Upload
curtis-hardy
View
217
Download
2
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
2013 State Reports 43 States Reporting
Debra Spielmaker, Project DirectorNational Agriculture in the Classroom
June 23, 2014
State Report Background
State reports assist Agriculture in the Classroom (AITC) state directors, National AITC leaders, USDA staff, and researchers with annual benchmark data to determine impacts, funding, and program priorities.
It’s a pain, but Tonya is right!
Don’t resist Willie It wasn’t that bad?
Q1: Resource Development
Please list, by title, any classroom resources (instructional units, CDs, DVDs, maps, posters, etc.) that were developed or revised by your AITC program staff this past year. This question captures AITC state resource data for the NALCM.
38 (88%) states reported they had developed resources in 2013
41 (95%) states 2012 38 (90%) states in
2011
Q2: Educational Standard Correlations
If you listed resources for Question 1, were the resources aligned or correlated to state or national education standards?
22 reported: All 16 reported: Most 5 reported: None
Q3: Estimated number of teachers contacted/trained face-to-face statewide with AITC programs, curriculum, or other resources, 2009-2013.
0-.5 hours
1-2 hours
3-5 hours
6-10 hours
11-20 hours
20-30 hours
30+ hours
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
47,651
59,253
9,102
2,604589 222 972
20092010201120122013
Q4, 5 & 7: The estimation of the number of students reached statewide through their teachers, directly through AITC staff and volunteers with AITC programs, curriculum, or other resources.
K-6
Teac
her
7-12
Tea
cher
K-6
Direct
AIT
C
7-12
Dire
ct A
ITC
Volu
ntee
r -
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
3,000,000 2,636,252
797,108
1,402,223
257,584
1,334,456
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
Total number of students reached in:
2009 - 42 states: 5,199,441
2010 - 44 states: 5,598,190
2011 – 42 states: 5,641,025
2012 - 43 states: 6,009,045
2013 – 43 states: 6,471,621,
Q6: Estimate the number of volunteers who conducted or assisted with AITC programs.
Volunteers -
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
45,000
50,000
24,326 26,204
31,041 29,048
41,825 43,998 2008 (42 Reports)
2009 (42 Reports)
2010 (44 Reports)
2011 (42 Reports)
2012 (43 Reports)
2013 (43 Reports)
Q8: Number of pre-service teachers contacted or trained with AITC.
0-.5 hours
1-2 hours
3-5 hours
6-10 hours
11-20 hours
21-30 hours
30+ hours
-
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
2,465
4,359
3,709
117 76 5 36
2009 (42 Reports)2010 (44 Reports)2011 (42 Reports)2012 (43 Reports)2013 (43 Reports)
Total number of pre-service teachers reached in:
2009 – 42 states: 8,867
2010 – 44 states: 10,243
2011 – 42 states: 9,352
2012 – 43 states: 10,058
2013 – 43 states: 10,767
Q9 & Q11: Budgets
Budget Total Grant Total $-
$2,000,000
$4,000,000
$6,000,000
$8,000,000
$10,000,000
$12,000,000 11,072,896
1,036,010
2009 (42 Re-ports, 21 re-ceived grants)2010 (44 Re-ports, 26 re-ceived grants)2011 (42 Re-ports, 22 re-ceived grants)
Budget Range 2012: $3,800 - $2,198,765 Grant Range 2012: $350 - $202,300
Budget Range 2013: $5,000 - $2,597,991 Grant Range 2013: $2,000 - $186,400
Q10a: Funding sources for state AITC 2013 budgets. No state receives direct federal on-going dollars outside of a grants.
22 (50%) reported 100% private funding (49% in 2012)
16 (37%) reported state and private funding (42% in 2012)
3 states reported they received federal funds for 2013 programs 3-15% of 2013 budget
Q10b: State dollar funding for 2013 budgets
16 states, 2013 (20 in 2012) reported some state funding
NY & MT reported 100% state funding
3-25% 26-50% 51-75% 76-100% -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
2012
2013
Q23: Do you perceive that your program is:
Inadequately funded to carry out program goals (we are meeting less than 25% of our program goals)
Poorly funded to carry out program goals (we are meeting 50% or less of our program goals)
In need of more funding to carry out program goals (we are meeting 50% - 75% of our program goals)
Adequately funded to carry out program goals (we are meeting 75% - 100% of our program goals)
Well-funded, we have more funding than we know what to do with (we are meeting more than 100% of our program goals)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Total number of states reporting funding perception
Rating
Q12: List the titles (up to five) of the lesson plan(s) you use most often with teachers/students to convey an agricultural literacy message. This/These should be your favorite go-to lesson(s).
