<%BANNER%>

Teaching Leadership in Agricultural Science: Behavioral Factors That Influence Secondary Agricultural Science Leadership...


PAGE 1

TEACHING LEADERSHIP IN AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE: BEHAVIORAL FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE SECONDARY AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE LEADERSHIP INSTRUCTION By ALAN CHRISTIAN MORGAN A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2004

PAGE 2

Copyright 2004 by Alan Christian Morgan

PAGE 3

This document is dedicated to my best friend, my wife Susan Morgan, and my three children, Tyler, Allison and Spencer for supporting me while I followed Gods lead pursuing this degree.

PAGE 4

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank my wife and children for enduring the past three years while I have spent numerous hours studying, writing, and generally being pre-occupied with earning this degree. They have been more than supportive in my endeavor and I am forever indebted to them. I would also like to thank my parents. First my mother Nancy Morgan, who has always held education in high esteem and instilled that value in me. And my father Tom Morgan, who demonstrated endurance and tenacity, two qualities that have proved useful to me during these past three years. A tremendous amount of gratitude goes out to my committee chair, Dr. Rick Rudd, who has helped to form this agriculture teacher into a researcher and writer. He may have suffered more frustrations with my program than I have. Dr. Rudd spent more hours than should be required editing my writing, expanding my thinking, and mentoring me through this process. His patience and encouragement are to be commended. I could not have completed this degree without my committee, Drs. Howard Ladewig, Shannon Washburn, and James Doud. They assisted me in designing a good study, and forced me to explain and defend my actions. Their persistence has helped hone my research skills. All of them have been very supportive and have exhibited a great deal of patience with me during this process, and I thank them for that. My friends and colleagues in 310 Rolfs Hall were supportive throughout this process. Not only did we challenge each other on issues, which allowed us all to grow, iv

PAGE 5

they were particularly supportive during the struggles I encountered while pursuing this degree. A heart-felt thank you goes to each one of you. Finally, a gracious thank you goes to my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. It was by His leading that I pursued this degree, and His grace that supported me through this process. Had I not believed that God wanted me to pursue this endeavor, I would not have had the tenacity to earn this degree. Thank you Lord. v

PAGE 6

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.................................................................................................iv LIST OF TABLES...............................................................................................................x LIST OF FIGURES..........................................................................................................xii ABSTRACT.....................................................................................................................xiv CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................1 Introduction to the Study..............................................................................................1 Background...................................................................................................................1 Problem Statement........................................................................................................5 Significance..................................................................................................................6 Purpose.........................................................................................................................7 Assumptions.................................................................................................................8 Limitations....................................................................................................................8 Definitions....................................................................................................................9 Chapter Summary.........................................................................................................9 2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE............................................................................11 Defining Leadership...................................................................................................12 The Importance of Teaching Leadership....................................................................13 Youth Leadership Development.................................................................................14 Existing Youth Programs....................................................................................15 High School Youth Programs..............................................................................16 Career and Technical Education Youth Programs..............................................17 Impact of Agricultural Science and FFA Programs on Youth Leadership.........18 Section Summary.................................................................................................22 A Leadership Curriculum for Youth...........................................................................23 The Model of Youth Leadership Development...................................................24 LifeKnowledge Curriculum Origin and Development........................................25 Curriculum Adoption...........................................................................................28 Section Summary.................................................................................................32 Why High School Agricultural Science Instructors Teach Leadership......................33 Theories of Behavior...........................................................................................33 vi

PAGE 7

Modified Triandis Model of Behavior................................................................34 Population Studied...............................................................................................36 High School Agricultural Science Instructor Leadership Teaching Behavior....37 Explanatory Variables.........................................................................................37 Knowledge...................................................................................................37 Attitude.........................................................................................................37 Expectations.................................................................................................38 Demographics...............................................................................................38 Section Summary.................................................................................................39 Chapter Summary.......................................................................................................39 3 METHODS.................................................................................................................41 Context of the Study...................................................................................................42 Place....................................................................................................................42 Time.....................................................................................................................42 National FFA Organization.................................................................................43 Research Design.........................................................................................................43 Research Objectives....................................................................................................44 Population...................................................................................................................45 Sample........................................................................................................................45 Instrumentation...........................................................................................................45 Procedures...................................................................................................................48 Pilot Study...........................................................................................................48 Data Collection Procedures.................................................................................49 Response Rate.....................................................................................................50 Data Analysis..............................................................................................................51 Summary.....................................................................................................................54 4 RESULTS...................................................................................................................55 Objective One: Determine the Demographic Characteristics of High School Agricultural Science Instructors............................................................................57 Age, Years Teaching, and Years Teaching in Current Position..........................57 Gender.................................................................................................................60 Number of Instructors at School..........................................................................61 School Location...................................................................................................63 Educational Background.....................................................................................65 FFA Involvement.................................................................................................66 High School and College Leadership Activities.................................................67 Professional and Civic Organization Leadership Experience.............................68 Committee Participation, and Workshops and Seminar Presentations...............71 School and Vocational Department Leadership Positions, and Attending the Advisors Washington Leadership Conference.................................................73 Leadership Course Taught in Agricultural Science Program..............................74 Objective Two: Determine the Extent to which Leadership Education is being Taught in High School Agricultural Science Classrooms.....................................76 vii

PAGE 8

Objective Three: Based on National FFA LifeKnowledge Leadership Curriculum, Determine High School Agricultural Science Instructor Leadership Knowledge.............................................................................................................78 Objective Four: Determine High School Agricultural Science Instructor Attitude towards Teaching Leadership................................................................................80 Objective Five: Determine the Expectations that High School Agricultural Science Instructors have of the Agriculture Students after Leadership has been Taught....................................................................................................................82 Objective Six: Determine the Relationship between High School Agricultural Science Instructor Leadership Knowledge, Instructor Attitude Towards Teaching Leadership, Instructor Expectations of Students after Teaching Leadership, and Instructor Demographics to Instructor Leadership Teaching Behavior.................................................................................................................84 Correlations.........................................................................................................84 Regression...........................................................................................................85 Summary.....................................................................................................................87 5 DISCUSSION.............................................................................................................89 Problem Statement......................................................................................................90 Review of Research Design........................................................................................90 Summary of Results....................................................................................................91 Objective One......................................................................................................91 Objective Two.....................................................................................................92 Objective Three...................................................................................................93 Objective Four.....................................................................................................93 Objective Five.....................................................................................................93 Objective Six.......................................................................................................94 Conclusions.................................................................................................................95 Discussion and Implications.......................................................................................96 Objective One: Determine the Demographic Characteristics of High School Agricultural Science Instructors......................................................................96 The average agricultural science instructor is 39.37 years old, has been teaching for 14.85 years, and has been teaching in their current position for 10.61 years...........................................................................96 Most agricultural science instructors are male, teach in a rural location, are in a single teacher department, received their certification through a university agriculture teacher program, and earned their bachelors of science degree in agricultural education...........................97 Instructors in teaching in urban locations were less likely to have participated in FFA as a high school student........................................100 Most agricultural science instructors were an FFA member in high school, an FFA chapter officer, and held at least one office in other high school organization outside of FFA..............................................101 Most agricultural science instructors took at least one leadership course in college and were an officer in at least one college organization......102 viii

PAGE 9

Most participants were active in leadership roles beyond their teaching responsibilities......................................................................................103 The demographic characteristics of agricultural science instructors that teach in rural areas differ from the demographic characteristics of agricultural science instructors in urban areas......................................105 Females and males differ in their leadership experiences..........................106 There are significant age differences between genders..............................107 Objective Two: Determine the Extent to which Leadership Education is being Taught in High School Agricultural Science Classrooms...................107 Objective Three: Based on National FFA LifeKnowledge Leadership Curriculum, Determine High School Agricultural Science Instructor Leadership Knowledge..................................................................................110 Objective Four: Determine High School Agricultural Science Instructor Attitude towards Teaching Leadership..........................................................111 Objective Five: Determine the Expectations that High School Agricultural Science Instructors have of the Agriculture Students after Leadership has been Taught....................................................................................................112 Objective Six: Determine the Relationship between High School Agricultural Science Instructor Leadership Knowledge, Instructor Attitude towards Teaching Leadership, Instructor Expectations of Students after Teaching Leadership, and Instructor Demographics to Instructor Leadership Teaching Behavior......................................................................114 Recommendations.....................................................................................................116 Suggestions for Additional Research........................................................................117 APPENDIX A PAPER INSTRUMENT...........................................................................................119 B INTERNET INSTRUMENT....................................................................................127 C SURVEY CORRESPONDENCE............................................................................131 D TABLES...................................................................................................................137 LIST OF REFERENCES.................................................................................................142 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH...........................................................................................153 ix

PAGE 10

LIST OF TABLES Table page 3-1 Correlation Magnitude Descriptors..........................................................................53 4-1 Participant Mean Age, Years Teaching, and Years Teaching in Current Position (n=167).....................................................................................................................57 4-2 Pearsons Product Moment Correlations Between Age, Years Teaching, Years Teaching in Current Position, and Selected Variables (n=157)...............................60 4-3 Independent Groups t-test for Significant Variables by Gender (n=167)................61 4-4 Pearsons Product Moment Correlations between Gender and Selected Variables (n=156).....................................................................................................................62 4-5 Number of agricultural science instructors at school (n=156).................................62 4-6 Pearsons Product Moment Correlations between Number of Instructors at School and Selected Variables (n=156)...................................................................64 4-7 Location of school (n=154)......................................................................................64 4-8 Pearsons Product Moment Correlations between School Location and Selected Variables (n=154).....................................................................................................65 4-9 Educational Background (n=158)............................................................................65 4-10 Pearsons Product Moment Correlations Between Educational Background and Selected Variables (n=157)......................................................................................66 4-11 FFA Involvement (n=158).......................................................................................67 4-12 Pearsons Product Moment Correlations between FFA Involvement and Selected Variables (n=158).....................................................................................................67 4-13 High School and College Leadership Activities of Participants..............................68 4-14 Pearsons Product Moment Correlations between High School and College Leadership Activities and Selected Variables (n=158)............................................69 4-15 Number of Offices Held in Professional and Civic Organizations..........................69 x

PAGE 11

4-16 Pearsons Product Moment Correlations Between Professional and Civic Organization Leadership Experience and Selected Variables (n=158)....................70 4-17 Pearsons Product Moment Correlations Between Professional Development Organization Membership and Holding Office, and Selected Variables (n=158)...71 4-18 Mean Committee Participation, and Workshops and Seminars Presented (n=158)72 4-19 Pearsons Product Moment Correlations Between Committee Participation, and Workshops and Seminar Presentations and Selected Variables (n=158).................73 4-20 Mean Number of Leadership Positions Held in Local School or Vocational Department and Advisors Washington Leadership Conference Attendance..........74 4-21 Pearsons Product Moment Correlations Between School and Vocational Department Leadership Positions, and Attending the Advisors Washington Leadership Conference and Selected Variables (n=158).........................................75 4-22 Pearsons Product Moment Correlations Between Leadership Course Taught in Agricultural Science Program and Selected Variables (n=158)...............................75 4-23 Pearsons Product Moment Correlations Between Instructor Leadership Teaching Behavior and Selected Variables (n=156)................................................................78 4-24 Pearsons Product Moment Correlations Between Instructor Attitude Towards Teaching Leadership and Selected Variables (n=158).............................................81 4-25 Pearsons Product Moment Correlations Between Instructor Expectations after Leadership has been Taught and Selected Variables (n=157).................................84 4-26 Backward Regression Explaining Leadership Teaching Behavior (n=145)............86 4-27 Crosstabs of Single-Instructor Department by Gender and Instructor Leadership Teaching Behavior...................................................................................................87 D-1 Pearsons Product Moment Correlations Between Age, Years Teaching, Years Teaching in Current Position, and Selected Variables (n=157).............................137 D-2 Pearsons Product Moment Correlations between Number of Instructors at School and Selected Variables (n=156).............................................................................138 D-3 Pearsons Product Moment Correlations Between Committee Participation, and Workshops and Seminar Presentations and Selected Variables (n=158)...............139 D-4 Pearsons Product Moment Correlations between High School and College Leadership Activities and Selected Variables (n=158)..........................................140 D-5 Pearson Product Moment Correlations between Instructor Leadership Teaching Behavior and Variables Studied.............................................................................141 xi

PAGE 12

LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 2-1 Model of Youth Leadership Development...............................................................25 2-2 Theoretical Model of Behavior................................................................................36 4-1 Distribution of Participant Age................................................................................58 4-2 Distribution of Participants Years Teaching...........................................................59 4-3 Distribution of Participants Years Teaching in Current Position...........................59 4-4 Distribution of Number of Agriculture Instructors in School..................................63 4-5 The Distribution of Instructor Leadership Teaching Behavior................................77 4-6 Distribution of Instructor Leadership Knowledge...................................................80 4-7 Instructor Attitude Toward Teaching Leadership....................................................81 4-8 Instructor Expectations after Leadership Has Been Taught.....................................83 4-9 Explanatory Model of Instructor Leadership Teaching Behavior............................86 A-1 Questionnaire Cover...............................................................................................119 A-2 Questionnaire Inside Cover....................................................................................120 A-3 Questionnaire Section I..........................................................................................121 A-4 Questionnaire Section II.........................................................................................122 A-5 Questionnaire Section III.......................................................................................123 A-6 Questionnaire Sections IV and V...........................................................................124 A-7 Questionnaire Section V Continued.......................................................................125 A-8 Questionnaire Qualitative Questions......................................................................126 B-1 Screen Capture of the Introductory Web Page.......................................................127 xii

PAGE 13

B-2 Screen Capture of Section I Web Form Questionnaire, Measuring Instructor Leadership Teaching Behavior...............................................................................128 B-3 Screen Capture of Section II Web Form Questionnaire, Measuring Instructor Expectations of Students after Leadership Instruction...........................................128 B-4 Screen Capture of Section III Web Form Questionnaire, Measuring Instructor Leadership Knowledge...........................................................................................129 B-5 Screen Capture of Section IV Web Form Questionnaire, Measuring Instructor Attitude toward Teaching Leadership....................................................................129 B-6 Screen Capture of Section V Web Form Questionnaire, Instructor Demographics130 B-7 Screen Capture of Thank You Web Page...............................................................130 C-1 Pre-notice Letter.....................................................................................................132 C-2 Cover Letter for First Questionnaire......................................................................133 C-3 Informed Consent Form.........................................................................................134 C-4 Thank You/ Reminder Postcard.............................................................................135 C-5 Cover Letter for Second Questionnaire..................................................................136 xiii

PAGE 14

Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy TEACHING LEADERSHIP IN AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE: BEHAVIORAL FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE SECONDARY AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE LEADERSHIP INSTRUCTION By Alan Christian Morgan August 2004 Chair: Rick D. Rudd Major Department: Agricultural Education and Communication The extent to which leadership is being taught in agricultural science classrooms is unknown and the attributes of high school agricultural science instructors that influence their decision to formally teach leadership are unclear. Research has been conducted to determine the predictors of agricultural science program quality and how leadership skills affect youth and community, but no research has been conducted to determine the extent to which leadership is being taught in the formal agricultural science classroom or why agricultural science instructors choose to teach leadership. The following questions were addressed in this study: To what extent are high school agricultural science instructors teaching leadership in the formal classroom? What are the factors that influence high school agricultural science instructors to teach leadership? This study, framed by the National FFAs LifeKnowledge curriculum, examined behavioral factors that influence high school agricultural science instructors to teach leadership in agricultural science classrooms. Using ex post facto research methods, a xiv

PAGE 15

model was developed to explain the dependent variable, level of leadership teaching behavior in high school agricultural science classrooms, in light of the independent variables, instructor leadership knowledge, instructor expectations of students after teaching leadership, instructor attitude toward teaching leadership, instructor leadership knowledge, and instructor demographics. An alpha level of 0.05 was set a priori. A national sample of 400 instructors was contacted and 167 responded via mail and the Internet, yielding a 41.8% response rate. A regression model was used to explain leadership teaching behavior. The following variables significantly explained 33% of instructor leadership teaching behavior: Leadership course taught in agricultural science program, urban location of school, gender, and instructor attitude toward the teaching of leadership. Findings revealed most agricultural science instructors have a moderate attitude toward teaching leadership, have moderate expectations of students after leadership instruction, and moderate leadership knowledge, based on the LifeKnowledge curriculum. A recommendation was to provide LifeKnowledge curriculum training to pre-service teachers and provide professional development programs for in-service teachers to help increase instructor leadership knowledge. xv

PAGE 16

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Introduction to the Study This study examined behavioral factors that influence high school agricultural science instructors to teach leadership in agricultural science classrooms. Using ex post facto research methods (Ary, Jacobs, & Razavieh, 1996) a model was developed to explain the dependent variable, instructor leadership teaching behavior of high school agricultural science instructors, in light of the independent variables, high school agricultural science instructor leadership knowledge, high school agricultural science instructor attitude towards teaching leadership, high school agricultural science instructor expectations after teaching leadership, and high school agricultural science instructor demographics. This chapter frames the study by defining leadership and providing a rationale for teaching leadership in high school. It then provides the historical background and current status of leadership instruction in agricultural education and the National FFA Organization. A brief description of the National FFAs LifeKnowledge curriculum is provided along with an explanation of how the curriculum spawned this research. Finally, the research problem and its significance are discussed. Background As we explore this issue, two questions should be addressed: What is leadership? and Why should leadership be taught to high school students? Leadership is a term with many definitions. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary (2003) defines leadership as the office or position of a leader; the capacity to lead; the act or an instance 1

PAGE 17

2 of leading. Northouse (2001) defines leadership as a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal (p.3 ). Kouzes and Posner (1997) define leadership as The art of mobilizing others to want to struggle for shared aspirations (p. 30). The LifeKnowledge curriculum defines leadership as Influence the ability to obtain followers (p. 5). Maxwell (1993) simply defines leadership as influence (p. 1). For the purpose of this study the definition offered by Northouse (2001) will be used. Why should leadership be taught to high school students? Throughout the United States businesses and government organizations are finding it difficult to fill leadership positions because of a lack of trained leaders--a leadership void (Bisoux, 2002; Burns, 1979; Figura, 1999). In an effort to prepare youth for successful careers, the U.S. Department of Labor (1999) published the Secretarys Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills (SCANS) that outlined the skills and competencies necessary for young people to succeed in the workplace. The goal was for the skills and competencies outlined in the SCANS report to be taught to youth through the secondary school system. One of the competencies deemed necessary in the SCANS report for workplace success was Exercises LeadershipCommunicates thoughts, feelings, and ideas to justify a position, encourages, persuades, convinces, or otherwise motivates an individual or groups, including responsibly challenging existing procedures, policies, or authority. Demonstrating competence in exercising leadership includes making positive use of the rules/values followed by others; justifying a position logically and appropriately; establishing credibility through competence and integrity; and taking minority viewpoints into consideration. (U.S. Department of Labor, 1999) In an effort to fill the existing leadership void and properly prepare youth for workplace challenges it is necessary to teach leadership to high school students.

PAGE 18

3 For the past 75 years, high school agricultural education courses have created an environment for students to exercise leadership and acquire many of the competencies outlined in the SCANS report through the teaching of leadership skills (National Research Council, 1988). Today leadership remains a cornerstone of the agricultural education curriculum with many of the over 12,000 high school agricultural science instructors teaching leadership competencies, including parliamentary law, proper business meeting procedure and public speaking, to over 712,000 students enrolled in agriculture courses (Barrett, 1983; National FFA Organization, 2002). A variety of curriculum resources specifically designed for agricultural education students are available for teaching leadership including material published by North Carolina State University (2003), Instructional Materials Service (2003), Interstate Publishers (Prentice Hall, 2003), and Delmar Publishers (2003). In addition to leadership instruction in the agriculture classroom, the co-curricular partnership with the National FFA Organization provides opportunities for youth to practice and demonstrate leadership competencies to prepare youth for successful careers. Historically, the marriage of agriculture and leadership grew out of the need for farmers to share successful agricultural practices with one another. Agricultural societies were formed so that new farming techniques could be shared with others and published, benefiting farmers in a local community. Out of these agricultural societies grew corn clubs for boys and girls, which provided opportunities for youth to meet, learn and participate in agricultural competitions. The boys and girls clubs were the forerunner of the Future Farmers of America, now the National FFA Organization (Barrett, 1983; Hillison & Bryant, 2001).

PAGE 19

4 Since its inception in 1928, the National FFA Organization has provided an avenue for young people to exercise and develop their leadership skills. The 33 young men that gathered in Kansas City to form the National FFA Organization specifically stated the goal of the organization: to provide leadership training for high school students of vocational agriculture (National FFA Organization, 2002, p. 5). Today the National FFA Organization continues this tradition of developing leadership skills in its 461,000 members. The mission statement links the original goal of the organization to the present by stating, FFA makes a positive difference in the lives of students by developing their potential for premier leadership, personal growth and career success through agricultural education (National FFA Organization, 2002, p.5). The link between the high school agricultural science program and the co-curricular National FFA Organization is unique. The agricultural science classroom provides a venue where the high school agricultural science instructor has the opportunity to teach leadership skills and students can learn leadership knowledge and actively engage in leadership activities. The FFA reinforces these leadership skills by providing opportunities for young people to participate in nonformal laboratory settings such as competitive leadership activities and opportunities (officers, committee chairs, etc.) for youth to lead at the local level and beyond. Although leadership education has been espoused by agricultural education and the FFA since its inception, no studies have been conducted to determine the extent to which leadership is taught through formal agricultural education curricula. To strengthen leadership instruction in agricultural science classrooms the National FFA Organization, with the assistance of high school agricultural science instructors,

PAGE 20

5 college faculty, state department of education staff, agriculture industry partners, the USDA, and others recently completed the LifeKnowledge curriculum. The instructional materials associated with the new curriculum consists of over 267 50-minute lessons that were distributed nationally and utilized in agricultural science classrooms beginning in spring and summer 2004. The curriculum materials may be used as a stand-alone curriculum or the lessons may be incorporated into existing classes. The goal of the curriculum is to Provide quality instructional materials so teachers can infuse premier leadership, personal growth and career success into every facet of agricultural education and provide teachers with additional practical learning strategies and corresponding instructional materials to empower young people to live the FFA mission every day. (National FFA Organization, 2003) High school agricultural science instructors have a great deal of influence over what curriculum they teach in the classroom (Rogers, 1999). By controlling the quantity and quality of curriculum taught in the classroom they are a key element in education (Kimpston & Anderson, 1982). Because the high school agricultural science instructor has such an important role, the following questions arise: To what extent is leadership being taught in agricultural science classrooms? What factors influence high school agricultural science instructors to teach leadership? Will the introduction of the new LifeKnowledge curriculum increase the frequency and quality of leadership instruction in high school agricultural education programs? To help determine the impact of this curriculum, baseline data must be gathered to determine current levels of leadership instruction in agricultural science classrooms. Problem Statement The extent to which leadership is being taught in agricultural science classrooms is unknown and the attributes of high school agricultural science instructors that influence

PAGE 21

6 their decision to formally teach leadership are unclear. Research has been conducted to determine predictors of agricultural science program quality (Vaughn & Moore, 2000) and how leadership skills affect youth (Carter & Spotanski, 1989; Dormody, 1994a; Ricketts & Newcomb, 1984; Rutherford, Townsend, Briers, Cummins, & Conrad, 2002; Scanlon & Burket, 1986; Townsend & Carter, 1983) and community (Brannon, Holley & Key, 1989) but no research has been conducted to determine the extent to which leadership is being taught in the formal agricultural science classroom or why high school agricultural science instructors choose to teach leadership. The following research questions are addressed in this study: To what extent are high school agricultural science instructors teaching leadership in the formal classroom? What are the factors that influence high school agricultural science instructors to teach, or not teach, leadership? Significance The outcomes of this study have the potential to impact both high school agricultural science instructors and students. By determining the factors that influence high school agricultural science instructors to teach leadership, pre-service programs could be tailored to motivate future high school agricultural science instructors to teach leadership. In-service workshops could be planned to specifically motivate the behavior of high school agricultural science instructors in such a way that they may increase the level of leadership instruction in agricultural classrooms. Students could benefit by receiving high quantity leadership instruction in high school agricultural education programs that has the potential to broaden their leadership skills, increase their personal growth and enhance their career success throughout their lives.

PAGE 22

7 In addition, writers of current leadership curriculum, such as that developed by the National FFA Organization, could revise and tailor their materials to enhance their impact on high school agricultural science instructors. In-service opportunities could be designed to target the factors that motivate high school agricultural science instructors to teach leadership, possibly leading to the full integration of the leadership curriculum. Other organizations may benefit from this research as well because the information found here may enable them to motivate their instructors to be better prepared to teach leadership principles. Furthermore, gathering baseline data on the leadership teaching behavior of agricultural science instructors will allow future studies to measure change in leadership teaching behavior and gauge the impact of the LifeKnowledge curriculum. Previous studies have determined predictors of successful agricultural science programs, determined the benefits of teaching leadership to youth, justified the teaching of leadership in agriscience classrooms, and determined the qualities of an effective high school agricultural science instructor, but few have specifically looked at what influences high school agricultural science instructors to teach a specific subject. The breadth of influence of this study has the potential to be significant by eliciting behavior change in high school agricultural science instructors to formally teach leadership to youth. Purpose The purpose of the study was to determine the extent to which high school agricultural science instructors are currently teaching leadership in formal agricultural science classrooms and to explain what influences high school agricultural science instructors to teach leadership in the classroom. The specific objectives were to

PAGE 23

8 Determine the demographic characteristics of high school agricultural science instructors; determine the extent to which leadership is being taught in high school agricultural science classrooms; determine high school agricultural science instructor leadership knowledge based on National FFA LifeKnowledge leadership curriculum; determine high school agricultural science instructor attitude towards teaching leadership; determine the expectations that high school agricultural science instructors have of the agriculture students after leadership has been taught; and explain the relationships between high school agricultural science instructor leadership knowledge, attitude towards teaching leadership, expectations of students, and high school agricultural science instructor demographics in light of high school agricultural science leadership content area teaching behavior. Assumptions Two assumptions were made in this study: first, that the local agricultural science program has sufficient support (logistical, financial, etc., from district, community, principal and others) to teach leadership; second, that the high school agricultural science instructors will respond honestly to the questionnaire. Limitations The results of this study can only be extended to the population studied, which is high school agricultural science instructors in the United States during the 2003-2004 school year. Individuals chosen to be part of the research sample cannot be forced to participate in the study; therefore only high school agricultural science instructors that want to participate will provide survey information. The instrument has limited reliability in that it has not previously been used with a national population.

PAGE 24

9 Definitions For the purposes of this study, the following terms were defined operationally: Agricultural education: describes the profession of teaching students about all areas of agriculture from production to consumption. Many times it is used in this study to denote any agricultural situation, occurrence, or topic where a student may learn something as an outcome, whether an agricultural educator is present or not (Ricketts, 2003). Civic organizations: organizations established to serve the community (e.g., Lions Club and Kiwanis). FFA Organization: formerly the Future Farmers of America, it is a youth organization of individuals enrolled in agricultural education courses. It is intended to supplement the agricultural education process with opportunities for students to develop their leadership, personal growth, and success in their future careers (Ricketts, 2003). High school agricultural science instructor leadership knowledge: knowledge of elements and principles of leadership based on the LifeKnowledge (National FFA Organization, 2003) curriculum. High school agricultural science instructor leadership teaching behavior: the extent to which leadership instruction is conducted by the high school agricultural science instructor. Professional development organizations: professional organizations open to people desiring to develop their professional and business skills (e.g., Toastmasters). Professional education organizations: professional organizations such as state education association, Association for Career and Technical Education (ACTE), and National Association of Agricultural Educators (NAAE) for educators. Student leadership organizations, other than FFA: youth organizations such as 4-H, Vocational Industrial Clubs of America (VICA), Distributive Education Clubs of America (DECA), student council, and National Honor Society. Student organizations at the college level: honor and social organizations such as Collegiate FFA, Alpha Tau Alpha, fraternities, sororities, and student government. Chapter Summary The primary purpose of this study was to describe the extent to which high school agricultural science instructors are currently teaching leadership and to identify factors

PAGE 25

10 that influence the level of high school agricultural science instructors teaching of leadership in the classroom. This chapter provided a brief history of the role of leadership in agriculture, agricultural education and the National FFA Organization. FFA has been a proponent of teaching leadership to agriculture students since its inception. Because of this, the FFA has recently developed the LifeKnowledge curriculum to teach leadership principles to students enrolled in secondary agricultural education courses. Few previous studies have addressed factors influencing high school agricultural science instructors teaching of a specific subject. This research investigated factors that influence agricultural science instructors to teach leadership. The results of this study may influence future pre-service and in-service activities, and will provide baseline data for future research in this area. The specific factors studied were high school agricultural science instructor leadership knowledge, high school agricultural science instructor leadership attitude toward teaching leadership, high school agricultural science instructor leadership expectations of students and high school agricultural science instructor demographics. These four factors were used to explain the high school agricultural science instructor behavior of teaching leadership.

PAGE 26

CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Chapter 1 introduced this study, discussed the importance of teaching leadership to youth, and described why teaching leadership is an integral part of high school agricultural education. Also discussed were the National FFA Organizations role in youth leadership education and their participation in the development of the LifeKnowledge curriculum. In addition, an outline of the research problem was presented and the significance of this study was explained. The purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which high school agricultural science instructors are currently teaching leadership in formal agricultural science classrooms and to explain what influences high school agricultural science instructors to teach leadership in the classroom. To accomplish this, a modified version of the Triandis (1971) behavioral model which incorporates knowledge, attitude and expectations to explain behavioral outcomes was used. Specifically this study sought to Determine the demographic characteristics of high school agricultural science instructors; determine the extent to which leadership is being taught in high school agricultural science classrooms; determine high school agricultural science instructor leadership knowledge based on National FFA LifeKnowledge leadership curriculum; determine high school agricultural science instructor attitude towards teaching leadership; determine the expectations that high school agricultural science instructors have of the agriculture students after leadership has been taught; and 11

PAGE 27

12 explain the relationship between high school agricultural science instructor leadership knowledge, high school agricultural science instructor attitude towards teaching leadership, high school agricultural science instructor expectations of students, and high school agricultural science instructor demographics in light of high school agricultural science instructor leadership content area teaching behavior. This chapter presents the conceptual and theoretical framework of the research. Specifically, this chapter describes previous research conducted about the importance to teaching leadership, youth leadership development, leadership curriculum, the theoretical behavior model, and the explanatory variables of behavior. Included are refereed articles, non-refereed publications, research conference proceedings, dissertations, theses, textbooks, articles from the ERIC Document Reproduction Service, and government publications. Defining Leadership Leadership is a term with many definitions. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary (2003) defines leadership as the office or position of a leader; the capacity to lead; the act or an instance of leading. Burns (1979) in his book Leadership defines it as leaders inducing followers to act for certain goals that represent the values and the motivations---the wants and needs, the aspirations and expectations--of both leaders and followers [italics in original text] (p. 19). Gardner (1990) tells us that leadership is the process of persuasion or example by which an individual (or leadership team) induces a group to pursue objectives held by the leader or shared by the leader and his or her followers (p. 1). Bass (1990) defines leadership as an interaction between two or more members of a group that often involves a structuring or restructuring of the situation and the perceptions of the members (p. 19). The definition of leadership formed by Kouzes and

PAGE 28

13 Posner (1997) is The art of mobilizing others to want to struggle for shared aspirations (p. 30). Hersey, Blanchard and Johnson (2001) refer to leadership as influencing others, whenever one person attempts to influence the behavior of an individual or group, regardless of the reason (p. 9). Similarly Northouse (2001) defines leadership as a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal (p. 3). Maxwell (1993) simply defines leadership as influence (p. 1). Ricketts and Rudds (2002) Model for Youth Leadership Curriculum states that leadership consists of these components: knowledge and information; attitude, will and desire; decision making, reasoning and critical thinking; intrapersonal and interpersonal skills; and oral and written communication skills. When defining leadership for youth van Linden and Fertman (1998) define leadership as a physical sensation: a need to share ideas, energy, and creativity, and not let personal insecurities be an obstacle (p. 17). For the purpose of this study, the definition offered by Northouse (2001) will be used. The Importance of Teaching Leadership People are needed to fill leadership roles at all levels of society, from the soccer coach to the president of the homeowners association to leading problem-solving groups in the workforce, we need leaders (Gardner, 1990). Yet education has focused on equipping people with technical job skills while overlooking leadership skills critical to career success (Benson, 1983). Aging baby boomers with key management positions (Figura, 1999, p. 20) will be retiring in the coming years, taking with them a vast amount of experience and leadership skills. Due to lower birth rates in the 1960s and 1970s, a

PAGE 29

14 smaller pool of young talent will be available fill these leadership positions, causing a leadership void. From an industry perspective, the business environment is becoming increasingly global, requiring leadership skills that can guide companies to success (Karnes & Stephens, 1999; Wah, 1999; Stewart, 1998). These leaders, whether they are employees, supervisors, managers, administrators, or CEOs, will need leadership skills such as honesty, integrity, teamwork, communication skills, and interpersonal skills to be successful (McKinley, Birkenholz, & Stewart, 1993; Morrison, 2000; Spotauski & Carter, 1993; University of North Carolina, 2003). The need for skilled leaders will continue in the years to come. To help fill this leadership void, high schools should prepare to train leaders (Barrett, 1983). Students who have been taught leadership are better prepared to act in a leadership capacity because they better understand the phenomena of leadership as a personal and attainable undertaking (Ricketts & Rudd, 2002). Early studies of leadership focused on innate leadership traits, but as the study of leadership has evolved over the years, we know that leadership knowledge and skill can be taught and learned (Bass, 1990; Gardner, 1990; McCall, 1998; Northouse, 2001). Furthermore, studies reveal that leadership can and should be taught to youth (Jones, 1938; Schmidt, 2001; van Linden & Fertman, 1998; Zeldin & Camino, 1999). Youth Leadership Development The value of developing leadership knowledge and skills in youth in order to prepare them for their future roles as citizens has been known for a number of years (Boy Scouts of America, 2003; Boys and Girls Clubs, 2003; van Linden & Fertman, 1998).

PAGE 30

15 This section will discuss some of the youth organizations that seek to instill leadership in youth. Existing Youth Programs Many programs are available in which youth can gain leadership skills. Boy Scouts have a history of producing leaders by training young people in citizenship, service, and leadership (Boy Scouts of America, 2003). Boys and Girls Clubs strive to develop youth into productive citizens through developing leadership skills (Boys and Girls Clubs, 2003). Van Linden and Fertman (1998) discuss a number of youth organizations and opportunities for leadership development including YMCA, Red Cross, and leadership camps. The 4-H organization has a long history of youth development in an agricultural context. Mueller (1989) investigated the belief that 4-H youth leadership involvement improves self-esteem. Of the 868 members in the sample, 402 responded, revealing that 4-H youth's level of participation in leadership activities was significantly related to leadership skill gain, relationship with 4-H leaders, and frequency of involvement in planning, implementing, and evaluating activities. Muellers results indicated that leadership activities can help prepare youth for participation in leadership roles, and that working with adults was an important factor of leadership development. Seevers and Dormody (1994) surveyed 4-H members to describe the involvement of senior 4-H members in planning, implementing and evaluating 4-H youth leadership activities. A 59% response rate with 234 respondents revealed that participation in 4-H leadership life skills activities was greatest at the club level. Activities identified and ranked as contributing highly toward leadership life skills development were holding office, teaching younger members, fairs, livestock shows, judging contests,

PAGE 31

16 demonstrations, public speaking, and community service. 4-H members indicated their greatest involvement in leadership development activities was through implementing activities, followed by evaluating activities. This finding is important in that it illustrates youth benefit most when they have the opportunity to become involved with the planning, implementation, and the evaluation of activities. Although this study illustrates how youth can develop leadership skills through participation in organized life skills activities, it is based on self-perceived leadership skills and doesnt objectively analyze what leadership skills the members possess. High School Youth Programs The high school environment has many leadership opportunities for students. Wallin (2003), in her case study of 40 students, found that students accept leadership roles in student council, athletics, and co-curricular activities. She also found that upperclassmen set the tone for leadership participation. Her results included suggestions for student involvement with administrative decisions and setting high standards for students to achieve. In addition, Chmielewski (2000) reinforced that it is important for teachers and administrators to take a proactive role with student organizations, including seminar and workshop attendance for leadership skill development. These studies reinforce the importance of adult involvement in youth organizations for leadership skills to develop. Organizations such as Students Active in Leadership (SAIL) provide students leadership opportunities that allow students to organize activities that benefit the community (Brutcher, 2003). This provides opportunities for students to develop leadership skills through activities such as securing funding for local projects through

PAGE 32

17 grants and donations. Additional leadership skills are developed through interaction with local officials and volunteers. Some schools have implemented student leadership camps and retreats to assist students in developing leadership skills. At these camps students are provided training in being a role model, dealing with peer pressure, making good choices, and the qualities of a leader (Wolff, 2002). The value of students learning about or experiencing leadership is important. Carter and Spotanski (1989) surveyed a convenience sample of 3437 Iowa high school students, located in three schools, over a three-year period and found that students who have served as a committee chair, officer, or have received formal leadership training, consistently rated each of the 10 measurement scales used significantly higher than students without these leadership experiences. Although the instrument assessed self-perceived skills, it is worth noting that students with leadership experience had greater self-perception, and possibly greater self-confidence, than did the students without leadership experience. A recommendation of this research was to develop curriculum materials for leadership education in high school. Career and Technical Education Youth Programs High school career and technical education programs are in a prime position to teach leadership skills to youth. Federal and state guidelines require these programs to teach students leadership skills along with technical job skills. These leadership skills help to provide students with the human resource skills required in the current work place (Leventhal, 1999; Ricketts & Rudd, 2002). To quantify the leadership benefits to students in career and technical programs, a study was conducted of 427 distributive education students who were active in the high

PAGE 33

18 school career and technical student organization DECA, as compared to distributive education students who had little or no activity in DECA. Results showed that students who are involved in career and technical club leadership activities tend to develop or acquire more leadership characteristics than students who are not involved in these activities (Clark, 1977). This study illustrates that leadership activity involvement can lead to youth leadership skill development. To determine and compare perceptions of advisors and chapter presidents of career and technical student organizations, a study was conducted using a random sample of 200 Ohio youth organization chapters including DECA, National FFA Organization, Future Homemakers of America, and Vocational Industrial Clubs of America. It was determined that leadership skills were being developed in the chapter presidents of these organizations (White, 1982). Although developing leadership skills in club presidents is beneficial, ideally all members of a youth organization would have the opportunity to develop leadership skills. Impact of Agricultural Science and FFA Programs on Youth Leadership Agricultural science programs encourage students to develop leadership skills through a wide variety of opportunities such as classroom instruction, supervised agricultural experience and FFA activities (Esters, 2002). This is a strength of these programs, in that they provide leadership training in the classroom and reinforce that training through FFA activities. The local chapters of the National FFA Organization shoulder the primary responsibility for providing leadership training and realistic leadership experiences for students involved in agricultural education (Brannon, Holley & Key, 1989; National FFA Organization, 2002). Leadership development has been a goal of FFA from the inception

PAGE 34

19 of the organization in 1928 (Connors, 1999; National Research Council, 1988). Through participation in FFA events, students have been able to obtain valuable leadership experiences in both formal and non-formal activities (Esters, 2002). A study by Townsend and Carter (1983) described the relationship between participation in FFA activities and development of leadership competencies. The population consisted of Iowa senior agriculture students from 54 randomly selected high schools, which generated 426 responses yielding a 67% response rate. Findings of the study show that self-perceived leadership competencies had a significant correlation with FFA participation. The results suggest the leadership trait is enhanced with FFA activity. In addition, students who attended state and national FFA conferences had a higher perception of their leadership abilities than did non-participants. These findings were similar to the findings of Seevers and Dormody (1994) and Clark (1977), providing some evidence of the benefits of youth involvement in organized leadership activities. A limiting factor with these three studies is they measure self-perceived leadership traits. Using an objective measure may have increased the validity of these studies. Ricketts and Newcomb (1984) surveyed 258 high school students, from 16 randomly selected high schools, to describe leadership and personal development abilities possessed by high school seniors. The study revealed that agriculture students and FFA members from both superior and non-superior chapters possess significantly more leadership and personal development abilities than did students not enrolled in agriculture. They also found that students who are more active tend to develop higher levels of leadership and personal development ability, and that vocational agriculture students and FFA members from superior FFA chapters are more active in FFA activities

PAGE 35

20 than vocational agriculture students and FFA members from non-superior chapters. It was also determined that the level of chapter member activity has a higher relationship to leadership and personal development abilities possessed by FFA members than member involvement at district or regional, state and national levels. Therefore, the more active a student is in the local chapter, the greater their self-perceived leadership and personal development abilities. Once again, the positive relationship between self-perceived leadership ability and FFA involvement is revealed, illustrating that students enrolled in agriculture classes have a higher perceived level of leadership ability than their peers not enrolled in agriculture classes. Stewart, Smith, Ehlert, and Mihalevich (1985) came to similar conclusions when they surveyed 483 advisors and FFA members from 44 FFA chapters. They found that local FFA chapter officers realized greater achievement from FFA membership than did regular members. This reinforces the previous findings that the more involved a student is in the organization, the greater their rewards. In addition, these results indicate that students holding an office benefit more in terms of perceived level of achievement, than those students that did not hold an office. Dormody and Seevers (1994b) using a stratified random sample technique, surveyed 400 FFA members from three states to determine predictors of youth leadership life skills development. A 67% response rate was achieved. Achievement expectancy, or a combination of the level of evaluation FFA members expect from others and the level of performance they expect from themselves in FFA activities and projects, had a positive relationship with youth leadership life skills development. Participation in FFA leadership activities had a weak positive relationship with youth leadership life skills

PAGE 36

21 development. In addition, judging contests, public speaking, chapter meetings, holding office, and parliamentary procedure were often cited as activities that made the greatest contribution to the students leadership life skills. Using the Dormody and Seevers instrument, Wingenbach (1995) analyzed self-perceived youth leadership and life skills of Iowa FFA members. Wingenbach used a random sample survey and received 316 usable questionnaires. A 79% response rate was achieved. The activities of chapter meetings, fundraising events, chapter banquets, SAE projects, and being an FFA committee member were found to have a significant relationship with the youth leadership and life skill development score. Also found were low positive correlations between youth leadership and life skills development scores and FFA leadership activities, and years of membership in the FFA. The major finding of this study was that participation in FFA leadership activities, in combination with the variables of after school jobs, years in FFA, self-reported cumulative grades, and gender, accounted for 22% of the variance in youth leadership and life skills development scores, with FFA activity being the most significant predictor of youth leadership and life skills development. This reinforces early studies in which FFA activity lead to self-perceived leadership skills. A survey of FFA chapter officers found that participation in FFA activities had a positive influence on the students perceived leadership skills. Rutherford, Townsend, Briers, Cummins, and Conrad (2002) surveyed student FFA members attending the National FFA Organizations Washington Leadership Conference (WLC). Of the 2086 student conference attendees, 279 self-selected attendees completed the instrument. No steps were taken to control for non-response error, and as such, the results were only

PAGE 37

22 applied to the participants of the study. The purpose of the study was to determine relationships between WLC participants' self-perception of their leadership skills and their chapter size, length of membership, level of involvement, and involvement in an officer position. This instrument was based on the instrument used by Townsend (1983). Findings revealed that a significant positive relationship was found between self-perceived leadership skills and FFA level of involvement. Results concerning level of FFA involvement found that self-perceived leadership traits of youth are enhanced by participation in FFA activities and supported research of several authors (Carter & Spotanski, 1989; Townsend & Carter, 1983). The positive, though not strong, correlation between level of FFA involvement and the instrument leadership scales reinforces the positive relationship between FFA activity and perceived leadership skills. Section Summary From Scouting to 4-H, youth organizations have been developing leadership skills in youth for many years. An abundance of research exists showing that these organizations develop self-perceived leadership skills in young people. For many youth, involvement in these organizations begins in high school through participation in extracurricular and intracurricular organizations. Career and technical organizations are particularly suited to develop leadership skills in youth, as Federal and State guidelines mandate that leadership training be incorporated into the curriculum. The National FFA Organization stands out from these organizations by providing a wide range of opportunities for students to develop leadership skills and through classroom leadership instruction. It has been well documented that students participation in FFA activities leads to increased student self-perceived leadership skill development.

