross-national setting. Cross-national research is defined as “any research that transcends national boundaries” (Kohn, 1987, p. 714). There are four types of cross-national studies: nation as object; nation as context; nation as unit of analysis; and those that are transnational in character (Kohn, 1987). For the purpose of this paper, we have chosen “transnational in 52
character.” We make the assumption that agricultural and extension educators will exhibit similar competencies regardless of country of origin. However, no research has determined the rank or importance perceived by a country in regards to competencies for agricultural educators worldwide. Part of the problem in collecting data across countries is instrumentation. For example, Hoppe (1998) discusses the challenges with generalizability. Most of the instrumentation has been developed in the United States with an attempt to ascertain cultural affinity between the United States and another country where the instrument will be used. Participants may be unfamiliar with its language and cultural meanings. Another factor is the societal fear of measuring people through instrumentation in some countries. “There are very few crossculturally reliable and valid instruments on the market today, and many organizations are using instruments with no known reliability or validity outside of the United States (1998, p. 361). Melvin Kohn also discusses the difficulty in interpreting similarities and differences in cross-national research. “Ultimately, though, we want to include the discrepant findings in a more comprehensive interpretation by reformulating the interpretation on a more general level that accounts for both similarities and differences” (Kohn, 1987, p. 721). This study will examine the similarities and differences in relation to graduate student competencies as they prepare for professional careers in agricultural and extension education. Purpose The purpose of this research was to explore and describe perceived academic knowledge, skills, and abilities of agricultural and extension education graduate students in cross-national settings to describe if the rankings of variables were consistent by country. The objectives of the study were to: 1. Describe perceived knowledge (cognitive analyses) and examine competencies by country; 2. Describe perceived skills (psychomotor task performance) and examine competencies by country; and 3. Describe perceived ability (observable behaviors) and examine competencies by country. Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education
Volume 10, Number 1
Methods The research design used for this study was descriptive in nature. The population consisted of 166 current agricultural and extension education graduate students located throughout the world. The population was identified using a two-step process. The first step consisted of identifying research partners using the Association of International Agricultural and Extension Educators membership list and listserv. The second step consisted of those research partners identifying agricultural and extension education graduate students in their respective academic programs and soliciting their participation in the study. The findings of this study are generalizable only to those in the identified population. However, the findings may provide a basis for increased professional conversations about the philosophical basis, knowledge bases, and
contextual applications in agricultural and extension education. The competency model used in this research was based on Lindner and Dooley’s (2001) Agricultural Education Taxonomy, which was designed to measure respondents’ perceptions of behavioral dimensions used to assess knowledge, skill, and abilities. This model has been shown to be valid and reliable for collecting data from agricultural and extension education students and their perceived competencies (Lindner & Dooley, 2002; Lindner, Dooley, & Murphy, 2001). Table 1 illustrates sample items from the Web-based questionnaire. Agricultural and extension education graduate students indicated their current levels of academic knowledge, skills, and abilities using a five-point Likert-type scale (1=very low; 2=low; 3=average; 4=high; and 5=very high).
Table 1 Sample Statements Measuring Agricultural and Extension Education Graduate Student Competencies Statements Academic Knowledge Teaching Strategies Knowledge: Learning Theories. Learning theories, techniques, and procedures to enhance the teaching-learning process; methods to evaluate learning. Youth Leadership. Methods and procedures or organizing and conducting youth leadership programs in school and non-school settings. Adult Education. Identification of basic principles motivating adults to learn. Procedures to implement these principles in bringing about changes in adult behavior. Youth Guidance and Counseling. Problems of youth with special attention given to rural youth; theories of vocational development reviewed and techniques and procedures developed to help youth make career choices. Foundation Knowledge: History and Philosophy. Historical and philosophical developments in education that brought about education in agriculture; ideas of individuals that culminate in agricultural education institutions and organizations. Research Theory. Theory and design of research problems in agricultural education; communication of research proposal and results of research; evaluation of current research of faculty and students; review of current research literature. Research Methods. Application of research techniques in agricultural and extension education. Determining the correct research design, treatment of data, and dissemination of results. Policy Development. Historical and philosophical foundations of agricultural education. Emphasis is on preparing leaders who can shape and interpret policy.