33 states noted lessons plans they most often used with teachers. Titles and links can be
found in the 2013 State Report Booklet, online: http://agclassroom.org/state/summaries/index.htm
Q13a: Have you created a state specific children's book on agriculture?
Q13b: If yes, did you self-publish or use a publisher?
Q13c: What is/are your book titles?
9 reported self-publishing, 2 used a publisher1. Arizona (publisher)
2. Arkansas (self)
3. California (self)
4. Florida (self)
5. Maine (self)
6. Michigan (self)
7. Montana (self)
8. Oklahoma (self)
9. Oregon (self)
10. Tennessee (self)
11. Virginia (publisher)
Q14: What do you typically measure when evaluating programming?
Other
Effects on student academic test scores
Perceptions of agricultural practices among student participants
Gains in agricultural knowledge among student participants
Usefulness of provided classroom resources
Perceptions of agricultural practices among teacher participants
Gains in agricultural knowledge among teacher participants
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Frequency
Q15: What type of evaluation methods are you using to determine program impact?
Other
Correlation methods between surveys and other measured outcomes such as state test scores
Student pre/post surveys
Anecdotal narratives
Post survey or evaluations
Pre/post survey or evaluations
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Frequency
Frequency
Q16: As the state contact for AITC, please rate what you perceive are your program strengths and weaknesses. (0 = nonexistent, 1 = weak, 2 = developing, 3 = satisfactory, 4 = strong)
**Social networking
*Recruitment and volunteer training
Newsletter preparation
*Instructional resource development for educators (lesson plans and other paper-based/pdf classroom media)
Developing online learning modules or courses
Grant writing
**Conducting STEM workshops
**Working directly with 6-12 students
**Secondary in-service professional development (6-12)
*Pre-service programming
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Score
Correlation with perceptions concerning adequate funding *p < .05**p < .01
Q17: As the state contact for AITC, please rank what you would like to develop or what is developed in your state program.(0 = not interested, 1 = some interest, 2 = interested but need training, 3 = doing this but we should put forth a greater effort in this area, 4 = our program already does this successfully)
Social networking
*Recruitment and volunteer training
Newsletter preparation
**Instructional resource development for educators (lesson plans and other paper-based/pdf classroom media)
Developing online learning modules or courses
Grant writing
Conducting STEM workshops
Working directly with 6-12 students
*Secondary in-service professional development (6-12)
**Pre-service programming
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Score
Correlation with perceptions concerning adequate funding *p < .05**p < .01
Q16 & 17: There was a positive correlation between the level of perception regarding program strengths and desired programming on all variables at p < .01.
• Pre-service programming• Elementary in-service professional development (K-5)• Secondary in-service professional development (6-12)• Working directly with K-5 students• Working directly with 6-12 students• Career education professional development• Conducting STEM workshops• Fundraising• Grant writing• Applications of technologies to improve programming• Developing online learning modules or courses• Measuring student agricultural literacy• Instructional resource development for educators (lesson plans
and other paper-based/pdf classroom media)• Instructional resource development for educators (media beyond
paper/pdfs: classroom ready kits, maps, posters, games, etc.)• Newsletter preparation• Student resource preparation (readers, books, kits, etc.)• Recruitment and volunteer training• Electronic resource development• Social networking
Q18: Describe your state program structure and/or supervision.
Other (describe organizational structure and oversight/supervision)
No outside or internal program oversight committee or advisors
An internal organization supervisor
An internal advisory group comprised of people within the organization
Program Advisory Council that is not a Board of Directors, comprised of a diverse and engaged cross-section of stakeholders
Board of Directors
State Department of Education
State Department of Agriculture
Higher Education (state funded)
Private Organization (Farm Bureau, Association)
Private Foundation
Foundation - nonprofit, 501(c)3
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Frequency
Q19-22: Describe how your AITC structure affects or impacts your ability to work with:
education policymakers
formal K-12 educators
grants
funders
0 5 10 15 20 25
Easy Somewhat EasySomewhat Difficult DifficultOur program doesn't work with this element
Q24-25: Outputs and Outcomes
Accomplishment (output): achieving the completion or fulfillment of something
Impact (outcome): to have an immediate and strong (measurable) effect on something or somebody related to program goals or objectives
To see state accomplishments and impacts, review the state summaries website: http://agclassroom.org/state/summaries/index.htm