Application of Marketing Techniques to Extension Programming Decision Making: Minnesota livestock producers’ preferred topics, informational formats, and

Application of Marketing Techniques to Application of Marketing Techniques to Extension Programming Decision Extension Programming Decision

Making:Making:Minnesota livestock producers’ preferred topics, Minnesota livestock producers’ preferred topics,

informational formats, and outreach methods informational formats, and outreach methods

concerning land application of manureconcerning land application of manure

John C. VickeryJohn C. VickeryLand Director, Palmer Land TrustLand Director, Palmer Land Trust

Colorado Springs, ColoradoColorado Springs, Colorado

Project management: Water Resource Center, UMn Project management: Water Resource Center, UMn

Grant administration: Mn Pollution Control AgencyGrant administration: Mn Pollution Control Agency

22

Project synopsisWhat: Focus groups and pre-discussion survey Audience: Minnesota livestock producers Goal: To identify preferred Extension education methods and topics re. land application of manure. When: Spring & summer of 2002, following a winter education program at the county level that focused on manure application practices, nutrient management, and protection of sensitive areas. Purpose: To give direction to future education and information services. Project report: John Vickery (2002), WRC website (just Google: vickery manure minnesota

33

Project backgroundProject background 2000, Minnesota Pollution Control 2000, Minnesota Pollution Control

Agency promulgated revisions to Agency promulgated revisions to the state feedlot rulesthe state feedlot rules

The rules address:The rules address: Feedlot registration, permitting, and Feedlot registration, permitting, and

designdesign Manure-nutrient application ratesManure-nutrient application rates Management of manure in Management of manure in

environmentally sensitive areasenvironmentally sensitive areas Other areas of environmental concern. Other areas of environmental concern.

44

Project backgroundProject background UMn WRC & Ext Service UMn WRC & Ext Service coordinated with coordinated with

state agencies to secure funding for and plan state agencies to secure funding for and plan an education program. an education program. (*BEP: timing)(*BEP: timing)

First year, 2000/1: information was delivered First year, 2000/1: information was delivered at regional and county levels regarding at regional and county levels regarding feedlot registration, permitting, discharge feedlot registration, permitting, discharge restrictions, and other basic requirements. restrictions, and other basic requirements.

Second year, 2001/2: focused on Second year, 2001/2: focused on requirements for land application of manure. requirements for land application of manure.

Joint Extension and state agency teams Joint Extension and state agency teams prepared education materials and delivered prepared education materials and delivered the workshops. the workshops.

55

Project backgroundProject background

The reasons in turn, for the new rules The reasons in turn, for the new rules included:included:

The growing public concern in the 1990s The growing public concern in the 1990s about the increase in numbers of large about the increase in numbers of large feedlots and the associated environmental feedlots and the associated environmental and human health effectsand human health effects

Legislative audit report of 1998 (MPCA, Legislative audit report of 1998 (MPCA, 2003). 2003).

>>>One of the primary conclusions of that >>>One of the primary conclusions of that report was that the feedlot rules—last report was that the feedlot rules—last revised in 1978—were out of date. revised in 1978—were out of date.

66


Back to the ‘present’, 2002Back to the ‘present’, 2002

Project leaders decided:Project leaders decided: Rather than Rather than evaluateevaluate the training program per the training program per

se, se,

Let’s apply remaining project resources to learn Let’s apply remaining project resources to learn what should be done next—what should be done next— What did the farmers want to learn or find out? What did the farmers want to learn or find out? In what format did they want to get the information? In what format did they want to get the information?

>>We asked them directly via the >>We asked them directly via the questionnaire and the focus group questions. questionnaire and the focus group questions.

77


Other componentsOther components QuestionnaireQuestionnaire

‘‘What do you do?’ To gauge ‘trends’, we asked What do you do?’ To gauge ‘trends’, we asked them about their adoption of desired (Required by them about their adoption of desired (Required by regulation and/or Extension-promoted) practices in regulation and/or Extension-promoted) practices in three time frames: three time frames: What they did—before 2000, What they did—before 2000, What they do currently—2002, What they do currently—2002, What do they plan to do—by 2004. What do they plan to do—by 2004. (Evaluation (Evaluation

connection)connection) Focus groupsFocus groups

Why don’t you do what we recommend?Why don’t you do what we recommend?‘‘Filter of impediments.’ Filter of impediments.’ Three of the ten selected practices we asked about in Three of the ten selected practices we asked about in

the questionnaire, were discussed in the focus groups the questionnaire, were discussed in the focus groups to identify to identify barriers to implementation.barriers to implementation.