Spring 2003
53
Volume 10, Number 1
Table 1 (continued) Statements Skills Content Skills: Speaking. Talking to others to effectively convey information. Active Listening. Listening to what other people are saying and asking questions as appropriate. Reading Comprehension. Understanding written sentences and paragraphs in work related documents. Writing. Communicating effectively with others in writing as indicated by the needs of the audience. Process Skills: Learning Strategies. Using multiple approaches when learning or teaching new things. Critical Thinking. Using logic and analysis to identify the strengths and weaknesses of different approaches. Active Learning. Working with new material or information to grasp its implications. Monitoring. Assessing how well one is doing when learning or doing something. Abilities Perceptual and Spatial Abilities: Flexibility of Closure. The ability to identify or detect a known pattern (a figure, object, word, or sound) that is hidden in other distracting material. Speed of Closure. The ability to quickly make sense of information that seems to be without meaning or organization. It involves quickly combining and organizing different pieces of information into a meaningful pattern. Perceptual Speed. The ability to quickly and accurately compare letters, numbers, objects, pictures, or patterns. The things to be compared may be presented at the same time or one after the other. This ability also includes comparing a presented object with a remembered object. Attentiveness and Quantitative Abilities: Number Facility. The ability to add, subtract, multiply, or divide quickly and correctly. Originality. The ability to come up with unusual or clever ideas about a given topic or situation, or to develop creative ways to solve a problem. Mathematical Reasoning. The ability to understand and organize a problem and then to select a mathematical method or formula to solve the problem. Time Sharing. The ability to efficiently shift back and forth between two or more activities or sources of information (such as speech, sounds, touch, or other sources). Data were collected by 23 researchers in 23 countries (see Figure 1) using a Web-based questionnaire. Appropriate procedures for using Web-based data collection methods were followed (Dillman, 2000; Ladner, Wingenbach, & Raven, 2002). Additional evidence of instrument reliability was estimated by
54
calculating a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient on the final sample. The alpha level was set a priori at .05. Reliability for the scales on knowledge (.89), skills (.93), and abilities (.90) were calculated. Reliability estimates for corresponding sub categories are presented in Table 2.
Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education
Volume 10, Number 1
Figure 1. Worldwide geographic representation of respondents by country of origin (N = 23). The questionnaire was designed to measure participants’ perceptions on competencies. The participants indicated their current level of competence using a five-point Likert-type scale. The points on the scale are: 1=very low; 2=low; 3=average; 4=high; and 5=very high. A limitation of this study is that competencies are self-reported. Findings Objective 1. The first objective of this study was to describe agricultural and extension education graduate students by perceived knowledge. Participants were asked what level of knowledge they possessed on 15 items. Knowledge items were classified into four sub categories. Mean scores of sub categories were computed and used to place participants’ level of knowledge into rank-order by country. Teaching Strategies Knowledge was defined as theories, techniques, and processes that enhance the teacher-learner process for adults and youth. Applications Knowledge was defined as current trends, practices, and applications that facilitate change and technology transfer. Foundations Knowledge was defined as methods, theories, principles, and practices that provide a foundation for and guide the field of agricultural education. International Knowledge was defined as theories, principles, and practices related to agricultural development in cross-national settings. Spring 2003