PAGE 38

23 The importance of student involvement in youth leadership organizations cannot be stressed enough. Involvement in these organizations allows youth the opportunity to develop leadership skills that will benefit them throughout their lives. Franklin Roosevelt stated, We cannot always build the future for our youth, but we can build our youth for the future (Riordon, 2000, p. 202). Agricultural science classrooms are an excellent place to begin building youth for the future through the teaching of leadership. A Leadership Curriculum for Youth The preceding research illustrates the benefits of youth being exposed to leadership opportunities through extra-curricular and co-curricular activities. Unfortunately, not all students participate in these activities. What is needed is a curriculum that can be taught in the classroom so that all students can have the opportunity to learn leadership knowledge and skills (Carter & Spotanski, 1989; Ricketts & Rudd, 2001). Although high school agricultural science instructors have the skills to develop their own curriculum materials, they prefer to use pre-existing materials (Wingenbach, Gartin, & Lawarence, 2000) and the use of a quality curriculum provides a strong foundation for quality teaching to occur (Swan, 1996). Boccia (1997) points out there is a meager base of programmatic guidelines for successful student leadership in schools (p. 76). Leadership textbooks are available (Delmar Learning, 2003; Prentice Hall, 2003) and leadership curriculum has been developed for some states (Commonwealth of Virginia Board of Education, 2001; Instructional Materials Service, 2003; North Carolina State University, 2003; Virginia Division of Policy and Public Affairs, 2001) to address local needs, but no national curriculum is currently available.

PAGE 39

24 The Model of Youth Leadership Development To develop a framework for a comprehensive youth leadership curriculum, Ricketts and Rudd (2002) conducted a meta-analysis of youth leadership development literature. Based on this research, the Model of Youth Leadership Development was developed (see figure 2.1). This model consists of five dimensions: Leadership knowledge and information--Base knowledge needed about leaders and leadership before application of leadership concepts. Leadership attitude, will and desire--Focuses on disposition, motivation, self-realization, and health to prepare students for leadership. Decision making, reasoning, and critical thinking--Using critical thinking skills to address problems and make decisions with incomplete information. Oral and written communication skills--Skills necessary to effectively sharing information and convey ideas, attitudes, opinions and feelings. Intrapersonal and interpersonal relations--Includes conflict resolution, stress management, teamwork and ethics viewed through the framework of diversity, learning styles and personality types (Ricketts, 2003). Each dimension represents one construct for which a curricular unit was developed. Each curricular unit is designed so it can be taught at three different levels of cognition: awareness, integration and mastery. By addressing each stage in each dimension, a complete and cohesive nature of a leadership curriculum is possible (Ricketts & Rudd, 2001).

PAGE 40

25 Figure 2-1. Model of Youth Leadership Development. From Ricketts, J. C., & Rudd, R. D. (2002). A comprehensive leadership education model to train, teach, and develop leadership in youth. Journal of Career and Technical Education, 19 (1), 7-17. LifeKnowledge Curriculum Origin and Development The LifeKnowledge curriculum grew out of the mission statement of the National FFA Organization: To make a positive difference in lives of students by developing their potential for premier leadership, personal growth and career success through agricultural education. To better serve organization members, FFA leadership began to take the steps necessary to develop a curriculum that would address the elements of the mission statement (Derner, 2004). The FFA mission and The Model of Youth Leadership

PAGE 41

26 Development framework (Ricketts & Rudd, 2002) were used as a guide to conceptualize and construct the LifeKnowledge leadership curriculum. The first step taken by the National FFA Organization brought together educators, business leaders, government leaders, agricultural education leaders, and FFA leaders to define measurable outcomes needed to master the constructs related to leadership, personal growth and career success. Once the outcomes were defined, money was secured to fund the development of a curriculum to address these constructs (Derner, 2004). Agriculture instructors, graduate students and university faculty were brought together to develop lessons for the curriculum. Once these lessons were written, they were sent to agriculture instructors for trial use and evaluation. Based on comments received from the evaluating instructors, corrections were made to the lessons. The lessons were then combined into a curriculum that was made available to agriculture instructors nationwide in 2004 (Derner, 2004). The purpose of this curriculum is to provide quality instructional materials so teachers can infuse premier leadership, personal growth, and career success into every facet of agricultural education and to provide teachers with additional practical learning strategies and corresponding instructional materials to empower young people to live the FFA mission every day. While the LifeKnowledge curriculum addresses the three areas of the FFA mission statement, this study addresses only the leadership component of this curriculum. Six leadership constructs are included in the curriculum: action, vision, character, relationships, awareness, and continuous improvement. The LifeKnowledge curriculum

PAGE 42

27 defines action as demonstration of the skills and competencies needed to achieve the desired results (National FFA Organization, 2003, p. 10). Action embraces empowerment, risk, communication, focusing on results, decision-making, problem solution, investment in individuals, and resource use and access (National FFA Organization, 2003, p. 10). Vision is defined by the LifeKnowledge curriculum as setting a clear image of what the future should be. Vision embraces enthusiasm, creativity, the future, conviction, mission, courage, concept, focus, principles, and change (National FFA Organization, 2003, p. 10). The LifeKnowledge curriculum defines character as a collection of virtues by which we live our lives. Character embraces integrity, courage, values, attitude, ethics, humility, perseverance, self-discipline and responsibility (National FFA Organization, 2003, p. 10). Relationships are defined by the LifeKnowledge curriculum as building a constituency. Relationships embrace compassion, service, listening, coaching, developing others, team development, and understanding and appreciating others (National FFA Organization, 2003, p. 10). Awareness is defined as a quest for purposeful understanding. Awareness includes self, community, diversity, environment, global and knowledge (National FFA Organization, 2003, p. 10). The LifeKnowledge curriculum defines continuous improvement as the pursuit of learning and growth. Continuous improvement embraces innovation, intuition,

PAGE 43

28 adaptation, life-long learning, and coachability (National FFA Organization, 2003, p. 10). Curriculum Adoption Having a new curriculum with which to teach high school students leadership knowledge and skills has the potential to be advantageous to students learning, but prior to students benefiting from the curriculum the instructors must first adopt it. Studies have found a common set of characteristics that lead to curriculum adoption (Bland, Starnaman, Wersal, Moorhead-Rosenburg, Zonia, & Henry, 2000). Bland et al. identified five categories for successful curriculum change: politics, participation by organization members, human resource development, evaluations and leadership. Politics revolve around the allocation of scarce resources (Bolman & Deal, 1997). These resources include internal networking and resource allocation. Internal networking consists of formal and informal channels through which people are influenced by opinion leaders (Bland et al., 2000; Rogers, 2003). Successful change requires advocates within this network. Resource allocation requires having the necessary funds to implement the change. These funds may be required for purchasing curriculum, or may be necessary for faculty training of the curriculum. Fortunately, the National FFA Organization has sufficient financial support to provide the LifeKnowledge curriculum and training to agricultural science instructors throughout the country. Possibly the most influential political element in curriculum adoption today is the popularity of standardized testing and accountability within the school system (Frontline, 2002). Students in many states are required to pass a standardized test prior to moving on to the next grade level. Using the student scores from these tests, schools can be rated and held accountable for students passing and failing these tests (Doherty, 2004).

PAGE 44

29 Because of the impact these tests have upon the students success as well as the schools accountability, a tremendous amount of effort goes into preparing students to pass these tests (FairTest.org, 2004). This may have an impact on the subjects offered in the schools. Subjects that do not have a direct positive impact on student standardized test scores may be at risk of being eliminated from the school course offerings. Standardized tests usually assess the students knowledge of mathematics, reading and grammar (Doherty, 2004). Typically, leadership is not a concept that students are held accountable for with these tests, and therefore a leadership curriculum may not be adopted in a school because it does not contribute to the success of students on standardized tests. This would be an unfortunate situation, because the skills learned through leadership instruction are skills that will benefit students regardless of the career in which they enter, providing them with the leadership and communication skills desired by employers (Boccia, 1997; Figura, 1999). Participation by organization members is a key element to successful change (Bland et al., 2000). Curriculum adoption efforts must have the support of instructors for the adoption effort to be a success. One method to accomplish this is to include instructors in the implementation of the adoption process (Butler, 1999; Lowery, 2000). As stated by Connors (1999), Teachers must see a need for change, believe it is justified, and be able to recognize problems that can be addressed by adoption of the curriculum (p. 54). Including instructors in the adoption process increases their skill development and the likelihood of curriculum implementation (Bland et al., 2000). Therefore, instructors must be willing to participate in the curriculum change for success to occur. High school agricultural science instructors have been involved with the LifeKnowledge

PAGE 45

30 curriculum since its inception. University faculty, that were previously secondary instructors, developed the framework for the curriculum. Current and former instructors wrote the lessons, and the lessons were field tested and critiqued by current agriculture instructors. Human resource development in the form of professional development workshops and seminars is important to allow instructors to see how the curriculum is properly utilized are necessary for successful curriculum adoption (Kirk & MacDonald, 2001; Leat & Higgins, 2002). In this way, instructors needs can be met through proper professional development, training, and support through the curriculum adoption process (Bland et al., 2000). LifeKnowledge curriculum workshops were held across the country, led by the curriculum authors, to train agricultural instructors how to incorporate the curriculum into existing lessons and how to implement the entire curriculum. Evaluation allows for monitoring of implemented changes and solving problems as they arise (Bland et al, 2000). The national scope of the LifeKnowledge curriculum distribution will require that instructors across the country be contacted to monitor and evaluate the adoption process. The findings of this current study will assist in the evaluation process by providing baseline data of current leadership instruction. Future studies can be conducted to determine the rate of adoption of the LifeKnowledge curriculum. This information may be helpful in determining future professional development seminars and possible curriculum changes in order that the curriculum will be most useful to instructors. Strong leadership is required for successful change to occur (Bland et al., 2000). With this adoption process the leader must be prepared to provide a vision for a national

PAGE 46

31 organization. The staff at the National FFA have successfully organized the development and implementation of the curriculum and have a long-range strategic plan for adoption. In addition, other factors within the adoption process are also necessary. Many studies found encouraging teachers to adopt a new curriculum can be a challenge for a number of reasons. For some instructors there is a period of delay from the time the curriculum is introduced to the instructors, to the time it is adopted (Connors & Elliot, 1994; Lowery, 2000; Rudd & Hillison, 1995; Wingenbach et al., 2000). This delay is natural and should be anticipated. The adoption rate of many of these studies follows the Rogers (2003) model of adoption innovation. For adoption to occur teachers must see the relative advantage to using the curriculum, they must be able to observe the advantage of using the curriculum, and the curriculum must be compatible with their existing schedule, teaching style and environment. The complexity of the curriculum must be at a level that is challenging to the students, yet relatively simple for the instructor to utilize. Finally, the curriculum must have the ability to be used on a trial basis to determine if it has the ability to integrate with the existing teaching environment and teaching style of the individual teacher. Rogers (2003) defines five adopter categories based on the individuals stage of adopting an innovation. Innovators Active seekers of new ideas, who adopt new ideas quickly, thought to be on the cutting edge. Early Adopters Individuals who have evaluated the innovation and are quick to adopt it once it meets their approval. Early Majority Individuals that adopt new ideas after thorough evaluation and just prior to an average member of the group adopts an idea or innovation. Late Majority Individuals that are skeptical about the innovation and must witness the success of others prior to adopting an idea or innovation themselves.

PAGE 47

32 Laggards Individuals who are last to adopt an innovation. While some instructors are slow to adopt the curriculum, others prefer to use only parts of the curriculum rather than the entire curriculum (Connors & Elliot, 1994; Rudd & Hillison, 1995; Wingenbach et al., 2000). For this reason the curriculum should be designed as bite-sized pieces that it can be incorporated into existing instruction (Leat & Higgins, 2002). This also provides instructors the opportunity to use the curriculum on a trial basis. The 267 lessons of the LifeKnowledge curriculum are designed in such a way that they may be used individually, incorporated into existing courses, or taught as a complete curriculum. This provides a way for instructors to sample a piece of the curriculum without being forced into using the entire curriculum. Similarly, instructors need to have the freedom to modify the curriculum to meet the needs of the school, community and constituent groups (Bland et al., 2000). This freedom provides ownership of the curriculum by the local instructor, which is essential, because they have the expertise to know what the students can handle and to know how curriculum can best be adapted for use locally (Kirk & MacDonald, 2001; Leat & Higgins, 2002). The LifeKnowledge curriculum offers a generous amount of flexibility to adapt to local needs. Lessons are on a compact disk (CD) and include lesson outlines, scripts, classroom activities, overhead transparency masters, and evaluation tools. From these lesson materials, instructors can choose which materials are best suited for use in their classroom. Section Summary This section illustrated that a leadership curriculum is needed for teaching youth leadership in formal classroom environments and, although instructors have the ability to

PAGE 48

33 create their own curriculum, they prefer to use pre-existing materials. In an effort to provide a quality curriculum, the National FFA Organization developed the LifeKnowledge curriculum, which consists of six constructs that strive to develop leadership competencies in youth. The curriculum was written by practitioners of youth leadership instruction and has sufficient flexibility to be used as a stand-alone curriculum or individual lessons may be infused with existing instructional materials. Many barriers to implementation of the curriculum were addressed. Of great importance to the adoption process is the acknowledgement that instructors adopt curriculum at differing rates. Strategies to be used to assist the adoption process include recognizing and communicating the adoption process to instructors; including instructors in the adoption process; allowing the curriculum to be used as individual lessons rather than as a stand-alone curriculum; giving instructors the freedom to modify the curriculum for their local setting; and providing adequate professional development to support and assist the instructors during the adoption process. Why High School Agricultural Science Instructors Teach Leadership Theories of Behavior To assist in describing and explaining the teaching behavior of agricultural science teachers, a behavior model was sought. Of the many behavioral models available (Bandura, 1986; Becker, 1974; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975; Fishbein, Bandura, Triandis, Kanfer, Becker, & Middlestadt, 1991; Triandis, 1971), the Triandis model was chosen for this study. This model identifies four explanatory variables of behavior that could be measured: attitude, social norms, habits, and expectancies. A modified Triandis model has been successfully used in an earlier study to describe and explain agricultural science curriculum adoption (Rudd, 1994).

PAGE 49

34 Modified Triandis Model of Behavior This current study used a variation of the Triandis model that uses four variables to explain behavior: attitude, social norms, habits, and expectations (Rudd & Hillison, 1995). For the purpose of this study, attitude is defined as a mental position with regard to a fact or state (Merriam-Webster, 2003) towards leadership. As defined by Triandis (1971) social norms are what people think they should do (p.14), based upon experiences and beliefs. In the case of agriculture instructors, the fundamental social norm is they are expected to teach. If this is extended to agriculture instructors teaching leadership, we see that instructors are expected to teach leadership. However, what is included within leadership? This may be defined by what agriculture instructors have taught in the past. Therefore, we may define social norms within in agricultural science leadership as those elements of leadership that should be taught in agriculture. Although no studies could be found that defined the social norms within agricultural leadership, elements of leadership in secondary agricultural education measured by researchers in previous studies include: participation in public speaking, judging contests, chapter banquet planning, committee work, leadership camp, parliamentary procedure, state conventions, national convention, chapter activities, community service, Washington Leadership conference, fundraising, supervised agricultural experience, Program of Activities (POA) planning, public relations, holding FFA office, earning proficiency awards, FFA membership, highest FFA degree held, exhibiting at fairs and shows, working with groups, understanding self, communicating, making decisions, leadership, and creed speaking (Brannon, Holley & Key, 1989; Clark, 1977; Dormody & Seevers, 1994a; Karr,

PAGE 50

35 Keith, Lockaby, & Vaughn, 2001; Ricketts & Newcomb, 1984; Rutherford et al., 2002; Thorp, Cummins, & Townsend, 1998; Townsend & Carter, 1983; Wingenbach, 1995). When an element of leadership was found in four or more of the studies, it was decided to retain that element as a social norm. Based on the consistencies found in these studies, social norms within agricultural leadership are defined in this study as participation in public speaking, judging contests, chapter banquet, committee work, leadership camp, parliamentary procedure, state conventions, proficiency awards, national convention, program of activities planning, and holding FFA office. Because these elements of leadership are found in multiple studies it is concluded that these elements are most likely what agricultural science researchers believe are the social norms of secondary agricultural leadership, and as such, are generally the same for each instructor, being reflected in the current condition of agricultural education (Rudd, 1994). If they are the same for each instructor, they need not be measured and therefore can be excluded from the behavioral model. Although these leadership skills described as the social norms are reflected in the current thinking of our agricultural instructors, these are not the leadership skills presented in the LifeKnowledge curriculum. The LifeKnowledge curriculum goes beyond parliamentary procedure and teaches interpersonal skills and intrapersonal skills, skills that allow a person to understand themselves and to understand others as well. Habits are defined as what a person has usually done (Triandis, 1971) and are based upon experiences, which are influenced by knowledge (Lee, 2000). Likewise, a persons past experiences are a function of their demographics (Taylor, Basen-Engquist, Shinn, & Bodurka, 2004; Variyam, 1999). Therefore, a persons habits are a function of their

PAGE 51

36 knowledge and demographics. In this study, habits will be measured through high school agricultural science instructors knowledge (Peasley & Henderson, 1992; Rudd, 1994) of leadership concepts and high school agricultural science instructor demographics (Connors & Elliot, 1994). Expectations are measured as expected benefits, or outcomes, of teaching leadership to students (Mischel & Mischel, 1977; Rudd, 1994). The modified behavioral model is diagrammed below: f Behavior = Attitude + Knowledge + Demographics + Expectations Figure 2-2. Theoretical Model of Behavior This study measured the behavior of high school agricultural science instructors teaching of leadership in the classroom. Also measured were high school agricultural science instructor attitude towards teaching leadership, high school agricultural science instructor knowledge of leadership, high school agricultural science instructor demographic variables, and high school agricultural science instructor expectations of students after leadership had been taught in the classroom. Population Studied The population studied was high school agricultural science instructors from throughout the United States. The population was developed from a list of active FFA chapters provided by the National FFA Organization. Because the LifeKnowledge curriculum is to be distributed nationally, it was important to conduct the study on a national scale so the results could be generalizable to the national population of high school agricultural science instructors.

PAGE 52

37 High School Agricultural Science Instructor Leadership Teaching Behavior Two methods of determining behavior are self-perceived and observation. Self-perceived behavior is information provided by the participants about their own behavior. Observation is information provided by a researcher who observes the participant and records findings (Ary et al., 1996). This research measured self-perceived high school agricultural science instructor behavior using a series of questions to determine if specific content areas of the LifeKnowledge curriculum were being taught using a self-report form. Explanatory Variables This section serves to address research specific to the variables used in this study. These variables are knowledge, attitude, expectations, and demographics. Knowledge Using knowledge as a descriptor for teacher behavior has been used successfully. Rudd (1994) found that knowledge alone explained 39% of the variance associated with the behavior of instructor curriculum adoption. This study measured high school agricultural science instructor leadership knowledge based the individual leadership development lessons from unit two of the FFA LifeKnowledge leadership curriculum. Attitude Instructor attitude is of great importance as it affects the instructors teaching and the students in their classrooms (ERIC Clearing House on Tests Measurement and Evaluation, 1985). Instructor attitude has been used in many studies to gather data on a wide range of issues. Osborne and Dyer (1998) measured attitudes of science instructors to determine their perceptions of high school agriculture programs. Likewise, Cano (1990) measured attitudes of male agricultural science instructors towards female

PAGE 53

38 agriculture science instructors. In two separate studies, attitude was found to be an explanatory variable when evaluating instructor attitudes towards curriculum (Peasley & Henderson, 1992; Rudd, 1994). This study measured instructor attitude towards the teaching of leadership. Expectations Along with attitudes, instructor expectations may have an effect on their own teaching behavior and student success (Happerlen, Clay, Henly, & Barke, 2002). Instructor expectations of student behavior after leadership instruction were measured in this study. Demographics When describing groups of instructors, demographics for each group can be significantly different. Instructors with low effectiveness had significantly different demographics from the instructors with high effectiveness (Miller, Kahler, & Rheault, 1989). Demographics measured by Miller et al. were instructor age, years teaching experience, years at present location, professional organization membership, civic organization membership, and leadership positions held in civic organizations. When explaining FFA program quality, Vaughn and Moore (2000) found that the demographic characteristics of number of teachers per department and instructors leadership experiences explained 36% of the variance of program quality. Demographic characteristics measured by Vaughn and Moore were years teaching experience, number of teachers in department, bachelors degree in agricultural education, masters degree earned, number of teachers pr department, FFA membership in high school, FFA office above chapter level, non-FFA positions held in high school, collegiate organization membership, professional education organization membership, civic organization

PAGE 54

39 membership, state and regional committee participation, agricultural education workshops and seminars conducted, vocational leadership position held in school, and Advisors Washington Leadership Conference attendance. When studying curriculum adoption, demographic variables were found to be a significant predictor of adoption (Connors & Elliot, 1994; Rudd, 1994). This exploratory study will analyze individual demographic characteristics to explain instructor leadership teaching behavior. Section Summary Modified versions of the Triandis behavior model have successfully been used in the past and offer a simple way to explain behavior with a limited number of variables. The variables used have the ability to be self-reported, which allows this model to be adapted for use with a survey instrument. The variables selected have provided explanatory ability in previous studies, and were expected to do the same in this study. Knowledge is fundamental in teaching subject matter and providing instructor self-confidence. Attitude has shown to be a strong predictor of instructor performance and the addition of expectations to the model provides a good framework for explaining instructor behavior. In addition, selected demographic variables have been shown to account for a substantial amount of variance in explanatory models. Chapter Summary The purpose of this chapter was to describe previous research conducted about how leadership is defined, the importance of teaching leadership, youth leadership development, leadership curriculums for youth, and explaining why instructors teach leadership.

PAGE 55

40 Definitions of leadership were discussed and the importance of teaching leadership to youth was provided. The literature suggests that leadership skills are in high demand by employers and will continue to be so, yet schools have focused on teaching job skills, and have overlooked teaching leadership skills. This has led previous researchers to conclude that leadership training needs to occur in high school. Youth leadership organizations allow high school youth to develop leadership skills that will benefit them throughout their lives. The National FFA Organization stands out among youth organizations by providing a wide range of opportunities for students to develop leadership skills. It has been well documented that students participation in FFA activities leads to increased student leadership skill development. Due to the partnership between agricultural education and FFA, the agricultural science classroom is an excellent place to begin building youth for the future through formal classroom teaching of leadership. To accomplish this the National FFA Organization developed the LifeKnowledge curriculum. The curriculum was written by practitioners of youth leadership instruction and has sufficient flexibility to be used alone or with existing materials. Many barriers to implementation of the curriculum were addressed along with methods used to increase the rate of adoption. To determine why high school agricultural science instructors teach leadership a modified version of the Triandis behavioral model was described. The variables of knowledge, attitude, expectations and demographics have been successfully used to explain instructor teaching behavior, and will be used in this study to explain the extent to which high school agricultural science instructors teach leadership.

PAGE 56

CHAPTER 3 METHODS Chapter 1 provided a brief history of the relationship of agriculture and leadership, then went on to describe the National FFA Organizations role in preparing youth for leadership responsibilities and why leadership is an integral part of agricultural education. Chapter 1 also described the importance of conducting this research. The purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which high school agricultural science instructors are currently teaching leadership in formal agricultural science classrooms and to explain what influences high school agricultural science instructors to teach leadership in the classroom. To accomplish this, a modified version of the Triandis (1971) behavioral model was used which incorporates knowledge, attitude and expectations to explain behavioral outcomes. Chapter 2 reviewed previous research conducted about youth leadership and provided a theoretical framework based on Triandis behavioral model (Ricketts, 2003; Rudd, 1994; Triandis, 1980) from which to build a theoretical model. Areas of review included defining leadership, the importance of teaching leadership, previous research on youth leadership, leadership curriculum for youth, why instructors teach leadership, the theoretical behavior model, and explanatory variables of behavior. This chapter will describe the research context of the study, research design, research questions, population, sample, instrumentation, procedures used to collect the data, and data analysis. 41

PAGE 57

42 Context of the Study Place The study was conducted via mail and on-line using the Internet, therefore the place of data collection was the classroom, home or other location of the high school agricultural science instructor. The instructors were located in every U.S. state, with the exception of five states in which the curriculum had been pilot tested: Kansas, Maine, Nebraska, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania. Postal mailings notifying the participants of the survey and required emails were sent from the researchers office on the University of Florida campus in Gainesville, FL. The survey instruments used were both paper and pencil, and on-line forms. The paper and pencil instrument consisted of an eight-page questionnaire mailed to the participants. The on-line instrument consisted of web pages and web forms, loaded on a World Wide Web file server located on the University of Florida campus. Data collected from the paper and pencil instrument were entered manually by the researcher. Data collected from the on-line instrument were sent to a text file on the file server and simultaneously emailed to the researcher. Data analyses, conclusions, and recommendations were completed at the University of Florida. Time Preliminary instrument development began on October 21, 2002. A preliminary instrument was completed on January 29, 2004. A panel of experts, consisting of the researchers committee reviewed the instrument and suggested additions and corrections that should be made to the instrument. Based on the panels comments, modifications were made to the instrument. The pilot study was administered to a sample of high school agricultural science instructors from Nebraska on February 26, 2004. Data

PAGE 58

43 analysis from the pilot study was conducted and revisions to the instrument were made on March 31, 2004. The national survey began on April 5, 2004. Final data collection was completed on May 17, 2004. Data were then analyzed beginning on May 17, 2004. The entire study was conducted between February 26, 2004 and May 17, 2004. National FFA Organization The National FFA Organization was instrumental in the development of this study. The LifeKnowledge curriculum developed by the FFA provided the leadership content areas with which this study was framed. In addition, the National FFA Organization provided a comprehensive list of high school agricultural science programs from across the United States from which the sample was derived. Research Design The study was conducted using survey research, and a correlational, ex post facto design. A correlational design involves the collection of two or more sets of data from a group of subjects with the attempt to determine the subsequent relationship between those sets of data (Tuckman, 1994). Ex post facto is a study in which the researcher examines the effects of a naturally occurring treatment after the treatment has occurred. The researcher relates the after-the-fact treatment to an outcome or dependent measure (Tuckman, 1994). The dependent variable measured was instructor leadership teaching behavior as determined by the level of formal leadership instruction taught in the high school agricultural science classroom. Independent variables measured were instructor leadership knowledge, instructor attitude towards teaching leadership, instructor expectations after teaching leadership to students, and instructor demographics. The

PAGE 59

44 measures of instructor behavior, instructor knowledge and instructor expectations were developed using lesson objectives in unit two of the LifeKnowledge curriculum (National FFA Organization, 2003). These variables will be discussed in more detail in the instrumentation section. Research Objectives Much research has been done regarding youths self-perception of their own leadership ability and skill (Rutherford et al., 2002; Seevers & Dormody, 1995; Townsend & Carter, 1983; Wingenbach, 1995). Yet, little research has been conducted on instructor teaching behavior. Additionally, the author could find neither research that quantified the amount of leadership being taught in agricultural science classrooms nor research that addressed the factors that influence instructors to teach leadership. This study sought to address the following research objectives: Determine the demographic characteristics of high school agricultural science instructors; determine the extent to which leadership is being taught in high school agricultural science classrooms; based on National FFA LifeKnowledge leadership curriculum, determine high school agricultural science instructor leadership knowledge; determine high school agricultural science instructor attitude towards teaching leadership; determine the expectations that high school agricultural science instructors have of the agriculture students after leadership has been taught; and explain the relationship between high school agricultural science instructor leadership knowledge, high school agricultural science instructor attitude towards teaching leadership, high school agricultural science instructor expectations of students, and high school agricultural science instructor demographics in light of high school agricultural science instructor leadership content area teaching behavior.

PAGE 60

45 Population The population for the study was all FFA advisors at high school agricultural science programs (National FFA Organization, 2002) with the exception of FFA advisors in five states where the curriculum had been pilot tested: Kansas, Maine, Nebraska, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania. The programs were identified through the National FFA Organization. Sample Nationally, there are 7,193 high school agricultural science programs (National FFA Organization, 2002). A 95% confidence level with 5% sampling error was chosen for this study. Based on sample size information from Dillman (2000), a sample size of 367 was required for a population of 8,000. The confidence level and sampling error are contingent upon receiving 367 usable responses. To account for incorrect addresses, inactive programs, etc. a sample size of 400 was chosen. Using a list of active FFA chapters provided by the National FFA Organization, 400 participants were selected by simple random sample selection (Agresti & Finlay, 1997). To accomplish this, that Active Chapter List was entered into an Excel file. Random numbers were assigned to each chapter in the sample frame and sorted. The first 400 chapters of the sorted list were used in the study. Instrumentation The instrument was designed to measure the level of leadership taught in the agricultural science classroom, the attitude of the instructor towards the teaching of leadership, the leadership knowledge of the instructor, demographic information of the instructor, and instructor expectations of students after leadership had been taught in the classroom (see Appendix A).

PAGE 61

46 Instructor leadership knowledge and the constructs of level of leadership being taught, instructor attitude towards teaching leadership, and instructor expectations of agricultural students were framed with the LifeKnowledge curriculum developed by the National FFA Organization (2003). Level of leadership instruction and leadership knowledge questions used in the instrument were based on lessons from unit two of the LifeKnowledge curriculum. This unit included elements from all six content areas of the LifeKnowledge curriculum and covers a broad mix of leadership concepts. A series of demographic questions were asked to gather information about the instructor (Miller et al., 1989; Vaughn & Moore, 2000). Section I of the instrument measured the teaching of leadership content areas contained in unit two of the LifeKnowledge curriculum (see Appendix A). Using a series of 30 statements, the high school agricultural science instructor was asked if they taught leadership by indicating either yes they taught the particular concept or no they did not teach the concept (Connors & Elliot, 1994; Rudd & Hillison, 1995). The instrument was developed as a paper and pencil instrument and as a web page for use on the Internet (see Appendix B). Answers for the web-based instrument were indicated by using the computer mouse to click on a radio button to indicate their answer using the dichotomous scale. Section II of the instrument measured high school agricultural science instructor expectations of the student for each of the leadership content areas in unit two of the LifeKnowledge curriculum (see Appendix A). Eighteen expectation statements were provided and a dichotomous scale was used to record the participants responses, yes if

PAGE 62

47 they expected the student to perform the action, or no if they did not expect the student to perform the action (Rudd & Hillison, 1995). Section III of the instrument measured the leadership knowledge of the instructors (see Appendix A). Thirty questions from the lesson objectives and evaluation tools found in unit two of the LifeKnowledge curriculum were used (National FFA Organization, 2003). Questions were in the form of true-false and multiple-choice. Curriculum defined knowledge content areas measured were values, beliefs, responsibility and accountability, character, leader, vision, influence, motivation, risk taking, self-worth, character, time management, goal setting, and mentors. Section IV of the instrument measured the high school agricultural science instructors attitude towards teaching leadership using a semantic differential technique consisting of 12 pairs of words (see Appendix A). A scale consisting of six spaces or radio buttons placed between the words was provided to indicate level of agreement with one of each of the pair of words. The pairs of words used were necessary/unnecessary, boring/interesting, positive/negative, practical/impractical, useful/useless, helpful/not helpful, wanted/unwanted, not worthwhile/worthwhile, valuable/worthless, successful/unsuccessful, wise/foolish, and bad/good. Word pairs were determined using established pairs of terms (Jenkins, Russell, & Suci, 1958; Rudd, 1994). Section V of the instrument addressed demographic questions about the high school agricultural science instructor (see Appendix A). Questions asked were school location, highest level of education, gender, if they had been certified through a university agriculture teacher certification program, was their bachelor degree in agricultural education, FFA membership in high school, FFA chapter officer in high school, FFA

PAGE 63

48 office above chapter level, age, years teaching agriculture, years teaching in current position, number of agriculture teachers at school, number of leadership courses taken in college, number of offices held in student leadership organizations other than FFA, offices held in college student organizations, offices held in professional education organizations, number of offices held in civic organizations, membership in professional development organizations, number of offices held in professional development organizations, participation on state or regional agricultural science committees, number of workshops or seminars conducted for agriculture teachers, number of workshops or seminars conducted for non-agriculture teachers, number of leadership positions held in local school or vocational department, number of times they attended the Advisors Washington Leadership Conference, and if a leadership course was taught in their agricultural science program (Miller et al., 1989; Vaughn & Moore, 2000). The instrument was checked for validity by a panel of experts consisting of the researchers committee members. Procedures Procedures used to collect the data are included in this section of the chapter. This includes a description of the pilot study, and the survey, including notification of participants, follow up contacts, etc. Pilot Study To pilot test the instrument, subjects (n =40) were selected at random from the Nebraska FFA chapters on the FFA Active Chapter List. A modified version of the Tailored Design Method (Dillman, 2000) was used for data collection. A pre-notice letter was sent on February 26, 2004 notifying the pilot sample that they had been selected to participate in this survey. Instructions were provided as to how they could

PAGE 64

49 access the study via the Internet. Three days later, March 1, 2004, a paper form of the instrument was sent to the participants. Seven days later, on March 8, 2004, a thank you/reminder postcard was sent to the participants. Seven days later March 15, 2004, a replacement questionnaire was sent to participants that had not yet responded. Seven days later March 22, 2004, a personal contact was made with non-respondents by a colleague in Nebraska, encouraging them to complete the questionnaire. Nine additional days were allowed for collection of electronic and mailed paper responses. Twenty pilot instruments were returned for a pilot response rate of 50%. Pilot instrument reliability was analyzed using SPSS to determine Coefficient alpha based on the three instrument constructs. From these results, the following changes were made to the instrument: Section I which measured the teaching of leadership content areas, had a reliability of alpha=0.92. Two questions were removed to increase the reliability to alpha=0.93. Section II which measured instructor expectations of the student, had a reliability of alpha=0.79. Eight questions were removed to increase the reliability to alpha=0.81. Section IV which measured instructor attitude toward teaching leadership, had a reliability of alpha=0.91. No changes were made to this portion of the instrument. Data Collection Procedures A modified version of the Tailored Design Method (Dillman, 2000) was used for data collection from the sample. A pre-notice letter (see Appendix C) was sent on April 5, 2004 notifying the sample that they had been selected to participate in this survey. Instructions were provided as to how they could access the study via the Internet. Four days later, April 9, 2004, a paper form of the instrument (see Appendix A), that included the IRB informed consent form (see Appendix C), was sent to the participants. Ten days

PAGE 65

50 later, on April 19, 2004, a thank you/reminder postcard was sent to the participants (see Appendix C). Ten days later April 29, 2004, a replacement questionnaire was sent to participants that had not yet responded (see Appendix C). Eight days later May 7, 2004, phone calls were placed to non-respondents encouraging them to complete the questionnaire. Ten additional days were allowed for collection of electronic and mailed paper responses. Thank you postcards were mailed to all respondents acknowledging receipt of their questionnaire and thanking them for their participation in the study. The postcard also provided the respondents with an Internet address where the results of this research could be located. Response Rate The final response rate for the study was 41.8% (n=167). This response rate appears to be low, but this may be influenced by a number of factors. First, it may be indicative of a trend in agricultural education. A review of studies in the Journal of Agricultural Education that sampled agriculture teachers shows response rates have been declining over the past 14 years (Balschweid & Thompson, 2002; Birkenbolz & Maricle, 1991; Boone, Gartin, Wright, Lawrence, & Odell, 2002; Conroy & Walker, 2000; Croom, 2003; Delnero & Montgomery, 2001; Dormody, 1993; Dormody, Seevers, & Clason, 1996; D. W. Duncan, 2004; Eaton & Bruening, 1996; Elbert, 2003; Fraze, Hardin, Brashears, Haygood, & Smith, 2003; Harris & Birkenbolz, 1996; Kotrlik & Drueckhammer, 1987; Kotrlik, Redmann, & Douglas, 2003; Layfield & Dobbins, 2002; Myers, Dyer, & Breja, 2003; Rogers, Townsend, & Lindner, 2004; Thobega & Miller, 2003; Thomas & Groves, 1986; Whent, 1994). When response rates are averaged for each decade, and separated into the categories of national study, regional study, and state

PAGE 66

51 study, a downward trend occurs. Response rates for national studies, averaged by decade, have declined from 84.4% in the 1980s to 57.9% currently. Another cause of the low response rate may be the time of the year. Follow up phone calls to the 320 instructors that had not responded after the third mailing revealed that many instructors were busy with spring activities such as livestock shows, banquets, final exams, inputting grades, etc. Many stated they had been too busy to complete the form. When instructors were asked if emailing a web link to the web based questionnaire would be helpful, most instructors stated that they would be more likely to complete the questionnaire if a link were sent to them. Finally, even with a response rate below 50%, this is higher than what is expected in many disciplines. Response rates in education, marketing, and applied health typically range from 1% to 31% (Fox, Robinson, & Boardley, 1998), while business marketing survey research rates are usually below 15% (Wilson, 1999). At the same time, response rates from healthcare organizations range from 8.2% to 24.8% (Hikmet & Chen, 2003). Even more dramatic are the response rates found in direct mail, which are typically 1% to 10% (Response Rates, 2000; Souccar, 2000; Teichgraeber, 2001). Based on this information, the response rate of the current study is reasonable for this population, and is above the expectations of some disciplines. Based on the sample size formula in Dillman (2000), the 167 responses of this study allow the results to have a 95% confidence level with 7.5% sampling error. Data Analysis Data were collected via paper and pencil questionnaires (see Appendix A) and the Internet using the on-line instrument (see Appendix B). Data from the paper and pencil instruments were entered into a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet by the researcher. Data

PAGE 67

52 from the Internet-based instrument were stored in a comma delimited text file on the University file server and sent as an email to the researcher. The text file containing all of the data was converted to a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. The data from the pencil and paper version and the electronic version of the instrument were combined in Excel, then imported to Statistical Package for the Social Sciences for Windows (SPSS) version 12.0 for analysis. To control for non-response bias a t-test was used to compare early respondents to late respondents (Miller & Smith, 1983). Early respondents (n=130) were compared with late respondents (n=37). Independent sample t-tests were conducted on each variable of interest and no significant differences were found between early and late respondents. Likewise, a t-test was conducted to compare participants that responded using the paper and pencil instrument sent in via the mail and the participants that responded using the Internet web-form. Paper and pencil respondents (n=96) were compared with Internet respondents (n=71). Independent sample t-tests were conducted on each variable of interest and no significant differences were found between pencil and paper, and Internet respondents. The instrument post-hoc reliability was analyzed using SPSS by computing an alpha coefficient for each of the three measured constructs. Instrument reliability was analyzed using SPSS to determine Coefficient alpha based on the three instrument constructs. Section I which measured the teaching of leadership content areas, had a reliability of alpha=0.95. Section II which measured instructor expectations of the student, had a reliability of alpha=0.84. Section IV which measured instructor attitude toward teaching leadership, had a reliability of alpha=0.92.