88

Theoretical context, Theoretical context, Principles of adult educationPrinciples of adult educationCommon sense: ‘find out what your market Common sense: ‘find out what your market

wants’wants’->Supported in the theoretical literature of ->Supported in the theoretical literature of

adult educationadult education

Principles Principles espoused by Malcolm Knowles* espoused by Malcolm Knowles* [as summarized by Atherton (2003)], include:[as summarized by Atherton (2003)], include: The need to knowThe need to know—adult learners need to know —adult learners need to know

why they need to learn something before why they need to learn something before undertaking to learn it. undertaking to learn it.

Learner self-conceptLearner self-concept—adults need to be —adults need to be responsible for their own decisions and to be responsible for their own decisions and to be treated as capable of self-direction treated as capable of self-direction

*Well-known adult ed. theoritician and communicator*Well-known adult ed. theoritician and communicator

Theoretical context, Theoretical context, Principles of adult educationPrinciples of adult education

The need to knowThe need to know Learner self-conceptLearner self-concept

External motivator—the new state External motivator—the new state regulations—primary need-to-know regulations—primary need-to-know standpoint standpoint Internal or self-interested, need-to-know Internal or self-interested, need-to-know motivators such as environmental ethics, motivators such as environmental ethics, farm management efficiency, and financial farm management efficiency, and financial benefits.benefits.

1010


‘‘Andragogy’Andragogy’—the adult education version —the adult education version of pedagogy. Popularized by Malcolm of pedagogy. Popularized by Malcolm KnowlesKnowles

Peter Jarvis (2001) re. Knowles’ Peter Jarvis (2001) re. Knowles’ development of androgogy: “the first major development of androgogy: “the first major attempt in the West to construct a attempt in the West to construct a comprehensive theory of adult education.” comprehensive theory of adult education.”

Clark, 1999: “In Clark, 1999: “In ppedagogy, the concern is edagogy, the concern is with transmitting the content, while in with transmitting the content, while in aandragogy, the concern is with facilitating ndragogy, the concern is with facilitating the acquisition of the contentthe acquisition of the content

1111


MKnowles originally described P & A MKnowles originally described P & A as distinct fields with a dichotomy of as distinct fields with a dichotomy of methods. Later emphasized a methods. Later emphasized a relationship better treated as a relationship better treated as a continuum and that each field could continuum and that each field could borrow methods from the other in borrow methods from the other in appropriate contexts. appropriate contexts.

MontessoriMontessori

1212

Theoretical context, Learning Theoretical context, Learning stylesstyles

Many frameworks. Smith (1981), characterizes Many frameworks. Smith (1981), characterizes 17 learning styles inventories17 learning styles inventories

‘‘Innate’ preferences versus that which is Innate’ preferences versus that which is practical, convenient Examples . . . .practical, convenient Examples . . . .

Beware of incorrect interpretations of Beware of incorrect interpretations of questionnaire responses—reason for focus questionnaire responses—reason for focus groupsgroups

Little information is available re farmers’ Little information is available re farmers’ preferred modes and styles. preferred modes and styles.

Trede and Miller (2000) studied a selected Trede and Miller (2000) studied a selected subset of Iowa farmers via a relatively large-subset of Iowa farmers via a relatively large-scale mail survey. scale mail survey. (Kolb Learning Style (Kolb Learning Style Inventory)Inventory)

1313

Theoretical context, Learning Theoretical context, Learning stylesstylesTrede and Miller’s results: Trede and Miller’s results: Farmers’ preferred learning modes and styles Farmers’ preferred learning modes and styles

vary by topic: vary by topic:

““The results of the study showed that The results of the study showed that

Active experimentationActive experimentation (learning by doing) (learning by doing) seemed to be the preferred learning mode for seemed to be the preferred learning mode for agricultural topics related to physical farming agricultural topics related to physical farming resources (land, crops, livestock, machinery, resources (land, crops, livestock, machinery, and buildings) whileand buildings) while

Abstract learningAbstract learning (by observing others) were (by observing others) were the preferred learning modes for more critical the preferred learning modes for more critical thinking activities such as markets and thinking activities such as markets and prices, whole farm planning, and financial prices, whole farm planning, and financial management.” management.”