Table 2 shows the overall average and by country rank-order of participants’ perceived level of knowledge. The overall average rank was computed using country rankings. Participants, overall, rankings of perceived level of knowledge were Foundations Knowledge (highest rank), Applications knowledge, Teaching Strategies Knowledge, and International Knowledge (lowest rank). All country rankings differed from the overall average ranking. A plurality of country rankings showed Applications Knowledge (f=9) ranked second, Foundations Knowledge (f=9) ranked third, International Knowledge (f=10) ranked fourth, and Teaching Strategies Knowledge (f=8) ranked fourth. When compared to the overall average ranking, country rankings varied among the four knowledge categories. In a cross-national context, the most consistent of the subcategories were Applications Knowledge and International Knowledge. Applications Knowledge and International Knowledge were ranked respectively, second and fourth, overall, and with a plurality of country rankings. Objective 2. The second objective of this study was to describe agricultural and extension education graduate students by perceived skill. Participants were asked what level of skill they possessed on 28 items. Skill items were classified into seven sub categories. Mean scores of sub categories were computed and used to
55
Volume 10, Number 1
place participants’ level of skill into rank-order by country. Content Skills, such as reading comprehension and mathematics provide a foundation for the acquisition of more specific skills. Process Skills, such as critical thinking and active learning contribute to increased acquisition of additional competencies. Social Skills, such as persuasion and social perceptiveness are developed capacities that help individuals achieve objectives. Resource Management Skills such as time management are needed to allocate resources. Complex Problem-Solving Skills, such as information gathering and idea evaluation are necessary to solve real-world problems. Systems Skills, such as visioning and decision-making, are needed for people to work with others. Technical Skills, such as technology design and operations
56
analysis are needed to use information technologies effectively. All country rankings differed from the overall average ranking. A majority of country rankings indicated Content Skills (f=12) was the highest skill and Technical Skills (f=18) was the lowest ranked skill. A plurality of country rankings showed Social Skills (f=7) ranked first, Process Skills (f=18) ranked second, Complex ProblemSolving Skills (f=7) ranked second, and Systems Skills (f=11) ranked sixth. Resource Management Skill had a tri-mode of first, fourth, and fifth. When compared to the overall average rankings, country rankings varied among the seven skill categories. In a cross-national setting, the most consistent of the sub categories were Technical Skill that ranked seventh and Systems Skills that ranked sixth.
Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education
Volume 10, Number 1
Table 2
Attentiveness & Quantitative (r=.67)
Perceptual & Spatial (r=.86)
Idea Generation & Reasoning (r=.81)
Communication (r=.85)
Resource Management (r=.56)
Systems (r=.83)
Technical (r=.92)
Complex Problem-Solving (r=.87)
Social (r=.76)
Process (r=.81)
Content (r=.76)
International (r=.91)
Applications (r=.77)
Foundations (r=.83)
Teaching Strategies (r=.77)
Competency Rankings as Perceived by Agricultural and Extension Education Graduate Students by Country (N = 166) Knowledge Skill Ability
Country n Rank Rank Rank United States 46 1 3 2 4 1 3 7 2 4 6 5 1 2 3 4 Venezuela 18 1 2 3 4 2 6 1 5 7 4 3 1 3 2 4 Ghana 16 1 4 2 3 1 2 3 5 7 6 4 1 3 2 4 Trinidad and Tobago 13 2 1 3 4 1 2 4 3 7 6 5 1 2 2 4 Pakistan 13 1 2 3 4 3 1 2 4 7 6 5 1 2 3 4 Taiwan 10 2 3 1 4 1 2 4 3 7 6 5 1 3 2 4 Iran 10 4 3 1 2 1 4 2 6 7 3 4 4 2 1 3 Australia 9 2 1 3 4 1 2 4 3 7 5 6 1 2 3 4 Jordan 8 3 1 2 4 2 4 3 4 7 6 1 2 1 3 4 South Africa 5 3 1 4 2 1 5 3 4 7 6 2 1 3 2 3 Mexico 3 1 3 2 4 4 1 2 4 7 4 3 1 1 4 2 Egypt 2 2 3 4 1 1 4 3 6 4 7 2 1 3 4 1 Kenya 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 2 6 7 3 1 1 3 3 2 Yemen 2 4 2 1 3 1 2 4 2 7 5 6 1 3 4 1 Botswana 1 1 3 2 4 1 3 2 4 7 6 4 2 3 4 3 Ethiopia 1 4 3 2 1 1 2 2 2 7 6 2 2 1 3 3 Papua New Guinea 1 4 2 3 1 