PAGE 68

53 Descriptive statistics and frequencies were compiled from the data. Previous studies summed leadership and demographic variables (Vaughn & Moore, 2000) and provided insufficient explanation for how they had been coded (Miller et al., 1989). Due to this lack of information regarding the relationships of the variables used in this study, it was decided to conduct correlations on all variables for this exploratory study. For correlational and regression analysis the variable gender was coded as a dichotomous dummy variable, 1=male; 0=female. The following variables were also coded as dummy variables, 1=yes; 0=no: rural school location, suburban school location, urban school location, certified through a university agriculture teacher certification program, bachelor degree in agricultural education, FFA member in high school, FFA chapter officer, FFA officer above chapter level, and leadership course taught in agricultural science program. Pearsons Product Moment correlation was performed with all of the variables to determine relationships. Magnitude of correlations will be described using the terms discussed by Miller (1998) (see Table 3-1). Variables having the greatest correlation with instructor teaching behavior were selected for use in regression analysis. Backwards multiple regression analysis was performed to determine relationship and explanatory qualities of the data. Regression models were analyzed for significance and explanatory qualities. An alpha level of 0.05 was set a priori for the statistical analysis. Results of this analysis are presented in chapter four of this study. Table 3-1. Correlation Magnitude Descriptors r Descriptor 1.0 Perfect 0.70 0.99 Very high 0.50 0.69 Substantial 0.30 0.49 Moderate 0.10 0.29 Low 0.01 0.09 Negligible

PAGE 69

54 From Miller, L. (1998). Appropriate analysis. Journal of Agricultural Education 39(2), 1-10. Summary This chapter described the methods used to research the current level of leadership taught in agricultural science classrooms and factors associated with describing and explaining the instructional behavior of leadership with high school agricultural science instructors. This is a descriptive study using ex post facto and correlational designs to reveal relationships and explain instructor teaching behavior. The development and analysis of the instrument were discussed and methods used for data collection were provided. Data were collected from n=167 high school agricultural science instructors located throughout the United States. Statistical analyses performed on the data were described in this chapter. Chapter four discusses the findings of this study.

PAGE 70

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS Chapter 1 provided a brief history of the relationship of agriculture and leadership then went on to describe the National FFA Organizations role in preparing youth for leadership responsibilities and why leadership is an integral part of agricultural education. Chapter 1 also described the necessity of conducting this research. The purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which high school agricultural science instructors are currently teaching leadership in formal agricultural science classrooms and explain what influences agricultural science instructors to teach leadership in the classroom. To accomplish this, a modified version of the Triandis (1971) behavioral model was used, which incorporates knowledge, attitude and expectations to explain behavioral outcomes. Specifically this study sought to: Determine the demographic characteristics of high school agricultural science instructors; determine the extent to which leadership is being taught in high school agricultural science classrooms; based on National FFA LifeKnowledge leadership curriculum, determine high school agricultural science instructor leadership knowledge; determine high school agricultural science instructor attitude towards teaching leadership; determine the expectations that high school agricultural science instructors have of the agriculture students after leadership has been taught; and explain the relationship between high school agricultural science instructor leadership knowledge, high school agricultural science instructor attitude towards teaching leadership, high school agricultural science instructor expectations of 55

PAGE 71

56 students, and high school agricultural science instructor demographics in light of high school agricultural science instructor leadership content area teaching behavior. Chapter 2 reviewed previous research conducted about youth leadership and provided a theoretical framework, based on Triandis behavioral model (Ricketts, 2003; Rudd, 1994; Triandis, 1980), from which to build a behavioral model. Areas of review included defining leadership, the importance of teaching leadership, previous research on youth leadership, leadership curriculum for youth, why instructors teach leadership, the theoretical behavior model, and explanatory variables of behavior. Chapter 3 described the methods used to discover the current level of leadership taught in agricultural science classrooms and factors associated with describing and explaining the instructional behavior of leadership with high school agricultural science instructors. This is a descriptive study using ex post facto and correlational designs to reveal relationships and explain instructor teaching behavior. The development and analysis of the instrument were discussed and methods used for data collection were provided. Usable responses were collected from 167 high school agricultural science instructors located throughout the United States and the statistical analyses that were performed on the data were described. This chapter will explain the findings of this study, addressing each objective presented in chapter 1. For correlational comparisons, dichotomous variables were coded as dummy variables. Similarly, for correlational comparisons in multiple regression, the variables number of agriculture instructors at the school and size of community in which the school was located were coded as a series of dummy variables.

PAGE 72

57 Objective One: Determine the Demographic Characteristics of High School Agricultural Science Instructors The average high school agricultural science instructor in this study is 39.37 years old, has been teaching for 14.85 years, and has been teaching at their current location for 10.61 years. Most instructors are male, teach in a one-instructor department, and their school is located in a rural community. Most earned their bachelors degree in agricultural education and were certified through a university agriculture teacher education program. In addition, most instructors were FFA chapter officers in high school. Specific characteristics and experiences of the participants of this study are presented later in this chapter. Age, Years Teaching, and Years Teaching in Current Position The age of the participants ranged from 23 to 61, with an average age of M=39.37 years. The number of years teaching for participants ranged from one to 38, with an average of M=14.85. The number of years teaching in their current position ranged from one to 34, with an average of M=10.61 (see Table 4-1). Table 4-1. Participant Mean Age, Years Teaching, and Years Teaching in Current Position (n=167) n M SD Minimum Maximum Age 157 39.37 10.31 23 61 Years teaching 158 14.85 10.16 1 38 Years teaching in current position 158 10.61 8.87 1 34 The distribution of participant age is shown in Figure 4-1. The distribution shows a group of participants from age 23 to age 33, then another group from age 35 to age 58. These two groups form somewhat of a bimodal distribution. When a normal curve is superimposed on top of the distribution, it appears slightly skewed left.

PAGE 73

58 Figure 4-1. Distribution of Participant Age The distribution for years teaching (Figure 4-2) is similar in that it too is skewed left. Once again there is a cluster of instructors with teaching experience from zero to eight years, then a decline in tenure, tapering off to the right. Figure 4-3 illustrates the distribution of participants years in current position. This distribution is more skewed to the left than the previous two figures, but contains similar features. The large group of instructors from zero to eight years is seen, and then a decline occurs as tenure increases. Previous research revealed correlations with age (Miller et al., 1989). When Pearsons Product Moment correlations were conducted to determine relationships with age (see Table 4-2), moderate correlations were found with gender (r=0.39), number of

PAGE 74

59 leadership positions held in local school or vocational department (r=0.35), and number of offices held in professional education organizations (r=0.30). Figure 4-2. Distribution of Participants Years Teaching Figure 4-3. Distribution of Participants Years Teaching in Current Position

PAGE 75

60 Table 4-2 shows moderate correlations which occurred between years teaching and gender (r=0.43), number of offices held in professional education organizations (r=0.37), and number of leadership positions in local school or vocational department (r=0.39). Number of years teaching in current position (see Table 4-2) had moderate relationships with number of offices held in civic organizations (r=0.40), gender (r=0.37) number of workshops and seminars for agriculture teachers (r=0.32), and level of education (r=0.31). Additional correlations for age, years teaching, and years teaching in current position are shown in Appendix D, Table D-1. Table 4-2. Pearsons Product Moment Correlations Between Age, Years Teaching, Years Teaching in Current Position, and Selected Variables (n=157) Variable Age Years Teaching Years Teaching in Current Position Gender 2 0.39 0.43 0.37 Number of leadership positions held in local school or vocational department 0.35 0.39 0.25 Number of offices held in professional education organizations 0.30 0.37 0.40 Number of offices held in civic organizations 0.25 0.32 0.19 Number of workshops and seminars for agriculture teachers 0.25 0.29 0.32 Level of education 0.18 0.25 0.31 Age -0.91 0.69 Years teaching --0.80 Notes: = p<0.05; 1 = Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0; 2 = Males coded as 1, Females coded as 2. Gender Males comprised 73.1% (n=114) of the sample. An independent groups t-test was conducted to determine if any significant differences existed between the female and male participants. Significant gender differences were found in the variables age t(153)=5.26, years teaching t(154)=5.90, and years teaching in current position t(154)=4.90. The results of this test are presented in Table 4-3.

PAGE 76

61 Table 4-3. Independent Groups t-test for Significant Variables by Gender (n=167) Variable t df Age 5.26 153 Years teaching 5.90 154 Years teaching in current position 4.90 154 Certified through a university agriculture teacher education program 2.77 154 Bachelor degree in agricultural education 2.46 153 Number of offices held in high school organizations outside of FFA -2.35 153 Number of offices held in professional education organizations 2.42 153 Number of offices held in civic organizations 2.38 152 Number of offices held in college organizations -2.22 154 Leadership course taught in agricultural science program 2.00 151 Note: *=p<0.05 Previous research did not investigate the influence of gender on instructor behavior. Because gender had not been researched as an explanatory variable in the past studies (Miller et al., 1989; Vaughn & Moore, 2000), it was decided to conduct correlations using this variable. Correlations were conducted for gender (see Table 4-4), with males coded as one and females coded as zero. The analysis revealed moderate correlations with years teaching (r=0.43), age (r=0.39), and years teaching in current position (r=0.37). Number of Instructors at School The number of agriculture instructors at the school ranged from one to six, with an average of M=1.56 instructors per department. Of the 156 participants that responded to this question, 59.0% (n=92) were located in one-instructor departments and 32.1% (n=50) were in two-instructor departments (see Table 4-5).

PAGE 77

62 Table 4-4. Pearsons Product Moment Correlations between Gender and Selected Variables (n=156) Variable Gender 2 Years teaching 0.43 Age 0.39 Years in current teaching position 0.37 Instructor leadership teaching behavior 0.23 Certified through a university agriculture teacher education program 1 0.22 Bachelor degree in agricultural education 1 0.20 Number of offices held in professional education organizations 0.19 Number of offices held in civic organizations 0.19 Four or more instructor department 1 0.18 Leadership course taught in agricultural science program 1 0.16 Number of offices held in high school organizations outside of FFA -0.19 Number of offices held in college organizations -0.18 Note: *=p<0.05; 1 =Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0; 2 =Males coded as 1, Females coded as 2. Table 4-5. Number of agricultural science instructors at school (n=156) n % One-instructor school 92 59.0 Two-instructor school 50 32.1 Three-instructor school 8 5.1 Four-or-more instructor school 6 3.8 Figure 4-4 shows the distribution of the number of agriculture instructors in school. The curve is skewed left, illustrating the large number of one-instructor and two-instructor agricultural science departments. Relationships with number of agricultural science instructors in school shows a negative, moderate correlation with rural school location (r=-0.34) and a positive, moderate correlation with suburban school location (r=0.31), indicating that as the school location becomes more urban (i.e. less rural), the number of agriculture instructors at a school increases (see Table 4-6).

PAGE 78

63 Figure 4-4. Distribution of Number of Agriculture Instructors in School Participants located in four-or-more instructor departments (see Table 4-6) had a moderate correlation with number of offices held in high school organizations outside of FFA (r=0.42). This reveals that participants teaching at schools with over three agriculture instructors were more likely to have participated in high school organizations outside of FFA, than were the participants teaching at schools with fewer instructors. Additional correlations with number of instructors at school can be found in Appendix D, Table D-2. School Location Participants were asked to describe the location of the community in which their school was located. Table 4-7 shows 73.4% (n=113) indicated their school was in a rural community, consisting of a population under 10,000 (Pennsylvania State University,

PAGE 79

64 2004; U.S. Census Bureau, 2004; Wingenbach, 1995). For determining correlational relationships, the locations of rural, suburban, and urban were coded as dichotomous dummy variables. Table 4-6. Pearsons Product Moment Correlations between Number of Instructors at School and Selected Variables (n=156) Variable Number of Agricultural Science Instructors One Instructor Two Instructor Three Instructor Four or More Instructors Rural school location 1 -0.34 0.27 -0.05 -0.22 -0.23 Suburban school location 1 0.31 -0.20 0.03 0.16 0.19 Location of school 0.28 -0.24 0.05 0.21 0.20 Number of workshops and seminars for non-agriculture teachers 0.21 -0.19 0.04 0.26 0.20 Number of offices held in high school organizations outside o f FFA 0.20 -0.11 -0.04 0.11 0.42 Level of education 1 0.18 -0.15 0.01 0.22 0.05 Instructor leadership teaching behavior 0.13 -0.12 0.04 0.18 0.07 Number of agricultural science instructors in school --0.78 0.35 0.39 0.40 One instructor department 1 ---0.81 -0.28 -0.17 Two instructor department 1 ----0.16 -0.10 Three instructor department 1 -----0.03 Notes: *=p<0.05; 1 =Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0. Table 4-7. Location of school (n=154) Location n % Rural (<10,000) 113 73.4 Suburban (10,000-49,999) 25 16.2 Urban (>49,000) 16 10.4 Pearsons Product Moment correlations produced strong correlations between the dichotomous location variables and the parent variable location. All other relationships were low (see Table 4-8). It is interesting to note that the relationships between FFA involvement and school location, although low in magnitude, reveal that instructors at

PAGE 80

65 rural schools were more likely to have been involved in FFA than were the instructors at urban schools. In addition, instructors in urban schools were less likely to have earned their bachelors degree in agricultural education, revealing that many urban instructors have a technical specialization outside of agricultural education. Table 4-8. Pearsons Product Moment Correlations between School Location and Selected Variables (n=154) Variable Location Rural 1 Suburban 1 Urban 1 Rural school location 1 -0.93 --0.73 0.57 Urban school location 1 0.84 ---Suburban school location 1 0.42 ---0.15 FFA chapter officer 1 -0.25 0.24 -0.12 -0.20 Number of workshops and seminars for non-agriculture teachers 0.24 -0.17 -0.03 0.28 Bachelor degree in agricultural education 1 -0.23 0.22 -0.12 -0.18 FFA member in high school 1 -0.22 0.22 -0.12 -0.17 FFA officer above chapter level 1 -0.16 0.17 -0.12 -0.10 Instructor leadership teaching behavior 0.13 -0.06 -0.08 0.19 Note. *=p<0.05; 1 =Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0. Educational Background When asked to indicate their highest level of education, 50.6% (n=80) of the participants held a masters degree (see Table 4-9). When asked to indicate if they were certified through a university agricultural teacher certification program, 96.8% (n=153) had been certified through a university agriculture teacher education program, and 85.4% (n=134) stated their bachelor degree was in agricultural education. Table 4-9. Educational Background (n=158) n % Less than a bachelor degree 3 1.9 Bachelor degree 75 47.5 Masters degree 80 50.6 Certified through a university agriculture teacher certification program 153 96.8 Bachelor degree in agricultural education 134 85.4 Pearsons Product Moment correlations revealed a moderate relationship between level of education and number of offices held in professional education organizations

PAGE 81

66 (r=0.31) (see Table 4-10). Relationships with the variable bachelor degree in agricultural education include two moderate correlations, the first with FFA member in high school (r=0.40) and the second with FFA chapter officer (r=0.36). FFA Involvement Table 4-11 presents the participants FFA involvement. Of the participants, 86.1% (n=136) stated they had been FFA members, and 75.9% (n=120) had been an FFA chapter officer. Table 4-10. Pearsons Product Moment Correlations Between Educational Background and Selected Variables (n=157) Variable Level of Education Certified through a University Agriculture Teacher Education Program 1 Bachelor Degree in Agricultural Education 1 Certified through a university agriculture teacher education program 1 0.10 --Bachelor degree in agricultural education 1 -0.03 0.23 -Number of offices held in professional education organizations 0.31 0.13 0.07 Number of offices held in civic organizations 0.16 0.02 0.06 Gender 2 0.15 0.22 0.20 Leadership course taught in agricultural science program 1 0.09 0.17 0.21 FFA chapter officer 1 0.07 0.07 0.36 Instructor expectations after leadership has been taught 0.07 0.17 0.20 Instructor attitude towards the teaching of leadership -0.06 0.16 0.06 Instructor leadership teaching behavior -0.03 0.09 0.09 FFA member in high school 1 0.03 0.14 0.40 Number of leadership courses taken in college 0.03 0.01 0.16 Membership in professional development organizations -0.02 0.01 0.18 Note. *=p<0.05; 1 =Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0; 2 =Males coded as 1, Females coded as 2.

PAGE 82

67 Table 4-11. FFA Involvement (n=158) n % FFA member in high school 136 86.1 FFA chapter officer 120 75.9 FFA officer above chapter level 52 33.1 Most instructors were FFA members in high school, however Table 4-12 shows that FFA membership had a negligible relationship to instructor leadership teaching behavior. A moderate relationship was found between holding an FFA office above chapter level and number of offices held in college organizations (r=0.31). Table 4-12. Pearsons Product Moment Correlations between FFA Involvement and Selected Variables (n=158) Variable FFA Member 1 FFA Chapter Officer 1 FFA Officer above Chapter Level 1 FFA member in high school 1 -0.72 0.25 FFA chapter officer 1 --0.33 Number of offices held in college organizations 0.20 0.22 0.31 Age -0.17 -0.16 -0.20 Number of leadership positions in local school or vocational department -0.17 -0.12 -0.10 Number of offices held in high school organizations outside of FFA 0.08 0.15 0.16 Instructor leadership teaching behavior 0.05 -0.01 -0.04 Note. *=p<0.05; 1 =Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0. High School and College Leadership Activities High school and college leadership activities of participants are listed in Table 4-13. Of the participants, 74.1% (n=117) held offices in high school organizations outside of FFA. In terms of college leadership activities, 73.1% (n=114) had taken one or more college leadership courses and 67.3% (n=107) held one or more offices in college organizations.

PAGE 83

68 Table 4-13. High School and College Leadership Activities of Participants n M SD Minimum Maximum Number of offices held in high school organizations outside of FFA 158 2.72 3.18 0 20 Number of leadership courses in college 156 1.67 1.62 0 10 Number of offices held in student organizations at the college level 159 1.83 2.15 0 15 Correlations in Table 4-14 reveal that number of offices held in high school organizations outside of FFA had a substantial relationship with number of offices held in college organizations (r=0.52), and a moderate relationship between number of offices in college organizations and holding FFA office above chapter level (r=0.31). An interesting finding is the relationship of these variables to instructor leadership teaching behavior. Number of leadership courses taken in college had a low relationship with instructor leadership teaching behavior, while negligible relationships were found with number of offices in high school organizations outside of FFA and number of offices in college organizations. These findings indicate these leadership activities had little influence on the amount of leadership taught in the agricultural science classroom. Additional correlations can be found in Appendix D, Table D-4. Professional and Civic Organization Leadership Experience Participant experience in professional and civic organizations is shown in Table 4-15. The number of offices held in professional education organizations ranged from zero to 15, with an average of M=2.03 offices per instructor. Of these participants, 51.9% (n=82) held one or more offices. Similarly, 79.2% (n=126) of the participants had membership in at least one professional development organization, and 36.1% (n=57) of the participants held an office in a professional development organization. When looking

PAGE 84

69 at how many offices were held in civic organizations, 58.0% (n=91) of the participants held one or more offices. Table 4-14. Pearsons Product Moment Correlations between High School and College Leadership Activities and Selected Variables (n=158) Variable Number of Leadership Courses in College Number of Offices in High School Organizations Number of Offices in College Organizations Number of offices held in college organizations 0.14 0.52 -Leadership course taught in agricultural science program 1 0.28 -0.03 0.07 Instructor leadership teaching behavior 0.22 0.09 0.07 Three-instructor department 1 0.21 0.11 0.23 Membership in professional development organizations 0.13 0.23 0.14 Number of regional or state agricultural education committees participated in -0.10 0.15 0.19 FFA member in high school 1 0.10 0.08 0.20 FFA chapter officer 1 0.09 0.15 0.22 Number of workshops and seminars for non-agriculture teachers 0.07 0.24 0.16 FFA officer above chapter 1 -0.06 0.16 0.31 Four or more instructor department 1 -0.06 0.27 0.10 Note. *=p<0.05; 1 =Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0; 2 =Males coded as 1, Females coded as 2. Table 4-15. Number of Offices Held in Professional and Civic Organizations n M SD Minimum Maximum Number of offices in professional education organizations 158 2.03 2.93 0 15 Membership in professional development organizations 159 2.16 1.77 0 8 Number of offices held in professional development organizations 158 0.68 1.14 0 6 Number of offices in civic organizations 157 1.65 2.52 0 17 Pearsons Product Moment correlations, shown in Table 4-16, revealed moderate correlations between offices in professional education organizations and number of regional or state agricultural education committees participated in (r=0.46), years in

PAGE 85

70 current teaching position (r=0.40), years teaching (r=0.37), number of workshops and seminars for agriculture teachers (r=0.33), level of education (r=0.31), and age (r=0.30). Offices in civic organizations had moderate relationships with number of offices held in professional development organizations (r=0.38), number of leadership positions in local school or vocational department (r=0.34), and years teaching (r=0.32). Table 4-16. Pearsons Product Moment Correlations Between Professional and Civic Organization Leadership Experience and Selected Variables (n=158) Variable Offices in Professional Education Organizations Offices in Civic Organizations Number of regional or state agricultural education committees participated in 0.46 0.16 Years in current teaching position 0.40 0.19 Years teaching 0.37 0.32 Number of workshops and seminars for agriculture teachers 0.33 0.09 Level of education 0.31 0.16 Age 0.30 0.25 Number of offices held in professional development organizations 0.26 0.38 Number of leadership positions in local school or vocational department 0.23 0.34 One-instructor department 1 -0.21 -0.13 Number of offices held in civic organizations 0.21 -Number of workshops and seminars for non-agriculture teachers 0.20 0.20 Gender 2 0.19 0.19 Instructor attitude towards the teaching of leadership -0.18 -0.11 Number of agricultural science instructors in school 1 0.17 0.06 Three-instructor department 1 0.13 0.22 Membership in professional development organizations 1 0.10 0.23 Instructor leadership teaching behavior 0.03 0.15 Note. *=p<0.05; 1 =Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0; 2 =Males coded as 1, Females coded as 2. Correlations with membership in professional development organizations, as shown in Table 4-17, revealed only low and negligible relationships. Moderate relationships were revealed between offices in professional development organizations and number of

PAGE 86

71 offices held in civic organizations (r=0.38), number of regional or state agricultural education committees participated in (r=0.39), and number of leadership positions in local school or vocational department (r=0.39). Table 4-17. Pearsons Product Moment Correlations Between Professional Development Organization Membership and Holding Office, and Selected Variables (n=158) Variable Membership in Professional Development Organizations Offices in Professional Development Organizations Number of workshops and seminars for agriculture teachers 0.25 0.25 Number of leadership positions in local school or vocational department 0.24 0.39 Number of offices held in high school organizations outside of FFA 0.23 0.09 Number of offices held in civic organizations 0.23 0.38 Number of regional or state agricultural education committees participated in 0.21 0.39 Instructor leadership teaching behavior 0.20 0.19 Bachelor degree in agricultural education 1 0.18 0.14 Instructor attitude towards the teaching of leadership 0.17 0.11 Years in current teaching position 0.10 0.22 Number of offices held in professional education organizations 0.10 0.26 Years teaching 0.08 0.28 Age 0.07 0.28 Number of times attended Advisors Washington Leadership Conference 0.06 0.24 Membership in professional development organizations -0.50 Notes: *=p<0.05; 1 =Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0. Committee Participation, and Workshops and Seminar Presentations Regional and state agricultural education committee participation ranged from zero to 35 committees, with an average of M=3.67 committees (see Table 4-18) per participant. Of the participants, 78.0% (n=124) had participated on one or more committees. When asked about workshops and training seminars presented to agriculture teachers, 51.9% (n=82) had conducted workshops and seminars for agriculture

PAGE 87

72 instructors, while 54.7% (n=87) had presented workshops and seminars for non-agriculture teachers. Table 4-18. Mean Committee Participation, and Workshops and Seminars Presented (n=158) M SD Minimum Maximum Number of regional and state agricultural education committees served on 3.67 5.29 0 35 Number of workshops and seminars conducted for agriculture teachers 2.37 4.71 0 30 Number of workshops and seminars conducted for non-agriculture teachers 2.89 5.62 0 31 Table 4-19 shows correlations of selected variables with number of regional or state agricultural education committees. A substantial relationship was found with number of workshops and seminars for agriculture teachers (r=0.50). Moderate relationships were found with number of offices held in professional education organizations (r=0.46), number of offices held in professional development organizations (r=0.39), and number of leadership positions in local school or vocational department. Number of workshops and seminars for agriculture teachers, as shown in Table 4-19, had moderate relationships with number of leadership positions in local school or vocational department (r=0.49), number of workshops and seminars for non-agriculture teachers (r=0.42). In addition, moderate relationships were found with number of times attended Advisors Washington Leadership Conference (r=0.38), number of offices held in professional education organizations (r=0.33), and years teaching in current position (r=0.32). When correlations were conducted with number of workshops and seminars for non-agriculture teachers, a moderate relationship was found with number of leadership positions held in local school or vocational department (r=0.35). Additional correlations with these variables can be found in Appendix D, Table D-3.

PAGE 88

73 Table 4-19. Pearsons Product Moment Correlations Between Committee Participation, and Workshops and Seminar Presentations and Selected Variables (n=158) Variable Number of Regional or State Agricultural Education Committees Participated in Number of Workshops and Seminars for Agriculture Teachers Number of Workshops and Seminars for Non-Agriculture Teachers Number of workshops and seminars for agriculture teachers 0.50 --Number of offices held in professional education organizations 0.46 0.33 0.20 Number of offices held in professional development organizations 0.39 0.25 0.09 Number of leadership positions in local school or vocational department 0.32 0.49 0.35 Years in current teaching position 0.29 0.32 0.10 Number of workshops and seminars for non-agriculture teachers 0.21 0.42 -Membership in professional development organizations 0.21 0.25 0.13 Number of offices held in college organizations 0.19 0.12 0.16 Number of times attended Advisors Washington Leadership Conference 0.19 0.38 0.07 Number of offices held in civic organizations 0.16 0.09 0.20 Note. *=p<0.05; 1 =Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0. School and Vocational Department Leadership Positions, and Attending the Advisors Washington Leadership Conference When looking at the number of leadership positions participants have held in their local school or vocational department, 82.9% (n=131) held leadership positions, with an average of M=2.58 positions per participant, and a range of zero to 12 positions. In terms of number of times attending the Advisors Washington Leadership Conference, 15.1% (n=24) instructors had attended the conference (see Table 4-20).

PAGE 89

74 Table 4-20. Mean Number of Leadership Positions Held in Local School or Vocational Department and Advisors Washington Leadership Conference Attendance n M SD Minimum Maximum Number of leadership positions held in local school or vocational department 158 2.58 2.55 0 12 Number of times attended the National FFA Advisors Washington Leadership Conference 159 0.30 1.37 0 16 Table 4-21 presents the correlations for the number of leadership positions in local school or vocational department and selected variables. Moderate relationships to the variable number of leadership positions in local school or vocational department include number of workshops and seminars for agriculture teachers (r=0.49), number of offices held in professional development organizations (r=0.39), number of workshops and seminars for non-agriculture teachers (r=0.35), number of offices held in civic organizations (r=0.34), and number of regional or state agricultural education committees participated in (r=0.32). In addition, one moderate relationship was found between number of times attended Advisors Washington Leadership Conference and number of workshops and seminars for agriculture teachers (r=0.38). Leadership Course Taught in Agricultural Science Program When asked if a leadership course was taught in their agricultural science program, 52.6% (n=82) indicated this did occur. Pearsons Product Moment correlation revealed a moderate relationship with instructor leadership teaching behavior (r=0.44) (see Table 4-22).

PAGE 90

75 Table 4-21. Pearsons Product Moment Correlations Between School and Vocational Department Leadership Positions, and Attending the Advisors Washington Leadership Conference and Selected Variables (n=158) Variable Number of Leadership Positions in Local School or Vocational Department Number of Times Attended Advisors Washington Leadership Conference Number of workshops and seminars for agriculture teachers 0.49 0.38 Years teaching 0.39 0.18 Number of offices held in professional development organizations 0.39 0.24 Number of workshops and seminars for non-agriculture teachers 0.35 0.07 Age 0.35 0.16 Number of offices held in civic organizations 0.34 0.05 Number of regional or state agricultural education committees participated in 0.32 0.19 Years in current teaching position 0.25 0.21 Membership in professional development organizations 0.24 0.06 Number of offices held in professional education organizations 0.23 0.10 Number of times attended Advisors Washington Leadership Conference 0.17 -FFA member in high school 1 -0.17 0.02 Notes: *=p<0.05; 1 =Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0. Table 4-22. Pearsons Product Moment Correlations Between Leadership Course Taught in Agricultural Science Program and Selected Variables (n=158) Variable Leadership Course Taught in Agricultural Science Program 1 Instructor leadership teaching behavior 0.44* Number of leadership courses taken in college 0.28* Bachelor degree in agricultural education 1 0.21* Certified through a university agriculture teacher education program 1 0.17* Gender 2 0.16* Notes: *=p<0.05; 1 =Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0; 2 =Males coded as 1, Females coded as 2.

PAGE 91

76 Objective Two: Determine the Extent to which Leadership Education is being Taught in High School Agricultural Science Classrooms Participants were asked 28 questions to determine instructor leadership teaching behavior, that is, the extent to which leadership was being taught in the participants classroom. These questions, based on curriculum content areas contained in unit two of the LifeKnowledge curriculum, were used to provide an indication of the level of leadership instruction occurring in the classroom. These questions were reviewed by an expert panel and pilot tested. Using a series of 28 statements, the participant was asked if they taught leadership by indicating either yes they taught the particular concept or no they did not teach the concept (Connors & Elliot, 1994; Rudd & Hillison, 1995). The instrument was developed as a paper and pencil instrument (see Appendix A) and as a web page for use on the Internet (see Appendix B). Answers for this section of the web-based instrument were indicated by using the computer mouse to click on a radio button to indicate their answer using the dichotomous scale. Responses to these 28 statements were summated and analyzed as a construct. The greater the number of leadership concepts taught, the greater the level of instructor leadership teaching behavior. The average participant indicated they were formally teaching specific lessons addressing an average of M=18.88, SD=8.21, of the 28 concepts of leadership. The median was 20.00 with a range of zero to 28. Of these, 94.0% (n=157) were teaching one or more specific lessons addressing these leadership concepts. Based on responses to statements in section one of the instrument (see Appendix A), participants taught the most lessons on the following leadership concepts: leaders are important, to identify leaders, and to develop a vision for the future. Lessons

PAGE 92

77 taught the least by the participants were the value of having a mentor and to select a mentor. The distribution of instructor leadership teaching behavior is shown in figure 4-5. The distribution shows a normal curve that is skewed right. The figure reveals a group on the left of approximately 10 participants that taught few or none of the leadership concepts inquired about, then reveals a general increase in the frequency of leadership concepts taught. The far right side of the figure illustrates a large group of participants that indicated they taught all or nearly all of the leadership concepts about which the instrument inquired. Figure 4-5. The Distribution of Instructor Leadership Teaching Behavior Pearson Product Moment correlations were conducted for instructor leadership teaching behavior, shown in Table 4-23. These correlations were conducted based on the

PAGE 93

78 explanatory variables of behavior found in previous studies (Miller, Kahler, & Rhealt, 1989; Vaughn & Moore, 2000) and the theoretical behavioral model used in this study. Relationships with leadership teaching behavior revealed moderate correlations with leadership course taught in agricultural science program (r=0.44), and instructor attitude towards the teaching of leadership (r=0.38). Other correlations found, although significant, were low. An exhaustive table of correlations with instructor leadership teaching behavior is found in Appendix D, Table D-5. Table 4-23. Pearsons Product Moment Correlations Between Instructor Leadership Teaching Behavior and Selected Variables (n=156) Variable Instructor Leadership Teaching Behavior Leadership course taught in agricultural science program 1 0.44* Instructor attitude towards the teaching of leadership 0.38* Gender 2 0.23* Number of leadership courses taken in college 0.22* Instructor expectations after leadership has been taught 0.21* Membership in professional development organizations 0.20* Number of offices held in professional development organizations 0.19* Urban location of school 1 0.19* Three-instructor department 1 0.18* Years teaching 0.16* Note. *=p<0.05; 1 =Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0; 2 =Males coded as 1, Females coded as 2. Objective Three: Based on National FFA LifeKnowledge Leadership Curriculum, Determine High School Agricultural Science Instructor Leadership Knowledge The instructor leadership knowledge score consisted of eight multiple choice and seven true-false questions. These questions were developed from the lesson objectives and evaluation tools found in unit two of the LifeKnowledge curriculum. They were then reviewed by an expert panel and pilot tested. The answers to these questions were summated to determine a knowledge score. Scores ranged from four correct answers to

PAGE 94

79 15 correct answers, with an average score of M=10.19, SD=1.98, and a median of 10.00 of a possible 15. Responses to the instrument questions (see Appendix A) indicated the questions answered correctly most frequently by the participants were, Something that someone wants to achieve is a: Goal, Delegating tasks takes more time than it saves: False, and Discouragement and giving up on a project is part of being responsible and accountable. Questions answered incorrectly most frequently by the participants were, Being responsible and accountable means: Being answerable for key areas of our life with qualified people, Personal self-worth is: The value I place in my own contributions, and When a person has dedicated time and effort to improving themselves (and their lives) in the areas of social/family life, work/school life, and personal life, we call this: Balance. Figure 4-6 provides a visual representation of the distribution of instructor leadership knowledge construct. The knowledge construct had a normal distribution, indicating a majority of the participants provided answers towards the center of the scale. Based on a similar mean (M=10.19) and median (10.00), the average level of participant leadership knowledge could be interpreted as moderate. When Pearsons Product Moment correlations were conducted with instructor leadership knowledge, they revealed only low relationships with other variables.

PAGE 95

80 Figure 4-6. Distribution of Instructor Leadership Knowledge Objective Four: Determine High School Agricultural Science Instructor Attitude towards Teaching Leadership A semantic differential consisting of 12 pairs of words was used to obtain the attitude construct. Answers from the questions were summated, with a higher score indicating a more positive attitude toward teaching leadership. The summated answers ranged from 25 to 72, with a median of 66.00. Participants had an average attitude score of M=64.69, SD=6.81 out of a possible 72. The distribution of instructor attitude toward teaching leadership is presented in figure 4-7. The distribution is skewed to the right. Based on the participants attitude mean (M=64.69) and median (66.00), the average attitude score can be interpreted as moderate.

PAGE 96

81 Figure 4-7. Instructor Attitude Toward Teaching Leadership. Based on previous research (Miller, Kahler, & Rhealt, 1989; Vaughn & Moore, 2000) it was decided to conduct correlations on selected variables. Pearsons Product Moment correlation with instructor attitude toward teaching leadership (see Table 4-24) revealed moderate correlations with instructor teaching behavior (r=0.38) and instructor expectations after leadership has been taught (r=0.34). Table 4-24. Pearsons Product Moment Correlations Between Instructor Attitude Towards Teaching Leadership and Selected Variables (n=158) Variable Instructor Attitude Towards Teaching Leadership Instructor leadership teaching behavior 0.38* Instructor expectations after leadership has been taught 0.34* Certified through a university agriculture teacher education program 1 0.16* Notes: *=p<0.05; 1 =Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0.

PAGE 97

82 Objective Five: Determine the Expectations that High School Agricultural Science Instructors have of the Agriculture Students after Leadership has been Taught The instructor expectations after leadership has been taught consisted of 22 dichotomous questions, the answers of which were summated to form a construct. The expectation questions were based on the leadership concepts in unit two of the LifeKnowledge curriculum. Higher scores indicated higher instructor expectations of students after teaching leadership. The range of summated answers ranged from four to 22 with a median of 18.00. The expectation average score was M=17.45, SD=3.92 out of a possible 22. Based on responses to section two of the questionnaire (see Appendix A), participants responded yes most frequently to the following statements: After my students learn about self-worth I would expect students to have greater confidence in their own ideas, After my students learn about leaders I would expect students to identify ways they can lead others, and After my students learn about goals I would expect students to demonstrate how to prioritize personal goals. Statements that participants responded no to most frequently were, After my students learn about mentors I would expect students to set an appointment with their mentor, After my students learn about personal values I would expect students to write a set of standards by which they will evaluate decisions, and After my students learn about vision I would expect students to create a vision that others can see and internalize. The distribution of instructor expectations after leadership has been taught is shown in Figure 4-8, showing a distribution skewed right. When the mean (M=17.45) and median (18.00) of the distribution are taken into consideration, the average participant

PAGE 98

83 expectations of students after leadership had been taught is less than the median and can be interpreted as having moderate expectations. Figure 4-8. Instructor Expectations after Leadership Has Been Taught The findings of previous researchers (Miller, Kahler, & Rhealt, 1989; Vaughn & Moore, 2000) and the theoretical behavioral model prompted correlations to be conducted with instructor expectations after leadership has been taught (see Table 4-25). This analysis revealed a moderate relationship with instructor attitude towards the teaching of leadership (r=0.34).

PAGE 99

84 Table 4-25. Pearsons Product Moment Correlations Between Instructor Expectations after Leadership has been Taught and Selected Variables (n=157) Variable Instructor Expectations after Leadership Instruction Instructor attitude towards the teaching of leadership 0.34* Instructor leadership teaching behavior 0.21* Bachelor degree in agricultural education 0.20* Number of offices held in high school organizations outside of FFA 0.19* Certified through a university agriculture teacher education program 0.17* Notes: *=p<0.05; 1 =Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0. Objective Six: Determine the Relationship between High School Agricultural Science Instructor Leadership Knowledge, Instructor Attitude Towards Teaching Leadership, Instructor Expectations of Students after Teaching Leadership, and Instructor Demographics to Instructor Leadership Teaching Behavior Correlations A Pearsons Product Moment Correlation table was constructed using the demographic variables, including the dummy coded variables, instructor leadership knowledge score, and the constructs of instructor leadership teaching behavior, instructor expectations after leadership has been taught, and instructor attitude towards teaching leadership. The significant correlations for these variables in relation to instructor leadership teaching behavior are provided in Table 4-23 and an exhaustive list is found in Appendix D, Table D-5. The variables with significant correlation to the construct of behavior were leadership course taught in agricultural science program (dummy coded) (r=0.44), instructor attitude towards the teaching of leadership (r=0.38), gender (dummy coded) (r=0.23), number of leadership courses taken in college (r=0.22), instructor expectations after leadership has been taught (r=0.21), number of offices held in professional

PAGE 100

85 development organizations (r=0.20), membership in professional development organizations (r=0.20), urban location of school (dummy coded) (r=0.19), three-instructor department (dummy coded) (r=0.18), and years teaching (r=0.16). These variables were then placed into SPSS 12.0 for Windows to develop an explanatory regression model. The variables leadership course taught in agricultural science program, urban location of school, gender, and instructor attitude towards the teaching of leadership, were included in the model that best explained total variance in agricultural science instructor leadership teaching behavior. Regression analysis revealed that this model significantly explained 33% of the variance in instructor leadership teaching behavior, the dependent variable. Regression Backwards regression was chosen because it is most appropriately used when the research goal is primarily exploratory (Gliem, 2003). Using backwards multiple regression techniques, a significant explanatory model was developed with a R-square value of 0.35 and an adjusted R-square value of 0.33, F(4,145)=19.15, p<0.05. This model used the explanatory variables leadership course taught in agricultural science program, urban location of school, gender, and instructor attitude towards the teaching of leadership. Unstandardized regression coefficients (B), intercept, and standardized regression coefficients () for each variable are presented in Table 4-26.

PAGE 101

86 Table 4-26. Backward Regression Explaining Leadership Teaching Behavior (n=145) B SE Beta t Sig. (Constant) -11.79 5.64 --2.09 0.04 Leadership course taught in agricultural science program 6.12 1.16 0.37 5.28 0.00 Instructor attitude towards the teaching of leadership 0.38 0.09 0.30 4.39 0.00 Gender 3.37 1.29 0.18 2.62 0.01 Urban location of school 4.75 1.84 0.18 2.58 0.01 Note: F(4,145)=19.15, p<0.00, Adjusted R 2 =0.33 The explanatory model produced by regression analysis is presented in Figure 4-9. This model illustrates that instructor leadership teaching behavior is a function of if a leadership course is taught in the high school agricultural science program, instructor attitude toward the teaching of leadership, gender, and urban location of school. Figure 4-9. Explanatory Model of Instructor Leadership Teaching Behavior Within this model gender is coded as 1=male and 0=female. Because it seemed unlikely that the gender of the instructor would directly affect the teaching of leadership, that is instructor leadership teaching behavior, statistical analyses using crosstabs were conducted on the data to determine if other variables were influencing gender.

PAGE 102

87 Coding leadership instructor behavior scores as dichotomous variables with scores above the median as high=1 and scores below the median as low=0, data were analyzed by gender and single-instructor department. By doing this, influences found in multiple instructor departments were controlled, allowing single-teacher departments to be compared by gender on the variable of instructor leadership teaching behavior. A significant difference at Phi<0.05 was revealed in this analysis, indicating that female instructors in single-instructor departments were less likely to teach leadership than their male counter parts in single-instructor departments. This analysis revealed little explanation why males were found to teach more leadership than females. Additional discussion will be given to this topic in chapter five. Table 4-27. Crosstabs of Single-Instructor Department by Gender and Instructor Leadership Teaching Behavior Behavior Gender High (<20) Low ( > 20) Total Female Count 6.0 16.0 22.0 Expected count 10.9 11.1 22.0 Male Count 39.0 30.0 69.0 Expected count 34.1 34.9 69.0 Total Count 45.0 46.0 91.0 Expected count 45.0 46.0 91.0 Notes: Phi= -0.25, p<0.05 Summary This chapter presented the findings of the study. Findings were organized and presented by the following objectives: Determine the demographic characteristics of high school agricultural science instructors; determine the extent to which leadership is being taught in high school agricultural science classrooms; based on National FFA LifeKnowledge leadership curriculum, determine high school agricultural science instructor leadership knowledge; determine high school agricultural science instructor

PAGE 103

88 attitude towards teaching leadership; determine the expectations that high school agricultural science instructors have of the agriculture students after leadership has been taught; and determine the relationship between high school agricultural science instructor leadership knowledge, instructor attitude towards leadership, instructor expectations of students, and instructor demographics to instructor leadership teaching behavior. Chapter 5 will present a more detailed discussion of the findings. Conclusions and recommendations will also be presented.