1414

Selected resultsSelected resultsMethods synopsisMethods synopsis

8 farmer focus groups; four counties in 8 farmer focus groups; four counties in different parts of the state. different parts of the state.

Each pair of focus groups in a county Each pair of focus groups in a county consisted of:consisted of: One group who attended a winter One group who attended a winter

workshop--workshop--‘Attenders’‘Attenders’ and and Another group who had not attended--Another group who had not attended--Non-Non-

AttendersAttenders

1515

Selected resultsSelected resultsMethods synopsisMethods synopsis Started with three-page questionnaire to Started with three-page questionnaire to

get the participants thinking about issues get the participants thinking about issues that would be explored in more detail that would be explored in more detail during the course of the discussion. during the course of the discussion.

The participants retained the questionnaire The participants retained the questionnaire through the discussion and were asked to through the discussion and were asked to refer to it at different points during the refer to it at different points during the sessionsession

1616

Selected results, Selected results, QuestionnaireQuestionnaireQuestionnaire componentsQuestionnaire components

Adoption of 10 recommended practices:Adoption of 10 recommended practices: (e.g., record keeping and soil testing)(e.g., record keeping and soil testing) ‘‘Yes’ or ‘No’ Yes’ or ‘No’ Three time frames: prior to 2000, currently (2002), Three time frames: prior to 2000, currently (2002),

planned to by 2004.planned to by 2004.

Preferences for 10 education topics Preferences for 10 education topics (land applic. (land applic.

manure)manure):: ““Would you attend?” Would you attend?” ‘ ‘Yes’, ‘maybe’, ‘no’; Top three choicesYes’, ‘maybe’, ‘no’; Top three choices

Preferences for education or information delivery Preferences for education or information delivery methods:methods: Preference rankingPreference ranking Seven delivery methods: publications, website, field days, and Seven delivery methods: publications, website, field days, and

workshops, newsletters, one-on-one assistanceworkshops, newsletters, one-on-one assistance

1717

Producers’ assessment of likelihood of attending or participating in educational programming: results for all (N = 51) questionnaire respondents combined (percent) & top choices for topics (counts)

All participants

Count PercentLettered topic / questionnaire item

Topchoice *

Yes Maybe No

A. Calibrating my manure spreader 9 18 47 35B. Manure sampling and nutrient content analysis 17 29 49 22

C. Soil sampling and testing 10 20 29 51

D. Manure application record keeping 11 31 51 18

E. Using UM Extension tables to calculate application rates 7 24 67 10

F. Field selection: soil P levels and manure application rates 16 33 61 6G. Managing sensitive areas 16 41 43 16H. Written nutrient management plan 12 35 57 8I. Applying and incorporating manure 17 34 58 8J. Determining total acres needed for all of my manure 7 47 35 18

*For ‘Top’ choice, respondents were allowed to list up to three choices. Most gave three.Results are given as counts or number of time

1818

Selected results, Selected results, QuestionnaireQuestionnaire

Participant rankings of informational formats and educational opportunities

All eight focus groupsessions

N = 51No. of times ranked

Item or opportunity Averageof the*median First Last

Publications 1.81 19 5Farm tours/demonstrations 2.25 14 4Newsletter, 'update', or periodicbulletin

2.25 11 9

Workshops 2.44 12 4Farm visit by specialist or consultantOR one-on-one assistance

2.69 13 14

Comprehensive website 3.37 4 17Nutrient management computersoftware

3.81 6 22

*The mean of the median of the rank assignments from each of the eight participant groups.

1919

Selected results, Selected results, QuestionnaireQuestionnaireDiscussionDiscussionThe farmers’ preferences can be analyzed The farmers’ preferences can be analyzed

from a number of perspectives and from a number of perspectives and theoretical frameworks such as:theoretical frameworks such as:

Instructor-centered versus learner-Instructor-centered versus learner-centered teachingcentered teaching

Information delivery versus educationInformation delivery versus education Thinking styleThinking style Learning style preferencesLearning style preferences Multiple intelligencesMultiple intelligences

2020

DiscussionDiscussion ‘ ‘Publications’ and ‘Newsletter’—the top and third Publications’ and ‘Newsletter’—the top and third

highest ranked here—are the ones that are most highest ranked here—are the ones that are most strictly informational in nature. strictly informational in nature.

