Catherine W. Shoulders

Instrument Validity in Manuscripts Published in the Journal of Agricultural Education between 2007 and 2016

We examined authors’ treatment of instrument validity in a stratified random sample (n = 94) of quantitative studies published in the Journal of Agricultural Education from 2007 to 2016. A majority (78.7%) of studies reported use of either a researcher-developed instrument (41.5%) or an existing instrument modified by the researchers (37.2%). In 67.0% of articles, authors validated the instrument for the study reported; in 16.0%, the authors claimed instrument validity based on previous studies. Authors made no claim for instrument validity in 11.7% of articles and claimed an unspecified form of validity in another 11.7%. Among the 72 articles where specific validity claims were made, 67 (93.1%) claimed face and content validity, either alone or in combination with other forms of validity. Claims for content, concurrent, and discriminant validity, either alone or in combination with other forms of validity, were made in 11 (15.3%) of the 72 articles. Among 70 articles claiming face, content, or construct validity, 91.4% included a description of the validation panel; panelists were most often described as ‘experts’ (70.3%), although their area(s) of expertise were specified in only 29.7% of articles. We conclude with specific recommendations intended to shift the profession’s subjective norms related to instrument validity.

A Description of the Professional Identities of Arkansas Agriculture Teachers

After decades of research in agricultural education on teacher knowledge, needs, behaviors, satisfaction, and attrition, calls for additional research and reform have remained fairly consistent. One potential factor influencing the rate at which these challenges are overcome is teacher professional identity, which shapes how teachers interpret and respond to knowledge delivered through professional development. Shoulders and Myers (2011) suggested the unique circumstances of agricultural education lead teachers to maintain a professional identity different than that of other educators, but little research has been conducted with regard to the professional identities of agriculture teachers. Using the theories of constructivism and planned behavior, this study utilized a researcher-adapted survey to describe the professional identities of Arkansas agriculture teachers. Findings indicated teachers identified as agriculture teachers more so than agriculturalists or educators, the professional identity of the agricultural educator was significantly different than that of the educator or the agriculturalist, and length of teaching experience was not related to professional identity score. We recommend teacher educators include the development of professional identity as a component of all professional development experiences. Recommendations for further research include qualitative investigation into the ways in which agriculture teachers’ professional identities manifest in the agriculture program.

Millennial and Non-Millennial Agriculture Teachers' Current and Ideal Emphasis on the Three Components of the Agricultural Education Program.

Classroom and laboratory instruction, FFA, and SAE have long represented the complete agricultural education program via the three-component model. While the model depicts three circles of equal size to represent these components, the focus and level of emphasis of each component within the agriculture program is the decision of the agriculture teacher. The purpose of this study was to describe [State] agriculture teachers’ behavioral intentions and actual behaviors regarding emphasis of each component in the profession’s three-component model. Results of this descriptive study indicated the average program emphasized instruction most, FFA next, and SAE least. However, the majority of respondents indicated a disparity between the emphasis of each component in their current program and their ideal program. Most respondents indicated their ideal program would emphasize instruction, FFA, and SAE equally. Differences between Millennial and Non-millennial teachers indicate the younger generation spent more time on FFA than the older generations, while the older generation wanted more personal time than their younger peers. We recommend further research be conducted to determine whether these results are found among other populations, as well as to uncover the reasons behind these results.