PAGE 104

CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION The purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which high school agricultural science instructors are currently teaching leadership in formal agricultural science classrooms and to explain what influences agricultural science instructors to teach leadership in the classroom. To accomplish this, a modified version of the Triandis (1971) behavioral model was used, which incorporates knowledge, attitude and expectations to explain behavioral outcomes. Specifically this study sought to: Determine the demographic characteristics of high school agricultural science instructors; determine the extent to which leadership is being taught in high school agricultural science classrooms; based on National FFA LifeKnowledge leadership curriculum, determine high school agricultural science instructor leadership knowledge; determine high school agricultural science instructor attitude towards teaching leadership; determine the expectations that high school agricultural science instructors have of the agriculture students after leadership has been taught; and explain the relationship between high school agricultural science instructor leadership knowledge, high school agricultural science instructor attitude towards teaching leadership, high school agricultural science instructor expectations of students, and high school agricultural science instructor demographics in light of high school agricultural science instructor leadership content area teaching behavior. Chapter two reviewed previous research conducted about youth leadership and provided a theoretical framework around which this research is framed. Chapter three 89

PAGE 105

90 described the research methods used in this study. Chapter four reported the findings of this study. This chapter will present a more detailed discussion of the findings. Conclusions and recommendations will also be presented. For the benefit for the reader, a brief summary of the problem statement, methods, and findings are also included. Problem Statement The extent to which leadership is being taught in agricultural science classrooms is unknown and the attributes of agricultural science instructors that influence their decision to formally teach leadership are unclear. Research has been conducted to determine predictors of agricultural science program quality (Vaughn & Moore, 2000) and how leadership skills affect youth (Carter & Spotanski, 1989; Dormody & Seevers, 1994a; Ricketts & Newcomb, 1984; Rutherford et al., 2002; Scanlon & Burket, 1986; Townsend & Carter, 1983) and community (Brannon, Holley & Key, 1989) but no research has been conducted to determine the extent to which leadership is being taught in the formal secondary agricultural science classroom or why instructors choose to teach leadership. The following research questions were posited: To what extent are high school agricultural science instructors teaching leadership in the formal classroom and what are the factors that influence high school agricultural science instructors to teach, or not teach, leadership? Review of Research Design The study was conducted using survey research. A correlational and ex post facto design was employed. A correlational design involves the collection of two or more sets of data from a group of subjects with the attempt to determine the subsequent relationship between those sets of data (Tuckman, 1994). Ex post facto is a study in which the

PAGE 106

91 researcher examines the effects of a naturally occurring treatment after the treatment has occurred. The researcher relates the after-the-fact treatment to an outcome or dependent measure (Tuckman, 1994). The dependent variable measured was instructor behavior as determined by the level of formal leadership instruction taught in the agricultural science classroom. Independent variables measured were instructor leadership knowledge, instructor attitude towards teaching leadership, instructor expectations after teaching leadership to students, and instructor demographics. The measures of instructor behavior, instructor knowledge and instructor expectations were developed using lesson objectives in unit two of the LifeKnowledge curriculum (National FFA Organization, 2003). Summary of Results Objective One Objective one sought to determine the demographic characteristics of high school agricultural science instructors. Of the participants in this study, 73.1% (n=114) were male. The age of the participants ranged from 23 to 61, with an average age of 39.37 years. The number of years teaching for participants ranged from one to 38, with an average of 14.85 years. The number of years teaching in their current position ranged from one to 34, with an average of 10.61 years. The number of agriculture instructors at the school ranged from one to six, with an average of 1.56 instructors. When participants were asked to describe the location of the community in which their school was located, 73.4% taught in a rural community, 16.2% taught in a suburban community, and 10.4% taught in an urban community. Of the participants in this study, 1.9% had less than a bachelors degree, 47.5% had a bachelors degree, 50.6% had a masters degree and 96.8% had been certified through a

PAGE 107

92 university agriculture teacher education program. Most participants (85.4%) stated their bachelors degree was in agricultural education. Many participants were an FFA member in high school (86.1%), an FFA chapter officer, (75.9%), and some (33.1%) had been an officer above the chapter level. Most (74.1%) participants held offices outside of FFA. Participants took an average of 1.67 leadership courses in college, 73.1% had taken one or more college leadership courses, and 67.3% held office in a college student organization. Fifty-one percent (51%) of the participants held an office in a professional education organization, 58.0% held an office in civic organizations, 79.2% were members of a professional development organization, and 36.1% had held office in a professional development organization. Regional and state agricultural education committee participation ranged from zero to 35 committees, with 78.0% having participated on one or more committees. Many (51.9%) had conducted workshops and seminars for agriculture instructors, while 54.7% had presented workshops and seminars for non-agriculture teachers. In addition, 82.9% of the participants held leadership positions held in their local school or vocational department, while 15.1% (n=24) had attended the Advisors Washington Leadership Conference, and 52.6% indicated there was a leadership course taught in their agricultural science program. Objective Two Objective two sought to determine the extent to which leadership content areas are being taught in agricultural science classrooms. Participants were asked 28 questions to determine instructor leadership teaching behavior based on the National FFA LifeKnowledge curriculum. Each question asked if the participant formally taught a

PAGE 108

93 specific lesson topic that addressed a particular concept of leadership. The answers to these questions were summated. The average participant indicated they were formally teaching specific lessons addressing an average of 18.88 leadership concepts. Of these, 94.0% were teaching one or more specific lessons addressing these leadership concepts. Objective Three The purpose of objective three was to determine the level of leadership knowledge based on the National FFAs LifeKnowledge curriculum. The instructor leadership knowledge score consisted of eight multiple choice and seven true-false questions. The answers to these questions were summated to determine a knowledge score. Scores ranged from four correct answers to 15 correct answers, with an average score of 10.19 out of 15. Objective Four Objective four sought to determine high school agricultural science instructor attitude towards teaching leadership. A semantic differential consisting of 12 pairs of words was used to obtain the attitude construct. Answers from the questions were summated, with a higher score indicating a more positive attitude. The summated answers ranged from 25 to 72, with an average of 64.69 out of 72. Objective Five The purpose of objective five was to determine the expectations that high school agricultural science instructors have of the agriculture students after leadership has been taught. The expectation construct consisted of 22 questions based on the National FFA LifeKnowledge curriculum, the answers of which were summated. Higher scores indicated higher expectations of students after teaching leadership. The range of

PAGE 109

94 summated answers was 4 to 22 with an average expectation score of 17.45 out of a possible 22. Objective Six Objective six sought to determine the relationship between high school agricultural science instructor leadership knowledge, instructor attitude towards teaching leadership, instructor expectations of students after teaching leadership, and instructor demographics to instructor leadership teaching behavior. For statistical analysis, all dichotomous variables were coded as dummy variables. Using Pearsons Product Moment correlation, correlations between the construct of instructor leadership teaching behavior and the variables studied were determined. Significant correlations were found with the following variables: gender, construct of instructor expectations of students after leadership has been taught, construct of instructor attitude toward teaching leadership, membership in professional development organizations, number of offices held in professional development organizations, if a leadership course was taught in their agricultural science program, number of leadership courses taken in college, years teaching, urban school location, and the dummy coded variable three-instructor department. These variables were then used to develop an explanatory regression model. Using backwards stepwise multiple regression techniques, a significant explanatory model was developed with a R-square value of 0.35 and an adjusted R-square value of 0.33, F(4,145)=11.96, p<0.05. This model used the explanatory variables if a leadership course was taught in the agricultural science program, the construct of attitude toward teaching leadership, gender, and urban school location to explain instructor leadership teaching behavior.

PAGE 110

95 Conclusions This study randomly selected agricultural science instructors from throughout the United States to participate in this study. Therefore, the results of this study should not be generalized beyond the population of United Stated high school agricultural science instructors during the 2003-2004 school year. With this limitation in mind, the following conclusions were drawn from the findings of the study: The average agricultural science instructor is well established in their career, at 39.37 years of age, having taught for 14.85 years, and has been teaching in their current position for 10.61 years. Most agricultural science instructors are male, teach in a rural location, are in a single-teacher department, received their certification through a university agriculture teacher program, and earned their bachelors of science degree in agricultural education. FFA participation is a common theme among instructors who responded, as most agricultural science instructors were an FFA member in high school, an FFA chapter officer, and held at least one office in another high school organization outside of FFA. Most instructors sampled have limited formal preparation in leadership with most agricultural science instructors having taken at least one leadership course in college. Instructors surveyed have a great deal of informal leadership experience with most participants having leadership roles beyond their teaching responsibilities. The demographic characteristics of agricultural science instructors that teach in rural areas differ from the demographic characteristics of agricultural science instructors in urban areas. Females and males differ in their leadership experiences. Based on the National FFA LifeKnowledge curriculum, some leadership is being taught in most participants agricultural science classrooms. Based on the National FFA LifeKnowledge curriculum, the average participant has a moderate level of leadership knowledge. Most participants have a positive attitude towards the teaching of leadership.

PAGE 111

96 Based on the National FFA LifeKnowledge curriculum, most participants have positive expectations of students after leadership has been taught. Teaching a leadership course in the agricultural science program, being in an urban location, gender, and the instructor having a positive attitude toward student actions after leadership was taught are the variables that best explained leadership teaching behavior. Discussion and Implications Objective One: Determine the Demographic Characteristics of High School Agricultural Science Instructors The average agricultural science instructor is 39.37 years old, has been teaching for 14.85 years, and has been teaching in their current position for 10.61 years Based on the demographic information collected in this study, the average agricultural instructor is 39.37 years old. This is similar to the findings of Dormody, Seevers and Clason (1996). Their national study found the mean age of agriculture teachers to be 40.2 years of age. Whent (1994) found in her national study that the mean age of teachers was 37.6 years. This information shows that the average age of agricultural science instructors in the profession has changed very little over the past 10 years. Likewise, the average instructor has been teaching for 14.85 years and has been teaching in their current position for 10.61 years. This is similar to what Thobega and Miller (2003) found in Iowa and what Dormody, Seevers and Clason (1996) found in a national study. Iowa agriculture instructors had 14 years teaching experience and Dormody et al. found the mean numbers of years teaching to be 14.1 nationally. In addition, Dormody et al. (1993) found the average number of years teaching to be 14.5. These findings illustrate the number of years teaching for agriculture instructors has remained consistent during the past ten years.

PAGE 112

97 This study found that the average teacher has been in their current teaching position for 10.61 years. This is less than what has been reported in other studies. Odell, Cochran, Lawrence and Garton (1990) in their regional study reported the number of years in their current teaching position to be 15.5 years and a state study by Vaughn and Moore (2000) stated the number of years teaching in current position was 13.1. It would seem as though the findings of this study indicate a decrease in the number of years that instructors have taught in their current position. This may indicate that instructors are becoming transient in their teaching positions than in years past. Due to the response rate of this study, and the corresponding sampling error, additional research should be conducted to determine if this observed decline in years teaching in current position is a trend. Most agricultural science instructors are male, teach in a rural location, are in a single teacher department, received their certification through a university agriculture teacher program, and earned their bachelors of science degree in agricultural education This study found that the majority (73.1%) of agriculture instructors are male. This finding is similar to a study of Virginia agriculture instructors by Duncan (2004) in which he found that 67.0% of Virginias agriculture instructors are male. However, this finding is different from the findings of other national studies. Dormody (1993) found that 93.4% of the agriculture instructors were male, and Dormody, Seevers and Clason (1996) discovered that 95% of agriculture instructors were male and 5% were female. Although the majority of agriculture instructors in this study are male, these findings seem to indicate a trend over the last 10 years in an increase of the number of female agriculture instructors teaching high school agricultural science.

PAGE 113

98 Most agriculture programs are in rural areas (73.4%), with 16.2% located in suburban areas, and 10.4% in urban areas. Other studies have found that 75.2% of the agriculture programs are in rural areas (Odell et al., 1990) This study found that urban programs show a stronger, positive relationship to instructor teaching behavior. This may be due in part to the nature of the urban programs. Trede and Russell (1999) found that many urban programs teach courses in areas such as biotechnology rather than in production agriculture. More discussion of this topic is found later in this chapter in the section addressing objective two of the study. Most instructors are in a single-instructor department (59.0%), and many are in two-instructor departments (32.1%). This is similar to Crooms (2003) national study and nearly identical to the North Carolina study by Vaughn and Moore (2000). Croom found that agriculture instructors in the Southeastern United States were predominantly in single-instructor departments (42%) and many were in two-instructor departments (38%). Vaughn and Moore (2000) determined that 57.3% of the instructors were in single-instructor departments and 31.2% of the instructors were in two-instructor departments. However, these findings are different from the national study by Dormody et al. (1996), in which single-instructor departments made up 76.0% of the participants and two-instructor departments made up 20.0% of the participants. There is some discrepancy between these studies. This could be attributed to the time between each study. In the time since the Dormody et al. study was conducted, it appears that the number of single-instructor departments have decreased, while at the same time an increase has occurred in the number of two-instructor departments. If this is the case, then a trend exists towards multiple-instructor departments.

PAGE 114

99 When the variable number of instructors in each agricultural science department was dummy coded as dichotomous variables, participants in three-instructor departments were found to have a significant relationship with instructor leadership teaching behavior. These results indicate participants in three-instructor departments were more likely to teach leadership in the classroom than participants in departments with fewer or more instructors. Perhaps multiple instructor departments have the flexibility to teach a wider variety of subjects, including leadership, than do single-instructor departments, and if so, an valiant effort should be made to equip these instructors with the resources in the LifeKnowledge curriculum. Certification from a university agriculture teacher certification program was prevalent (96.8%) in this study. Although this study did not inquire if participants were certified through an alternative means, there has been some concern about alternatively certified teachers entering the agricultural education discipline. Yet this study indicates that a strong majority of agriculture instructors are traditionally certified. A significant correlation emerged between participant certification from a university agriculture teacher certification program and teaching a leadership course in their agricultural science program. This indicates that participants who were certified through a university agriculture teacher education program had a greater propensity to teach leadership courses than participants who had not been certified through a university agricultural education program. At the same time, most teachers received their bachelor degree in agricultural education (85.4%). This is similar to findings of Croom (2003), in which 86.7% of the instructors from the Southeastern region of the United States earned their bachelor degree

PAGE 115

100 in agricultural education. This finding emphasizes the potential influence that university teacher education programs have on the secondary agriculture education discipline. University agriculture teacher education programs have the opportunity to influence the future of agricultural education based on the experiences and training they provide for pre-service instructors. This includes encouraging pre-service instructors to use specific curriculums, such as LifeKnowledge. Two significant correlations were found between the variable participants who received their bachelor degree in agricultural education and the variables of high school FFA membership and holding an FFA chapter office. These findings reveal participants that earned a bachelor degree in agricultural education were more likely to have participated in FFA as a high school student. This may have implications for student recruitment into the agriculture teacher pre-service program. Instructors in teaching in urban locations were less likely to have participated in FFA as a high school student Negative correlations emerged between school location and the variables of FFA member in high school and FFA chapter officer. These relationships show that as the school location became more urban, the participants were less likely to have been an FFA member in high school or to have held an FFA chapter office. It may be that instructors that have not participated in FFA activities are drawn to suburban and urban agricultural science programs. Combined with the earlier finding that urban programs have a stronger relationship to instructor leadership teaching behavior, these findings suggest that urban high school agriculture instructors, with less FFA experience, teach more leadership than do their counterparts from non-urban locations with more FFA experience. More research should be conducted to investigate these findings.

PAGE 116

101 Most agricultural science instructors were an FFA member in high school, an FFA chapter officer, and held at least one office in other high school organization outside of FFA Most instructors were an FFA member in high school (86.1%) and an FFA chapter officer (72.3%). These findings are similar to those found by Vaughn and Moore (2000) who found 73.2% of the instructors in North Carolina were an FFA member and 62.4% were an FFA chapter officer. These findings indicate that a high percentage of agriculture instructors were involved in FFA as a high school student. The enjoyment of FFA participation may lead some students into the profession of becoming an agriculture instructor. Because only a few FFA members have the opportunity to hold office above the chapter level, it comes as little surprise that 31.0% of the participants were officers above the chapter level. Vaughn and Moore (2000) found similar results (29.9%) in their study. However, participants that were an officer above the chapter level were more likely to hold office in other high school organizations and in college organizations. Perhaps the officer experiences in high school prepared these participants for officer roles in FFA positions above chapter level and college organizations. Many participants (69%) held one or more offices in high school organizations other than FFA. This finding is similar to the findings of Vaughn and Moore (2000) who determined that 62.4 % of the instructors in their state study held offices in high school organizations other than FFA. Significant correlations found with number of offices held in high school organizations outside of FFA included the variables number of offices held in college organizations, membership in professional development organizations, and number of agricultural education committees served on at the regional and state level. From these findings, it appears that holding an office in high school organizations outside

PAGE 117

102 of FFA is a predictor of college organization involvement. In addition, holding office in high school organizations outside of the FFA may provide a foundation that fosters participation in professional development organizations and on committees. These findings lead the researcher to conclude that although agricultural science instructors have taken advantage of leadership opportunities in their youth, as evidenced from the number of instructors who have held offices in youth organizations, this leadership experience has negligible influence on their leadership teaching behavior. The question for future research becomes why do these experiences not have a greater affect on agricultural science instructor leadership teaching behavior? A broader question that needs to be addressed is do these leadership experiences during youth have an impact on leadership skills as an adult? Most agricultural science instructors took at least one leadership course in college and were an officer in at least one college organization Learning about leadership appears to have appeal to agricultural science instructors, as two-thirds (67.8%) of them have taken at least one leadership course in college, with many taking two (22.6%), and three (9.7%) courses. When correlated with instructor leadership teaching behavior, this relationship proved to be significant and positive. Also of interest is the significant, positive correlation between number of leadership courses taken in college and a leadership course taught in the agricultural science program. These positive relationships may be due to an increased level of leadership knowledge provided from the college courses (Cruickshank, 1990). More research should be conducted to fully investigate these relationships. In addition, significant positive correlations were found between number of leadership courses taken in college, and the variables suburban school location and

PAGE 118

103 instructor teaching in a three-instructor department. This interesting finding demands additional research. One possible explanation is that instructors that take leadership courses in college have well-developed interpersonal skills, as might be taught in college leadership courses, which allows them to effectively work in multiple-instructor departments. The trend of agricultural instructors holding leadership positions in youth organizations continued into college with 67.3% of the participants holding at least one office in a college organization, while some participants held as many as 15 offices. An earlier study (Vaughn & Moore, 2000) found only 51% of the participants held office. Relationships with number of offices held in college organizations revealed participants who held offices in college organizations had significant, positive correlations with the variables committee membership and with working in a three-instructor department. Perhaps participation as an officer in college organizations provides the skills required for committee involvement and for working in a multiple-instructor department. These relationships deserve additional research so they may be fully understood. Most participants were active in leadership roles beyond their teaching responsibilities Most participants were active in some form of leadership role, such as holding leadership positions in the local school or vocational department (82.9%), membership in professional development organizations (79.2%), and participating on regional and state agricultural education committees (78.0%). These findings are quite different from an earlier study (Vaughn & Moore, 2000) in which 64.3% held positions in the local school or vocational department, 16.6% were members of professional development organizations, and 71.3% participated on regional and state agricultural education

PAGE 119

104 committees. These findings suggest that leadership activity has increased, however other explanations may include differences between state and national studies. Significant relationships with number of leadership positions in the local school and vocational department occurred between many variables. Number of offices held in professional education organizations, number of offices held in civic organizations, membership in professional development organizations, number of offices held in professional development organizations, number of state and regional agricultural education committees served on, number of workshops and seminars presented for agriculture teachers, and number of workshops and seminars presented for non-agriculture teachers all had significant relationships with number of leadership positions in the local school and vocational department. This indicates that instructors are involved in a number of leadership positions, and may benefit from leadership instruction so they may carry out their responsibilities effectively. In addition, many of these variables had significant relationships with each other. Number of offices held in professional education organizations had significant relationships with number of offices held in civic organizations, number of offices in held in professional development organizations, number of regional or state agricultural education committees participated in, number of workshops and seminars for agriculture teachers, and number of workshops and seminars for non-agriculture teachers. Number of offices in civic organizations had significant relationships with membership in professional development organizations, number of offices held in professional development organizations, number of regional or state agricultural education committees participated in, and number of workshops and seminars for non-agriculture teachers.

PAGE 120

105 Membership in professional development organizations had significant relationships with the variables number of regional or state agricultural education committees participated in and number of workshops and seminars for agriculture teachers. Offices in professional development organizations had significant relationships with the variables number of regional or state agricultural education committees participated in and number of workshops and seminars for agriculture teachers. These findings reveal instructors which participate in one leadership activity, such as holding office in their school, may be likely to participate in other leadership activities, such as committee participation or membership in professional development organizations. Once again, leadership training would most likely be beneficial for instructors that are drawn to these leadership positions. It must also be noted that when high school FFA membership was correlated with the variables listed in the previous paragraph, the only significant relationship revealed was with number of leadership positions in local school or vocational department, and this relationship was negative. Similarly, no significant relationships were found between holding an FFA chapter office and these variables. These findings are important in that they reveal FFA experience had no positive significant influence on participants engaging in leadership roles. The question that arises is, why do FFA experiences not have more influence on participants engagement in leadership roles as adults? The demographic characteristics of agricultural science instructors that teach in rural areas differ from the demographic characteristics of agricultural science instructors in urban areas When correlations were conducted with the data, differences between instructors from rural and urban school locations stand out. Instructors in rural locations tend to have a bachelor degree in agricultural education, were an FFA member in high school,

PAGE 121

106 were an FFA chapter officer, were an FFA chapter above the chapter level, teach in a single-instructor department, and are less likely to present workshops for non-agriculture teachers. In contrast, instructors in urban schools tend to not have a bachelor degree in agricultural education, were not an FFA member in high school, were not a chapter officer, are more likely to present workshops to non-agriculture teachers, and were more likely to teach leadership. This is an interesting finding with possible implications when we begin to consider pre-service instructor programs that are preparing students to teach in urban locations, in particular the lack of FFA experience that appears with instructors in urban programs and the additional interest in leadership instruction. Females and males differ in their leadership experiences The leadership experiences of females and males differ. Significant relationships occurred between females and number of offices in high school organizations other than FFA and number of offices in college organizations. In contrast, males had significant relationships between the number of offices in professional education organizations, and the number of offices in civic organizations. These findings show the females tend to be more involved in high school organizations other than FFA and college organizations, while males tend to be more involved in professional education organizations and civic organizations. Questions that require further inquiry are: why are females drawn to leadership roles in high school and college organizations; and why do males tend to obtain leadership positions in professional and civic organizations?

PAGE 122

107 There are significant age differences between genders Of the participants in this study that indicated gender, 42 (26.9%) stated they were female and 114 (73.1%) indicated they were male. When an independent groups t-test was conducted to determine if significant differences existed between gender within variables, 12 variables proved to have significant differences at the alpha 0.05 level. Four of these variables were discussed in the previous section: number of offices held in high school organizations other than FFA, number of offices in college organizations, number of offices in professional education organizations, and number of offices in civic organizations. Of particular interest within these significant variables are the variables that address time. For age the female average was 32.71 years old, and the male average was 41.73 years old. These averages reveal a 9.02 year age difference between female and male participants. Similarly, years teaching had a difference of 9.75 years between genders, with females having an average of 7.62 years teaching and males with 17.37 years teaching. Years in current position revealed an average for females of 5.29 years, and an average of 12.64 years for males, with a difference between the genders of 7.35 years. These findings may be caused by late entrance of females into the field of agricultural education (Foster, 2001). Further examination should be conducted to understand why these differences exist. Objective Two: Determine the Extent to which Leadership Education is being Taught in High School Agricultural Science Classrooms Based on the National FFA LifeKnowledge Curriculum, leadership is being taught in most agricultural science classrooms Overall 92.9% of the participants are teaching at least one of the surveyed leadership concepts in their classroom, with an average of 18.73 surveyed leadership

PAGE 123

108 concepts being taught in agricultural science classrooms. When viewed as a percentage of the 28 leadership concepts surveyed, agriculture instructors are teaching 69.9% of the leadership concepts in the average program. For the purpose of statistical analysis, the answers to these 28 leadership concepts were summed to create one variable called instructor leadership teaching behavior. The greater the number of leadership concepts taught, the greater the level of instructor leadership teaching behavior. Not surprising, the variable leadership course taught in agricultural science program had a significant correlation with instructor leadership teaching behavior. The fact that a leadership course was being taught in the agricultural science program may lend itself to the teaching of the leadership concepts surveyed. Gender also had a significant correlation with instructor leadership teaching behavior, revealing that in this study males were more likely to teach leadership concepts than females. The findings of this study suggest that females teach less leadership than their male counterparts. Although it is possible that women prefer to teach less leadership, there are most likely other reasons for this finding. A significant relationship was found with number of leadership courses taken in college. Taking a leadership course in college may provide sufficient leadership knowledge, and self-confidence of the subject matter, for the behavior of leadership instruction to occur. Membership in professional development organizations had a significant relationship with instructor leadership teaching behavior. Perhaps the leadership experience gained in professional development organizations provides instructors with

PAGE 124

109 the experience necessary to teach leadership. Alternatively, the experience of participating in a professional development organization may allow the instructor to appreciate the need for leadership instruction and motivate them to teach leadership. Instructors teaching in an urban school location had a significant relationship with instructor leadership teaching behavior. This may be due to the nature of the urban programs. Urban programs tend to focus on leadership, environmental science, and biotechnology, while rural programs tend to focus on agribusiness, leadership and animal science (Foster, Bell, & Erskine, 1995; Trede & Russell, 1999). Many programs in urban locations have less emphasis on production agriculture skill areas and may be more likely to teach stand-alone courses on subject areas such as leadership (Trede & Russell, 1999). Three variables studied in the modified Triandis behavioral model had correlations worth noting. First, instructor student expectations after leadership had been taught (r=0.21) had a significant positive relationship with instructor leadership teaching behavior. Next, instructor leadership knowledge (r=-0.05) had a negligible relationship with instructor leadership teaching behavior. Finally, instructor attitude towards the teaching of leadership (r=0.27) had a significant positive, relationship with instructor leadership teaching behavior. The modified Triandis behavioral model states that an individuals behavior is a function of attitude, knowledge, demographics, and expectations. That being the case, the findings of this study only partially support the modified Triandis model. This study found that instructor expectations and instructor attitude support the model, but instructor knowledge does not support this behavioral model. Additional discussion of these relationships will be provided in the sections of this chapter that deal specifically with these variables.

PAGE 125

110 Objective Three: Based on National FFA LifeKnowledge Leadership Curriculum, Determine High School Agricultural Science Instructor Leadership Knowledge Based on the National FFA LifeKnowledge Curriculum, the average participant has a moderate level of leadership knowledge. Of the 15 questions asked to assess instructor leadership knowledge, the average instructor answered 10.19 questions correctly, equating to 67.9% correct. When using the median (10.00) as a dividing point for determining low and high knowledge, the mean (10.19) level of instructor knowledge may be considered moderate. If the knowledge scores are viewed as percentages it could be said that scores ranged from 27% correct to 100% correct, illustrating that some instructors have a great deal of leadership knowledge, while other instructors may benefit from some professional development in leadership. For instructors to teach a particular curriculum there must be a critical level of familiarity and knowledge with the subject matter for the instructor to feel comfortable teaching the curriculum (Cruickshank, 1990). More information may be revealed when viewing specific question which the instructors most frequently and least frequently scored correctly. Responses to the instrument questions (see Appendix A) indicated the questions answered correctly most frequently by the participants were, Something that someone wants to achieve is a: Goal, Delegating tasks takes more time than it saves: False, and Discouragement and giving up on a project is part of being responsible and accountable: False. Questions answered incorrectly most frequently by the participants were, Being responsible and accountable means: Being answerable for key areas of our life with qualified people, Personal self-worth is: The value I place in my own contributions, and When a person has dedicated time and effort to improving themselves (and their lives) in the areas of social/family life, work/school life, and personal life, we call this: Balance. This

PAGE 126

111 information may prove beneficial to individuals organizing professional development for the LifeKnowledge curriculum and other leadership training programs. When instructor leadership knowledge was correlated with instructor leadership teaching behavior a non-significant relationship emerged. In the modified Triandis model, as knowledge increases so does the individuals behavior. It appears that participants believe they have knowledge of leadership concepts because many teach leadership concepts in class, but when evaluated using leadership definitions from the National FFAs LifeKnowledge curriculum, leadership knowledge is moderate. The reason for this digression from the behavioral model deserves additional investigation. Based on the modified Triandis behavioral model, and the findings of this study, a perceived high level of leadership knowledge may be sufficient to influence behavior, rather than possessing a high level of factual leadership knowledge. Some instructors may equate leadership and leadership education with parliamentary procedure and public speaking, while the LifeKnowledge curriculum views leadership as knowing ones own self so they can influence other people. It may also be that instructors have a general knowledge of leadership, but knowledge about the specific elements of leadership, as presented in the LifeKnowledge curriculum, are unfamiliar to agriculture instructors. Objective Four: Determine High School Agricultural Science Instructor Attitude towards Teaching Leadership Most participants have a moderate attitude towards teaching leadership The construct of instructor attitude towards the teaching of leadership was moderate with a range of 25 to 72 and an average of 64.69 out of 72. When the median (66.00) is designated as the dividing point between positive and negative scores, the

PAGE 127

112 mean score (64.69) may be interpreted as moderate. The correlation of this variable to instructor leadership teaching behavior was significant and positive. As mentioned previously, the modified Triandis model uses attitude as a predictor of behavior. This study validated that attitude is positively correlated with behavior and reinforces the importance attitude has on behavior. This finding supports Fishbein and Ajzen (1975), attitude toward the behavior is often related to performance of the behavior. This also reveals that high school agricultural science instructors with a positive attitude toward teaching leadership may be more inclined to teach leadership. Additionally, a significant positive correlation was found between instructor attitude toward teaching leadership and instructor expectations after leadership has been taught. This relationship helps to support the modified Triandis model, illustrating that an increase in attitude coincides with an increase in expectations. Number of offices held in professional education organizations proved to be a negative relationship with instructor attitude towards the teaching of leadership. Although holding office in a professional education organization may at times be a challenging leadership experience, it may also be rewarding. This interesting finding deserves further investigation to fully understand the relationship. Objective Five: Determine the Expectations that High School Agricultural Science Instructors have of the Agriculture Students after Leadership has been Taught Based on the National FFA Life Knowledge Curriculum, most participants have moderate positive expectations of students after leadership has been taught Of the 22 questions used to determine instructors expectations of students, the participants responses ranged from 4 to 22, with an average of 17.45. If the mean is viewed as a percentage of the number of questions asked, then participants agreed with 80% of the expectations. When the median (18.00) is defined as the dividing point

PAGE 128

113 between positive and negative expectations, the mean (17.45) reveals moderate participant expectations of students after leadership instruction. Specific responses to expectation statements from section two of the questionnaire (see Appendix A), reveal participants responded yes most frequently to the following statements: After my students learn about self-worth I would expect students to have greater confidence in their own ideas, After my students learn about leaders I would expect students to identify ways they can lead others, and After my students learn about goals I would expect students to demonstrate how to prioritize personal goals. Statements that participants responded no to most frequently were, After my students learn about mentors I would expect students to set an appointment with their mentor, After my students learn about personal values I would expect students to write a set of standards by which they will evaluate decisions, and After my students learn about vision I would expect students to create a vision that others can see and internalize. This information may be beneficial to individuals planning professional development workshops for the LifeKnowledge curriculum or other leadership training. Areas in which instructors responded most frequently may not need to be addressed in training, while areas with lower response frequencies may need additional training in order that instructors may see how leadership training can prepare students to accomplish these activities. Participant answers to these 22 questions were summated for statistical analysis. When instructor expectations were correlated with instructor leadership teaching behavior the relationship was significant. This finding supports the modified Triandis model and the work of other researchers (Fishbein et al., 1991), that a persons

PAGE 129

114 expectations of the results of a behavior influence their performance of that behavior. In this case, instructors who expected students to benefit from leadership instruction were more likely to teach leadership in the classroom. Other significant correlations with the variable expectations of instructor after leadership has been taught include the variables certified through a university agricultural teacher certification program, number of offices held in high school organizations other than FFA, instructor attitude toward the teaching of leadership, and teaching in a three-instructor department. The relationship with number of offices held in high school organizations other than FFA may illustrate that participants see a value in their high school leadership experience, and believe that leadership instruction will benefit others. The correlation with instructor attitude toward teaching leadership helps to support the theory of the modified Triandis model that expectations and attitude influence behavior. The relationship with teaching in a three-instructor department may support previous findings in this study that participants in multiple-instructor departments have time to pursue leadership activities and therefore may see benefits of leadership instruction, resulting in high student expectations. Objective Six: Determine the Relationship between High School Agricultural Science Instructor Leadership Knowledge, Instructor Attitude towards Teaching Leadership, Instructor Expectations of Students after Teaching Leadership, and Instructor Demographics to Instructor Leadership Teaching Behavior Leadership course taught in agricultural science program, urban location of school, gender, and instructor attitude toward the teaching of leadership are the variables that best explained leadership teaching behavior The variables leadership course taught in agricultural science program, urban location of school, gender, and instructor attitude towards the teaching of leadership were included in the model that best explained total variance in agricultural science instructor

PAGE 130

115 leadership teaching behavior. Regression analysis revealed that this model significantly explained 33% of the variance in instructor leadership teaching behavior, the dependent variable. Although explaining 33% of the variance is laudable, 67% still remains unexplained, allowing room for additional research in this area. Based on this information, the best predictor of instructor leadership teaching behavior is if a leadership course is currently being taught in the agricultural science program. This would appear to be an expected finding, except for two relevant facts. First, the social norm is leadership consists of activities such as teaching parliamentary procedure and attending the state FFA convention, yet these were not the items measured to determine instructor leadership teaching behavior. The behavior construct used in the questionnaire asked instructors if instructors were teaching leadership concepts as leadership is defined in the LifeKnowledge curriculum, which does not include the social norms. This finding reveals that instructors teaching a leadership course in the agricultural science classroom were teaching leadership concepts similar to those found in the LifeKnowledge curriculum. In this study, instructor attitude was an explanatory variable of leadership teaching behavior. This illustrates the importance of a moderate to positive attitude toward teaching leadership before leadership instruction will occur. Gender was also an explanatory variable in this model, revealed that male participants in this study were more likely to teach leadership than female participants. Crosstabs was conducted to attempt to gain a further understanding of this relationship, but no additional information was revealed. There may be a number of explanations for this occurrence. It may be that female instructors in multiple instructor departments do

PAGE 131

116 not have the opportunity teach courses that allow leadership concepts to be taught. Perhaps the locations at which female participants teach do not allow the flexibility for the incorporation of leadership concepts into the courses. Based on the findings of the study only speculative answers can be gleaned. The finding of this relationship raise a number of questions that require further research to fully understand. One question to be addressed is what courses are these female agriculture instructors teaching, and how do these courses compare to their male counterparts. Finally, urban location of school was an explanatory variable in this study. Based on the findings of this study we have gained some insight into the demographic differences between urban and rural agriculture instructors, but do not have sufficient information to fully understand why urban location has such explanatory power. More research should be undertaken to better understand this relationship. Recommendations Based upon the findings and conclusions of this study, the following recommendations were made: Teacher preparation institutions should modify their programs to address the changing demographics of agricultural educators. Specifically, programs should address the growing number of female instructors and the increase in multi-instructor departments. The findings of this study suggest that teacher preparation institutions should be prepared to provide additional FFA training to pre-service instructors desiring to teach in an urban location. The findings of this study indicate that a larger percentage of instructors teaching in urban locations have limited FFA experience. Teacher preparation institutions have the potential to influence the adoption of the LifeKnowledge curriculum and should provide pre-service instructors with LifeKnowledge curriculum training so they will be prepared to teach leadership in agricultural science classrooms. Approximately 85% of high school agricultural science instructors graduated from a university agriculture teacher education program, indicating that these university programs, through pre-service training, can influence a majority of the instructors in the profession.

PAGE 132

117 FFA experiences should be reviewed and modified so youth may acquire skills that will encourage them to engage in leadership activities as an adult. The findings of this study indicate that high school FFA experiences have little influence on adult leadership involvement. Because enrollment in a college leadership course was positively related to leadership instruction, it is recommended that pre-service instructors be encouraged to take a leadership course so they will be better prepared to teach leadership concepts as an instructor. Because involvement in professional development organizations was related to leadership instruction and other leadership activities, it is recommended that agricultural science instructors be encouraged to become a member of a professional development organization. Through participation in these organizations instructors will have the opportunity to develop skills that allow them to advance professionally, develop a network of professionals outside of the education profession, and educate others about agricultural education. Since instructors are teaching leadership with a moderate amount of leadership knowledge, leadership professional development programs should be offered to increase instructor leadership knowledge. The results of the knowledge component of the instrument used in this study may be beneficial for developing these programs. Suggestions for Additional Research Based upon the findings and conclusions of this study, the following suggestions for additional research were made: Because of the changing demographics of agriculture instructors, a census study should be conducted to determine current demographic characteristics of instructors, and to determine if any trends exist. Determine why certain demographic characteristics influence the amount of leadership instruction. Specifically, determine why gender and urban school location influence leadership instruction in agricultural science classrooms. This study found that activity in professional education organizations had a negative affect on the participants attitude towards teaching leadership. Additional research should be conducted to understand this relationship. Because of the differences of the leadership experiences between genders, additional research should be conducted to determine why males and females participate in different leadership organizations.