4 4 1 3 7 4 1 3 2 1 1 Peru 1 2 3 3 1 2 5 1 2 7 5 4 1 4 1 4 Portugal 1 4 2 3 1 2 2 1 2 7 6 5 2 1 2 1 Russia 1 4 2 2 1 3 2 5 3 7 6 1 2 2 4 3 United Arab Emirates 1 3 2 1 4 3 5 1 2 5 7 3 1 2 4 1 Ukraine 1 4 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Uruguay 1 4 2 3 1 4 4 1 2 1 2 4 4 3 2 1 Average Rank 3 1 2 4 2 1 3 5 7 6 4 1 2 3 4 Note. Rankings were based on mean score responses to 59 Likert-type questions: very low to very high. Knowledge questions (15) were classified into four subcategories. Skill questions (28) into seven subcategories. Ability questions (16) into four subcategories. Rank of 1 indicates highest mean score for subcategory. Average rank was computed using country rankings.
Spring 2003
57
Volume 10, Number 1
Objective 3. The third objective of this study was to describe agricultural and extension education graduate students by perceived ability. Participants were asked what level of skill they possessed on 16 items. Ability items were classified into four sub categories. Mean scores of sub categories were computed and used to place participants’ level of ability into rankorder by country. Communication abilities, such as oral comprehension, written expression, speech clarity, and auditory attention are needed to focus attention and communicate effectively. Idea Generation and Reasoning Abilities are needed to formulate logical conclusions. Attentiveness and Quantitative Abilities, such as time-sharing and arithmetic reasoning are needed to handle multiple tasks, concentrate on single tasks, and use mathematical methods to solve problems. Perception and Spatial Abilities, such as speed of closure and visualization are needed to identify and make sense of complexly related material and systems. Most (f=20) of the country rankings differed from the overall average ranking. A majority (f=15) of country rankings indicated Communications Abilities was the highest ranked ability. A plurality of country rankings showed Perceptual & Spatial Abilities (f=7) ranked second, Idea Generation & Reasoning Abilities (f=9) ranked third, and Attentiveness & Quantitative Ability (f=9) ranked fourth. When compared to the overall average rankings, country rankings tended to vary among the four ability categories. In a cross-national setting, the most consistent of the subcategories was Communication Abilities that ranked first and Attentiveness & Quantitative Ability that ranked fourth. Conclusions and Implications The results of this study suggest that most perceived rankings of agricultural and extension education competencies varied by national orientation. Applications Knowledge, International Knowledge, Technical Skills, Systems Skills, Communication Abilities, and Attentiveness & Quantitative Abilities rankings, however, tended to be consistent in a crossnational setting. As noted previously, the sampling techniques used and sample sizes from some countries limit the generalizability of the data to those in the identified population. 58
Another limitation is that data is self-reported and represents participants’ perceptions. The findings, however, may provide a basis for increased professional conversations about agricultural and extension education graduate student competencies in a cross-national context. These provide a springboard for professional discussions about what our graduates “look like” and what they should “look like.” The findings provide mixed evidence of the generalizability of findings and applicability of recommendations made in studies looking at agricultural and extension education competencies in the United States. These findings may help researchers and practitioners discuss, reconsider, and/or modify findings made in single-national research (Kohn, 1987). Kohn noted that consistencies of findings in cross-national settings allow researchers and practitioners to assert relationships between variables (in our research, agricultural and extension education graduates) are meaningful alone. For example, we found that regardless of country setting, agricultural and extension education graduate students tended to rank their perceived Technical Skills lower than any other skill. When inconsistencies of findings in a cross-national setting are found, Kohn noted that interpretations