In terms of one way of categorizing thinking stylesIn terms of one way of categorizing thinking styles—reflective, creative, practical, and conceptual— —reflective, creative, practical, and conceptual— these two ‘formats’ are the ones best suited to the these two ‘formats’ are the ones best suited to the ‘practical’ style (Rochester Institute of Technology, ‘practical’ style (Rochester Institute of Technology, 2000). 2000).

‘ ‘Farm tours/demonstrations’ and ‘workshops’ are Farm tours/demonstrations’ and ‘workshops’ are the ones that are best identified as ‘educational’. the ones that are best identified as ‘educational’. Depending on their design, they could be Depending on their design, they could be instructor-centered or learner-centered, although instructor-centered or learner-centered, although the former is probably more common in practice. the former is probably more common in practice.

2121

DiscussionDiscussion Depending on design and user preference, ‘Farm visit’ Depending on design and user preference, ‘Farm visit’

and ‘website’ can likewise serve in both or either fashions and ‘website’ can likewise serve in both or either fashions (learner vs. instructor centered). (learner vs. instructor centered).

If we simplify learning style preferences/’intelligence If we simplify learning style preferences/’intelligence type’ to the most relevant here—visual, auditory, and type’ to the most relevant here—visual, auditory, and kinesthetic—we find that the questionnaire results kinesthetic—we find that the questionnaire results indicate a relatively indicate a relatively even balance between visual and even balance between visual and auditoryauditory preferences among the top four choices. preferences among the top four choices.

There was an intermediate level of preference for the two There was an intermediate level of preference for the two formats that typically could offer the most opportunities formats that typically could offer the most opportunities for for kinesthetickinesthetic learning—‘farm tours’ and ‘one-on-one’. learning—‘farm tours’ and ‘one-on-one’.

From the educator’s perspective, then ‘software’ and From the educator’s perspective, then ‘software’ and ‘one-on-one’, followed by ‘tours’, ‘workshops’ and ‘one-on-one’, followed by ‘tours’, ‘workshops’ and ‘website are most likely to be ‘website are most likely to be ‘learner-centered’‘learner-centered’..

2222

Focus group resultsFocus group resultsQuestionQuestion sequencesequence or ‘question route’ with or ‘question route’ with

three sectionsthree sections. . Part 1Part 1 BarriersBarriers to adoption of Extension to adoption of Extension

recommendations, with emphasis on application recommendations, with emphasis on application rates, record keeping, and the rules for sensitive rates, record keeping, and the rules for sensitive areas areas

Part 2Part 2 Preferred Preferred eeducation topics, methods ducation topics, methods and formatsand formats, including small-group nutrient , including small-group nutrient management plan writing sessions, the appropriate management plan writing sessions, the appropriate matching of topics and formats, and the ranking of matching of topics and formats, and the ranking of formats (e.g., newsletter, website)formats (e.g., newsletter, website)

Part 3Part 3 Ending or summation questionsEnding or summation questions such such as “Of all the education and assistance needs as “Of all the education and assistance needs mentioned today, which is most important to you?”mentioned today, which is most important to you?”

2323

Focus group results, methods & Focus group results, methods & formatsformats

Selected key findings and explanatory Selected key findings and explanatory notesnotes

Nutrient management Plans:Nutrient management Plans:

assistance needed; involve private sector, assistance needed; involve private sector, ag. professionalsag. professionals

Website as a source of information: Website as a source of information:

important to some, but most farmers are not important to some, but most farmers are not keen to usekeen to use

2424


Nutrient management PlansNutrient management PlansThose producers with some experience with Those producers with some experience with

NMP, recognize that it not something they NMP, recognize that it not something they can readily do or would want to do can readily do or would want to do themselves. themselves.

Those who are interested in starting NMP, Those who are interested in starting NMP, know they need one-on-one assistance or know they need one-on-one assistance or small group trainings. small group trainings.

In some cases, it is not clear where this In some cases, it is not clear where this assistance will come from. assistance will come from.

The participants suggest that more private The participants suggest that more private sector agricultural professionals be trained sector agricultural professionals be trained to provide this service.to provide this service.

2525


Website as a source of informationWebsite as a source of information

There is quite a range in the level of There is quite a range in the level of interest and proficiency when it comes interest and proficiency when it comes to computers and the Internet. to computers and the Internet.