PAGE 133

118 Because participants leadership knowledge scores based on the LifeKnowledge curriculum were moderate, additional research should be conducted to determine the knowledge instructors have related to leadership and how instructors define leadership. In order to better prepare agricultural science instructors to teach leadership, a study should be conducted to determine what leadership knowledge and skills a secondary agricultural education student should have upon graduation. Because of the relationships found with youth leadership activities and adult leadership engagement, research should be conducted to determine how youth leadership experiences impact adult leadership skills and leadership engagement. Specifically, determine why participants past FFA experiences have little influence on leadership activity. Based on the modified Triandis behavioral model, further research should be conducted to determine why neither knowledge nor expectations were a function of behavior in this study. Because this study was conducted using only unit two of the LifeKnowledge curriculum, it is recommended that similar studies be conducted to explain teaching behavior for units one, three, four, and five of the Life Knowledge curriculum. A follow-up study should be conducted after five years of LifeKnowledge curriculum dissemination to determine if there is a change in instructor leadership teaching behavior

PAGE 134

APPENDIX A PAPER INSTRUMENT Figure A-1. Questionnaire Cover 119

PAGE 135

120 Figure A-2. Questionnaire Inside Cover

PAGE 136

121 Figure A-3. Questionnaire Section I

PAGE 137

122 Figure A-4. Questionnaire Section II

PAGE 138

123 Figure A-5. Questionnaire Section III

PAGE 139

124 Figure A-6. Questionnaire Sections IV and V

PAGE 140

125 Figure A-7. Questionnaire Section V Continued

PAGE 141

126 Figure A-8. Questionnaire Qualitative Questions

PAGE 142

APPENDIX B INTERNET INSTRUMENT Figure B-1. Screen Capture of the Introductory Web Page 127

PAGE 143

128 Figure B-2. Screen Capture of Section I Web Form Questionnaire, Measuring Instructor Leadership Teaching Behavior Figure B-3. Screen Capture of Section II Web Form Questionnaire, Measuring Instructor Expectations of Students after Leadership Instruction

PAGE 144

129 Figure B-4. Screen Capture of Section III Web Form Questionnaire, Measuring Instructor Leadership Knowledge Figure B-5. Screen Capture of Section IV Web Form Questionnaire, Measuring Instructor Attitude toward Teaching Leadership

PAGE 145

130 Figure B-6. Screen Capture of Section V Web Form Questionnaire, Instructor Demographics Figure B-7. Screen Capture of Thank You Web Page

PAGE 146

APPENDIX C SURVEY CORRESPONDENCE

PAGE 147

132 132 Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences Department of Agricultural Education and Communication 305 Rolfs Hall PO Box 110540 Gainesville, FL 32611-0540 Telephone: (352) 392-0502 Fax: (352) 392-9585FFA Advisor Participant Number 1 April 5, 2004 Dear FFA Advisor, You have been selected to participate in a nati onal study to determine the amount of leadership formally taught in agricultural science classrooms. Your input is vital to help us understand the current status and direction of leadership e ducation in the agricultural science classroom. It is our belief that excellent teaching occurs in many agricultural science programs. It is also our belief that agricultural science inst ructors are the best source for information related to current teaching practices occurring in agricultural scien ce classrooms. This study seeks to determine how much leadership is being taught in ag ricultural science classrooms and what factors influence the teaching of leadership. In the next few days you will receive a ques tionnaire. We anticipate that it will take approximately 20-25 minutes to complete. Please answer all questions as truthfully as possible. Your responses will be kept confid ential and anonymous to the extent provided by law. If you do not want to participate, please contact me reques ting to be removed and we will not include you in the study. Please remember that by not particip ating your valued input will not be available to improve future curriculum. If you prefer to access the questionnaire via the Internet, please go to the web address http://aecresearch.ifas.ufl.edu/morgan /Leadership-Intro.htm and enter your participant number 1. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 352-392-0502 ext. 223 or at acmorgan@ufl.edu. Once again, thank you for your anticipated particip ation in this study. Your time and effort is very appreciated and will be valuable for im proving leadership curriculum in the future. Respectfully, Chris Morgan Rick Rudd, Ph.D. Graduate Assistant Associate Professor Figure C-1. Pre-notice Letter

PAGE 148

133 Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences Department of Agricultural Education and Communication 305 Rolfs Hall PO Box 110540 Gainesville, FL 32611-0540 Telephone: (352) 392-0502 Fax: (352) 392-9585 FFA Advisor Participant 1 April 8, 2004 Dear FFA Advisor, Thank you for taking this opportunity to participate in this national study to determine the amount of leadership formally taught in agricultural science classrooms. Your input is valued and appreciated. Please take a few minutes to complete the enclosed questionnaire. The questionnaire consists of five sections which should take 20-25 minutes to complete. The first section asks if you teach specific lessons on topics relating to leadership. The next section addresses how you expect students to act after you teach a particular leadership concept. The third section consists of both multiple choice questions and true/false questions to determine your level of leadership knowledge. The fourth section asks your views about teaching leadership. The final section asks questions related to you, your school, and your community. After completing the questionnaire, please sign the enclosed Informed Consent form, and place the questionnaire and the signed Informed Consent form in the enclosed Business Reply Mail envelope. Postage will be paid by the University of Florida. The questionnaire may also be accessed via the Internet by entering the following address into your web browser: http://aecresearch.ifas.ufl.edu/morgan/Leadership-Intro.htm To complete the questionnaire on-line you will need to enter your participant number 1. Your participation in this study will help us to understand how much formal leadership education is occurring in agricultural science classrooms and help us to refine leadership curriculum. Therefore, your participation has the potential to influence the shape of leadership curriculum in years to come. Thank you for taking time to complete the questionnaire. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 352-392-0502 ext. 223 or at acm organ@ufl.edu Once again, thank you for participating in this study. Your time and effort is very appreciated and will be valuable for improving leadership curriculum in the future. Respectfully, Chris Morgan Rick Rudd, Ph.D. Graduate Assistant Associate Professor Figure C-2. Cover Letter for First Questionnaire

PAGE 149

134 Informed Consent Project title: Leadership Education in Agricultural Science: An Evaluation of Current Leadership Trends. Purpose of the research study: To solicit input from high school agricultural science teachers to determine: (1) the amount of leadership being taught in agricultural science classrooms; (2) the attitude of agricultural science teachers towards teaching leadership; (3) the level of leadership knowledge of agricultural science teachers; (4) the expectations of agricultural science teachers of students if leadership is taught, and: (5) demographic information about agricultural science teachers. What will you be asked to do in the study: Complete one instrument. Time required: Approximately 20-25 minutes. Risks: No risk of physical, psychological or economic harm to participants is foreseen. Benefits/Compensation: There is no compensation, monetary or otherwise, to you for participation. There are no benefits to participation in this study. Confidentiality: Your identity will be kept confidential to the extent provided by the law. Your responses to the instrument will be anonymous. Voluntary participation: Your participation is completely voluntary. There is no penalty for not participating. Right to withdraw from the study: You have the right to withdraw from the study at anytime without consequence. Whom to contact if you have questions about the study: Chris Morgan, M. Ed., Graduate Assistant University of Florida Dept. of Agricultural Education and Communication 305 Rolfs Hall; PO Box 110540 Gainesville, FL 32611-0540 Ph: 352-392-0502 x223 Fx: 352-392-9585 E-mail: acmorgan@ufl.edu Rick Rudd, Ph.D., Associate Professor University of Florida Dept. of Agricultural Education and Communication 305 Rolfs Hall; PO Box 110540 Gainesville, FL 32611-0540 Ph: 352-392-0502 x239 Fx: 352-392-9585 E-mail: rrudd@ufl.edu Whom to contact about your rights in the study: University of Florida Institutional Review Board Office PO Box 112250 University of Florida Gainesville, FL 32611-2250 ph: 352-392-0433 Agreement: I have read the procedure described above. I voluntarily agree to participate in the procedure and have received a copy of this description. Participant: ____________________________________ Date: _____________ Principal Investigator: ____________________________ Date: _____________ Chris Morgan, M.Ed. Supervisor: ____________________________________ Date: _____________ Rick Rudd, Ph.D. Figure C-3. Informed Consent Form

PAGE 150

135 Dear Agriscience Instructor, Approximately one week ago a questionnaire seeking your input about leadership education in agricultural science was sent to you. Your name was randomly selected from a national list of agricultural science instructors. If you have already completed and returned the questionnaire to us, please accept our sincere thanks. If not, could you please find time today to complete it? I know this is a busy time of year, but if you could take a few moments to provide your ideas and experiences we would appreciate it greatly. It is only by asking people like you to share your thoughts and insights that we can determine how much leadership is being taught in agricultural classrooms and improve future curriculum. Please complete the previously mailed questionnaire and return it to us using the postage paid envelope. You may also access the questionnaire on the Internet at http://aecresearch.ifas.ufl.edu/morgan/leadership-intro.htm. Your participant number is Part No. If you would prefer that a questionnaire be mailed to you, please contact me at (352) 392-0502 ext. 223 or at acmorgan@ufl.edu and one will be mailed to you immediately. Thank you in advance for your time and consideration. Please return the questionnaire by April 28, 2004. Sincerely, Chris Morgan, Graduate Assistant Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences University of Florida Department of Agricultural Education and Communication; 352-392-0502 Figure C-4. Thank You/ Reminder Postcard

PAGE 151

136 Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences Department of Agricultural Education and Communication 305 Rolfs Hall PO Box 110540 Gainesville, FL 32611-0540 Telephone: (352) 392-0502 Fax: (352) 392-9585 FFA Advisor Participant Number 1 April 28, 2004 Dear FFA Advisor, Approximately three weeks ago you were sent a questionnaire seeking your input about leadership education in agricultural science. As of today we have not received your questionnaire. If you have recently returned the questionnaire, thank you for your assistance in this study. If this is the case, this letter and your questionnaire have probably crossed in the mail. The comments of people who have already responded have provided some insight into the leadership being taught in high schools across the country. We believe the results from this study will be very useful in determining how much leadership is currently being taught in agricultural science classrooms and help to improve future curriculum. I am writing again because of the importance that your questionnaire has for helping to get accurate results. Although we have sent questionnaires to teachers throughout the country, its only by hearing from nearly everyone in the sample that we can be sure that the results are truly representative. I realize the end of a semester can be a busy time of the year, however your ideas are highly valued. Please take a few minutes today to complete the study. We anticipate that the questionnaire will take approximately 20-25 minutes to complete. I have enclosed another copy of the questionnaire in the event that you did not receive the first mailing. After completing the questionnaire, please sign the enclosed Informed Consent form, and place the questionnaire and the signed Informed Consent form in the enclosed Business Reply Mail envelope. Postage will be paid by the University of Florida. The questionnaire may also be accessed via the Internet by entering the following address into your web browser: http://aecresearch.ifas.ufl.edu/morgan/Leadership-Intro.htm To complete the questionnaire on-line you will need to enter your participant number . We hope that you will fill out and return the questionnaire soon, but if for any reason you prefer not to answer it, please let us know by returning your blank questionnaire in the postage paid envelope or sending an email to acm organ@ufl.edu If you have any questions, please contact me by email or phone at (352) 392-0502 x223. Thank you in advance for participating in this study. Your time and effort is very appreciated and will be valuable for improving leadership curriculum in the future. Respectfully, Chris Morgan Rick Rudd, Ph.D. Graduate Assistant Associate Professor Figure C-5. Cover Letter for Second Questionnaire

PAGE 152

APPENDIX D TABLES Table D-1. Pearsons Product Moment Correlations Between Age, Years Teaching, Years Teaching in Current Position, and Selected Variables (n=157) Variable Age Years Teaching Years Teaching in Current Position Gender 2 0.39 0.43 0.37 Number of leadership positions held in local school or vocational department 0.35 0.39 0.25 Number of offices held in professional education organizations 0.30 0.37 0.40 Number of offices held in college organizations -0.28 -0.20 -0.12 Number of offices held in professional development organizations 0.28 0.28 0.22 Number of offices held in civic organizations 0.25 0.32 0.19 Number of workshops and seminars for agriculture teachers 0.25 0.29 0.32 Number of regional or state agricultural education committees participated in 0.23 0.29 0.29 Number of workshops and seminars for non-agriculture teachers 0.22 0.22 0.10 FFA officer above chapter level 1 -0.20 -0.17 -0.12 Number of offices held in high school organizations outside of FFA -0.19 -0.14 -0.14 Level of education 0.18 0.25 0.31 FFA member in high school 1 -0.17 -0.04 0.05 FFA chapter officer 1 -0.16 -0.03 0.02 Number of times attended Advisors Washington Leadership Conference 0.16 0.18 0.21 Instructor leadership teaching behavior 0.12 0.16 0.12 Instructor attitude towards the teaching of leadership 0.09 0.08 0.17 Certified through a university agriculture teacher education program 1 0.08 0.10 0.16 Age -0.91 0.69 Years teaching --0.80 Notes: = p<0.05; 1 = Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0; 2 = Males coded as 1, Females coded as 2. 137

PAGE 153

138 Table D-2. Pearsons Product Moment Correlations between Number of Instructors at School and Selected Variables (n=156) Variable Number of Agricultural Science Instructors One Instructor Two Instructor Three Instructor Four or More Instructors Rural school location 1 -0.34 0.27 -0.05 -0.22 -0.23 Suburban school location 1 0.31 -0.20 0.03 0.16 0.19 Location of school 0.28 -0.24 0.05 0.21 0.20 Number of workshops and seminars for non-agriculture teachers 0.21 -0.19 0.04 0.26 0.20 Number of offices held in high school organizations outside o f FFA 0.20 -0.11 -0.04 0.11 0.42 Level of education 1 0.18 -0.15 0.01 0.22 0.05 Number of offices held in professional education organizations 0.18 -0.21 0.15 0.13 0.14 Number of regional or state agricultural education committees participated in 0.15 -0.21 0.13 0.22 0.02 Number of workshops and seminars for agriculture teachers 0.14 -0.15 0.07 0.12 0.18 Instructor leadership teaching behavior 0.13 -0.12 0.04 0.18 0.07 Number of offices held in college organizations 0.13 -0.07 -0.07 0.23 0.10 Number of leadership courses taken in college 0.12 -0.08 -0.02 0.21 -0.06 Urban location of school 1 0.12 -0.14 0.04 0.13 0.11 Number of offices held in civic organizations 0.06 -0.13 0.09 0.22 -0.07 Bachelor degree in agricultural education -0.10 -0.06 0.17 0.02 -0.07 Number of agricultural science instructors in school --0.78 0.35 0.39 0.40 One instructor department 1 ---0.81 -0.28 -0.17 Two instructor department 1 ----0.16 -0.10 Three instructor department 1 -----0.03 Notes: *=p<0.05; 1 =Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0.

PAGE 154

139 Table D-3. Pearsons Product Moment Correlations Between Committee Participation, and Workshops and Seminar Presentations and Selected Variables (n=158) Variable Number of Regional or State Agricultural Education Committees Participated in Number of Workshops and Seminars for Agriculture Teachers Number of Workshops and Seminars for Non-Agriculture Teachers Number of workshops and seminars for agriculture teachers 0.50 --Number of offices held in professional education organizations 0.46 0.33 0.20 Number of offices held in professional development organizations 0.39 0.25 0.09 Number of leadership positions in local school or vocational department 0.32 0.49 0.35 Years teaching 0.29 0.29 0.22 Years in current teaching position 0.29 0.32 0.10 Age 0.23 0.25 0.22 Three-instructor department 1 0.22 0.12 0.26 One-instructor department 1 -0.21 -0.15 -0.19 Number of workshops and seminars for non-agriculture teachers 0.21 0.42 -Membership in professional development organizations 0.21 0.25 0.13 Number of offices held in college organizations 0.19 0.12 0.16 Number of times attended Advisors Washington Leadership Conference 0.19 0.38 0.07 Number of offices held in civic organizations 0.16 0.09 0.20 Number of agricultural science instructors in school 0.15 0.14 0.21 Number of offices held in high school organizations outside of FFA 0.15 0.14 0.24 Instructor leadership teaching behavior 0.11 0.09 0.08 Instructor leadership knowledge 0.10 0.19 -0.02 Location of school -0.03 0.16 0.24 Rural school location 1 0.03 -0.16 -0.17 Urban location of school 1 -0.01 0.11 0.28* Note. *=p<0.05; 1 =Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0.

PAGE 155

140 Table D-4. Pearsons Product Moment Correlations between High School and College Leadership Activities and Selected Variables (n=158) Variable Number of Leadership Courses in College Number of Offices in High School Organizations Number of Offices in College Organizations Number of offices held in high school organizations outside of FFA 0.02 --Number of offices held in college organizations 0.14 0.52 -Leadership course taught in agricultural science program 1 0.28 -0.03 0.07 Instructor leadership teaching behavior 0.22 0.09 0.07 Three instructor department 1 0.21 0.11 0.23 Bachelors degree in agricultural education 1 0.16 0.16 0.12 Membership in professional development organizations 0.13 0.23 0.14 Number of agricultural science instructors in school 0.12 0.20 0.13 Number of regional or state agricultural education committees participated in -0.10 0.15 0.19 FFA member in high school 1 0.10 0.08 0.20 FFA chapter officer 1 0.09 0.15 0.22 Instructor expectations after leadership has been taught 0.09 0.19 0.07 Years teaching -0.08 -0.14 -0.20 Number of workshops and seminars for non-agriculture teachers 0.07 0.24 0.16 FFA officer above chapter 1 -0.06 0.16 0.31 Age -0.06 -0.19 -0.28 Four or more teacher department 1 -0.06 0.27 0.10 Gender 2 -0.05 -0.19 -0.18 Note. *=p<0.05; 1 =Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0; 2 =Males coded as 1, Females coded as 2.

PAGE 156

141 Table D-5. Pearson Product Moment Correlations between Instructor Leadership Teaching Behavior and Variables Studied r n Sig. (2-tailed) Leadership course taught in agricultural science program 1 0.44 156 0.00 Instructor attitude towards the teaching of leadership 0.38 160 0.00 Gender 2 0.23 156 0.01 Number of leadership courses taken in college 0.22 156 0.01 Instructor expectations after leadership has been taught 0.21 162 0.01 Membership in professional development organizations 0.20 159 0.01 Number of offices held in professional development organizations 0.20 159 0.01 Urban location of school 1 0.19 154 0.02 Three-instructor department 1 0.18 157 0.03 Years teaching 0.16 158 0.05 Number of offices held in civic organizations 0.15 157 0.06 Location of school 0.13 154 0.11 Number of agricultural science teachers in school 0.13 156 0.11 One-instructor department 1 -0.12 157 0.14 Age 0.12 157 0.14 Years in current teaching position 0.12 158 0.14 Number of leadership positions in local school or vocational department 0.11 158 0.11 Number of regional or state agricultural education committees participated in 0.11 159 0.18 Bachelors degree in agricultural education 1 0.09 157 0.27 Certified through a university agriculture teacher education program 1 0.09 158 0.27 Number of offices held in high school organizations outside of FFA 0.09 158 0.28 Number of workshops and seminars for agriculture teachers 0.09 158 0.29 Suburban school location 1 -0.08 154 0.32 Number of workshops and seminars for non-agriculture teachers 0.08 159 0.31 Number of offices held in college organizations 0.07 159 0.36 Four-or-more instructor department 1 0.07 157 0.38 Rural school location 1 -0.06 154 0.43 Instructor leadership knowledge -0.06 161 0.49 Number of times attended Advisors Washington Leadership Conference 0.06 159 0.49 FFA member in high school 1 0.05 158 0.58 FFA officer above chapter 1 -0.04 157 0.62 Two-instructor department 1 0.04 157 0.63 Level of education -0.03 158 0.71 Number of offices held in professional education organizations 0.03 158 0.74 FFA chapter officer 1 -0.01 158 0.94 Note. Bold=p<0.05; 1 =Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0; 2 =Males coded as 1, Females coded as 2.

PAGE 157

LIST OF REFERENCES Agresti, A., & Finlay, B. (1997). Statistical methods for the social sciences (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., & Razavieh, A. (1996). Introduction to research in education (5th ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace College Publishers. Balschweid, M. A., & Thompson, G. W. (2002). Integrating science in agricultural education: Attitudes of Indiana agricultural science and business teachers. Journal of Agricultural Education 43(2), 1-10. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Barrett, L. A. (1983). Leadership education for agricultural students. NACTA Journal, 27(1), 6, 47-48. Bass, B. M. (1990). Bass and Stogdill's handbook of leadership (3rd ed.). New York: Free Press. Becker, M. H. (1974). The health belief model and personal health behavior. Health Education Monographs, 2, 324-508. Benson, G. L. (1983). On the campus: How well do business schools prepare graduates for the business world? Personnel, 60(4), 61-65. Birkenbolz, R. J., & Maricle, G. L. (1991). Adult education in agriculture: A national survey. Journal of Agricultural Education, 32(4), 19-24. Bisoux, T. (2002, September). The mind of a leader. BizEd, 26-31. Bland, C. J., Starnaman, S., Wersal, L., Moorhead-Rosenburg, L., Zonia, S., & Henry, R. (2000). Curricular change in medical schools. Academic Medicine, 75, 575-594. Boccia, J. A. (1997). Students taking the lead. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (1997). Reframing organizations (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 142

PAGE 158

143 Boone, H. N., Gartin, S. A., Wright, C., Lawrence, L. D., & Odell, K. (2002). Adult education philosophies practiced by agricultural education teachers in Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia. Journal of Agricultural Education, 43(3), 37-48. Boy Scouts of America. (2003). Scouting FAQs. Retrieved October 24, 2003 from http://www.scouting.org Boys and Girls Clubs. (2003). Program leadership. Retrieved October 24, 2003 from http://www.bgca.org/programs/leadership.asp Brannon, T., Holley, C. W. & Key, J. P. (1989). Impact of vocational agriculture/FFA on community leadership. Journal of Agricultural Education, 30(3), 37-45. Brutcher, R. W. (2003). Developing leadership skills. School Administrator, 60(3), 6. Burns, J. M. (1979). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row. Butler, J. B. (1999). Global studies in Arkansas: An experiment in statewide curriculum reform. International Journal of Social Reform, 14(1), 93-110. Cano, J. (1990). Male vocational agriculture teachers' attitude and perception towards female teachers of agriculture. Journal of Agricultural of Education, 31(3), 19-23. Carter, R. I., & Spotanski, D. R. (1989). Perceptions of leadership and personal development of selected high school students in Iowa. Journal of Agricultural Education, 30(4), 30-34. Chmielewski, T. R. (2000). Student leadership. Principal Leadership (High School Ed.), 1(2), 18-23. Clark, A. A. (1977). An analysis of leadership and self-confidence and or self-acceptance outcomes from student participation in Distributive Education Clubs of America. Unpublished Dissertation, The University of Minnesota. Commonwealth of Virginia Board of Education. (2001). Linking leadership to instruction: A leadership development curriculum for Virginia public schools. Retrieved October 10, 2003, from www.pen.k12.va.us/VDOE/Instruction/leadership/index.html Connors, J. J. (1999). Division report: Agricultural education. Techniques, 74(2), 54. Connors, J. J., & Elliot, J. (1994). Teacher perceptions of agriscience and natural resources curriculum. Journal of Agricultural Education, 35(4), 15-19. Conroy, C. A., & Walker, N. J. (2000). An examination of integration of academic and vocational subject matter in the aquaculture classroom. Journal of Agricultural Education, 41(2), 54-64.

PAGE 159

144 Croom, D. B. (2003). Teacher burnout in agricultural education. Journal of Agricultural Education, 44(2), 1-13. Cruickshank, D. R. (1990). Research that informs teachers and teacher educators. Bloomingdale, IN: Phi Delta Kappa. Delmar Learning. (2003). Leadership: Personal development, career success. Retrieved October 2, 2003 from http://www.delmarlearning.com/samplechapters/sampchaps_index.aspx?disc=8 Delnero, J., & Montgomery, D. (2001). Perceptions of work among California agriculture teachers. Journal of Agricultural Education, 42(2), 56-67. Derner, S. (2004). An overview of LifeKnowledge. The Agricultural Education Magazine, 76, 5-8. Dillman, D. (2000). Mail and internet surveys: The tailored design method (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Doherty, K. M. (2004, July). Assessment. Education Week. Retrieved June 26, 2004, from http://www.edweek.org/context/topics/issuespage.cfm?id=41 Dormody, T. J. (1993). Science credentialing and science credit in secondary school agricultural education. Journal of Agricultural Education, 34(2), 63-70. Dormody, T. J., & Seevers, B. S. (1994a). Participation of FFA members in leadership development activities: A tri-state study. Journal of Agricultural Education, 35(4), 42-48. Dormody, T. J., & Seevers, B. S. (1994b). Predicting youth leadership life skills development among FFA members in Arizona, Colorado, and New Mexico. Journal of Agricultural Education, 35(2), 65-71. Dormody, T. J., Seevers, B. S., & Clason, D. L. (1996). Teacher perceptions of the goals achieved by adult organizations in agricultural education. Journal of Agricultural Education, 37(1), 31-40. Duncan, D. W. (2004). Knowledge and perceptions of Virginia secondary agriculture educators toward the agricultural technology program at Virginia Tech. Journal of Agricultural Education, 45(1), 21-28. Eaton, D. W., & Bruening, T. H. (1996). The strategic plan for agricultural education: An assessment in Pennsylvania. Journal of Agricultural Education, 37(1), 56-64. Elbert, C. D. (2003). Teacher competence for working with disabled students as perceived by secondary level agricultural instructors in Pennsylvania. Journal of Agricultural Education, 44(1), 105-115.

PAGE 160

145 ERIC Clearing House on Tests Measurement and Evaluation. (1985). Measuring teacher attitudes toward mainstreaming (ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED289885). Princeton, NJ: ERIC. Esters, L. T. (2002). Leadership development in an urban program. The Agricultural Education Magazine, 75, 20-21. FairTest.org. (2004). The dangerous consequences of high-stakes standardized testing. Retrieved June 26, 2004, from http://www.fairtest.org/facts/Dangerous%20Consequences.html Figura, S. Z. (1999, September). Leadership void. Government Executive. Retrieved October 2, 2003 from www.govexec.com/news/index.cfm?mode=report&articleid=16021 Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Boston: Addison-Wesley. Fishbein, M., Bandura, A., Triandis, H. C., Kanfer, F. H., Becker, M. H., & Middlestadt, S. E. (1991). Factors influencing behavior and behavior change. In A. Baum, T. Revenson & J. Singer (Eds.), Handbook of health psychology (pp. 3-17). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.. Foster, B. (2001, December). Women in agricultural education: Who are you? Paper presented at the National Agricultural Educators Research Conference, New Orleans. Foster, R., Bell, L., & Erskine, N. (1995). The importance of selected instructional areas in the present and future secondary agricultural education curriculum as perceived by teachers, principals, and superintendents in Nebraska. Journal of Agricultural Education, 36(3), 1-7. Fox, C. M., Robinson, K. L., & Boardley, D. (1998). Cost-effectiveness of follow-up strategies in improving the response rate of mail surveys. Industrial Marketing Management, 27, 127-133. Fraze, S. D., Hardin, K. K., Brashears, M. T., Haygood, J. L., & Smith, J. H. (2003). The effects of delivery mode upon survey response rate and perceived attitudes of Texas agri-science instructors. Journal of Agricultural Education, 44(2), 27-37. Frontline. (2002). Testing. Teaching. Learning?. Retrieved June 26, 2004 from http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/schools/testing/ Gardner, J. W. (1990). On leadership. New York: The Free Press. Gliem, J. A. (2003, December). Use and interpretation of multiple linear regression. Paper presented at the American Association for Agricultural Education Research Pre-Session, Orlando, FL.

PAGE 161

146 Happerlen, T. M., Clay, D. L., Henly, G. A., & Barke, C. R. (2002). Measuring teacher attitudes and expectations toward students with ADHD: Development of the test of knowledge about ADHD. Journal of Attention Disorders, 5(3), 133-142. Harris, C. R., & Birkenbolz, R. J. (1996). Agricultural literacy of Missouri secondary school educators. Journal of Agricultural Education, 37(2), 63-71. Hersey, P., Blanchard, K. H., & Johnson, D. E. (2001). Management of organizational behavior (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Hikmet, N., & Chen, S. K. (2003). An investigation into low mail survey response rates of information technology users in health care organizations. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 72(1), 29-24. Hillison, J., & Bryant, B. (2001). Agricultural societies as antecedents of the FFA. Paper presented at the Southern Agricultural Educators Research Conference, Fort Worth, TX. Instructional Materials Service. (2003). Description of leadership and communications courses. Retrieved October 2, 2003 from http://www-ims.tamu.edu/index.aspx?page=123 Jenkins, J. J., Russell, W. A., & Suci, G. J. (1958). An atlas of semantic profiles for 360 words. American Journal of Psychology, 71(4), 688-699. Jones, A. J. (1938). The education of youth for leadership (1st ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Karnes, F. A., & Stephens, K. R. (1999). Planning for the future: Leadership education in the schools. Educational Horizons, 77, 89-93. Karr, K., Keith, L., Lockaby, J., & Vaughn, P. (2001, February). The self-perceived impact of participation in the Texas 4-H council by former council members. Paper presented at the Southern Agricultural Education Research Conference, Fort Worth, TX. Kimpston, R. D., & Anderson, D. H. (1982). A study to analyze curriculum decision making in school districts. Educational Leadership, 40(2), 63-67. Kirk, D., & MacDonald, D. (2001). Teacher voice and ownership of curriculum change. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 33, 551-567. Kotrlik, J. W., & Drueckhammer, D. (1987). The importance of selected external factors and programmatic components in planning vocational agriculture programs. Journal of Agricultural Education, 28(4), 26-31.

PAGE 162

147 Kotrlik, J. W., Redmann, D. H., & Douglas, B. B. (2003). Technology integration by agriscience teachers in the teaching/learning process. Journal of Agricultural Education, 44(3), 78-89. Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1997). The leadership challenge (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Layfield, K. D., & Dobbins, T. (2002). Inservice needs and perceived competencies of South Carolina agricultural educators. Journal of Agricultural Education, 43(4), 46-55. Leat, D., & Higgins, S. (2002). The role of powerful pedagogical strategies in curriculum development. The Curriculum Journal, 13(1), 71-85. Lee, J. A. (2000). Adapting Triandis' model of subjective culture and social behavior relations to consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 9(2), 117-126. Leventhal, J. I. (1999). Providing leadership development for all students: an integral part of classroom instruction. Tech Directions, 59, 22-24. Lowery, M. (2000). Math lessons: A case study in the adoption of an innovative math curriculum. NASSP Bulletin, 86(615), 61-73. Maxwell, J. C. (1993). Developing the leader within you. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson. McCall, M. W. (1998). High flyers: Developing the next generation of leaders. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. McKinley, B. G., Birkenholz, R. J., & Stewart, B. R. (1993). Characteristics and experiences related to the leadership skills of agriculture students in college. Journal of Agricultural Education, 34(3), 76-83. Merriam-Webster. (2003). Merriam-Webster Dictionary. Retrieved December 18, 2003 http://www.m-w.com Miller, L. E. (1998). Appropriate analysis. Journal of Agricultural Education, 39(2), 1-10. Miller, L. E., & Smith, K. L. (1983). Handling nonresponse issues. Journal of Extension, 21, 45-50. Miller, W. W., Kahler, A. A., & Rheault, K. (1989). Profile of the effective vocational agriculture teacher. Journal of Agricultural Education, 30(2), 33-40. Mischel, W., & Mischel, H. N. (1977). Essentials of psychology. New York: Random House.

PAGE 163

148 Morrison, G. R. (2000). Graduation is the beginning, not the end: Are your students ready? High School Magazine, 7, 5-7. Mueller, D. M. (1989). Relationships between 4-H youth leadership involvement and self esteem. Unpublished Thesis, Washington State University. Myers, B. E., Dyer, J. E., & Breja, L. M. (2003). Recruitment strategies and activities used by agriculture teachers. Journal of Agricultural Education, 44(4), 94-105. National FFA Organization (2002). FFA Key Statistics. National FFA Organization. Retrieved December 2, 2002 http://www.ffa.org/about_ffa/organization/html/ffa.html National FFA Organization (2003). FFA LifeKnowledge initiative. Indianapolis, IN. National Research Council. (1988). Understanding agriculture: New directions for education. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. North Carolina State University. (2003). Agricultural leadership I curriculum. Retrieved October 2, 2003 from http://www.ces.ncsu.edu/plymouth/aee/agLdrshp1.html Northouse, P. G. (2001). Leadership: Theory and practice (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Odell, K. S., Cochran, J. E., Lawrence, L. D., & Gartin, S. A. (1990). The job and marital satisfaction of secondary agriculture teachers and their spouses. Journal of Agricultural Education, 34(3), 14-18. Osborne, E. W., & Dyer, J. E. (1998). Attitudes of Illinois high school science teachers toward educational programs in agriculture. Journal of Agricultural Education, 39(1), 8-16. Peasley, D. D., & Henderson, J. L. (1992). Agriscience curriculum in Ohio agricultural education: Teacher utilization, attitudes, and knowledge. Journal of Agricultural Education, 33(1), 37-45. Pennsylvania State University. (2004). Definitions of terms used in the A-100 Report. Pennsylvania State University. Retrieved March 26, 2004 http://ict.cas.psu.edu/Support/Downloads/Guides/A-100/5_A-100_2003_Definitions.pdf Prentice Hall. (2003). Developing leadership and communication skills. Retrieved October 2, 2003 from http://www.phschool.com/catalog/cat_3.cfm?prog_id=8921&sub_id=16 Response rates to howl about. (2000, Jan. 17). Brandweek Marketing.

PAGE 164

149 Ricketts, J. C. (2003). Critical thinking skills of selected youth leaders: The efficacy of leadership development, critical thinking dispositions, and student academic performance. Unpublished Dissertation, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL. Ricketts, J. C., & Rudd, R. D. (2001). Developing leadership competence: A coherent curriculum framework for youth in agricultural education. Journal of Southern Agricultural Education Research, 51(1). Retrieved December 2, 2003, from http://aaaeonline.ifas.ufl.edu/Research%2020Conferences/Saerc/2001/Index.htm. Ricketts, J. C., & Rudd, R. D. (2002). A comprehensive leadership education model to train, teach, and develop leadership in youth. Journal of Career and Technical Education, 19(1). Retrieved December 2, 2003 from http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JCTE/v2019n2001/pdf/rickets.pdf. Ricketts, S. C., & Newcomb, L. H. (1984). Leadership and personal development abilities possessed by high school seniors who are members in superior and non-superior FFA chapters, and by seniors who were never enrolled in vocational agriculture. Journal of the American Association of Teacher Educators in Agriculture, 25(2), 51-59. Riordon, J. T. (2000). Building our youth for the future. Chain Store Age, 76, 202. Rogers, B. (1999). Conflicting approaches to curriculum: Recognizing how fundamental beliefs can sustain or sabotage school reform. Peabody Journal of Education, 74(1), 29-69. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: Simon and Schuster. Rogers, J. F., Townsend, C. D., & Lindner, J. R. (2004). Perseverance of agricultural educators by academic attainment. Journal of Agricultural Education, 45(1), 74-85. Rudd, R. D. (1994). Teacher characteristics related to the adoption of agriscience curriculum in Virginia middle school agricultural science education programs. Unpublished Dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA. Rudd, R. D., & Hillison, J. H. (1995). Teacher characteristics related to the adoption of agriscience curriculum in Virginia middle school agricultural education programs. Journal of Agricultural Education, 36(2), 19-27. Rutherford, T. A., Townsend, C. D., Briers, G. E., Cummins, R., & Conrad, C. R. (2002). Leadership self-perceptions of WLC participants. Journal of Agricultural Education, 43(2), 22-33. Scanlon, D. C., & Burket, L. (1986). The influence of selected FFA factors in developing the interpersonal skills of students studying vocational agriculture. Journal of the American Association of Teacher Educators in Agriculture, 27(4), 51-56.

PAGE 165

150 Schmidt, R. (2001). JROTC cadets in leadership training display significantly higher personal development than typical students. Education (Chula Vista, Calif.), 122, 302-306. Seevers, B. S., & Dormody, T. J. (1994). 4-H youth participation in leadership development activities: A tri-state study. Journal of Agricultural Education, 35(4), 49-54. Seevers, B. S., & Dormody, T. J. (1995). Leadership life skills development: perceptions of senior 4-H youth. Journal of Extension, 33(4). Souccar, M. K. (2000, Feb. 16). Mass-mailing misfires still bedeviling card issuers despite technical advances. American Banker, 165. Spotauski, D. R., & Carter, R. I. (1993). Self evaluation of leadership practices and behaviors used by department executive officers in agricultural education. Journal of Agricultural Education, 34(3), 17-25. Stewart, B. R., Smith, C. L., Ehlert, M. W., & Mihalevich, J. R. (1985). Member, officer, and advisor perceptions of FFA organizational goals and activities. Journal of the American Association of Teacher Educators in Agriculture, 26(2), 47-55. Stewart, T. A. (1998). Why leadership matters: America's most admired companies. Fortune, 137, 71-73. Swan, E. T. (1996). Let's put more quality into TQM. Contemporary Education, 67, 97-98. Taylor, C. L. C., Basen-Engquist, K., Shinn, E. H., & Bodurka, D. C. (2004). Predictors of sexual functioning in ovarian cancer patients. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 22(5), 881-889. Teichgraeber, T. (2001). Tech profile: Hotwire Interactive Inc., marketing firm boosts response rate with technology. Business Journal, 21(50), 19. Thobega, M., & Miller, G. (2003). Relationship of instructional supervision with agriculture teachers' job satisfaction and their intention to remain in the teaching profession. Journal of Agricultural Education, 44(4), 57-66. Thomas, L., & Groves, R. (1986). Vocational agriculture teachers' opinions relative to selected animal science competencies. Journal of Agricultural Education, 27(3), 20-28. Thorp, L., Cummins, R., & Townsend, C. (1998). Women's self-perceived leadership skills in a collegiate agricultural education course. Journal of Agricultural Education, 39(1), 55-62.

PAGE 166

151 Townsend, C. D., & Carter, R. I. (1983). The relationship of participation in FFA activities and leadership, citizenship and cooperation. Journal of the American Association of Teacher Educators in Agriculture, 24(1), 20-25. Trede, L., & Russell, D. (1999, December). Perceptions of stakeholders towards linkages and curriculum in urban agricultural education programs. Paper presented at the National Agricultural Education Research Conference, Orlando, FL. Triandis, H. C. (1971). Attitude and attitude change. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Triandis, H. C. (1980). Values, attitudes, and interpersonal behavior. In M. M. Page (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 1979 Vol. 27 (pp. 195-259). Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press. Tuckman, B. W. (1994). Conducting educational research (4th ed.). Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace & Company. U.S. Census Bureau. (2004). Appendix A: Census 2000 geographic terms and concepts. US Census Bureau. Retrieved March 26, 2004 from www.census.gov/geo/www/tiger/glossry2.pdf U.S. Department of Labor. (1999). Skills and tasks for jobs: A SCANS report for America 2000. Washington, DC: The Secretary's Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills. University of North Carolina. (2003). Job outlook 2003: Finding a job is your first job. University of North Carolina Career Services. Retrieved October 7, 2003 from www.uncwil.edu/stuaff/career/students/joboutlook2003.htm van Linden, J. A., & Fertman, C. I. (1998). Youth leadership: A guide to understanding leadership development in adolescents. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Variyam, J. N. (1999). America's eating habits: Changes and consequences (AIB-750). Washington, DC: Economic Research Service. Vaughn, Z. J., & Moore, G. E. (2000, December). Predictors of FFA program quality. Paper presented at the National Agricultural Education Research Conference, San Diego, CA. Virginia Division of Policy and Public Affairs. (2001). Board of education adopts optional leadership curriculum. Virginia Department of Education. Retrieved October 10, 2003 from http://www.pen.k12.va.us/VDOE/VA_Board/jun20sum.pdf Wah, L. (1999, October). Global leader of the future. Management Review, 88, 9.

PAGE 167

152 Wallin, D. (2003). Student leadership and democratic schools: A case study. NASSP Bulletin, 87(636), 55-78. Whent, L. (1994). Factors influencing resource sharing between agriculture and science teachers participation in the agriscience program. Journal of Agricultural Education, 35(3), 11-17. White, C. D. (1982). Leadership developed through vocational student organizations. Unpublished Dissertation, The Ohio State University. Wilson, E. J. (1999). Research practice in business marketing. Industrial Marketing Management, 28, 257-260. Wingenbach, G. J. (1995). Self-perceived youth leadership and life skills development among Iowa FFA members. Unpublished Dissertation, Iowa State University. Wingenbach, G. J., Gartin, S. A., & Lawarence, L. D. (2000). Assessing the aquaculture curriculum in the northeastern region. Journal of Agricultural Education, 41(2), 2-10. Wolff, B. (2002). Student leadership as a moral anchor. Educational Digest, 68, 7-10. Zeldin, S., & Camino, L. (1999). Youth leadership: Linking research and program theory to exemplary practice. New designs for youth development, 15(2). Retrieved October 15, 2003 from http://www.cydjournal.org/NewDesigns/ND2099Spr/camino.html

PAGE 168

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Alan Christian Chris Morgan is the husband of his best friend Susan Morgan and the father of three wonderful children, Tyler, Allison and Spencer. He enjoys spending time with his family and traveling. Chris was born in San Francisco, CA, and adopted into a wonderful family at the age of three months. While a youth he lived in California, Pennsylvania, and Texas. He graduated in 1982 from Duncanville High School, and then attended Texas A&M University earning a Bachelor Degree of horticulture in 1988. With his degree in hand, he moved to Houston, TX where he worked in the horticulture industry for eight years in management and sales. During this time he met and married his best friend, Susan. Feeling led to teach, Chris returned to Texas A&M to earn a teaching certificate and a masters degree in agricultural education, awarded in 1997. Chris taught agricultural science four years at Marcus High School in Flower Mound, TX. During this time he taught a wide variety of courses, from introduction to agriculture to floral design. He was also instrumental in procuring a greenhouse for the program and encouraged students to become involved in many functions including livestock shows and National FFA Convention. Believing it was Gods desire for him to teach at the college level, Chris moved his family to Gainesville, FL so he could pursue a Ph.D. in agricultural education and leadership at the University of Florida. There he shared an office with 12 outstanding 153

PAGE 169

154 graduate students, and had the opportunity to teach college courses and conduct research. After many struggles, both academic and personal, he graduated in August 2004. Chris goal is to equip students for successful careers. He is currently pursuing this goal as a faculty member at Oklahoma State University.


Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0006619/00001

Material Information

Title: Teaching Leadership in Agricultural Science: Behavioral Factors That Influence Secondary Agricultural Science Leadership Instruction
Physical Description: Mixed Material
Copyright Date: 2008

Record Information

Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID: UFE0006619:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0006619/00001

Material Information

Title: Teaching Leadership in Agricultural Science: Behavioral Factors That Influence Secondary Agricultural Science Leadership Instruction
Physical Description: Mixed Material
Copyright Date: 2008

Record Information

Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID: UFE0006619:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text











TEACHING LEADERSHIP IN AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE:
BEHAVIORAL FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE SECONDARY AGRICULTURAL
SCIENCE LEADERSHIP INSTRUCTION














By

ALAN CHRISTIAN MORGAN


A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


2004































Copyright 2004

by

Alan Christian Morgan


































This document is dedicated to my best friend, my wife Susan Morgan, and my three
children, Tyler, Allison and Spencer for supporting me while I followed God's lead
pursuing this degree.
















ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to thank my wife and children for enduring the past three years while I

have spent numerous hours studying, writing, and generally being pre-occupied with

earning this degree. They have been more than supportive in my endeavor and I am

forever indebted to them.

I would also like to thank my parents. First my mother Nancy Morgan, who has

always held education in high esteem and instilled that value in me. And my father Tom

Morgan, who demonstrated endurance and tenacity, two qualities that have proved useful

to me during these past three years.

A tremendous amount of gratitude goes out to my committee chair, Dr. Rick Rudd,

who has helped to form this agriculture teacher into a researcher and writer. He may

have suffered more frustrations with my program than I have. Dr. Rudd spent more

hours than should be required editing my writing, expanding my thinking, and mentoring

me through this process. His patience and encouragement are to be commended.

I could not have completed this degree without my committee, Drs. Howard

Ladewig, Shannon Washburn, and James Doud. They assisted me in designing a good

study, and forced me to explain and defend my actions. Their persistence has helped

hone my research skills. All of them have been very supportive and have exhibited a

great deal of patience with me during this process, and I thank them for that.

My friends and colleagues in 310 Rolfs Hall were supportive throughout this

process. Not only did we challenge each other on issues, which allowed us all to grow,










they were particularly supportive during the struggles I encountered while pursuing this

degree. A heart-felt thank you goes to each one of you.

Finally, a gracious thank you goes to my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. It was by

His leading that I pursued this degree, and His grace that supported me through this

process. Had I not believed that God wanted me to pursue this endeavor, I would not

have had the tenacity to earn this degree. Thank you Lord.




















TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page


ACKNOWLEDGMENT S .............. .................... iv


LIST OF TABLES ............ ..... .__ ...............x...


LIST OF FIGURES .............. ....................xii


AB STRAC T ................ .............. xiv


CHAPTER


1 INTRODUCTION ................. ...............1.......... ......


Introduction to the Study .............. ...............1.....
Background ................. ...............1.................
Problem Statement ................. ...............5.................

Significance .............. ...............6.....
Purpose .............. ...............7.....
Assum options .............. ...............8.....
Limitations ................. ...............8.................
D efinitions .............. ...............9.....

Chapter Summary .............. ...............9.....


2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ................. ...............11........... ...


Defining Leadership ............... .. .... ...............1
The Importance of Teaching Leadership ................. ...............13........... ...
Youth Leadership Development ................. ...............14........... ....
Existing Youth Programs .............. ...............15....
High School Youth Programs ................. ............ ...............16. ....
Career and Technical Education Youth Programs ................. ... .. ................1
Impact of Agricultural Science and FFA Programs on Youth Leadership .........18
Section Summary............... .... .............2
A Leadership Curriculum for Youth............... ... ...............2
The Model of Youth Leadership Development ................. ................. ......24
LifeKnowledge Curriculum Origin and Development..........._._... ........._.._.. ..25
Curriculum Adoption............... ...............28
Section Summary................. ... ... ... .. .. .......3
Why High School Agricultural Science Instructors Teach Leadership ........._...........33
Theories of Behavior ........._.. ..... ._ ...............3 3....