of differences are more difficult to make and must be made “in terms of historical, cultural, political, or economic idiosyncrasies” (Kohn, 1987, p.716). Recommendations for additional study include identifying “historical, cultural, political, or economic idiosyncrasies” (Kohn, 1987, p. 716) that may help identify why competency ranking of agricultural and extension education graduates differs by country. More rigorous sampling techniques are needed to expand the generalizability of findings. Improved data collection instruments need to be developed to overcome the limitation of self reported data. The opportunities for cross-national collaborative research are improving, through online data collection methods and communication tools (Ladner, Wingenbach, & Raven, 2002). Even with the challenges, Kohn (1987) noted: [C]ross-national research is valuable, even indispensable, for establishing the generality of findings and the validity of interpretations derived from single-nation Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education
Volume 10, Number 1
studies. In no other way can we be certain that what we believe to be social-structural regularities are not merely particularities, the product of some limited set of historical or cultural or political circumstances. (p. 713) References Buford, J. A., Jr., & Lindner, J. R. (2002). Human resource management in local government: Concepts and applications for HRM students and practitioners. Cincinnati: South-Western. Dillman, D. A. (2000). Mail and internet surveys: The tailored design method (2nd Ed.). New York: Wiley & Sons. Dyer, J. E., & Osborne, E. W. (1996). Effects of teaching approach on problem-solving abilities of agricultural education students with varying learning styles. Journal of Agricultural Education, 37(4), 36-43. Findlay, H. J. (1992). Where do secondary vocational agriculture teachers acquire professional agricultural education competencies? Journal of Agricultural Education, 33(2), 28-33. Goecker, A. D. (1992). Priorities for college and university agricultural education faculty. Journal of Agricultural Education, 33(3), 1-7. Henderson, J. L., & Shibano, G. (1990). Followup of international graduate students in agricultural education at the Ohio State University. Journal of Agricultural Education, 31(1), 71-74. Hoppe, M. H. (1998). Cross-cultural issues in leadership development. In C. D. McCauley, R. S. Moxley, & V. Velsor (Eds.), The Center for Creative Leadership: Handbook of Leadership Development (pp. 336-378). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Kohn, M. L. (1987). Cross-national research as an analytic strategy. Ladner, D., Wingenbach, G., & Raven, M. (2002). Internet and paper-based data collection methods in agricultural education research. Journal of Southern Agricultural Education Research, 52(1), 40-51.
Spring 2003
The social-structural regularity of “competencies” in the field of agricultural and extension education provide the context for continued research to establish generalizability and interpretation in a cross-cultural context.
Lindner, J. R., & Dooley, K. E. (2001). A taxonomy of agricultural education graduate students’ knowledge, skills, and abilities (Department Information Bulletin No 01-4). College Station, Texas: Texas A&M University, Department of Agricultural Education. Lindner, J. R., & Dooley, K. E. (2002). Agricultural education competencies and progress towards a doctoral degree. Journal of Agricultural Education, 43(1), 57-68. Lindner, J. R., Dooley, K. E., & Murphy, T. M. (2001). Discrepancies in competencies between doctoral students on-campus and at a distance. American Journal of Distance Education, 15(2), 25-40. McCormick, D. F., & Whittington, M. S. (2000). Assessing academic challenges for their contribution to cognitive development. Journal of Agricultural Education, 41(3), 114-122. Place, N. T., & Jacob, S. (2001). Stress: Professional development needs of extension faculty. Journal of Agricultural Education, 42(1), 95-103. Timko, J. J., Linhardt, R. E., & Stewart, B. R. (1991). Educational needs of international graduate students in agriculture and education as perceived by University of Missouri-Columbia graduate faculty. Journal of Agricultural Education, 32(2), 44-51.
59