However, most of the participants are However, most of the participants are not likely to use an Extension website not likely to use an Extension website very often.very often.

2626

Qualitative and quantitative Qualitative and quantitative methods in combination methods in combination

Aspect of comparison Qualitative methods Quantitative methods methods of survey focus-group discussions questionnaire method of analysis content analysis descriptive statistics point of view the subject the investigator disciplinary paradigm social sciences natural sciences logical reasoning inductive deductive ‘language’ verbal, soft data mathematical, hard data

2727

Qualitative and quantitative Qualitative and quantitative methods in combinationmethods in combination

Theoretical considerationsTheoretical considerations

Most researchers use one or the other Most researchers use one or the other approach, but not both; but, the nature of the approach, but not both; but, the nature of the two is such that they have to be treated as two is such that they have to be treated as incompatibleincompatible

As noted by Duncan (1992) As noted by Duncan (1992) ““Observation, interviews, questionnaires and Observation, interviews, questionnaires and

other tools, under the title of research methods, other tools, under the title of research methods, are not necessarily quantitative or qualitative are not necessarily quantitative or qualitative per seper se. Second, any attempt to quantify . Second, any attempt to quantify involves a qualitative judgment, and vice-versa. involves a qualitative judgment, and vice-versa. Qualitative statements imply a certain Qualitative statements imply a certain hierarchy, number and magnitude that give hierarchy, number and magnitude that give form to meaning.” form to meaning.”

2828


Schulze (2003) describes three models Schulze (2003) describes three models of combination as formulated by of combination as formulated by Creswell (1994):Creswell (1994):

Two-phase modelTwo-phase model Dominant less-dominant modelDominant less-dominant model Mixed methodology modelMixed methodology model

2929


Schulze takes a bit of a cautionary Schulze takes a bit of a cautionary slant, noting: slant, noting: First, that some may find problematic the First, that some may find problematic the

combination of methods that have combination of methods that have incongruous theoretical underpinnings incongruous theoretical underpinnings and and

Second, that mixed methods are best left Second, that mixed methods are best left to those who are experienced with both to those who are experienced with both methods and fully understand the methods and fully understand the underlying paradigms. underlying paradigms.

3030


Scandura (2002), feels that the use of Scandura (2002), feels that the use of both methods can lead to better or both methods can lead to better or more comprehensive understanding more comprehensive understanding and that furthermore, the results of and that furthermore, the results of one method can help refine one method can help refine investigations using the other. This investigations using the other. This last idea, employed purposefully, has last idea, employed purposefully, has been termed been termed ‘triangulation’ ‘triangulation’

3131

Combination approach and the Combination approach and the present studypresent study

Examples from the project that support Examples from the project that support the use of two methodsthe use of two methods

Preferred learning formatsPreferred learning formats ““Farm tour/demonstrations” was one of the Farm tour/demonstrations” was one of the

preferred education formats identified by preferred education formats identified by the questionnaire. the questionnaire.

However, from the focus group discussions, However, from the focus group discussions, we learned that most participants would we learned that most participants would probably not attend. probably not attend.

Farm tours just ranked high compared with Farm tours just ranked high compared with the response choices offered.the response choices offered.

3232

Combination approach and the Combination approach and the present studypresent study

Examples from the project that support the use of two Examples from the project that support the use of two methodsmethods

Why producers do what they do Why producers do what they do (or Why don’t they follow official (or Why don’t they follow official

recommendations?)recommendations?)

Self-prediction in 2002 re. using/adopted a practice Self-prediction in 2002 re. using/adopted a practice by 2004, less than 80 percent, all 8 groups by 2004, less than 80 percent, all 8 groups combined:combined:

Calibrate manure spreaders (74%)Calibrate manure spreaders (74%) Follow Extension’s recommended rates for nitrogen Follow Extension’s recommended rates for nitrogen

(71%, Non-Attenders)(71%, Non-Attenders) Adjust for phosphorous (62%, Non-Attenders)Adjust for phosphorous (62%, Non-Attenders) Properly manage sensitive areas (75%, Non-Attenders)Properly manage sensitive areas (75%, Non-Attenders) Develop/update manure management plans Develop/update manure management plans

(70%, Non-Attenders)(70%, Non-Attenders)

3333

Combination approach and the Combination approach and the present studypresent studyExamples from the project that support the use of two Examples from the project that support the use of two

methodsmethods

With respect to With respect to ratesrates, for example, they , for example, they expressed doubt about the ability to expressed doubt about the ability to closely match crop needs because of closely match crop needs because of the variability in the first and second the variability in the first and second year availability of nutrients. year availability of nutrients.