Modified Triandis Model of Behavior .............. ...............34....

Population Studied................ .......... .. .. ..........3
High School Agricultural Science Instructor Leadership Teaching Behavior ....37
Explanatory Variables .............. ...............37....
Knowl ed ge .............. ...............37....
Attitude ................. ...............37._ ___.......

Expectations .............. ...............3 8....
Demographics............... .............3
Section Summary............... ...............39
Chapter Summary .............. ...............39....


3 M ETHODS .............. ...............41....


Context of the Study ............ _...... ._ ...............42...
Place .............. ...............42....
Tim e................. ... .... ...........4
National FFA Organization ....__ ......_____ ..... ...............43.
Research Design .............. ...............43....
Research Objectives............... ...............4
Population ............. ...... ._ ...............45....
Sam ple .............. ...............45....
Instrumentation ............. ...... ._ ...............45....
Proc edure s............. ...... ._ ...............48....
Pilot Study .............. .. ...............48...
Data Collection Procedures .............. ...............49....

Response Rate .............. ...............50....
Data Analy sis............... ...............5
Sum m ary ............. ...... ._ ...............54....


4 RE SULT S .............. ...............55....


Obj ective One: Determine the Demographic Characteristics of High School
Agricultural Science Instructors .............. ... .......... ..........5
Age, Years Teaching, and Years Teaching in Current Position............._.._.. .......57
G ender ............... ... .. ...... ..........6
Number of Instructors at School ................. ...............61........... ...
School Location................ ...............6
Educational Background .............. ...............65....
FFA Involvement. .............. ... .. ............ ........... .............6

High School and College Leadership Activities .............. ....................6
Professional and Civic Organization Leadership Experience .............................68
Committee Participation, and Workshops and Seminar Presentations ...............71
School and Vocational Department Leadership Positions, and Attending the
Advi sors Wa shi ngton L eadershi p C conference .....__.___ ..... ... ..__............7 3
Leadership Course Taught in Agricultural Science Program ............................74
Obj ective Two: Determine the Extent to which Leadership Education is being
Taught in High School Agricultural Science Classrooms .............. ...................76











Obj ective Three: Based on National FFA LifeKnowledge Leadership Curriculum,
Determine High School Agricultural Science Instructor Leadership
K now ledge .............. .. ........ ...... ... ... .. ... ........7
Obj ective Four: Determine High School Agricultural Science Instructor Attitude
towards Teaching Leadership .............. ................. ....... ... .... .......8
Obj ective Five: Determine the Expectations that High School Agricultural
Science Instructors have of the Agriculture Students after Leadership has been
Taught ................. ..... ...... ... .. ... ............. .. ....... .........8
Obj ective Six: Determine the Relationship between High School Agricultural
Science Instructor Leadership Knowledge, Instructor Attitude Towards
Teaching Leadership, Instructor Expectations of Students after Teaching
Leadership, and Instructor Demographics to Instructor Leadership Teaching
B ehavi or ................. ...............84...............
Correlations .............. ...............84....
Regression .............. ...............85....
Sum m ary ................. ...............87........ ......

5 DI SCUS SSION ................. ...............8.. 9......... ....

Problem Statement ................. ...............90.................
Review of Research Design ................. ...............90................
Summary of Results............... ...............9
Obj ective One ................. ...............91._._. ......
Obj ective Two ........._.__...... ._ __ ...............92....
Obj ective Three ................. ...............93..._._ ._......
Obj ective F our ................. ...............93._._. ......
Obj ective Five ........._.__...... ._ __ ...............93....
Objective Six .............. ...............94....
Conclusions............... .... ............9
Discussion and Implications ........._._..... .....__ ..... ..._. ..................9
Obj ective One: Determine the Demographic Characteristics of High School
Agricultural Science Instructors .............. .... .. .... .................9
The average agricultural science instructor is 39.37 years old, has been
teaching for 14.85 years, and has been teaching in their current
position for 10.61 years............... .... ... .. .. .......9
Most agricultural science instructors are male, teach in a rural location,
are in a single teacher department, received their certification
through a university agriculture teacher program, and earned their
bachelor' s of science degree in agricultural education ................... ........97
Instructors in teaching in urban locations were less likely to have
participated in FFA as a high school student ................. ................ ..100
Most agricultural science instructors were an FFA member in high
school, an FFA chapter officer, and held at least one office in other
high school organization outside of FFA ............... .. .. ... ........... ........101
Most agricultural science instructors took at least one leadership course
in college and were an officer in at least one college organization......1 02











Most participants were active in leadership roles beyond their teaching
responsibilities .............. ..... .. .. ...... ........10
The demographic characteristics of agricultural science instructors that
teach in rural areas differ from the demographic characteristics of
agricultural science instructors in urban areas ................. ................. 105
Females and males differ in their leadership experiences............_..._... .......106
There are significant age differences between genders ........._...................107
Obj ective Two: Determine the Extent to which Leadership Education is
being Taught in High School Agricultural Science Classrooms ...................107
Obj ective Three: Based on National FFA LifeKnowledge Leadership
Curriculum, Determine High School Agricultural Science Instructor
Leadership Knowledge .................. ............ .... ... ...... ..... .......... 11
Objective Four: Determine High School Agricultural Science Instructor
Attitude towards Teaching Leadership ................... .. ....... ..... ................. 111
Obj ective Five: Determine the Expectations that High School Agricultural
Science Instructors have of the Agriculture Students after Leadership has
been Taught. .............. .... ......... .. ... .. ........... ........ ..... ........ 1
Obj ective Six: Determine the Relationship between High School
Agricultural Science Instructor Leadership Knowledge, Instructor Attitude
towards Teaching Leadership, Instructor Expectations of Students after
Teaching Leadership, and Instructor Demographics to Instructor
Leadership Teaching Behavior ................. ...............114....._._......
Recommendations................. ... .. ........1
Suggestions for Additional Research ................. .........._......... 117_......

APPENDIX

A PAPER INSTRUMENT ................. ...............119...............

B INTERNET INSTRUMENT ................. ......... ...............127 .....

C SURVEY CORRESPONDENCE .............. ...............131....

D TABLES .............. ...............137....

LIST OF REFERENCES ................. ...............142................

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................. ...............153......... ......


















LIST OF TABLES


Table pg

3-1 Correlation Magnitude Descriptors ......___ ... ......_._. ...._._ ............5

4-1 Participant Mean Age, Years Teaching, and Years Teaching in Current Position
(n= 167) ..........._...__........ ...............57.....

4-2 Pearson's Product Moment Correlations Between Age, Years Teaching, Years
Teaching in Current Position, and Selected Variables (n=157) ..........._..._ ..............60

4-3 Independent Groups t-test for Significant Variables by Gender (n=167) ................61

4-4 Pearson's Product Moment Correlations between Gender and Selected Variables
(n= 15 6) ................ ...............62........ .....

4-5 Number of agricultural science instructors at school (n=156) ................ ...............62

4-6 Pearson's Product Moment Correlations between Number of Instructors at
School and Selected Variables (n=156) .............. ...............64....

4-7 Location of school (n=154) ................ ...............64........... ..

4-8 Pearson's Product Moment Correlations between School Location and Selected
Variables (n=154)............... ...............65

4-9 Educational Background (n=158) .............. ...............65....

4-10 Pearson's Product Moment Correlations Between Educational Background and
Selected Variables (n=157) .............. ...............66....

4-11 FFA Involvement (n=158) .............. ...............67....

4-12 Pearson's Product Moment Correlations between FFA Involvement and Selected
Variables (n=158)............... ...............67

4-13 High School and College Leadership Activities of Participants .............. ..... ..........68

4-14 Pearson's Product Moment Correlations between High School and College
Leadership Activities and Selected Variables (n=158) ................ ......._.._.. ......69

4-15 Number of Offices Held in Professional and Civic Organizations ..........................69










4-16 Pearson's Product Moment Correlations Between Professional and Civic
Organization Leadership Experience and Selected Variables (n=158) ................... .70

4-17 Pearson's Product Moment Correlations Between Professional Development
Organization Membership and Holding Office, and Selected Variables (n=158)...71

4-18 Mean Committee Participation, and Workshops and Seminars Presented (n=158) 72

4-19 Pearson's Product Moment Correlations Between Committee Participation, and
Workshops and Seminar Presentations and Selected Variables (n=158) .................73

4-20 Mean Number of Leadership Positions Held in Local School or Vocational
Department and Advisors' Washington Leadership Conference Attendance ..........74

4-21 Pearson's Product Moment Correlations Between School and Vocational
Department Leadership Positions, and Attending the Advisors Washington
Leadership Conference and Selected Variables (n=158) .............. ....................75

4-22 Pearson's Product Moment Correlations Between Leadership Course Taught in
Agricultural Science Program and Selected Variables (n=158)............... ...............75

4-23 Pearson's Product Moment Correlations Between Instructor Leadership Teaching
Behavior and Selected Variables (n=156)................ ...............7

4-24 Pearson's Product Moment Correlations Between Instructor Attitude Towards
Teaching Leadership and Selected Variables (n=158) ................. ............. .......81

4-25 Pearson's Product Moment Correlations Between Instructor Expectations after
Leadership has been Taught and Selected Variables (n=157) ................ ...............84

4-26 Backward Regression Explaining Leadership Teaching Behavior (n=145) ............86

4-27 Crosstabs of Single-Instructor Department by Gender and Instructor Leadership
Teaching Behavior .............. ...............87....

D-1 Pearson's Product Moment Correlations Between Age, Years Teaching, Years
Teaching in Current Position, and Selected Variables (n=157) ................... ..........137

D-2 Pearson's Product Moment Correlations between Number of Instructors at School
and S el ected Variabl es (n= 156) .............. ............... 13 8...

D-3 Pearson's Product Moment Correlations Between Committee Participation, and
Workshops and Seminar Presentations and Selected Variables (n=158) ...............139

D-4 Pearson's Product Moment Correlations between High School and College
Leadership Activities and Selected Variables (n=158) ................ ............... ....140

D-5 Pearson Product Moment Correlations between Instructor Leadership Teaching
Behavior and Variables Studied ................. ...............141...............



















LIST OF FIGURES


Figure pg

2-1 Model of Youth Leadership Development. ......___ ....... __ ... ...._.........25

2-2 Theoretical Model of Behavior .............. ...............36....

4-1 Distribution of Participant Age ........._._ ...... .__ ....__ ...........5

4-2 Distribution of Participants' Years Teaching ....._._._ ..... ... .........._......59

4-3 Distribution of Participants' Years Teaching in Current Position .........._..............59

4-4 Distribution of Number of Agriculture Instructors in School ........._.... ..............63

4-5 The Distribution of Instructor Leadership Teaching Behavior .............. .................77

4-6 Distribution of Instructor Leadership Knowledge ........._.._. ......_. ...............80

4-7 Instructor Attitude Toward Teaching Leadership. ............. .....................8

4-8 Instructor Expectations after Leadership Has Been Taught ................. ................. 83

4-9 Explanatory Model of Instructor Leadership Teaching Behavior ................... .........86

A-1 Questionnaire Cover ....__. ................. ........_.._.........11

A-2 Questionnaire Inside Cover ........................_. ...............120 ....

A-3 Questionnaire Section I ................. ...............121........ ....

A-4 Questionnaire Section II............... ...............122..

A-5 Questionnaire Section III .............. ...............123....

A-6 Questionnaire Sections IV and V............... ...............124...

A-7 Questionnaire Section V Continued ................. ........._.._.......125.........

A-8 Questionnaire Qualitative Questions ....__. ................. ........__. ........12

B-1 Screen Capture of the Introductory Web Page ......................... ........._.....127











B-2 Screen Capture of Section I Web Form Questionnaire, Measuring Instructor
Leadership Teaching Behavior............... ...............12

B-3 Screen Capture of Section II Web Form Questionnaire, Measuring Instructor
Expectations of Students after Leadership Instruction................ .............12

B-4 Screen Capture of Section III Web Form Questionnaire, Measuring Instructor
Leadership Knowl ed ge................. .............. 129........ .....

B-5 Screen Capture of Section IV Web Form Questionnaire, Measuring Instructor
Attitude toward Teaching Leadership ........._.__...... .___ ...._.._._..........12

B-6 Screen Capture of Section V Web Form Questionnaire, Instructor Demographicsl30

B-7 Screen Capture of Thank You Web Page............... ..................130

C-1 Pre-notice Letter ................. ...............132__ ......

C-2 Cover Letter for First Questionnaire ...........__......__ ....___ ..........13

C-3 Informed Consent Form .............. ...............134....

C-4 Thank You/ Reminder Postcard ....__ ......_____ .......___ ..........13

C-5 Cover Letter for Second Questionnaire ....__ ......_____ ...... ....__........13
















Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

TEACHING LEADERSHIP IN AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE:
BEHAVIORAL FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE SECONDARY AGRICULTURAL
SCIENCE LEADERSHIP INSTRUCTION

By

Alan Christian Morgan

August 2004

Chair: Rick D. Rudd
Major Department: Agricultural Education and Communication

The extent to which leadership is being taught in agricultural science classrooms is

unknown and the attributes of high school agricultural science instructors that influence

their decision to formally teach leadership are unclear. Research has been conducted to

determine the predictors of agricultural science program quality and how leadership skills

affect youth and community, but no research has been conducted to determine the extent

to which leadership is being taught in the formal agricultural science classroom or why

agricultural science instructors choose to teach leadership. The following questions were

addressed in this study: To what extent are high school agricultural science instructors

teaching leadership in the formal classroom? What are the factors that influence high

school agricultural science instructors to teach leadership?

This study, framed by the National FFA's LifeKnowledge curriculum, examined

behavioral factors that influence high school agricultural science instructors to teach

leadership in agricultural science classrooms. Using ex post facto research methods, a









model was developed to explain the dependent variable, level of leadership teaching

behavior in high school agricultural science classrooms, in light of the independent

variables, instructor leadership knowledge, instructor expectations of students after

teaching leadership, instructor attitude toward teaching leadership, instructor leadership

knowledge, and instructor demographics.

An alpha level of 0.05 was set a priori. A national sample of 400 instructors was

contacted and 167 responded via mail and the Internet, yielding a 41.8% response rate. A

regression model was used to explain leadership teaching behavior. The following

variables significantly explained 33% of instructor leadership teaching behavior:

Leadership course taught in agricultural science program, urban location of school,

gender, and instructor attitude toward the teaching of leadership. Findings revealed most

agricultural science instructors have a moderate attitude toward teaching leadership, have

moderate expectations of students after leadership instruction, and moderate leadership

knowledge, based on the LifeKnowledge curriculum. A recommendation was to provide

LifeKnowledge curriculum training to pre-service teachers and provide professional

development programs for in-service teachers to help increase instructor leadership

knowledge.















CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

Introduction to the Study

This study examined behavioral factors that influence high school agricultural

science instructors to teach leadership in agricultural science classrooms. Using ex post

facto research methods (Ary, Jacobs, & Razavieh, 1996) a model was developed to

explain the dependent variable, instructor leadership teaching behavior of high school

agricultural science instructors, in light of the independent variables, high school

agricultural science instructor leadership knowledge, high school agricultural science

instructor attitude towards teaching leadership, high school agricultural science instructor

expectations after teaching leadership, and high school agricultural science instructor

demographics. This chapter frames the study by defining leadership and providing a

rationale for teaching leadership in high school. It then provides the historical

background and current status of leadership instruction in agricultural education and the

National FFA Organization. A brief description of the National FFA' s LifeKnowledge

curriculum is provided along with an explanation of how the curriculum spawned this

research. Finally, the research problem and its significance are discussed.

Background

As we explore this issue, two questions should be addressed: "What is

leadership?" and "Why should leadership be taught to high school students?" Leadership

is a term with many definitions. The M~erriamn-Webster Dictionary (2003) defines

leadership as "the office or position of a leader; the capacity to lead; the act or an instance









of leading." Northouse (2001) defines leadership as "a process whereby an individual

influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal" (p.3 ). Kouzes and Posner

(1997) define leadership as "The art of mobilizing others to want to struggle for shared

aspirations" (p. 30). The LifeKnowledge curriculum defines leadership as "Influence -

the ability to obtain followers" (p. 5). Maxwell (1993) simply defines leadership as

"influence" (p. 1). For the purpose of this study the definition offered by Northouse

(2001) will be used.

Why should leadership be taught to high school students? Throughout the United

States businesses and government organizations are finding it difficult to fill leadership

positions because of a lack of trained leaders--a leadership void (Bisoux, 2002; Burns,

1979; Figura, 1999). In an effort to prepare youth for successful careers, the U.S.

Department of Labor (1999) published the Secretary's Commission on Achieving

Necessary Skills (SCANS) that outlined the skills and competencies necessary for young

people to succeed in the workplace. The goal was for the skills and competencies

outlined in the SCANS report to be taught to youth through the secondary school system.

One of the competencies deemed necessary in the SCANS report for workplace success

was

Exercises Leadership-Communicates thoughts, feelings, and ideas to justify a
position, encourages, persuades, convinces, or otherwise motivates an individual or
groups, including responsibly challenging existing procedures, policies, or
authority. Demonstrating competence in exercising leadership includes making
positive use of the rules/values followed by others; justifying a position logically
and appropriately; establishing credibility through competence and integrity; and
taking minority viewpoints into consideration. (U.S. Department of Labor, 1999)

In an effort to fill the existing leadership void and properly prepare youth for workplace

challenges it is necessary to teach leadership to high school students.









For the past 75 years, high school agricultural education courses have created an

environment for students to "exercise leadership" and acquire many of the competencies

outlined in the SCANS report through the teaching of leadership skills (National

Research Council, 1988). Today leadership remains a cornerstone of the agricultural

education curriculum with many of the over 12,000 high school agricultural science

instructors teaching leadership competencies, including parliamentary law, proper

business meeting procedure and public speaking, to over 712,000 students enrolled in

agriculture courses (Barrett, 1983; National FFA Organization, 2002). A variety of

curriculum resources specifically designed for agricultural education students are

available for teaching leadership including material published by North Carolina State

University (2003), Instructional Materials Service (2003), Interstate Publishers (Prentice

Hall, 2003), and Delmar Publishers (2003).

In addition to leadership instruction in the agriculture classroom, the co-curricular

partnership with the National FFA Organization provides opportunities for youth to

practice and demonstrate leadership competencies to prepare youth for successful careers.

Historically, the marriage of agriculture and leadership grew out of the need for farmers

to share successful agricultural practices with one another. Agricultural societies were

formed so that new farming techniques could be shared with others and published,

benefiting farmers in a local community. Out of these agricultural societies grew corn

clubs for boys and girls, which provided opportunities for youth to meet, learn and

participate in agricultural competitions. The boys' and girls' clubs were the forerunner of

the Future Farmers of America, now the National FFA Organization (Barrett, 1983;

Hillison & Bryant, 2001).









Since its inception in 1928, the National FFA Organization has provided an avenue

for young people to exercise and develop their leadership skills. The 33 young men that

gathered in Kansas City to form the National FFA Organization specifically stated the

goal of the organization: to "provide leadership training for high school students of

vocational agriculture" (National FFA Organization, 2002, p. 5). Today the National

FFA Organization continues this tradition of developing leadership skills in its 461,000

members. The mission statement links the original goal of the organization to the present

by stating, "FFA makes a positive difference in the lives of students by developing their

potential for premier leadership, personal growth and career success through agricultural

education" (National FFA Organization, 2002, p.5).

The link between the high school agricultural science program and the co-curricular

National FFA Organization is unique. The agricultural science classroom provides a

venue where the high school agricultural science instructor has the opportunity to teach

leadership skills and students can learn leadership knowledge and actively engage in

leadership activities. The FFA reinforces these leadership skills by providing

opportunities for young people to participate in nonformal laboratory settings such as

competitive leadership activities and opportunities (officers, committee chairs, etc.) for

youth to lead at the local level and beyond. Although leadership education has been

espoused by agricultural education and the FFA since its inception, no studies have been

conducted to determine the extent to which leadership is taught through formal

agricultural education curricula.

To strengthen leadership instruction in agricultural science classrooms the National

FFA Organization, with the assistance of high school agricultural science instructors,









college faculty, state department of education staff, agriculture industry partners, the

USDA, and others recently completed the LifeKnowledge curriculum. The instructional

materials associated with the new curriculum consists of over 267 50-minute lessons that

were distributed nationally and utilized in agricultural science classrooms beginning in

spring and summer 2004. The curriculum materials may be used as a stand-alone

curriculum or the lessons may be incorporated into existing classes. The goal of the

curriculum is to

Provide quality instructional materials so teachers can infuse premier leadership,
personal growth and career success into every facet of agricultural education and
provide teachers with additional practical learning strategies and corresponding
instructional materials to empower young people to live the FFA mission every
day. (National FFA Organization, 2003)

High school agricultural science instructors have a great deal of influence over

what curriculum they teach in the classroom (Rogers, 1999). By controlling the quantity

and quality of curriculum taught in the classroom they are a key element in education

(Kimpston & Anderson, 1982). Because the high school agricultural science instructor

has such an important role, the following questions arise: To what extent is leadership

being taught in agricultural science classrooms? What factors influence high school

agricultural science instructors to teach leadership? Will the introduction of the new

LifeKnowledge curriculum increase the frequency and quality of leadership instruction in

high school agricultural education programs? To help determine the impact of this

curriculum, baseline data must be gathered to determine current levels of leadership

instruction in agricultural science classrooms.

Problem Statement

The extent to which leadership is being taught in agricultural science classrooms is

unknown and the attributes of high school agricultural science instructors that influence









their decision to formally teach leadership are unclear. Research has been conducted to

determine predictors of agricultural science program quality (Vaughn & Moore, 2000)

and how leadership skills affect youth (Carter & Spotanski, 1989; Dormody, 1994a;

Ricketts & Newcomb, 1984; Rutherford, Townsend, Briers, Cummins, & Conrad, 2002;

Scanlon & Burket, 1986; Townsend & Carter, 1983) and community (Brannon, Holley &

Key, 1989) but no research has been conducted to determine the extent to which

leadership is being taught in the formal agricultural science classroom or why high school

agricultural science instructors choose to teach leadership.

The following research questions are addressed in this study: To what extent are

high school agricultural science instructors teaching leadership in the formal classroom?

What are the factors that influence high school agricultural science instructors to teach, or

not teach, leadership?

Significance

The outcomes of this study have the potential to impact both high school

agricultural science instructors and students. By determining the factors that influence

high school agricultural science instructors to teach leadership, pre-service programs

could be tailored to motivate future high school agricultural science instructors to teach

leadership. In-service workshops could be planned to specifically motivate the behavior

of high school agricultural science instructors in such a way that they may increase the

level of leadership instruction in agricultural classrooms. Students could benefit by

receiving high quantity leadership instruction in high school agricultural education

programs that has the potential to broaden their leadership skills, increase their personal

growth and enhance their career success throughout their lives.









In addition, writers of current leadership curriculum, such as that developed by the

National FFA Organization, could revise and tailor their materials to enhance their

impact on high school agricultural science instructors. In-service opportunities could be

designed to target the factors that motivate high school agricultural science instructors to

teach leadership, possibly leading to the full integration of the leadership curriculum.

Other organizations may benefit from this research as well because the information found

here may enable them to motivate their instructors to be better prepared to teach

leadership principles.

Furthermore, gathering baseline data on the leadership teaching behavior of

agricultural science instructors will allow future studies to measure change in leadership

teaching behavior and gauge the impact of the LifeKnowledge curriculum.

Previous studies have determined predictors of successful agricultural science

programs, determined the benefits of teaching leadership to youth, justified the teaching

of leadership in agriscience classrooms, and determined the qualities of an effective high

school agricultural science instructor, but few have specifically looked at what influences

high school agricultural science instructors to teach a specific subj ect. The breadth of

influence of this study has the potential to be significant by eliciting behavior change in

high school agricultural science instructors to formally teach leadership to youth.

Purpose

The purpose of the study was to determine the extent to which high school

agricultural science instructors are currently teaching leadership in formal agricultural

science classrooms and to explain what influences high school agricultural science

instructors to teach leadership in the classroom. The specific objectives were to










* Determine the demographic characteristics of high school agricultural science
instructors;

* determine the extent to which leadership is being taught in high school agricultural
science classrooms;

* determine high school agricultural science instructor leadership knowledge based
on National FFA LifeKnowledge leadership curriculum;

* determine high school agricultural science instructor attitude towards teaching
leadership;

* determine the expectations that high school agricultural science instructors have of
the agriculture students after leadership has been taught; and

* explain the relationships between high school agricultural science instructor
leadership knowledge, attitude towards teaching leadership, expectations of
students, and high school agricultural science instructor demographics in light of
high school agricultural science leadership content area teaching behavior.

Assumptions

Two assumptions were made in this study: first, that the local agricultural science

program has sufficient support (logistical, financial, etc., from district, community,

principal and others) to teach leadership; second, that the high school agricultural science

instructors will respond honestly to the questionnaire.

Limitations

The results of this study can only be extended to the population studied, which is

high school agricultural science instructors in the United States during the 2003-2004

school year. Individuals chosen to be part of the research sample cannot be forced to

participate in the study; therefore only high school agricultural science instructors that

want to participate will provide survey information.

The instrument has limited reliability in that it has not previously been used with a

national population.









Definitions

For the purposes of this study, the following terms were defined operationally:

* Agricultural education: describes the profession of teaching students about all
areas of agriculture from production to consumption. Many times it is used in this
study to denote any agricultural situation, occurrence, or topic where a student may
learn something as an outcome, whether an agricultural educator is present or not
(Ricketts, 2003).

* Civic organizations: organizations established to serve the community (e.g., Lions
Club and Kiwanis).

* FFA Organization: formerly the Future Farmers of America, it is a youth
organization of individuals enrolled in agricultural education courses. It is intended
to supplement the agricultural education process with opportunities for students to
develop their leadership, personal growth, and success in their future careers
(Ricketts, 2003).

* High school agricultural science instructor leadership knowledge: knowledge
of elements and principles of leadership based on the LifeKnowledge (National
FFA Organization, 2003) curriculum.

* High school agricultural science instructor leadership teaching behavior: the
extent to which leadership instruction is conducted by the high school agricultural
science instructor.

* Professional development organizations: professional organizations open to
people desiring to develop their professional and business skills (e.g.,
Toastmasters) .

* Professional education organizations: professional organizations such as state
education association, Association for Career and Technical Education (ACTE),
and National Association of Agricultural Educators (NAAE) for educators.

* Student leadership organizations, other than FFA: youth organizations such as
4-H, Vocational Industrial Clubs of America (VICA), Distributive Education Clubs
of America (DECA), student council, and National Honor Society.

* Student organizations at the college level: honor and social organizations such as
Collegiate FFA, Alpha Tau Alpha, fraternities, sororities, and student government.

Chapter Summary

The primary purpose of this study was to describe the extent to which high school

agricultural science instructors are currently teaching leadership and to identify factors









that influence the level of high school agricultural science instructors teaching of

leadership in the classroom. This chapter provided a brief history of the role of

leadership in agriculture, agricultural education and the National FFA Organization. FFA

has been a proponent of teaching leadership to agriculture students since its inception.

Because of this, the FFA has recently developed the LifeKnowledge curriculum to teach

leadership principles to students enrolled in secondary agricultural education courses.

Few previous studies have addressed factors influencing high school agricultural

science instructors' teaching of a specific subj ect. This research investigated factors that

influence agricultural science instructors to teach leadership. The results of this study

may influence future pre-service and in-service activities, and will provide baseline data

for future research in this area.

The specific factors studied were high school agricultural science instructor

leadership knowledge, high school agricultural science instructor leadership attitude

toward teaching leadership, high school agricultural science instructor leadership

expectations of students and high school agricultural science instructor demographics.

These four factors were used to explain the high school agricultural science instructor

behavior of teaching leadership.















CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Chapter 1 introduced this study, discussed the importance of teaching leadership to

youth, and described why teaching leadership is an integral part of high school

agricultural education. Also discussed were the National FFA Organization's role in

youth leadership education and their participation in the development of the

LifeKnowledge curriculum. In addition, an outline of the research problem was

presented and the significance of this study was explained.

The purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which high school

agricultural science instructors are currently teaching leadership in formal agricultural

science classrooms and to explain what influences high school agricultural science

instructors to teach leadership in the classroom. To accomplish this, a modified version

of the Triandis (1971) behavioral model which incorporates knowledge, attitude and

expectations to explain behavioral outcomes was used. Specifically this study sought to

* Determine the demographic characteristics of high school agricultural science
instructors;

* determine the extent to which leadership is being taught in high school agricultural
science classrooms;

* determine high school agricultural science instructor leadership knowledge based
on National FFA LifeKnowledge leadership curriculum;

* determine high school agricultural science instructor attitude towards teaching
leadership;

* determine the expectations that high school agricultural science instructors have of
the agriculture students after leadership has been taught; and










*explain the relationship between high school agricultural science instructor
leadership knowledge, high school agricultural science instructor attitude towards
teaching leadership, high school agricultural science instructor expectations of
students, and high school agricultural science instructor demographics in light of
high school agricultural science instructor leadership content area teaching
behavior.

This chapter presents the conceptual and theoretical framework of the research.

Specifically, this chapter describes previous research conducted about the importance to

teaching leadership, youth leadership development, leadership curriculum, the theoretical

behavior model, and the explanatory variables of behavior. Included are refereed articles,

non-refereed publications, research conference proceedings, dissertations, theses,

textbooks, articles from the ERIC Document Reproduction Service, and government

publications.

Defining Leadership

Leadership is a term with many definitions. The M~erriamn-Webster Dictionaly

(2003) defines leadership as "the office or position of a leader; the capacity to lead; the

act or an instance of leading." Burns (1979) in his book Leadership defines it as "leaders

inducing followers to act for certain goals that represent the values and the motivations---

the wants and needs, the aspirations and expectations--of both leaders and followers

[italics in original text]" (p. 19). Gardner (1990) tells us that leadership is "the process of

persuasion or example by which an individual (or leadership team) induces a group to

pursue obj ectives held by the leader or shared by the leader and his or her followers" (p.

1). Bass (1990) defines leadership as "an interaction between two or more members of a

group that often involves a structuring or restructuring of the situation and the

perceptions of the members" (p. 19). The definition of leadership formed by Kouzes and









Posner (1997) is "The art of mobilizing others to want to struggle for shared aspirations"

(p. 30).

Hersey, Blanchard and Johnson (2001) refer to leadership as influencing others,

"whenever one person attempts to influence the behavior of an individual or group,

regardless of the reason" (p. 9). Similarly Northouse (2001) defines leadership as "a

process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common

goal" (p. 3). Maxwell (1993) simply defines leadership as "influence" (p. 1).

Ricketts and Rudd's (2002) Model for Youth Leadership Curriculum states that

leadership consists of these components: knowledge and information; attitude, will and

desire; decision making, reasoning and critical thinking; intrapersonal and interpersonal

skills; and oral and written communication skills. When defining leadership for youth

van Linden and Fertman (1998) define leadership as "a physical sensation: a need to

share ideas, energy, and creativity, and not let personal insecurities be an obstacle" (p.

17). For the purpose of this study, the definition offered by Northouse (2001) will be

used.

The Importance of Teaching Leadership

People are needed to fill leadership roles at all levels of society, from the soccer

coach to the president of the homeowners association to leading problem-solving groups

in the workforce, we need leaders (Gardner, 1990). Yet education has focused on

equipping people with technical job skills while overlooking leadership skills critical to

career success (Benson, 1983). "Aging baby boomers with key management positions"

(Figura, 1999, p. 20) will be retiring in the coming years, taking with them a vast amount

of experience and leadership skills. Due to lower birth rates in the 1960's and 1970's, a









smaller pool of young talent will be available fill these leadership positions, causing a

leadership void.

From an industry perspective, the business environment is becoming increasingly

global, requiring leadership skills that can guide companies to success (Karnes &

Stephens, 1999; Wah, 1999; Stewart, 1998). These leaders, whether they are employees,

supervisors, managers, administrators, or CEOs, will need leadership skills such as

honesty, integrity, teamwork, communication skills, and interpersonal skills to be

successful (McKinley, Birkenholz, & Stewart, 1993; Morrison, 2000; Spotauski &

Carter, 1993; University of North Carolina, 2003).

The need for skilled leaders will continue in the years to come. To help fill this

leadership void, high schools should prepare to train leaders (Barrett, 1983). Students

who have been taught leadership are better prepared to act in a leadership capacity

because they better understand the phenomena of leadership as a personal and attainable

undertaking (Ricketts & Rudd, 2002).

Early studies of leadership focused on innate leadership traits, but as the study of

leadership has evolved over the years, we know that leadership knowledge and skill can

be taught and learned (Bass, 1990; Gardner, 1990; McCall, 1998; Northouse, 2001).

Furthermore, studies reveal that leadership can and should be taught to youth (Jones,

1938; Schmidt, 2001; van Linden & Fertman, 1998; Zeldin & Camino, 1999).

Youth Leadership Development

The value of developing leadership knowledge and skills in youth in order to

prepare them for their future roles as citizens has been known for a number of years (Boy

Scouts of America, 2003; Boys and Girls Clubs, 2003; van Linden & Fertman, 1998).









This section will discuss some of the youth organizations that seek to instill leadership in

youth.

Existing Youth Programs

Many programs are available in which youth can gain leadership skills. Boy

Scouts have a history of producing leaders by training "young people in citizenship,

service, and leadership" (Boy Scouts of America, 2003). Boys and Girls Clubs strive to

develop youth into productive citizens through developing leadership skills (Boys and

Girls Clubs, 2003). Van Linden and Fertman (1998) discuss a number of youth

organizations and opportunities for leadership development including YMCA, Red Cross,

and leadership camps.

The 4-H organization has a long history of youth development in an agricultural

context. Mueller (1989) investigated the belief that 4-H youth leadership involvement

improves self-esteem. Of the 868 members in the sample, 402 responded, revealing that

4-H youth's level of participation in leadership activities was significantly related to

leadership skill gain, relationship with 4-H leaders, and frequency of involvement in

planning, implementing, and evaluating activities. Mueller' s results indicated that

leadership activities can help prepare youth for participation in leadership roles, and that

working with adults was an important factor of leadership development.

Seevers and Dormody (1994) surveyed 4-H members to describe the involvement

of senior 4-H members in planning, implementing and evaluating 4-H youth leadership

activities. A 59% response rate with 234 respondents revealed that participation in 4-H

leadership life skills activities was greatest at the club level. Activities identified and

ranked as contributing highly toward leadership life skills development were holding

office, teaching younger members, fairs, livestock shows, judging contests,









demonstrations, public speaking, and community service. 4-H members indicated their

greatest involvement in leadership development activities was through implementing

activities, followed by evaluating activities. This finding is important in that it illustrates

youth benefit most when they have the opportunity to become involved with the

planning, implementation, and the evaluation of activities. Although this study illustrates

how youth can develop leadership skills through participation in organized life skills

activities, it is based on self-perceived leadership skills and doesn't obj ectively analyze

what leadership skills the members possess.

High School Youth Programs

The high school environment has many leadership opportunities for students.

Wallin (2003), in her case study of 40 students, found that students accept leadership

roles in student council, athletics, and co-curricular activities. She also found that

upperclassmen set the tone for leadership participation. Her results included suggestions

for student involvement with administrative decisions and setting high standards for

students to achieve. In addition, Chmielewski (2000) reinforced that it is important for

teachers and administrators to take a proactive role with student organizations, including

seminar and workshop attendance for leadership skill development. These studies

reinforce the importance of adult involvement in youth organizations for leadership skills

to develop.

Organizations such as Students Active in Leadership (SAIL) provide students

leadership opportunities that allow students to organize activities that benefit the

community (Brutcher, 2003). This provides opportunities for students to develop

leadership skills through activities such as securing funding for local proj ects through










grants and donations. Additional leadership skills are developed through interaction with

local officials and volunteers.

Some schools have implemented student leadership camps and retreats to assist

students in developing leadership skills. At these camps students are provided training in

being a role model, dealing with peer pressure, making good choices, and the qualities of

a leader (Wolff, 2002).

The value of students learning about or experiencing leadership is important.

Carter and Spotanski (1989) surveyed a convenience sample of 3437 Iowa high school

students, located in three schools, over a three-year period and found that students who

have served as a committee chair, officer, or have received formal leadership training,

consistently rated each of the 10 measurement scales used significantly higher than

students without these leadership experiences. Although the instrument assessed self-

perceived skills, it is worth noting that students with leadership experience had greater

self-perception, and possibly greater self-confidence, than did the students without

leadership experience. A recommendation of this research was to develop curriculum

materials for leadership education in high school.

Career and Technical Education Youth Programs

High school career and technical education programs are in a prime position to

teach leadership skills to youth. Federal and state guidelines require these programs to

teach students leadership skills along with technical job skills. These leadership skills

help to provide students with the human resource skills required in the current work place

(Leventhal, 1999; Ricketts & Rudd, 2002).

To quantify the leadership benefits to students in career and technical programs, a

study was conducted of 427 distributive education students who were active in the high









school career and technical student organization DECA, as compared to distributive

education students who had little or no activity in DECA. Results showed that students

who are involved in career and technical club leadership activities tend to develop or

acquire more leadership characteristics than students who are not involved in these

activities (Clark, 1977). This study illustrates that leadership activity involvement can

lead to youth leadership skill development.

To determine and compare perceptions of advisors and chapter presidents of career

and technical student organizations, a study was conducted using a random sample of 200

Ohio youth organization chapters including DECA, National FFA Organization, Future

Homemakers of America, and Vocational Industrial Clubs of America. It was

determined that leadership skills were being developed in the chapter presidents of these

organizations (White, 1982). Although developing leadership skills in club presidents is

beneficial, ideally all members of a youth organization would have the opportunity to

develop leadership skills.

Impact of Agricultural Science and FFA Programs on Youth Leadership

Agricultural science programs encourage students to develop leadership skills

through a wide variety of opportunities such as classroom instruction, supervised

agricultural experience and FFA activities (Esters, 2002). This is a strength of these

programs, in that they provide leadership training in the classroom and reinforce that

training through FFA activities.

The local chapters of the National FFA Organization shoulder the primary

responsibility for providing leadership training and realistic leadership experiences for

students involved in agricultural education (Brannon, Holley & Key, 1989; National FFA

Organization, 2002). Leadership development has been a goal of FFA from the inception









of the organization in 1928 (Connors, 1999; National Research Council, 1988). Through

participation in FFA events, students have been able to obtain valuable leadership

experiences in both formal and non-formal activities (Esters, 2002).

A study by Townsend and Carter (1983) described the relationship between

participation in FFA activities and development of leadership competencies. The

population consisted of lowa senior agriculture students from 54 randomly selected high

schools, which generated 426 responses yielding a 67% response rate. Findings of the

study show that self-perceived leadership competencies had a significant correlation with

FFA participation. The results suggest the leadership trait is enhanced with FFA activity.

In addition, students who attended state and national FFA conferences had a higher

perception of their leadership abilities than did non-participants. These findings were

similar to the findings of Seevers and Dormody (1994) and Clark (1977), providing some

evidence of the benefits of youth involvement in organized leadership activities. A

limiting factor with these three studies is they measure self-perceived leadership traits.

Using an obj ective measure may have increased the validity of these studies.

Ricketts and Newcomb (1984) surveyed 258 high school students, from 16

randomly selected high schools, to describe leadership and personal development abilities

possessed by high school seniors. The study revealed that agriculture students and FFA

members from both superior and non-superior chapters possess significantly more

leadership and personal development abilities than did students not enrolled in

agriculture. They also found that students who are more active tend to develop higher

levels of leadership and personal development ability, and that vocational agriculture

students and FFA members from superior FFA chapters are more active in FFA activities









than vocational agriculture students and FFA members from non-superior chapters. It

was also determined that the level of chapter member activity has a higher relationship to

leadership and personal development abilities possessed by FFA members than member

involvement at district or regional, state and national levels. Therefore, the more active a

student is in the local chapter, the greater their self-perceived leadership and personal

development abilities. Once again, the positive relationship between self-perceived

leadership ability and FFA involvement is revealed, illustrating that students enrolled in

agriculture classes have a higher perceived level of leadership ability than their peers not

enrolled in agriculture classes.

Stewart, Smith, Ehlert, and Mihalevich (1985) came to similar conclusions when

they surveyed 483 advisors and FFA members from 44 FFA chapters. They found that

local FFA chapter officers realized greater achievement from FFA membership than did

regular members. This reinforces the previous findings that the more involved a student

is in the organization, the greater their rewards. In addition, these results indicate that

students holding an office benefit more in terms of perceived level of achievement, than

those students that did not hold an office.

Dormody and Seevers (1994b) using a stratified random sample technique,

surveyed 400 FFA members from three states to determine predictors of youth leadership

life skills development. A 67% response rate was achieved. Achievement expectancy, or

a combination of the level of evaluation FFA members expect from others and the level

of performance they expect from themselves in FFA activities and proj ects, had a positive

relationship with youth leadership life skills development. Participation in FFA

leadership activities had a weak positive relationship with youth leadership life skills









development. In addition, judging contests, public speaking, chapter meetings, holding

office, and parliamentary procedure were often cited as activities that made the greatest

contribution to the students' leadership life skills.

