Files in this item
|(no description provided)|
|Title:||Processes used by selected Illinois Extension agents (advisers) to produce high-quality programs|
|Author(s):||Wissemann, Arnold Fredrick|
|Doctoral Committee Chair(s):||Law, Dale|
|Department / Program:||Education|
|Degree Granting Institution:||University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign|
|Subject(s):||Education, Adult and Continuing
|Abstract:||Previous research indicates that Extension advisers have not followed program planning models recommended in the literature. This study determined the actual processes Illinois county advisers have commonly used to produce high quality Extension programs. One reason the study was carried out was so that other advisers not already using these processes may become aware of them and adopt them if they are not already using them. This could result in more high quality programs in Illinois. The study was conducted in two stages. In the first stage, Illinois regional Extension directors participated in a delphi survey to determine the criteria they consider most important in distinguishing high quality programs. These criteria were then used by each regional Extension director to select the home economics adviser and the agricultural adviser under their supervision who have most consistently produced high quality programs. Regional directors were also interviewed to discover more generally how they perceive high quality programs.
In the second and major stage of the study the seven home economics advisers and the seven agricultural advisers selected by regional directors were interviewed in-depth to discover the processes they have commonly used to produce high quality programs. These processes were discovered based on descriptions advisers gave of programs they had produced. Qualitative data analysis focused on commonalities in advisers experiences. The mechanical aspects of data analysis were assisted through using Ethnograph, a microcomputer software program.
Twenty four common processes were discovered. The processes commonly used by home economics advisers were compared with those commonly used by agricultural advisers. Fourteen were unique to home economics advisers and two were unique to agricultural advisers. The eight commonly used by both groups of advisers were labelled: knowledge of county, reviewing and identifying needs throughout each year, advisers rather than their program councils originally identifying many of the needs ultimately addressed through programs, flexibility, tailoring curriculum materials, organizing and coordinating program delivery, use of mass media and focusing on felt needs. An assessment was made of the extent to which the twenty four common processes have been incorporated into Boyle's (1981) model for a developmental program.
|Rights Information:||Copyright 1991 Wissemann, Arnold Fredrick|
|Date Available in IDEALS:||2011-05-07|
|Identifier in Online Catalog:||AAI9136766|