FFA Member Perceptions of State Career Development Event Preparation

Edward Franklin Department of Agricultural Education College of Agriculture and Life Sciences University of Arizona

FFA Career Development Events

• Career Development Events (CDE) demonstrate the meaningful connections between classroom instruction and real-life scenarios. • CDE’s build on what is learned in agricultural classrooms, supervised agricultural experiences, and FFA activities. • “When students prepare for these CDE’s they are practicing or applying previous learning from the classroom and laboratory” (Newcomb, McCracken, Warmbrod, & Whittington, 2004, p. 274).

Faculty Concerns

• College faculty members responsible for organizing career development events had expressed concern over low scores posted by winning individuals and teams in past field day events. • They believe students competing in a state level event that qualifies a team to represent the state at a national level should be more prepared.

FFA Member Comments

• Student contestants were often overheard saying things as: – “I have no idea what I am doing”, and – “my advisor told me today I would be in this event”. • The question of preparation of students for competition became a concern.

FFA Advisor Concerns

• Does the content of events reflect the curriculum taught in the local high school classroom? • Field day staff heard complaints of event material being: – “too difficult”, or – “not close to what I teach my kids”, and – “events should be run similar to National FFA CDE activities”.

“New Wrinkle”

• 2001 – CALS Field Day piloted the use of CDE Scoring Software and scantron forms.

– Three events were selected (Dairy, Equine, Livestock) and tabulated.

• 2002 – CALS elects to move all 16 events to the scantron scoring system.

• 2002- present – all CALS CDE field day events continue to use the scantron scoring system.

Change in CDE Scoring Format

• The purpose of the change was three-fold: – To streamline the scoring and tabulation process of individual events minimizing scoring errors; – To align appropriate state events with the National FFA Career Development Events in the manner that they are conducted; and – To familiarize FFA members and advisors with the scoring process utilized at the national level.

Need for Study

• In teacher-preparation, we introduce the role of CDE’s to the total agricultural education program.

– Role of teachers as “Coaches” – Time to train teams – Involvement of community to serve as CDE coaches.

– If CDE’s reflect what is taught in the classroom, shouldn’t CDEs’ be taught in the classroom?

• This study was conducted to respond to questions about the level of preparation of students for competition in career development events. • It is the preparation and process that is the focus of this study.

Literature Review

• Factors resulting in the success of students competing in a national-level livestock judging event (Herren, 1982), • Student scores on a national-level agriculture mechanics CDE (Buriak, Harper, and Gliem, 1985), • Student perceptions of benefits of participating in a national-level contest (Gamble, 1986), • Prediction of student achievement in a state-level agriculture mechanics CDE related to specific student characteristics (Johnson, 1991; 1993), • Perceived value of FFA contests and awards by students and adults (Blakely, Holschuh, Seefeldt, Shinn, Smith & Vaughn, 1993).

• Additional research presented shows FFA advisors are influential in student participation in FFA activities and CDE competitions (Blakely, Holschuh, Seefeldt, Shinn, Smith & Vaught, 1993; Deeds & Thomas, 1999).

• Over a third of the students indicated they had not studied the subject matter related to the CDE’s in class (Deeds & Thomas, 1999).

• Less than half of the students indicated that they were very familiar with the forms used in the CDE (Deeds & Thomas,1999).

Conceptual Framework

Student Characteristics Age, Gender, Years in Agricultural Education Motivation for Participation in CDE Students Perceived Level of Preparation Coach of CDE Team Frequency and Length of Practice

Purpose & Objectives

• Determine how well prepared students were for participation in the numerous state FFA career development events and what methods instructors were using to prepare student of the state level competitions.

Objectives

• Specific objectives were to: 1. Develop a demographic profile of FFA members participating in the state career development events.

2. Determine when and how often students practiced for the career development events 3.

Determine who served as the coach for specific CDE’s teams.

4.

5.

Determine the level of preparation for the CDE’s as perceived by students.

Determine how student selected CDE’s for participation.

6. Determine what activities student perceived would improve their preparation.

Methodology

• A descriptive study of the students participating in state level career development events.

• Conducted using a researcher-developed instrument modified from research conducted by Deeds and Thomas (1999) in Mississippi.

• A panel of experts (former teachers, former FFA members, teacher-educators) reviewed the instrument for face and content validity.