Using the Dormody and Seevers instrument, Wingenbach (1995) analyzed self-

perceived youth leadership and life skills of lowa FFA members. Wingenbach used a

random sample survey and received 316 usable questionnaires. A 79% response rate was

achieved. The activities of chapter meetings, fundraising events, chapter banquets, SAE

proj ects, and being an FFA committee member were found to have a significant

relationship with the youth leadership and life skill development score. Also found were

low positive correlations between youth leadership and life skills development scores and

FFA leadership activities, and years of membership in the FFA. The maj or finding of

this study was that participation in FFA leadership activities, in combination with the

variables of after school jobs, years in FFA, self-reported cumulative grades, and gender,

accounted for 22% of the variance in youth leadership and life skills development scores,

with FFA activity being the most significant predictor of youth leadership and life skills

development. This reinforces early studies in which FFA activity lead to self-perceived

leadership skills.

A survey of FFA chapter officers found that participation in FFA activities had a

positive influence on the students' perceived leadership skills. Rutherford, Townsend,

Briers, Cummins, and Conrad (2002) surveyed student FFA members attending the

National FFA Organization's Washington Leadership Conference (WLC). Of the 2086

student conference attendees, 279 self-selected attendees completed the instrument. No

steps were taken to control for non-response error, and as such, the results were only









applied to the participants of the study. The purpose of the study was to determine

relationships between WLC participants' self-perception of their leadership skills and

their chapter size, length of membership, level of involvement, and involvement in an

officer position. This instrument was based on the instrument used by Townsend (1983).

Findings revealed that a significant positive relationship was found between self-

perceived leadership skills and FFA level of involvement. Results concerning level of

FFA involvement found that self-perceived leadership traits of youth are enhanced by

participation in FFA activities and supported research of several authors (Carter &

Spotanski, 1989; Townsend & Carter, 1983). The positive, though not strong, correlation

between level of FFA involvement and the instrument leadership scales reinforces the

positive relationship between FFA activity and perceived leadership skills.

Section Summary

From Scouting to 4-H1, youth organizations have been developing leadership skills

in youth for many years. An abundance of research exists showing that these

organizations develop self-perceived leadership skills in young people. For many youth,

involvement in these organizations begins in high school through participation in

extracurricular and intracurricular organizations. Career and technical organizations are

particularly suited to develop leadership skills in youth, as Federal and State guidelines

mandate that leadership training be incorporated into the curriculum.

The National FFA Organization stands out from these organizations by providing a

wide range of opportunities for students to develop leadership skills and through

classroom leadership instruction. It has been well documented that students'

participation in FFA activities leads to increased student self-perceived leadership skill

development.









The importance of student involvement in youth leadership organizations cannot be

stressed enough. Involvement in these organizations allows youth the opportunity to

develop leadership skills that will benefit them throughout their lives. Franklin Roosevelt

stated, "We cannot always build the future for our youth, but we can build our youth for

the future" (Riordon, 2000, p. 202). Agricultural science classrooms are an excellent

place to begin building youth for the future through the teaching of leadership.

A Leadership Curriculum for Youth

The preceding research illustrates the benefits of youth being exposed to leadership

opportunities through extra-curricular and co-curricular activities. Unfortunately, not all

students participate in these activities. What is needed is a curriculum that can be taught

in the classroom so that all students can have the opportunity to learn leadership

knowledge and skills (Carter & Spotanski, 1989; Ricketts & Rudd, 2001). Although high

school agricultural science instructors have the skills to develop their own curriculum

materials, they prefer to use pre-existing materials (Wingenbach, Gartin, & Lawarence,

2000) and the use of a quality curriculum provides a strong foundation for quality

teaching to occur (Swan, 1996).

Boccia (1997) points out "there is a meager base of programmatic guidelines for

successful student leadership in schools" (p. 76). Leadership textbooks are available

(Delmar Learning, 2003; Prentice Hall, 2003) and leadership curriculum has been

developed for some states (Commonwealth of Virginia Board of Education, 2001;

Instructional Materials Service, 2003; North Carolina State University, 2003; Virginia

Division of Policy and Public Affairs, 2001) to address local needs, but no national

curriculum is currently available.









The Model of Youth Leadership Development

To develop a framework for a comprehensive youth leadership curriculum, Ricketts

and Rudd (2002) conducted a meta-analysis of youth leadership development literature.

Based on this research, the M~odel of Youth Leadership Development was developed (see

figure 2.1). This model consists of five dimensions:

* Leadership knowledge and information--Base knowledge needed about leaders and
leadership before application of leadership concepts.

* Leadership attitude, will and desire--Focuses on disposition, motivation, self-
realization, and health to prepare students for leadership.

* Decision making, reasoning, and critical thinking--Using critical thinking skills to
address problems and make decisions with incomplete information.

* Oral and written communication skills--Skills necessary to effectively sharing
information and convey ideas, attitudes, opinions and feelings.

* Intrapersonal and interpersonal relations--Includes conflict resolution, stress
management, teamwork and ethics viewed through the framework of diversity,
learning styles and personality types (Ricketts, 2003).

Each dimension represents one construct for which a curricular unit was

developed. Each curricular unit is designed so it can be taught at three different levels of

cognition: awareness, integration and mastery. By addressing each stage in each

dimension, a complete and cohesive nature of a leadership curriculum is possible

(Ricketts & Rudd, 2001).
































Interacti on The individual thinks about leadership and
wants to explore.


Awareness Leadership is not yet a part of the
individual' s life



Figure 2-1. Model of Youth Leadership Development. From Ricketts, J. C., & Rudd, R.
D. (2002). A comprehensive leadership education model to train, teach, and
develop leadership in youth. Journal of Career and Technical Education, 19


LifeKnowledge Curriculum Origin and Development

The LifeKnowledge curriculum grew out of the mission statement of the National

FFA Organization: To make a positive difference in lives of students by developing their

potential for premier leadership, personal growth and career success through agricultural

education. To better serve organization members, FFA leadership began to take the steps

necessary to develop a curriculum that would address the elements of the mission

statement (Derner, 2004). The FFA mission and The Model of Youth Leadership










Development framework (Ricketts & Rudd, 2002) were used as a guide to conceptualize

and construct the LifeKnowledge leadership curriculum.

The first step taken by the National FFA Organization brought together educators,

business leaders, government leaders, agricultural education leaders, and FFA leaders to

define measurable outcomes needed to master the constructs related to leadership,

personal growth and career success. Once the outcomes were defined, money was

secured to fund the development of a curriculum to address these constructs (Derner,

2004).

Agriculture instructors, graduate students and university faculty were brought

together to develop lessons for the curriculum. Once these lessons were written, they

were sent to agriculture instructors for "trial" use and evaluation. Based on comments

received from the evaluating instructors, corrections were made to the lessons. The

lessons were then combined into a curriculum that was made available to agriculture

instructors nationwide in 2004 (Derner, 2004).

The purpose of this curriculum is to provide quality instructional materials so

teachers can infuse premier leadership, personal growth, and career success into every

facet of agricultural education and to provide teachers with additional practical learning

strategies and corresponding instructional materials to empower young people to live the

FFA mission every day. While the LifeKnowledge curriculum addresses the three areas

of the FFA mission statement, this study addresses only the leadership component of this

curri culum.

Six leadership constructs are included in the curriculum: action, vision, character,

relationships, awareness, and continuous improvement. The LifeKnowledge curriculum










defines action as "demonstration of the skills and competencies needed to achieve the

desired results" (National FFA Organization, 2003, p. 10). Action "embraces

empowerment, risk, communication, focusing on results, decision-making, problem

solution, investment in individuals, and resource use and access" (National FFA

Organization, 2003, p. 10).

Vision is defined by the LifeKnowledge curriculum as "setting a clear image of

what the future should be." Vision "embraces enthusiasm, creativity, the future,

conviction, mission, courage, concept, focus, principles, and change" (National FFA

Organization, 2003, p. 10).

The LifeKnowledge curriculum defines character as "a collection of virtues by

which we live our lives." Character "embraces integrity, courage, values, attitude, ethics,

humility, perseverance, self-discipline and responsibility" (National FFA Organization,

2003, p. 10).

Relationships are defined by the LifeKnowledge curriculum as "building a

constituency." Relationships "embrace compassion, service, listening, coaching,

developing others, team development, and understanding and appreciating others"

(National FFA Organization, 2003, p. 10).

Awareness is defined as "a quest for purposeful understanding." Awareness

includes "self, community, diversity, environment, global and knowledge" (National FFA

Organization, 2003, p. 10).

The LifeKnowledge curriculum defines continuous improvement as "the pursuit of

learning and growth." Continuous improvement "embraces innovation, intuition,










adaptation, life-long learning, and coachability" (National FFA Organization, 2003, p.

10).

Curriculum Adoption

Having a new curriculum with which to teach high school students leadership

knowledge and skills has the potential to be advantageous to students' learning, but prior

to students benefiting from the curriculum the instructors must first adopt it. Studies

have found a common set of characteristics that lead to curriculum adoption (Bland,

Starnaman, Wersal, Moorhead-Rosenburg, Zonia, & Henry, 2000). Bland et al. identified

Hyve categories for successful curriculum change: politics, participation by organization

members, human resource development, evaluations and leadership.

Politics revolve around the allocation of scarce resources (Bolman & Deal, 1997).

These resources include internal networking and resource allocation. Internal networking

consists of formal and informal channels through which people are influenced by opinion

leaders (Bland et al., 2000; Rogers, 2003). Successful change requires advocates within

this network. Resource allocation requires having the necessary funds to implement the

change. These funds may be required for purchasing curriculum, or may be necessary for

faculty training of the curriculum. Fortunately, the National FFA Organization has

sufficient financial support to provide the LifeKnowledge curriculum and training to

agricultural science instructors throughout the country.

Possibly the most influential political element in curriculum adoption today is the

popularity of standardized testing and accountability within the school system (Frontline,

2002). Students in many states are required to pass a standardized test prior to moving on

to the next grade level. Using the student scores from these tests, schools can be rated

and held accountable for students' passing and failing these tests (Doherty, 2004).









Because of the impact these tests have upon the students' success as well as the school's

accountability, a tremendous amount of effort goes into preparing students to pass these

tests (FairTest.org, 2004). This may have an impact on the subjects offered in the

schools. Subj ects that do not have a direct positive impact on student standardized test

scores may be at risk of being eliminated from the school course offerings. Standardized

tests usually assess the students' knowledge of mathematics, reading and grammar

(Doherty, 2004). Typically, leadership is not a concept that students are held accountable

for with these tests, and therefore a leadership curriculum may not be adopted in a school

because it does not contribute to the success of students on standardized tests. This

would be an unfortunate situation, because the skills learned through leadership

instruction are skills that will benefit students regardless of the career in which they enter,

providing them with the leadership and communication skills desired by employers

(Boccia, 1997; Figura, 1999).

Participation by organization members is a key element to successful change

(Bland et al., 2000). Curriculum adoption efforts must have the support of instructors for

the adoption effort to be a success. One method to accomplish this is to include

instructors in the implementation of the adoption process (Butler, 1999; Lowery, 2000).

As stated by Connors (1999), "Teachers must see a need for change, believe it is justified,

and be able to recognize problems that can be addressed by adoption of the curriculum"

(p. 54). Including instructors in the adoption process increases their skill development

and the likelihood of curriculum implementation (Bland et al., 2000). Therefore,

instructors must be willing to participate in the curriculum change for success to occur.

High school agricultural science instructors have been involved with the LifeKnowledge










curriculum since its inception. University faculty, that were previously secondary

instructors, developed the framework for the curriculum. Current and former instructors

wrote the lessons, and the lessons were field tested and critiqued by current agriculture

instructors.

Human resource development in the form of professional development workshops

and seminars is important to allow instructors to see how the curriculum is properly

utilized are necessary for successful curriculum adoption (Kirk & MacDonald, 2001; Leat

& Higgins, 2002). In this way, instructors' needs can be met through proper professional

development, training, and support through the curriculum adoption process (Bland et al.,

2000). LifeKnowledge curriculum workshops were held across the country, led by the

curriculum authors, to train agricultural instructors how to incorporate the curriculum into

existing lessons and how to implement the entire curriculum.

Evaluation allows for monitoring of implemented changes and solving problems as

they arise (Bland et al, 2000). The national scope of the LifeKnowledge curriculum

distribution will require that instructors across the country be contacted to monitor and

evaluate the adoption process. The findings of this current study will assist in the

evaluation process by providing baseline data of current leadership instruction. Future

studies can be conducted to determine the rate of adoption of the LifeKnowledge

curriculum. This information may be helpful in determining future professional

development seminars and possible curriculum changes in order that the curriculum will

be most useful to instructors.

Strong leadership is required for successful change to occur (Bland et al., 2000).

With this adoption process the leader must be prepared to provide a vision for a national










organization. The staff at the National FFA have successfully organized the development

and implementation of the curriculum and have a long-range strategic plan for adoption.

In addition, other factors within the adoption process are also necessary. Many

studies found encouraging teachers to adopt a new curriculum can be a challenge for a

number of reasons. For some instructors there is a period of delay from the time the

curriculum is introduced to the instructors, to the time it is adopted (Connors & Elliot,

1994; Lowery, 2000; Rudd & Hillison, 1995; Wingenbach et al., 2000). This delay is

natural and should be anticipated.

The adoption rate of many of these studies follows the Rogers (2003) model of

adoption innovation. For adoption to occur teachers must see the relative advantage to

using the curriculum, they must be able to observe the advantage of using the curriculum,

and the curriculum must be compatible with their existing schedule, teaching style and

environment. The complexity of the curriculum must be at a level that is challenging to

the students, yet relatively simple for the instructor to utilize. Finally, the curriculum

must have the ability to be used on a trial basis to determine if it has the ability to

integrate with the existing teaching environment and teaching style of the individual

teacher. Rogers (2003) defines five adopter categories based on the individual's stage of

adopting an innovation.

* Innovators Active seekers of new ideas, who adopt new ideas quickly, thought to
be "on the cutting edge."

* Early Adopters Individuals who have evaluated the innovation and are quick to
adopt it once it meets their approval.

* Early Maj ority Individuals that adopt new ideas after thorough evaluation and
just prior to an "average" member of the group adopts an idea or innovation.

* Late Maj ority Individuals that are skeptical about the innovation and must
witness the success of others prior to adopting an idea or innovation themselves.










*Laggards Individuals who are last to adopt an innovation.


While some instructors are slow to adopt the curriculum, others prefer to use only

parts of the curriculum rather than the entire curriculum (Connors & Elliot, 1994; Rudd

& Hillison, 1995; Wingenbach et al., 2000). For this reason the curriculum should be

designed as 'bite-sized' pieces that it can be incorporated into existing instruction (Leat

& Higgins, 2002). This also provides instructors the opportunity to use the curriculum on

a trial basis. The 267 lessons of the LifeKnowledge curriculum are designed in such a

way that they may be used individually, incorporated into existing courses, or taught as a

complete curriculum. This provides a way for instructors to sample a piece of the

curriculum without being forced into using the entire curriculum.

Similarly, instructors need to have the freedom to modify the curriculum to meet

the needs of the school, community and constituent groups (Bland et al., 2000). This

freedom provides ownership of the curriculum by the local instructor, which is essential,

because they have the expertise to know what the students can handle and to know how

curriculum can best be adapted for use locally (Kirk & MacDonald, 2001; Leat &

Higgins, 2002). The LifeKnowledge curriculum offers a generous amount of flexibility

to adapt to local needs. Lessons are on a compact disk (CD) and include lesson outlines,

scripts, classroom activities, overhead transparency masters, and evaluation tools. From

these lesson materials, instructors can choose which materials are best suited for use in

their classroom.

Section Summary

This section illustrated that a leadership curriculum is needed for teaching youth

leadership in formal classroom environments and, although instructors have the ability to









create their own curriculum, they prefer to use pre-existing materials. In an effort to

provide a quality curriculum, the National FFA Organization developed the

LifeKnowledge curriculum, which consists of six constructs that strive to develop

leadership competencies in youth. The curriculum was written by practitioners of youth

leadership instruction and has sufficient flexibility to be used as a stand-alone curriculum

or individual lessons may be infused with existing instructional materials.

Many barriers to implementation of the curriculum were addressed. Of great

importance to the adoption process is the acknowledgement that instructors adopt

curriculum at differing rates. Strategies to be used to assist the adoption process include

recognizing and communicating the adoption process to instructors; including instructors

in the adoption process; allowing the curriculum to be used as individual lessons rather

than as a stand-alone curriculum; giving instructors the freedom to modify the curriculum

for their local setting; and providing adequate professional development to support and

assist the instructors during the adoption process.

Why High School Agricultural Science Instructors Teach Leadership

Theories of Behavior

To assist in describing and explaining the teaching behavior of agricultural science

teachers, a behavior model was sought. Of the many behavioral models available

(Bandura, 1986; Becker, 1974; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975; Fishbein, Bandura, Triandis,

Kanfer, Becker, & Middlestadt, 1991; Triandis, 1971), the Triandis model was chosen

for this study. This model identifies four explanatory variables of behavior that could be

measured: attitude, social norms, habits, and expectancies. A modified Triandis model

has been successfully used in an earlier study to describe and explain agricultural science

curriculum adoption (Rudd, 1994).









Modified Triandis Model of Behavior

This current study used a variation of the Triandis model that uses four variables to

explain behavior: attitude, social norms, habits, and expectations (Rudd & Hillison,

1995). For the purpose of this study, attitude is defined as "a mental position with regard

to a fact or state" (Merriam-Webster, 2003) towards leadership.

As defined by Triandis (1971) social norms are what people think they should do

(p.14), based upon experiences and beliefs. In the case of agriculture instructors, the

fundamental social norm is they are expected to teach. If this is extended to agriculture

instructors teaching leadership, we see that instructors are expected to teach leadership.

However, what is included within leadership? This may be defined by what agriculture

instructors have taught in the past.

Therefore, we may define social norms within in agricultural science leadership as

those elements of leadership that should be taught in agriculture. Although no studies

could be found that defined the social norms within agricultural leadership, elements of

leadership in secondary agricultural education measured by researchers in previous

studies include: participation in public speaking, judging contests, chapter banquet

planning, committee work, leadership camp, parliamentary procedure, state conventions,

national convention, chapter activities, community service, Washington Leadership

conference, fundraising, supervised agricultural experience, Program of Activities (POA)

planning, public relations, holding FFA office, earning proficiency awards, FFA

membership, highest FFA degree held, exhibiting at fairs and shows, working with

groups, understanding self, communicating, making decisions, leadership, and creed

speaking (Brannon, Holley & Key, 1989; Clark, 1977; Dormody & Seevers, 1994a; Karr,










Keith, Lockaby, & Vaughn, 2001; Ricketts & Newcomb, 1984; Rutherford et al., 2002;

Thorp, Cummins, & Townsend, 1998; Townsend & Carter, 1983; Wingenbach, 1995).

When an element of leadership was found in four or more of the studies, it was

decided to retain that element as a social norm. Based on the consistencies found in these

studies, social norms within agricultural leadership are defined in this study as

participation in public speaking, judging contests, chapter banquet, committee work,

leadership camp, parliamentary procedure, state conventions, proficiency awards,

national convention, program of activities planning, and holding FFA office.

Because these elements of leadership are found in multiple studies it is concluded

that these elements are most likely what agricultural science researchers believe are the

social norms of secondary agricultural leadership, and as such, are generally the same for

each instructor, being "reflected in the current condition of agricultural education" (Rudd,

1994). If they are the same for each instructor, they need not be measured and therefore

can be excluded from the behavioral model.

Although these leadership skills described as the social norms are reflected in the

current thinking of our agricultural instructors, these are not the leadership skills

presented in the LifeKnowledge curriculum. The LifeKnowledge curriculum goes

beyond parliamentary procedure and teaches interpersonal skills and intrapersonal skills,

skills that allow a person to understand themselves and to understand others as well.

Habits are defined as what a person has usually done (Triandis, 1971) and are based

upon experiences, which are influenced by knowledge (Lee, 2000). Likewise, a person's

past experiences are a function of their demographics (Taylor, Basen-Engquist, Shinn, &

Bodurka, 2004; Variyam, 1999). Therefore, a person's habits are a function of their









knowledge and demographics. In this study, habits will be measured through high school

agricultural science instructors' knowledge (Peasley & Henderson, 1992; Rudd, 1994) of

leadership concepts and high school agricultural science instructor demographics

(Connors & Elliot, 1994).

Expectations are measured as expected benefits, or outcomes, of teaching

leadership to students (Mischel & Mischel, 1977; Rudd, 1994). The modified behavioral

model is diagrammed below:

fBehavior = Attitude + K~nowledge + Demographics + Expectations

Figure 2-2. Theoretical Model of Behavior


This study measured the behavior of high school agricultural science instructors'

teaching of leadership in the classroom. Also measured were high school agricultural

science instructor attitude towards teaching leadership, high school agricultural science

instructor knowledge of leadership, high school agricultural science instructor

demographic variables, and high school agricultural science instructor expectations of

students after leadership had been taught in the classroom.

Population Studied

The population studied was high school agricultural science instructors from

throughout the United States. The population was developed from a list of active FFA

chapters provided by the National FFA Organization. Because the LifeKnowledge

curriculum is to be distributed nationally, it was important to conduct the study on a

national scale so the results could be generalizable to the national population of high

school agricultural science instructors.










High School Agricultural Science Instructor Leadership Teaching Behavior

Two methods of determining behavior are self-perceived and observation. Self-

perceived behavior is information provided by the participants about their own behavior.

Observation is information provided by a researcher who observes the participant and

records findings (Ary et al., 1996). This research measured self-perceived high school

agricultural science instructor behavior using a series of questions to determine if specific

content areas of the LifeKnowledge curriculum were being taught using a self-report

form.

Explanatory Variables

This section serves to address research specific to the variables used in this study.

These variables are knowledge, attitude, expectations, and demographics.

Knowledge

Using knowledge as a descriptor for teacher behavior has been used successfully.

Rudd (1994) found that knowledge alone explained 39% of the variance associated with

the behavior of instructor curriculum adoption. This study measured high school

agricultural science instructor leadership knowledge based the individual leadership

development lessons from unit two of the FFA LifeKnowledge leadership curriculum.

Attitude

Instructor attitude is of great importance as it affects the instructors' teaching and

the students in their classrooms (ERIC Clearing House on Tests Measurement and

Evaluation, 1985). Instructor attitude has been used in many studies to gather data on a

wide range of issues. Osborne and Dyer (1998) measured attitudes of science instructors

to determine their perceptions of high school agriculture programs. Likewise, Cano

(1990) measured attitudes of male agricultural science instructors towards female










agriculture science instructors. In two separate studies, attitude was found to be an

explanatory variable when evaluating instructor attitudes towards curriculum (Peasley &

Henderson, 1992; Rudd, 1994). This study measured instructor attitude towards the

teaching of leadership.

Expectations

Along with attitudes, instructor expectations may have an effect on their own

teaching behavior and student success (Happerlen, Clay, Henly, & Barke, 2002).

Instructor expectations of student behavior after leadership instruction were measured in

this study.

Demographics

When describing groups of instructors, demographics for each group can be

significantly different. Instructors with low effectiveness had significantly different

demographics from the instructors with high effectiveness (Miller, Kahler, & Rheault,

1989). Demographics measured by Miller et al. were instructor age, years teaching

experience, years at present location, professional organization membership, civic

organization membership, and leadership positions held in civic organizations.

When explaining FFA program quality, Vaughn and Moore (2000) found that the

demographic characteristics of number of teachers per department and instructor' s

leadership experiences explained 36% of the variance of program quality. Demographic

characteristics measured by Vaughn and Moore were years teaching experience, number

of teachers in department, bachelor' s degree in agricultural education, master' s degree

earned, number of teachers pr department, FFA membership in high school, FFA office

above chapter level, non-FFA positions held in high school, collegiate organization

membership, professional education organization membership, civic organization









membership, state and regional committee participation, agricultural education

workshops and seminars conducted, vocational leadership position held in school, and

Advisor' s Washington Leadership Conference attendance.

When studying curriculum adoption, demographic variables were found to be a

significant predictor of adoption (Connors & Elliot, 1994; Rudd, 1994). This exploratory

study will analyze individual demographic characteristics to explain instructor leadership

teaching behavior.

Section Summary

Modified versions of the Triandis behavior model have successfully been used in

the past and offer a simple way to explain behavior with a limited number of variables.

The variables used have the ability to be self-reported, which allows this model to be

adapted for use with a survey instrument.

The variables selected have provided explanatory ability in previous studies, and

were expected to do the same in this study. Knowledge is fundamental in teaching

subject matter and providing instructor self-confidence. Attitude has shown to be a

strong predictor of instructor performance and the addition of expectations to the model

provides a good framework for explaining instructor behavior. In addition, selected

demographic variables have been shown to account for a substantial amount of variance

in explanatory models.

Chapter Summary

The purpose of this chapter was to describe previous research conducted about how

leadership is defined, the importance of teaching leadership, youth leadership

development, leadership curriculums for youth, and explaining why instructors teach

leadership.









Definitions of leadership were discussed and the importance of teaching leadership

to youth was provided. The literature suggests that leadership skills are in high demand

by employers and will continue to be so, yet schools have focused on teaching job skills,

and have overlooked teaching leadership skills. This has led previous researchers to

conclude that leadership training needs to occur in high school.

Youth leadership organizations allow high school youth to develop leadership skills

that will benefit them throughout their lives. The National FFA Organization stands out

among youth organizations by providing a wide range of opportunities for students to

develop leadership skills. It has been well documented that students' participation in

FFA activities leads to increased student leadership skill development. Due to the

partnership between agricultural education and FFA, the agricultural science classroom is

an excellent place to begin building youth for the future through formal classroom

teaching of leadership. To accomplish this the National FFA Organization developed the

LifeKnowledge curriculum. The curriculum was written by practitioners of youth

leadership instruction and has sufficient flexibility to be used alone or with existing

materials. Many barriers to implementation of the curriculum were addressed along with

methods used to increase the rate of adoption.

To determine why high school agricultural science instructors teach leadership a

modified version of the Triandis behavioral model was described. The variables of

knowledge, attitude, expectations and demographics have been successfully used to

explain instructor teaching behavior, and will be used in this study to explain the extent to

which high school agricultural science instructors teach leadership.















CHAPTER 3
METHOD S

Chapter 1 provided a brief history of the relationship of agriculture and leadership,

then went on to describe the National FFA Organization's role in preparing youth for

leadership responsibilities and why leadership is an integral part of agricultural education.

Chapter 1 also described the importance of conducting this research.

The purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which high school

agricultural science instructors are currently teaching leadership in formal agricultural

science classrooms and to explain what influences high school agricultural science

instructors to teach leadership in the classroom. To accomplish this, a modified version

of the Triandis (1971) behavioral model was used which incorporates knowledge, attitude

and expectations to explain behavioral outcomes.

Chapter 2 reviewed previous research conducted about youth leadership and

provided a theoretical framework based on Triandis' behavioral model (Ricketts, 2003;

Rudd, 1994; Triandis, 1980) from which to build a theoretical model. Areas of review

included defining leadership, the importance of teaching leadership, previous research on

youth leadership, leadership curriculum for youth, why instructors teach leadership, the

theoretical behavior model, and explanatory variables of behavior.

This chapter will describe the research context of the study, research design,

research questions, population, sample, instrumentation, procedures used to collect the

data, and data analysis.










Context of the Study

Place

The study was conducted via mail and on-line using the Internet, therefore the place

of data collection was the classroom, home or other location of the high school

agricultural science instructor. The instructors were located in every U.S. state, with the

exception of Hyve states in which the curriculum had been pilot tested: Kansas, Maine,

Nebraska, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania.

Postal mailings notifying the participants of the survey and required emails were

sent from the researcher' s office on the University of Florida campus in Gainesville, FL.

The survey instruments used were both paper and pencil, and on-line forms. The paper

and pencil instrument consisted of an eight-page questionnaire mailed to the participants.

The on-line instrument consisted of web pages and web forms, loaded on a World Wide

Web file server located on the University of Florida campus. Data collected from the

paper and pencil instrument were entered manually by the researcher. Data collected

from the on-line instrument were sent to a text fie on the Eile server and simultaneously

emailed to the researcher. Data analyses, conclusions, and recommendations were

completed at the University of Florida.

Time

Preliminary instrument development began on October 21, 2002. A preliminary

instrument was completed on January 29, 2004. A panel of experts, consisting of the

researcher' s committee reviewed the instrument and suggested additions and corrections

that should be made to the instrument. Based on the panel's comments, modifications

were made to the instrument. The pilot study was administered to a sample of high

school agricultural science instructors from Nebraska on February 26, 2004. Data










analysis from the pilot study was conducted and revisions to the instrument were made on

March 31, 2004.

The national survey began on April 5, 2004. Final data collection was completed

on May 17, 2004. Data were then analyzed beginning on May 17, 2004. The entire

study was conducted between February 26, 2004 and May 17, 2004.

National FFA Organization

The National FFA Organization was instrumental in the development of this study.

The LifeKnowledge curriculum developed by the FFA provided the leadership content

areas with which this study was framed. In addition, the National FFA Organization

provided a comprehensive list of high school agricultural science programs from across

the United States from which the sample was derived.

Research Design

The study was conducted using survey research, and a correlational, ex post facto

design. A correlational design involves the collection of two or more sets of data from a

group of subj ects with the attempt to determine the subsequent relationship between those

sets of data (Tuckman, 1994). Ex post facto is a study in which the researcher examines

the effects of a naturally occurring treatment after the treatment has occurred. The

researcher relates the after-the-fact treatment to an outcome or dependent measure

(Tuckman, 1994).

The dependent variable measured was instructor leadership teaching behavior as

determined by the level of formal leadership instruction taught in the high school

agricultural science classroom. Independent variables measured were instructor

leadership knowledge, instructor attitude towards teaching leadership, instructor

expectations after teaching leadership to students, and instructor demographics. The









measures of instructor behavior, instructor knowledge and instructor expectations were

developed using lesson obj ectives in unit two of the LifeKnowledge curriculum (National

FFA Organization, 2003). These variables will be discussed in more detail in the

instrumentation section.

Research Objectives

Much research has been done regarding youths' self-perception of their own

leadership ability and skill (Rutherford et al., 2002; Seevers & Dormody, 1995;

Townsend & Carter, 1983; Wingenbach, 1995). Yet, little research has been conducted

on instructor teaching behavior. Additionally, the author could find neither research that

quantified the amount of leadership being taught in agricultural science classrooms nor

research that addressed the factors that influence instructors to teach leadership. This

study sought to address the following research obj ectives:

* Determine the demographic characteristics of high school agricultural science
instructors;

* determine the extent to which leadership is being taught in high school agricultural
science classrooms;

* based on National FFA LifeKnowledge leadership curriculum, determine high
school agricultural science instructor leadership knowledge;

* determine high school agricultural science instructor attitude towards teaching
leadership;

* determine the expectations that high school agricultural science instructors have of
the agriculture students after leadership has been taught; and

* explain the relationship between high school agricultural science instructor
leadership knowledge, high school agricultural science instructor attitude towards
teaching leadership, high school agricultural science instructor expectations of
students, and high school agricultural science instructor demographics in light of
high school agricultural science instructor leadership content area teaching
behavior.










Population

The population for the study was all FFA advisors at high school agricultural

science programs (National FFA Organization, 2002) with the exception of FFA advisors

in Hyve states where the curriculum had been pilot tested: Kansas, Maine, Nebraska, New

Jersey, and Pennsylvania. The programs were identified through the National FFA

Organization.

Sample

Nationally, there are 7, 193 high school agricultural science programs (National

FFA Organization, 2002). A 95% confidence level with 5% sampling error was chosen

for this study. Based on sample size information from Dillman (2000), a sample size of

367 was required for a population of 8,000. The confidence level and sampling error are

contingent upon receiving 367 usable responses. To account for incorrect addresses,

inactive programs, etc. a sample size of 400 was chosen. Using a list of active FFA

chapters provided by the National FFA Organization, 400 participants were selected by

simple random sample selection (Agresti & Finlay, 1997). To accomplish this, that

Active Chapter List was entered into an Excel@ fie. Random numbers were assigned to

each chapter in the sample frame and sorted. The first 400 chapters of the sorted list were

used in the study.

Instrumentation

The instrument was designed to measure the level of leadership taught in the

agricultural science classroom, the attitude of the instructor towards the teaching of

leadership, the leadership knowledge of the instructor, demographic information of the

instructor, and instructor expectations of students after leadership had been taught in the

classroom (see Appendix A).









Instructor leadership knowledge and the constructs of level of leadership being

taught, instructor attitude towards teaching leadership, and instructor expectations of

agricultural students were framed with the LifeKnowledge curriculum developed by the

National FFA Organization (2003). Level of leadership instruction and leadership

knowledge questions used in the instrument were based on lessons from unit two of the

LifeKnowledge curriculum. This unit included elements from all six content areas of the

LifeKnowledge curriculum and covers a broad mix of leadership concepts. A series of

demographic questions were asked to gather information about the instructor (Miller et

al., 1989; Vaughn & Moore, 2000).

Section I of the instrument measured the teaching of leadership content areas

contained in unit two of the LifeKnowledge curriculum (see Appendix A). Using a series

of 30 statements, the high school agricultural science instructor was asked if they taught

leadership by indicating either yes they taught the particular concept or no they did not

teach the concept (Connors & Elliot, 1994; Rudd & Hillison, 1995). The instrument was

developed as a paper and pencil instrument and as a web page for use on the Internet (see

Appendix B). Answers for the web-based instrument were indicated by using the

computer mouse to click on a "radio button" to indicate their answer using the

dichotomous scale.

Section II of the instrument measured high school agricultural science instructor

expectations of the student for each of the leadership content areas in unit two of the

LifeKnowledge curriculum (see Appendix A). Eighteen expectation statements were

provided and a dichotomous scale was used to record the participant' s responses, yes if










they expected the student to perform the action, or no if they did not expect the student to

perform the action (Rudd & Hillison, 1995).

Section III of the instrument measured the leadership knowledge of the instructors

(see Appendix A). Thirty questions from the lesson objectives and evaluation tools found

in unit two of the LifeKnowledge curriculum were used (National FFA Organization,

2003). Questions were in the form of true-false and multiple-choice. Curriculum defined

knowledge content areas measured were values, beliefs, responsibility and accountability,

character, leader, vision, influence, motivation, risk taking, self-worth, character, time

management, goal setting, and mentors.

Section IV of the instrument measured the high school agricultural science

instructor' s attitude towards teaching leadership using a semantic differential technique

consisting of 12 pairs of words (see Appendix A). A scale consisting of six spaces or

radio buttons placed between the words was provided to indicate level of agreement with

one of each of the pair of words. The pairs of words used were necessary/unnecessary,

boring/interesting, positive/negative, practical/impractical, useful/useless, helpful/not

helpful, wanted/unwanted, not worthwhile/worthwhile, valuable/worthless,

successful/unsuccessful, wise/foolish, and bad/good. Word pairs were determined using

established pairs of terms (Jenkins, Russell, & Suci, 1958; Rudd, 1994).

Section V of the instrument addressed demographic questions about the high school

agricultural science instructor (see Appendix A). Questions asked were school location,

highest level of education, gender, if they had been certified through a university

agriculture teacher certification program, was their bachelor degree in agricultural

education, FFA membership in high school, FFA chapter officer in high school, FFA










office above chapter level, age, years teaching agriculture, years teaching in current

position, number of agriculture teachers at school, number of leadership courses taken in

college, number of offices held in student leadership organizations other than FFA,

offices held in college student organizations, offices held in professional education

organizations, number of offices held in civic organizations, membership in professional

development organizations, number of offices held in professional development

organizations, participation on state or regional agricultural science committees, number

of workshops or seminars conducted for agriculture teachers, number of workshops or

seminars conducted for non-agriculture teachers, number of leadership positions held in

local school or vocational department, number of times they attended the Advisors'

Washington Leadership Conference, and if a leadership course was taught in their

agricultural science program (Miller et al., 1989; Vaughn & Moore, 2000).

The instrument was checked for validity by a panel of experts consisting of the

researcher' s committee members.

Procedures

Procedures used to collect the data are included in this section of the chapter. This

includes a description of the pilot study, and the survey, including notification of

participants, follow up contacts, etc.

Pilot Study

To pilot test the instrument, subj ects (n =40) were selected at random from the

Nebraska FFA chapters on the FFA Active Chapter List. A modified version of the

Tailored Design Method (Dillman, 2000) was used for data collection. A pre-notice

letter was sent on February 26, 2004 notifying the pilot sample that they had been

selected to participate in this survey. Instructions were provided as to how they could










access the study via the Intemet. Three days later, March 1, 2004, a paper form of the

instrument was sent to the participants. Seven days later, on March 8, 2004, a thank

you/reminder postcard was sent to the participants. Seven days later March 15, 2004, a

replacement questionnaire was sent to participants that had not yet responded. Seven

days later March 22, 2004, a personal contact was made with non-respondents by a

colleague in Nebraska, encouraging them to complete the questionnaire. Nine additional

days were allowed for collection of electronic and mailed paper responses. Twenty pilot

instruments were returned for a pilot response rate of 50%.

Pilot instrument reliability was analyzed using SPSS@ to determine Coefficient

alpha based on the three instrument constructs. From these results, the following changes

were made to the instrument:

Section I which measured the teaching of leadership content areas, had a reliability

of alpha=0.92. Two questions were removed to increase the reliability to alpha=0.93.

Section II which measured instructor expectations of the student, had a reliability of

alpha=0.79. Eight questions were removed to increase the reliability to alpha=0.81.

Section IV which measured instructor attitude toward teaching leadership, had a

reliability of alpha=0.91. No changes were made to this portion of the instrument.

Data Collection Procedures

A modified version of the Tailored Design Method (Dillman, 2000) was used for

data collection from the sample. A pre-notice letter (see Appendix C) was sent on April

5, 2004 notifying the sample that they had been selected to participate in this survey.

Instructions were provided as to how they could access the study via the Intemet. Four

days later, April 9, 2004, a paper form of the instrument (see Appendix A), that included

the IRB informed consent form (see Appendix C), was sent to the participants. Ten days









later, on April 19, 2004, a thank you/reminder postcard was sent to the participants (see

Appendix C). Ten days later April 29, 2004, a replacement questionnaire was sent to

participants that had not yet responded (see Appendix C). Eight days later May 7, 2004,

phone calls were placed to non-respondents encouraging them to complete the

questionnaire. Ten additional days were allowed for collection of electronic and mailed

paper responses. Thank you postcards were mailed to all respondents acknowledging

receipt of their questionnaire and thanking them for their participation in the study. The

postcard also provided the respondents with an Internet address where the results of this

research could be located.

Response Rate

The final response rate for the study was 41.8% (n=167). This response rate

appears to be low, but this may be influenced by a number of factors. First, it may be

indicative of a trend in agricultural education. A review of studies in the Journal of

Agricultural Education that sampled agriculture teachers shows response rates have been

declining over the past 14 years (Balschweid & Thompson, 2002; Birkenbolz & Maricle,

1991; Boone, Gartin, Wright, Lawrence, & Odell, 2002; Conroy & Walker, 2000;

Croom, 2003; Delnero & Montgomery, 2001; Dormody, 1993; Dormody, Seevers, &

Clason, 1996; D. W. Duncan, 2004; Eaton & Bruening, 1996; Elbert, 2003; Fraze,

Hardin, Brashears, Haygood, & Smith, 2003; Harris & Birkenbolz, 1996; Kotrlik &

Drueckhammer, 1987; Kotrlik, Redmann, & Douglas, 2003; Layfield & Dobbins, 2002;

Myers, Dyer, & Breja, 2003; Rogers, Townsend, & Lindner, 2004; Thobega & Miller,

2003; Thomas & Groves, 1986; Whent, 1994). When response rates are averaged for

each decade, and separated into the categories of national study, regional study, and state










study, a downward trend occurs. Response rates for national studies, averaged by

decade, have declined from 84.4% in the 1980's to 57.9% currently.

Another cause of the low response rate may be the time of the year. Follow up

phone calls to the 320 instructors that had not responded after the third mailing revealed

that many instructors were busy with spring activities such as livestock shows, banquets,

final exams, inputting grades, etc. Many stated they had been too busy to complete the

form. When instructors were asked if mailing a web link to the web based questionnaire

would be helpful, most instructors stated that they would be more likely to complete the

questionnaire if a link were sent to them.

Finally, even with a response rate below 50%, this is higher than what is expected

in many disciplines. Response rates in education, marketing, and applied health typically

range from 1% to 31% (Fox, Robinson, & Boardley, 1998), while business marketing

survey research rates are usually below 15% (Wilson, 1999). At the same time, response

rates from healthcare organizations range from 8.2% to 24.8% (Hikmet & Chen, 2003).

Even more dramatic are the response rates found in direct mail, which are typically 1% to

10% (Response Rates, 2000; Souccar, 2000; Teichgraeber, 2001).

Based on this information, the response rate of the current study is reasonable for

this population, and is above the expectations of some disciplines. Based on the sample

size formula in Dillman (2000), the 167 responses of this study allow the results to have a

95% confidence level with 7.5% sampling error.

Data Analysis

Data were collected via paper and pencil questionnaires (see Appendix A) and the

Internet using the on-line instrument (see Appendix B). Data from the paper and pencil

instruments were entered into a Microsoft@ Excel@ spreadsheet by the researcher. Data









from the Internet-based instrument were stored in a comma delimited text file on the

University file server and sent as an email to the researcher. The text file containing all

of the data was converted to a Microsoft@ Excel@ spreadsheet. The data from the pencil

and paper version and the electronic version of the instrument were combined in Excel@,

then imported to Statistical Package for the Social Sciences for WindowsTM (SPSS@)

version 12.0 for analysis.

To control for non-response bias a t-test was used to compare early respondents to

late respondents (Miller & Smith, 1983). Early respondents (n=130) were compared with

late respondents (n=37). Independent sample t-tests were conducted on each variable of

interest and no significant differences were found between early and late respondents.

Likewise, a t-test was conducted to compare participants that responded using the

paper and pencil instrument sent in via the mail and the participants that responded using

the Internet web-form. Paper and pencil respondents (n=96) were compared with Internet

respondents (n=71). Independent sample t-tests were conducted on each variable of

interest and no significant differences were found between pencil and paper, and Internet

respondents.

The instrument post-hoc reliability was analyzed using SPSS by computing an

alpha coefficient for each of the three measured constructs. Instrument reliability was

analyzed using SPSS@ to determine Coefficient alpha based on the three instrument

constructs. Section I which measured the teaching of leadership content areas, had a

reliability of alpha=0.95. Section II which measured instructor expectations of the

student, had a reliability of alpha=0.84. Section IV which measured instructor attitude

toward teaching leadership, had a reliability of alpha=0.92.










Descriptive statistics and frequencies were compiled from the data. Previous

studies summed leadership and demographic variables (Vaughn & Moore, 2000) and

provided insufficient explanation for how they had been coded (Miller et al., 1989). Due

to this lack of information regarding the relationships of the variables used in this study,

it was decided to conduct correlations on all variables for this exploratory study. For

correlational and regression analysis the variable gender was coded as a dichotomous

dummy variable, 1=male; 0=female. The following variables were also coded as dummy

variables, 1=yes; 0=no: rural school location, suburban school location, urban school

location, certified through a university agriculture teacher certification program, bachelor

degree in agricultural education, FFA member in high school, FFA chapter officer, FFA

officer above chapter level, and leadership course taught in agricultural science program.

Pearson' s Product Moment correlation was performed with all of the variables to

determine relationships. Magnitude of correlations will be described using the terms

discussed by Miller (1998) (see Table 3-1). Variables having the greatest correlation

with instructor teaching behavior were selected for use in regression analysis. Backwards

multiple regression analysis was performed to determine relationship and explanatory

qualities of the data. Regression models were analyzed for significance and explanatory

qualities. An alpha level of 0.05 was set a priori for the statistical analysis. Results of

this analysis are presented in chapter four of this study.

Table 3-1. Correlation Magnitude Descriptors
r Descriptor
1.0 Perfect
0.70 0.99 Very high
0.50 0.69 Substantial
0.30 0.49 Moderate
0.10 0.29 Low
0.01 0.09 Negligible










From Miller, L. (1998). Appropriate analysis. Journal ofAgricultural Education 39(2),
1-10.

Summary

This chapter described the methods used to research the current level of leadership

taught in agricultural science classrooms and factors associated with describing and

explaining the instructional behavior of leadership with high school agricultural science

instructors.

This is a descriptive study using ex post facto and correlational designs to reveal

relationships and explain instructor teaching behavior. The development and analysis of

the instrument were discussed and methods used for data collection were provided. Data

were collected from n=167 high school agricultural science instructors located throughout

the United States. Statistical analyses performed on the data were described in this

chapter. Chapter four discusses the findings of this study.















CHAPTER 4
RESULTS


Chapter 1 provided a brief history of the relationship of agriculture and leadership

then went on to describe the National FFA Organization's role in preparing youth for

leadership responsibilities and why leadership is an integral part of agricultural education.

Chapter 1 also described the necessity of conducting this research.

The purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which high school

agricultural science instructors are currently teaching leadership in formal agricultural

science classrooms and explain what influences agricultural science instructors to teach

leadership in the classroom. To accomplish this, a modified version of the Triandis

(1971) behavioral model was used, which incorporates knowledge, attitude and

expectations to explain behavioral outcomes. Specifically this study sought to:

* Determine the demographic characteristics of high school agricultural science
instructors;

* determine the extent to which leadership is being taught in high school agricultural
science classrooms;

* based on National FFA LifeKnowledge leadership curriculum, determine high
school agricultural science instructor leadership knowledge;

* determine high school agricultural science instructor attitude towards teaching
leadership;

* determine the expectations that high school agricultural science instructors have of
the agriculture students after leadership has been taught; and

* explain the relationship between high school agricultural science instructor
leadership knowledge, high school agricultural science instructor attitude towards
teaching leadership, high school agricultural science instructor expectations of










students, and high school agricultural science instructor demographics in light of
high school agricultural science instructor leadership content area teaching
behavior.

Chapter 2 reviewed previous research conducted about youth leadership and

provided a theoretical framework, based on Triandis' behavioral model (Ricketts, 2003;

Rudd, 1994; Triandis, 1980), from which to build a behavioral model. Areas of review

included defining leadership, the importance of teaching leadership, previous research on

youth leadership, leadership curriculum for youth, why instructors teach leadership, the

theoretical behavior model, and explanatory variables of behavior.

Chapter 3 described the methods used to discover the current level of leadership

taught in agricultural science classrooms and factors associated with describing and

explaining the instructional behavior of leadership with high school agricultural science

instructors.

This is a descriptive study using ex post facto and correlational designs to reveal

relationships and explain instructor teaching behavior. The development and analysis of

the instrument were discussed and methods used for data collection were provided.

Usable responses were collected from 167 high school agricultural science instructors

located throughout the United States and the statistical analyses that were performed on

the data were described.

This chapter will explain the findings of this study, addressing each obj ective

presented in chapter 1. For correlational comparisons, dichotomous variables were coded

as dummy variables. Similarly, for correlational comparisons in multiple regression, the

variables number of agriculture instructors at the school and size of community in which

the school was located were coded as a series of dummy variables.










Objective One: Determine the Demographic Characteristics of High School
Agricultural Science Instructors

The average high school agricultural science instructor in this study is 39.37 years

old, has been teaching for 14.85 years, and has been teaching at their current location for

10.61 years. Most instructors are male, teach in a one-instructor department, and their

school is located in a rural community. Most earned their bachelor' s degree in

agricultural education and were certified through a university agriculture teacher

education program. In addition, most instructors were FFA chapter officers in high

school. Specific characteristics and experiences of the participants of this study are

presented later in this chapter.

Age, Years Teaching, and Years Teaching in Current Position

The age of the participants ranged from 23 to 61, with an average age ofM=-39.37

years. The number of years teaching for participants ranged from one to 38, with an

average of M= 14.85. The number of years teaching in their current position ranged from

one to 34, with an average ofM=-10.61 (see Table 4-1).

Table 4-1. Participant Mean Age, Years Teaching, and Years Teaching in Current
Position (n=167)
n M SD Minimum Maximum
Age 157 39.37 10.31 23 61
Years teaching 158 14.85 10.16 1 38
Years teaching in current position 158 10.61 8.87 1 34

The distribution of participant age is shown in Figure 4-1. The distribution shows a

group of participants from age 23 to age 33, then another group from age 35 to age 58.

These two groups form somewhat of a bimodal distribution. When a normal curve is

superimposed on top of the distribution, it appears slightly skewed left.
































30 240 50 60
Age

Figure 4-1. Distribution of Participant Age

The distribution for years teaching (Figure 4-2) is similar in that it too is skewed

left. Once again there is a cluster of instructors with teaching experience from zero to

eight years, then a decline in tenure, tapering off to the right.

Figure 4-3 illustrates the distribution of participants' years in current position. This

distribution is more skewed to the left than the previous two figures, but contains similar

features. The large group of instructors from zero to eight years is seen, and then a

decline occurs as tenure increases.

Previous research revealed correlations with age (Miller et al., 1989). When

Pearson's Product Moment correlations were conducted to determine relationships with

age (see Table 4-2), moderate correlations were found with gender (r=0.39), number of











leadership positions held in local school or vocational department (r=0.35), and number

of offices held in professional education organizations (r=0.30).


a
aln


O 10 30 30 41
Year~steaching

Figure 4-2. Distribution of Participants' Years Teaching


0 10 20 30
Years in current position

Figure 4-3. Distribution of Participants' Years Teaching in Current Position










Table 4-2 shows moderate correlations which occurred between years teaching and

gender (r=0.43), number of offices held in professional education organizations (r=0.37),

and number of leadership positions in local school or vocational department (r=0.39).

Number of years teaching in current position (see Table 4-2) had moderate

relationships with number of offices held in civic organizations (r=0.40), gender (r=0.37)

number of workshops and seminars for agriculture teachers (r=0.32), and level of

education (r=0.31). Additional correlations for age, years teaching, and years teaching in

current position are shown in Appendix D, Table D-1.

Table 4-2. Pearson's Product Moment Correlations Between Age, Years Teaching, Years
Teaching in Current Position, and Selected Variables (n=157)
Years Years Teaching in
Variable Age Teaching Current Position
Gender2 0.39* 0.43* 0.37*
Number of leadership positions held in local 0.35* 0.39* 0.25*
school or vocational department
Number of offices held in professional 0.30* 0.37* 0.40*
education organizations
Number of offices held in civic 0.25*" 0.32* 0.19*
organizations
Number of workshops and seminars for 0.25*" 0.29* 0.32*
agriculture teachers
Level of education 0.18* 0.25*" 0.31*
Age -- 0.91* 0.69*
Years teaching -- -- 0.80*
Notes: p<0.05; = Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0; 2 Males coded as 1, Females
coded as 2.

Gender

Males comprised 73.1% (n= 114) of the sample. An independent groups t-test

was conducted to determine if any significant differences existed between the female and

male participants. Significant gender differences were found in the variables age

t(153)=5.26, years teaching t(154)=5.90, and years teaching in current position

t(1 54)=4.90. The results of this test are presented in Table 4-3.










Table 4-3. Independent Groups t-test for Significant Variables by Gender (n=167)
Variable t df
Age 5.26* 153
Years teaching 5.90* 154
Years teaching in current position 4.90* 154
Certified through a university agriculture teacher education program 2.77* 154
Bachelor degree in agricultural education 2.46* 153
Number of offices held in high school organizations outside of FFA -2.35* 153
Number of offices held in professional education organizations 2.42* 153
Number of offices held in civic organizations 2.38* 152
Number of offices held in college organizations -2.22* 154
Leadership course taught in agricultural science program 2.00* 151
Note: *=p<0.05

Previous research did not investigate the influence of gender on instructor behavior.

Because gender had not been researched as an explanatory variable in the past studies

(Miller et al., 1989; Vaughn & Moore, 2000), it was decided to conduct correlations

using this variable. Correlations were conducted for gender (see Table 4-4), with males

coded as one and females coded as zero. The analysis revealed moderate correlations

with years teaching (r=0.43), age (r=0.39), and years teaching in current position

(r=0.37).

Number of Instructors at School

The number of agriculture instructors at the school ranged from one to six, with an

average of M= 1.56 instructors per department. Of the 156 participants that responded to

this question, 59.0% (n=92) were located in one-instructor departments and 32.1%

(n= 50) were in two-instructor departments (see Table 4-5).












Table 4-4. Pearson's Product Moment Correlations between Gender and Selected
Variables (n=156)
Variable Gender2
Years teaching 0.43*
Age 0.39*
Years in current teaching position 0.37*
Instructor leadership teaching behavior 0.23*
Certified through a university agriculture teacher education programs 0.22*
Bachelor degree in agricultural education 0.20*
Number of offces held in professional education organizations 0.19*
Number of offces held in civic organizations 0.19*
Four or more instructor department 0.18*
Leadership course taught in agricultural science programs 0.16*
Number of offces held in high school organizations outside of FFA -0.19*
Number of offces held in college organizations -0.18*
Note: *-p<0.05; -=Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0; 2=Males coded as 1, Females coded
as 2.


Table 4-5. Number of agricultural science instructors at school (n=1 56)
n %
One-instructor school 92 59.0
Two-instructor school 50 32.1
Three-instructor school 8 5.1
Four-or-more instructor school 6 3.8

Figure 4-4 shows the distribution of the number of agriculture instructors in school.

The curve is skewed left, illustrating the large number of one-instructor and two-

instructor agricultural science departments.

Relationships with number of agricultural science instructors in school shows a

negative, moderate correlation with rural school location (r=-0.34) and a positive,

moderate correlation with suburban school location (r=0.31), indicating that as the school

location becomes more urban (i.e. less rural), the number of agriculture instructors at a

school increases (see Table 4-6).











100-










40-








1 '1 3 4 5 6
Number of Aricuhure Instructors in School



Figure 4-4. Distribution of Number of Agriculture Instructors in School

Participants located in four-or-more instructor departments (see Table 4-6) had a

moderate correlation with number of offices held in high school organizations outside of

FFA (r=0.42). This reveals that participants teaching at schools with over three

agriculture instructors were more likely to have participated in high school organizations

outside of FFA, than were the participants teaching at schools with fewer instructors.

Additional correlations with number of instructors at school can be found in Appendix D,

Table D-2.

School Location

Participants were asked to describe the location of the community in which their

school was located. Table 4-7 shows 73.4% (n=113) indicated their school was in a rural

community, consisting of a population under 10,000 (Pennsylvania State University,










2004; U.S. Census Bureau, 2004; Wingenbach, 1995). For determining correlational

relationships, the locations of rural, suburban, and urban were coded as dichotomous

dummy variables.

Table 4-6. Pearson' s Product Moment Correlations between Number of Instructors at
School and Selected Variables (n=156)
Number of
Agricultural Four
Science One Two Three or More
Variable Instructors Instructor Instructor Instructor Instructors
Rural school location -0.34* 0.27* -0.05 -0.22* -0.23*
Suburban school locations 0.31* -0.20* 0.03 0.16 0.19*
Location of school 0.28*" -0.24* 0.05 0.21* 0.20*
Number of workshops and 0.21* -0.19* 0.04 0.26* 0.20*


seminars for non-agriculture
teachers
Number of offices held in high 0.20*
school organizations outside of
FFA
Level of education 0.18*
Instructor leadership teaching 0.13
behavior
Number of agricultural science--
instructors in school
One instructor department --
Two instructor department --
Three instructor department' --
Notes: *=p<0.05; l=Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0.

Table 4-7. Location of school (n=1 54)
Location

Rural (<10,000)

Suburban (10,000-49,999)

Urban (>49,000)


0.42*


0.05
0.07

0.40*

-0.17*
-0.10
-0.03


-0.11


-0.15
-0.12

-0.78*


-0.04


0.01
0.04

0.35*

-0.81*


0.11


0.22*
0.18*

0.39*

-0.28*
-0.16*


73.4

16.2

10.4


n

113

25

16


Pearsons' Product Moment correlations produced strong correlations between the

dichotomous location variables and the parent variable location. All other relationships

were low (see Table 4-8). It is interesting to note that the relationships between FFA

involvement and school location, although low in magnitude, reveal that instructors at









rural schools were more likely to have been involved in FFA than were the instructors at

urban schools. In addition, instructors in urban schools were less likely to have earned

their bachelor' s degree in agricultural education, revealing that many urban instructors

have a technical specialization outside of agricultural education.

Table 4-8. Pearson's Product Moment Correlations between School Location and
Selected Variables (n=154)
Variable Location Rural Suburban Urban
Rural school locations -0.93* -- -0.73* 0.57*
Urban school locations 0.84* ----
Suburban school locations 0.42* -- -- -0.15
FFA chapter officers -0.25* 0.24* -0.12 -0.20*
Number of workshops and seminars for non- 0.24* -0.17* -0.03 0.28*"
agriculture teachers
Bachelor degree in agricultural education -0.23* 0.22* -0.12 -0.18*
FFA member in high school' -0.22* 0.22* -0.12 -0.17*
FFA officer above chapter level -0.16* 0.17* -0.12 -0.10
Instructor leadership teaching behavior 0.13 -0.06 -0.08 0.19*
Note. *=p<0.05; -=Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0.

Educational Background

When asked to indicate their highest level of education, 50.6% (n= 80) of the

participants held a masters degree (see Table 4-9). When asked to indicate if they were

certified through a university agricultural teacher certification program, 96.8% (n= 153)

had been certified through a university agriculture teacher education program, and 85.4%

(n= 134) stated their bachelor degree was in agricultural education.

Table 4-9. Educational Background (n=158)
n %
Less than a bachelor degree 3 1.9
Bachelor degree 75 47.5
Masters degree 80 50.6
Certified through a university agriculture teacher certification program 153 96.8
Bachelor degree in agricultural education 134 85.4


Pearson's Product Moment correlations revealed a moderate relationship between

level of education and number of offices held in professional education organizations









(r=0.31) (see Table 4-10). Relationships with the variable bachelor degree in agricultural

education include two moderate correlations, the first with FFA member in high school

(r=0.40) and the second with FFA chapter officer (r=0.36).

FFA Involvement

Table 4-11 presents the participants' FFA involvement. Of the participants, 86.1%

(n=136) stated they had been FFA members, and 75.9% (n=120) had been an FFA

chapter officer.

Table 4-10. Pearson's Product Moment Correlations Between Educational Background
and Selected Variables (n=157)
Certified through a Bachelor
University Degree in
Level of Agriculture Teacher Agricultural
Variable Education Education Program Education
Certified through a university agriculture 0.10---
teacher education programs
Bachelor degree in agricultural education -0.03 0.23* --
Number of offices held in professional 0.31* 0.13 0.07
education organizations
Number of offices held in civic 0.16* 0.02 0.06
organizations
Gender2 0.15 0.22* 0.20*
Leadership course taught in agricultural 0.09 0.17* 0.21*
science programs
FFA chapter officers 0.07 0.07 0.36*
Instructor expectations after leadership has 0.07 0.17* 0.20*
been taught
Instructor attitude towards the teaching of -0.06 0.16* 0.06
leadership
Instructor leadership teaching behavior -0.03 0.09 0.09
FFA member in high school' 0.03 0.14 0.40*
Number of leadership courses taken in 0.03 0.01 0.16*
college
Membership in professional development -0.02 0.01 0.18*
organizations
Note. *=p<0.05; l=Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0; 2=Males coded as 1, Females coded as











Table 4-11. FFA Involvement (n=158)
n %
FFA member in high school 136 86.1
FFA chapter officer 120 75.9
FFA officer above chapter level 52 33.1


Most instructors were FFA members in high school, however Table 4-12 shows

that FFA membership had a negligible relationship to instructor leadership teaching

behavior. A moderate relationship was found between holding an FFA office above

chapter level and number of offices held in college organizations (r=0.31).

Table 4-12. Pearson's Product Moment Correlations between FFA Involvement and
Selected Variables (n=158)
FFA FFA Chapter FFA Officer above
Variable Memberl Officer Chapter Level
FFA member in high school' -- 0.72* 0.25*"
FFA chapter officers -- -- 0.33*
Number of offices held in college 0.20* 0.22* 0.31*
organizations
Age -0.17* -0.16* -0.20*
Number of leadership positions in local -0.17* -0.12 -0.10
school or vocational department
Number of offices held in high school 0.08 0.15 0.16*
organizations outside of FFA
Instructor leadership teaching behavior 0.05 -0.01 -0.04
Note. *=p<0.05; -Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0.


High School and College Leadership Activities

High school and college leadership activities of participants are listed in Table 4-

13. Of the participants, 74. 1% (n=1 17) held offices in high school organizations outside

of FFA. In terms of college leadership activities, 73.1% (n=1 14) had taken one or more

college leadership courses and 67.3% (n=107) held one or more offices in college

organizations.











Table 4-13. High School and College Leadership Activities of Participants
n M SD Minimum Maximum
Number of offices held in high school 158 2.72 3.18 0 20
organizations outside of FFA
Number of leadership courses in college 156 1.67 1.62 0 10
Number of offices held in student organizations 159 1.83 2.15 0 15
at the college level


Correlations in Table 4-14 reveal that number of offices held in high school

organizations outside of FFA had a substantial relationship with number of offices held in

college organizations (r=0.52), and a moderate relationship between number of offices in

college organizations and holding FFA office above chapter level (r=0.31). An

interesting finding is the relationship of these variables to instructor leadership teaching

behavior. Number of leadership courses taken in college had a low relationship with

instructor leadership teaching behavior, while negligible relationships were found with

number of offices in high school organizations outside of FFA and number of offices in

college organizations. These findings indicate these leadership activities had little

influence on the amount of leadership taught in the agricultural science classroom.

Additional correlations can be found in Appendix D, Table D-4.

Professional and Civic Organization Leadership Experience

Participant experience in professional and civic organizations is shown in Table 4-

15. The number of offices held in professional education organizations ranged from zero

to 15, with an average ofM=-2.03 offices per instructor. Of these participants, 51.9%

(n= 82) held one or more offices. Similarly, 79.2% (n= 126) of the participants had

membership in at least one professional development organization, and 36.1% (n=57) of

the participants held an office in a professional development organization. When looking









at how many offices were held in civic organizations, 58.0% (n=91) of the participants

held one or more offices.

Table 4-14. Pearson's Product Moment Correlations between High School and College
Leadership Activities and Selected Variables (n=158)
Number of Number of Number of
Leadership Offices in High Offices in
Courses in School College
Variable College Organizations Organizations
Number of offices held in college 0.14 0.52* -
orgamizations
Leadership course taught in agricultural 0.28* -0.03 0.07
science programs
Instructor leadership teaching behavior 0.22* 0.09 0.07
Three-instructor department 0.21* 0.11 0.23*"
Membership in professional development 0.13 0.23* 0.14
organizations
Number of regional or state agricultural -0.10 0.15 0.19*
education committees participated in
FFA member in high school' 0.10 0.08 0.20*
FFA chapter officers 0.09 0.15 0.22*
Number of workshops and seminars for 0.07 0.24* 0.16*
non-agriculture teachers
FFA officer above chapter -0.06 0.16* 0.31*
Four or more instructor department -0.06 0.27* 0.10
Note. *=p<0.05; -Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0; 2_Males coded as 1, Females coded as



Table 4-15. Number of Offices Held in Professional and Civic Organizations
n M SD Minimum Maximum
Number of offices in professional education 158 2.03 2.93 0 15
organizations
Membership in professional development 159 2.16 1.77 0 8
organizations
Number of offices held in professional 158 0.68 1.14 0 6
development organizations
Number of offices in civic organizations 157 1.65 2.52 0 17


Pearson's Product Moment correlations, shown in Table 4-16, revealed moderate

correlations between offices in professional education organizations and number of

regional or state agricultural education committees participated in (r=0.46), years in










current teaching position (r=0.40), years teaching (r=0.37), number of workshops and

seminars for agriculture teachers (r=0.33), level of education (r=0.31), and age (r=0.30).

Offices in civic organizations had moderate relationships with number of offices held in

professional development organizations (r=0.3 8), number of leadership positions in local

school or vocational department (r=0.34), and years teaching (r=0.32).

Table 4-16. Pearson's Product Moment Correlations Between Professional and Civic
Organization Leadership Experience and Selected Variables (n=158)
Offices in
Professional
Education Offices in Civic
Variable Organizations Organizations
Number of regional or state agricultural education 0.46* 0.16*
committees participated in
Years in current teaching position 0.40* 0.19*
Years teaching 0.37* 0.32*
Number of workshops and seminars for agriculture 0.33* 0.09
teachers
Level of education 0.31* 0.16*
Age 0.30* 0.25*
Number of offices held in professional development 0.26* 0.38*
organizations
Number of leadership positions in local school or 0.23*" 0.34*
vocational department
One-instructor department -0.21* -0.13
Number of offices held in civic organizations 0.21* -
Number of workshops and seminars for non-agriculture 0.20* 0.20*
teachers
Gender2 0.19* 0.19*
Instructor attitude towards the teaching of leadership -0.18* -0.11
Number of agricultural science instructors in school 0.17* 0.06
Three-instructor department 0.13 0.22*
Membership in professional development organizations 0.10 0.23*
Instructor leadership teaching behavior 0.03 0.15
Note. *=p<0.05; -Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0; 2_Males coded as 1, Females coded as


Correlations with membership in professional development organizations, as shown

in Table 4-17, revealed only low and negligible relationships. Moderate relationships

were revealed between offices in professional development organizations and number of









offices held in civic organizations (r=0.3 8), number of regional or state agricultural

education committees participated in (r=0.39), and number of leadership positions in

local school or vocational department (r=0.39).

Table 4-17. Pearson's Product Moment Correlations Between Professional Development
Organization Membership and Holding Office, and Selected Variables
(n=158)
Membership in Offices in
Professional Professional
Development Development
Variable Organizations Organizations
Number of workshops and seminars for agriculture 0.25*" 0.25*"
teachers
Number of leadership positions in local school or 0.24* 0.39*
vocational department
Number of offices held in high school organizations 0.23*" 0.09
outside of FFA
Number of offices held in civic organizations 0.23*" 0.38*
Number of regional or state agricultural education 0.21* 0.39*
committees participated in
Instructor leadership teaching behavior 0.20* 0.19*
Bachelor degree in agricultural education 0.18* 0.14
Instructor attitude towards the teaching of leadership 0.17* 0.11
Years in current teaching position 0.10 0.22*
Number of offices held in professional education 0.10 0.26*
organizations
Years teaching 0.08 0.28*
Age 0.07 0.28*
Number of times attended Advisor' s Washington 0.06 0.24*
Leadership Conference
Membership, in professional development organizations -- 0.50*
Notes: *-p<0.05; -Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0.


Committee Participation, and Workshops and Seminar Presentations

Regional and state agricultural education committee participation ranged from zero

to 35 committees, with an average ofM=-3.67 committees (see Table 4-18) per

participant. Of the participants, 78.0% (n=124) had participated on one or more

committees. When asked about workshops and training seminars presented to agriculture

teachers, 51.9% (n=82) had conducted workshops and seminars for agriculture









instructors, while 54.7% (n=87) had presented workshops and seminars for non-

agriculture teachers.

Table 4-18. Mean Committee Participation, and Workshops and Seminars Presented
(n=158)
M SD Minimum Maximum
Number of regional and state agricultural education 3.67 5.29 0 35
committees served on
Number of workshops and seminars conducted for 2.37 4.71 0 30
agriculture teachers
Number of workshops and seminars conducted for 2.89 5.62 0 31
non-agriculture teachers


Table 4-19 shows correlations of selected variables with number of regional or

state agricultural education committees. A substantial relationship was found with

number of workshops and seminars for agriculture teachers (r=0.50). Moderate

relationships were found with number of offices held in professional education

organizations (r=0.46), number of offices held in professional development organizations

(r=0.39), and number of leadership positions in local school or vocational department.

Number of workshops and seminars for agriculture teachers, as shown in Table 4-

19, had moderate relationships with number of leadership positions in local school or

vocational department (r=0.49), number of workshops and seminars for non-agriculture

teachers (r=0.42). In addition, moderate relationships were found with number of times

attended Advisor' s Washington Leadership Conference (r=0.3 8), number of offices held

in professional education organizations (r=0.33), and years teaching in current position

(r=0.32). When correlations were conducted with number of workshops and seminars

for non-agriculture teachers, a moderate relationship was found with number of

leadership positions held in local school or vocational department (r=0.35). Additional

correlations with these variables can be found in Appendix D, Table D-3.












Table 4-19. Pearson's Product Moment Correlations Between Committee Participation,
and Workshops and Seminar Presentations and Selected Variables (n=158)
Number of
Number of Number of Workshops
Regional or State Workshop s and
Agricultural and Seminars Seminars
Education for for Non-
Committees Agriculture Agriculture


Irticipated in Teachers Teachers
0.50* --


Variable Pa
Number of workshops and seminars for
agriculture teachers
Number of offices held in professional
education organizations
Number of offices held in professional
development organizations
Number of leadership positions in local
school or vocational department
Years in current teaching position
Number of workshops and seminars for
non-agriculture teachers
Membership in professional development
organizations
Number of offices held in college
organizations
Number of times attended Advisor' s
Washington Leadership Conference
Number of offices held in civic
organizations
Note. *=p<0.05; =Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0.


0.46*

0.39*

0.32*

0.29*
0.21*

0.21*

0.19*

0.19*

0.16


0.33*

0.25*

0.49*

0.32*
0.42*

0.25*

0.12

0.38*

0.09


0.20*

0.09

0.35*

0.10


0.13

0.16*

0.07

0.20*


School and Vocational Department Leadership Positions, and Attending the
Advisors Washington Leadership Conference

When looking at the number of leadership positions participants have held in their

local school or vocational department, 82.9% (n=131) held leadership positions, with an

average ofM=-2.58 positions per participant, and a range of zero to 12 positions. In terms

of number of times attending the Advisor' s Washington Leadership Conference, 15.1%


(n=24) instructors had attended the conference (see Table 4-20).









Table 4-20. Mean Number of Leadership Positions Held in Local School or Vocational
Department and Advisors' Washington Leadership Conference Attendance
n M SD Minimum Maximum
Number of leadership positions held in local 158 2.58 2.55 0 12
school or vocational department
Number of times attended the National FFA 159 0.30 1.37 0 16
Advisors' Washington Leadership Conference


Table 4-21 presents the correlations for the number of leadership positions in local

school or vocational department and selected variables. Moderate relationships to the

variable number of leadership positions in local school or vocational department include

number of workshops and seminars for agriculture teachers (r=0.49), number of offices

held in professional development organizations (r=0.39), number of workshops and

seminars for non-agriculture teachers (r=0.35), number of offices held in civic

organizations (r=0.34), and number of regional or state agricultural education committees

participated in (r=0.32). In addition, one moderate relationship was found between

number of times attended Advisor' s Washington Leadership Conference and number of

workshops and seminars for agriculture teachers (r=0.38).

Leadership Course Taught in Agricultural Science Program

When asked if a leadership course was taught in their agricultural science program,

52.6% (n=82) indicated this did occur. Pearson's Product Moment correlation revealed a

moderate relationship with instructor leadership teaching behavior (r=0.44) (see Table 4-

22).












Table 4-21. Pearson' s Product Moment Correlations Between School and Vocational
Department Leadership Positions, and Attending the Advisors Washington
Leadership Conference and Selected Variables (n=158)
Number of Leadership Number of Times
Positions in Local Attended Advisor's
School or Vocational Washington Leadership


Department Conference
0.49* 0.38*


Variable
Number of workshops and seminars for
agriculture teachers
Years teaching
Number of offices held in professional
development organizations
Number of workshops and seminars for
non-agriculture teachers
Age
Number of offices held in civic
organizations
Number of regional or state agricultural
education committees participated in
Years in current teaching position
Membership in professional development
organizations
Number of offices held in professional
education organizations
Number of times attended Advisor' s
Washington Leadership Conference
FFA member in high school' -0.17
Notes: *-p<0.05; -Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0.


0.39*
0.39*

0.35*

0.35*
0.34*

0.32*

0.25*
0.24*

0.23*

0.17*


0.18*
0.24*


0.07

0.16
0.05


0.19*

0.21*
0.06


0.10


0.02


Table 4-22. Pearson's Product Moment Correlations Between Leadership Course Taught
in Agricultural Science Program and Selected Variables (n=158)
Leadership Course Taught
in Agricultural Science
Variable Programl
Instructor leadership teaching behavior 0.44*
Number of leadership courses taken in college 0.28*
Bachelor degree in agricultural education 0.21*
Certified through a university agriculture teacher education 0.17*
programs
Gender2 0.16*
Notes: *=p<0.05; =Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0; 2=Males coded as 1, Females coded
as 2.










Objective Two: Determine the Extent to which Leadership Education is being
Taught in High School Agricultural Science Classrooms

Participants were asked 28 questions to determine instructor leadership teaching

behavior, that is, the extent to which leadership was being taught in the participants'

classroom. These questions, based on curriculum content areas contained in unit two of

the LifeKnowledge curriculum, were used to provide an indication of the level of

leadership instruction occurring in the classroom. These questions were reviewed by an

expert panel and pilot tested. Using a series of 28 statements, the participant was asked if

they taught leadership by indicating either yes they taught the particular concept or no

they did not teach the concept (Connors & Elliot, 1994; Rudd & Hillison, 1995). The

instrument was developed as a paper and pencil instrument (see Appendix A) and as a

web page for use on the Internet (see Appendix B). Answers for this section of the web-

based instrument were indicated by using the computer mouse to click on a "radio

button" to indicate their answer using the dichotomous scale.

Responses to these 28 statements were summated and analyzed as a construct. The

greater the number of leadership concepts taught, the greater the level of instructor

leadership teaching behavior. The average participant indicated they were formally

teaching specific lessons addressing an average ofM=~1 8.88, SD=8.21i, of the 28 concepts

of leadership. The median was 20.00 with a range of zero to 28. Of these, 94.0%

(n=157) were teaching one or more specific lessons addressing these leadership concepts.

Based on responses to statements in section one of the instrument (see Appendix

A), participants taught the most lessons on the following leadership concepts: "leaders

are important," "to identify leaders," and "to develop a vision for the future." Lessons










taught the least by the participants were "the value of having a mentor" and "to select a

mentor."

The distribution of instructor leadership teaching behavior is shown in figure 4-5.

The distribution shows a normal curve that is skewed right. The figure reveals a group

on the left of approximately 10 participants that taught few or none of the leadership

concepts inquired about, then reveals a general increase in the frequency of leadership

concepts taught. The far right side of the figure illustrates a large group of participants

that indicated they taught all or nearly all of the leadership concepts about which the

instrument inquired.





40-


















0 5 10 15 20 ')5
Instructor Leadership Teaching Behavior

Figure 4-5. The Distribution of Instructor Leadership Teaching Behavior

Pearson Product Moment correlations were conducted for instructor leadership

teaching behavior, shown in Table 4-23. These correlations were conducted based on the









explanatory variables of behavior found in previous studies (Miller, Kahler, & Rhealt,

1989; Vaughn & Moore, 2000) and the theoretical behavioral model used in this study.

Relationships with leadership teaching behavior revealed moderate correlations with

leadership course taught in agricultural science program (r=0.44), and instructor attitude

towards the teaching of leadership (r=0.38). Other correlations found, although

significant, were low. An exhaustive table of correlations with instructor leadership

teaching behavior is found in Appendix D, Table D-5.

Table 4-23. Pearson' s Product Moment Correlations Between Instructor Leadership
Teaching Behavior and Selected Variables (n=156)
Instructor Leadership
Variable Teaching Behavior
Leadership course taught in agricultural science program 0.44*
Instructor attitude towards the teaching of leadership 0.38*
Gender2 0.23*
Number of leadership courses taken in college 0.22*
Instructor expectations after leadership has been taught 0.21*
Membership in professional development organizations 0.20*
Number of offices held in professional development organizations 0.19*
Urban location of school 0.19*
Three-instructor department 0.18*
Years teaching 0.16*
Note. *=p<0.05; l=Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0; 2=Males coded as 1, Females coded as



Objective Three: Based on National FFA LifeKnowledge Leadership Curriculum,
Determine High School Agricultural Science Instructor Leadership Knowledge

The instructor leadership knowledge score consisted of eight multiple choice and

seven true-false questions. These questions were developed from the lesson obj ectives

and evaluation tools found in unit two of the LifeKnowledge curriculum. They were then

reviewed by an expert panel and pilot tested. The answers to these questions were

summated to determine a knowledge score. Scores ranged from four correct answers to









15 correct answers, with an average score ofM=-10.19, SD=1.98, and a median of 10.00

of a possible 15.

Responses to the instrument questions (see Appendix A) indicated the questions

answered correctly most frequently by the participants were, "Something that someone

wants to achieve is a: Goal," "Delegating tasks takes more time than it saves: False," and

"Discouragement and giving up on a proj ect is part of being responsible and

accountable." Questions answered incorrectly most frequently by the participants were,

"Being responsible and accountable means: Being answerable for key areas of our life

with qualified people," "Personal self-worth is: The value I place in my own

contributions," and "When a person has dedicated time and effort to improving

themselves (and their lives) in the areas of social/family life, work/school life, and

personal life, we call this: Balance."

Figure 4-6 provides a visual representation of the distribution of instructor leadership

knowledge construct. The knowledge construct had a normal distribution, indicating a

majority of the participants provided answers towards the center of the scale. Based on a

similar mean (M=-10. 19) and median (10.00), the average level of participant leadership

knowledge could be interpreted as moderate. When Pearson's Product Moment

correlations were conducted with instructor leadership knowledge, they revealed only

low relationships with other variables.











40-




















4 6 8 10 12 14
Instructor Leadership Knowledge Sum

Figure 4-6. Distribution of Instructor Leadership Knowledge

Objective Four: Determine High School Agricultural Science Instructor Attitude
towards Teaching Leadership

A semantic differential consisting of 12 pairs of words was used to obtain the

attitude construct. Answers from the questions were summated, with a higher score

indicating a more positive attitude toward teaching leadership. The summated answers

ranged from 25 to 72, with a median of 66.00. Participants had an average attitude score

ofM=-64.69, SD=6.81 out of a possible 72.

The distribution of instructor attitude toward teaching leadership is presented in

figure 4-7. The distribution is skewed to the right. Based on the participants' attitude

mean (M=-64.69) and median (66.00), the average attitude score can be interpreted as

moderate.































30 40 50 60 70
Instructor Attitude Suim

Figure 4-7. Instructor Attitude Toward Teaching Leadership.

Based on previous research (Miller, Kahler, & Rhealt, 1989; Vaughn & Moore,

2000) it was decided to conduct correlations on selected variables. Pearson's Product

Moment correlation with instructor attitude toward teaching leadership (see Table 4-24)

revealed moderate correlations with instructor teaching behavior (r=0.38) and instructor

expectations after leadership has been taught (r=0.34).

Table 4-24. Pearson's Product Moment Correlations Between Instructor Attitude
Towards Teaching Leadership and Selected Variables (n=158)
Instructor Attitude
Towards Teaching
Variable Leadership
Instructor leadership teaching behavior 0.38*
Instructor expectations after leadership has been taught 0.34*
Certified through a university agriculture teacher education programs 0.16*
Notes: *-p<0.05; -=Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0.










Objective Five: Determine the Expectations that High School Agricultural Science
Instructors have of the Agriculture Students after Leadership has been Taught

The instructor expectations after leadership has been taught consisted of 22

dichotomous questions, the answers of which were summated to form a construct. The

expectation questions were based on the leadership concepts in unit two of the

LifeKnowledge curriculum. Higher scores indicated higher instructor expectations of

students after teaching leadership. The range of summated answers ranged from four to

22 with a median of 18.00. The expectation average score wasM=~17.45, SD=3.92 out of

a possible 22.

Based on responses to section two of the questionnaire (see Appendix A),

participants responded "yes" most frequently to the following statements: "After my

students learn about self-worth I would expect students to have greater confidence in

their own ideas," "After my students learn about leaders I would expect students to

identify ways they can lead others," and "After my students learn about goals I would

expect students to demonstrate how to prioritize personal goals." Statements that

participants responded "no" to most frequently were, "After my students learn about

mentors I would expect students to set an appointment with their mentor," "After my

students learn about personal values I would expect students to write a set of standards by

which they will evaluate decisions," and "After my students learn about vision I would

expect students to create a vision that others can see and internalize."

The distribution of instructor expectations after leadership has been taught is shown

in Figure 4-8, showing a distribution skewed right. When the mean (M=-17.45) and

median (18.00) of the distribution are taken into consideration, the average participant










expectations of students after leadership had been taught is less than the median and can

be interpreted as having moderate expectations.























5 7.5 10 125 15 175 0 215.5
Instructor Expectations Sum

Figure 4-8. Instructor Expectations after Leadership Has Been Taught

The findings of previous researchers (Miller, Kahler, & Rhealt, 1989; Vaughn &

Moore, 2000) and the theoretical behavioral model prompted correlations to be conducted

with instructor expectations after leadership has been taught (see Table 4-25). This

analysis revealed a moderate relationship with instructor attitude towards the teaching of

leadership (r=0.34).












Table 4-25. Pearson's Product Moment Correlations Between Instructor Expectations
after Leadership has been Taught and Selected Variables (n=157)
Instructor Expectations
after Leadership
Variable Instruction
Instructor attitude towards the teaching of leadership 0.34*
Instructor leadership teaching behavior 0.21*
Bachelor degree in agricultural education 0.20*
Number of offices held in high school organizations outside of 0.19*
FFA
Certified through a university agriculture teacher education 0.17*
program
Notes: *=p<0.05; = Yes coded as 1, No coded as 0.


Objective Six: Determine the Relationship between High School Agricultural
Science Instructor Leadership Knowledge, Instructor Attitude Towards Teaching
Leadership, Instructor Expectations of Students after Teaching Leadership, and
Instructor Demographics to Instructor Leadership Teaching Behavior

Correlations

A Pearson's Product Moment Correlation table was constructed using the

demographic variables, including the dummy coded variables, instructor leadership

knowledge score, and the constructs of instructor leadership teaching behavior, instructor

expectations after leadership has been taught, and instructor attitude towards teaching

leadership. The significant correlations for these variables in relation to instructor

leadership teaching behavior are provided in Table 4-23 and an exhaustive list is found in

Appendix D, Table D-5.

The variables with significant correlation to the construct of behavior were

leadership course taught in agricultural science program (dummy coded) (r=0.44),

instructor attitude towards the teaching of leadership (r=0.3 8), gender (dummy coded)

(r=0.23), number of leadership courses taken in college (r=0.22), instructor expectations

after leadership has been taught (r=0.21), number of offices held in professional









development organizations (r=0.20), membership in professional development

organizations (r=0.20), urban location of school (dummy coded) (r=0. 19), three-

instructor department (dummy coded) (r=0. 18), and years teaching (r=0. 16). These

variables were then placed into SPSS@ 12.0 for Windows to develop an explanatory

regression model.

The variables leadership course taught in agricultural science program, urban

location of school, gender, and instructor attitude towards the teaching of leadership,

were included in the model that best explained total variance in agricultural science

instructor leadership teaching behavior. Regression analysis revealed that this model

significantly explained 33% of the variance in instructor leadership teaching behavior, the

dependent variable.

Regression

Backwards regression was chosen because it is most appropriately used when the

research goal is primarily exploratory (Gliem, 2003). Using backwards multiple

regression techniques, a significant explanatory model was developed with a R-square

value of 0.35 and an adjusted R-square value of 0.33, F(4,145)=19. 15, p<0.05. This

model used the explanatory variables leadership course taught in agricultural science

program, urban location of school, gender, and instructor attitude towards the teaching of

leadership. Unstandardized regression coefficients (B), intercept, and standardized

regression coefficients (p) for each variable are presented in Table 4-26.