• Piloted with 56 students competing in CDE activities during a district-level field day. • Reliability of the instrument was established at 0.76.

• The instrument contained four demographic questions, and ten questions regarding preparation for the event and why students selected to participate in their respective CDE’s.

• The population for the study consisted of all FFA students participating in state level CDE’s. • College students assisting with the organization of each event administered surveys to all FFA contestants during or at the completion of their individual events. • A total of 581 instruments were collected with usable data from the 802 student members who participated in their events. • Data were analyzed with SPSS (version 11.5) using descriptive statistics only.

Findings

• Sixteen career development events were conducted during the spring 2004 field day hosted by the university. • The event with the largest number of respondents was Livestock (73/92 79.3%). • The smallest number of respondents participated in the largest-attended event, Horse Evaluation (34/128, 26.5%).

• The Meats Evaluation CDE failed to return any completed questionnaires.

• Ag Issues (81.8%) and Job Interview (80%) report the highest participation of female students. • Agriculture Mechanics recorded the highest percentage of a single gender. –

Nearly 93% of the participants of the Agriculture Mechanics event were male.

• This was the second largest participated event as reported by the survey respondents.

Objective One – Student Profile

• Female student participation • Male student participation • Juniors • Sophomores • Freshmen • Seniors • 7 th graders • Previous CDE experience • Mean Age 15.9 yrs • Mean years in FFA 2.1 yrs 347 (54.6%) 288 (45.5%) 171 (29.1%) 161 (27.4%) 133 (22.7%) 107 (18.2%) 3 ( 0.5%) 374 (63.7%)

Event # of Participants # Surveys Female Male N % N % N % Ag Bus Mnt Ag Issue Ag Mech Agronomy Aquaculture Dairy Judging Entomology 29 28 96.5 20 71.4 8 28.6

23 22 95.6 18 81.8 4 18.2

99 69 69.6 5 7.5 62 92.5

28 21 75.0 12 57.1 9 42.9

62 62 100.0 30 49.2 31 50.8

64 63 98.4 38 60.3 25 39.7

34 21 98.4 12 57.1 9 42.9

Field Crop Forestry Horse Eval Job Interview Livestock Meat Nursery 29 29 100.0 7 24.1 22 75.9

34 34 100.0 12 35.3 22 64.7 128 34 26.5 24 68.6 11 31.4

45 45 100.0 80 80.0 20 20.0

92 73 79.3 41 56.2 32 43.8

75 0 00.0 NR NR 60 58 96.6 34 58.6 24 41.4

Range 23 22 95.6 14 60.9 9 39.1

Total 825 581 70.4 347 54.6 288 45.5

Objective Two – When did you practice?

• Before School • During Class • During Lunch • After School • Other (weekends) 95 (16%) 343 (59%) 131 (22.5%) 387 (66.6%) 105 (18.1%)

Note: students marked more than one response.

Objective Three – Who coached your team?

• My Ag teacher

–

Ag Business Mgnt (46.45%)

• FFA member

–

Ag Business Mgnt (39.3%)

399 (69.3%) 98 (17.0%) • Another teacher 31 ( 5.4%) • Adult community member 28 ( 4.9%) • FFA parent 17 ( 3.0%)

Objective Four How prepared were you?

• Was your CDE taught in your class?

Yes 292 (50.4%)

• • • • •

No The “No’s”

Ag Business Management (75%) Ag Issues (68.2%) Job Interview (64.4%) Forestry (58.8%) Aquaculture (55.7%)

287 (49.6%)

How familiar with the forms used in your CDE?

Very familiar - Ag Issues (81.8%) - Job Interview (75.6%) - Agronomy (57.1%) Somewhat familiar 159 (27.5%) 338 (58.4%) - Range Mgnt. (82.6%) - Ag Mech. (67.6%) Never saw them before today 82 (14.2%)

-

Ag Business Mgnt (28.6%)

Hours per week spent preparing for CDE

Less than 1 hour per week 1-3 hours per week 4-6 hours per week 75 (13.0%) 263 (45.4%) 180 (31.1%) More than 6 hours per 61 (10.5%) week

Overall, how prepared were you for your CDE?

Very well prepared Somewhat prepared Not prepared 213 (36.7%) 310 (53.4%) 58 (10.0%)

Reasons cited why FFA members participated in state-level CDE’s

Advisor recommended it Previous experience Related to career goal Friend’s influence Chance to come to University Related to my SAE Family suggested it 344 (54%) 220 (35%) 189 (30%) 174 (27%) 126 (20%) 125 (20%) 84 (13%)

What would have helped you to be better prepared for today’s event?

Knowing more about the CDE activities 303 (51.6%) Knowing more about the written exam 195 (33.2%) Knowing more about the forms used 179 (30.5%) More classroom instruction 177 (30.2%) Out-of-School Practice 94 (16.0%) Knowing more about the group activity 94 (16.0%) Other* 58 ( 9.9%) *“more practice”, “better coaching”, “know what to look for”, “having more time”, “state study guide”, and “having the right list”.

Note: Respondents marked more than one answer.

Conclusions

• Participants were likely to be 16 years of age, Junior class, with 2 years of FFA membership and have previous CDE experience.

• Females more likely to participate in Job Interview, Ag Issues, and Ag Business Management.

–

Less likely to participate in Ag Mechanics, Field Crops

.

• Males more likely to participate in Ag Mechanics and Field Crops.

–

Less likely to participate in Job Interview, Ag Issues, or Ag Business Management.

Conclusions (continued)

• Half of the students received instruction about their CDE in their classroom, yet practice for CDE’s took place during class time and after school for most of the students. • The local advisor was responsible for the majority of students participating in their CDE. • The coach of the CDE was likely to be the local FFA advisor. –

Exception: Ag Business Management

• Overall, students felt they were “somewhat” prepared for their CDE competition, and “somewhat familiar” with forms used by in their CDE. • Students’ felt to be better prepared for CDE’s they need to know more about the CDE activities.

Recommendations

• Teacher educators need to continue the discussion of CDE and the role of advisors/coaches with future teachers of agricultural education.

• Make sure prospective educators know that the proper time to introduce the concept of CDE is during class when course content is covered. • Advisors should be encouraged to enlist assistance from other teachers, community members, and parents with knowledge skill of the CDE material.

Recommendations

• CDE activities and written exam content need to be covered more thoroughly with students. • CDE material should measure competencies taught in the classroom.

• Teachers coaching CDE’s such as agriculture business management, need to find ways of incorporating the CDE into their classroom teaching curriculum.

Implications

• Need to understand why certain CDE’s “attract” students?

• Are there barriers to student participation? • Teachers need to justify why students who feel are not prepared to compete in CDE’s are brought to a state-level field day and compete in a CDE.

• Teachers and CDE faculty need to meet to address CDE content.

– Is it appropriate? – Is it too challenging?

References

• Blakley, M, Holschuh, M, Seefeldt, B, Shinn, G, Smith, E. and Vaughn, P. (1993). Perceived values of FFA contests and awards by students and other adult groups,

Meeting,

Nashville, TN

.

p. 355-360.

Proceeding of the20th annual National Agricultural Education Research

• • • Buriak, P., Harper, J., Gliem, J. (1986). Analysis of contestants’ scores on the National FFA Agricultural Mechanics Contest 1979-1984.

Journal of the American Association of Teacher Educators of Agriculture, 27

(2) 27-33.

• • Deeds, J. and Thomas, S. (1999). Student perceptions of career development event preparation.

Proceedings of the 1999 Southern Agricultural Education Research Meeting

, Memphis TN. p.103-110.

• Gamble, K. (1986). The personal, educational and occupational benefits received by participants in the National FFA contests,

Proceedings of the 13 th annual National Agricultural Education Research Meeting

. Dallas, TX • • • Herren, R. V. (1982)

Factors associated with the success of participants in the 1981 national livestock judging contest.

Unpublished doctoral dissertation Virginal Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA • • Johnson, D. (1991). Student achievement and factors related to achievement in a state agricultural mechanics contest.

Journal of Agricultural Education

32, (3) 23-28.

Thank You!!

• Johnson, D. (1993). A three-year study of student achievement and factors related to achievement in a state FFA agricultural mechanics contest

. Journal of Agricultural Education

34, (4) 39-45.

• National FFA Organization. (2004).

Career development events

. Retrieved February 17, 2004 from http://www.ffa.org/programs/cde/index.html.