One recommendation was: More on-One recommendation was: More on-farm nutrient rate demonstrations or farm nutrient rate demonstrations or experiments are needed, especially in experiments are needed, especially in parts of the state that are not well parts of the state that are not well represented by Experiment Stations.represented by Experiment Stations.

3434

Findings summaryFindings summary

We found the combination useful in that:We found the combination useful in that: By beginning with the questionnaire, By beginning with the questionnaire,

participants had time to reflect on the questions participants had time to reflect on the questions prior to entering into discussion.prior to entering into discussion.

Since the farmers retained the questionnaires Since the farmers retained the questionnaires through the course of the session and were through the course of the session and were allowed to make changes in their responses, the allowed to make changes in their responses, the questionnaire results could more accurately questionnaire results could more accurately portray the participants’ practices and portray the participants’ practices and preferencespreferences

These are only logical inferences--These are only logical inferences--

We did not try to measure systematically nor characterize We did not try to measure systematically nor characterize anecdotally, the degree to which reflection and amendment took anecdotally, the degree to which reflection and amendment took place.place.

3535


The discussion phase helped us to The discussion phase helped us to better interpret the questionnaire better interpret the questionnaire results. results.

By using two methods, we are more By using two methods, we are more confident in the reliability of the confident in the reliability of the results and our interpretation thereof, results and our interpretation thereof, even though the sample size is even though the sample size is relatively small for survey methodsrelatively small for survey methods

3636


Probably more important, was that by allowing the participants to retain their questionnaires, there was greater opportunity for the moderator to review the completed instruments on an individual basis to check for:

1) omissions, errors, and legibility; 2) correct interpretation in cases where

the respondents provided answers or annotations in their own words.

3737

Review, Summary, ConclusionReview, Summary, Conclusion Focus groups have become a mainstay of

qualitative research in the social sciences. Long used for marketing research in the for-profit

sector, this method is now frequently employed in the public and academic sectors, often in the context of social marketing.

Surveys, including written questionnaires, are a quintessential quantitative method in the social sciences.

In the present study, we gave equal emphasis to each method, carrying them out on the same occasion with the same study subjects/ participants.

3838

Review, Summary, ConclusionReview, Summary, Conclusion Again, we found the combined approach

useful, for we were able to be more confident in our conclusions, given the relatively small sample size.

However, for each method, the development, administration, compilation, and analysis phases are time-consuming.

Thus, investigators must keep in mind the potential value of the outcomes, before deciding to allocate the resources necessary for the combination approach.

3939

AcknowledgmentsAcknowledgmentsMany thanks to those individuals and organizations who made this effort and report possible:Many thanks to those individuals and organizations who made this effort and report possible:

Project sponsors, leaders, collaborators, and staff

Jim Anderson, Department of Water, Soil, and Climate, Jim Anderson, Department of Water, Soil, and Climate, University of MinnesotaUniversity of Minnesota

Kevin Blanchet, University of Minnesota Extension ServiceKevin Blanchet, University of Minnesota Extension Service

Dennis Busch, University of Minnesota Extension ServiceDennis Busch, University of Minnesota Extension Service

Les Everett, Water Resources Center, University of MinnesotaLes Everett, Water Resources Center, University of Minnesota

Bruce Montgomery, Minnesota Department of AgricultureBruce Montgomery, Minnesota Department of Agriculture

Philip Nesse, University of Minnesota Extension ServicePhilip Nesse, University of Minnesota Extension Service

David Wall, Minnesota Pollution Control AgencyDavid Wall, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency

4040

Acknowledgements, contAcknowledgements, contMany thanks to those individuals and organizations who made this effort and report possible:Many thanks to those individuals and organizations who made this effort and report possible:

Local cooperators (the last of the county agents)

Robert Stommes, University of Minnesota Extension Service, Pope CountYRobert Stommes, University of Minnesota Extension Service, Pope CountY

Juergen Peters, University of Minnesota Extension Service, Waseca CountyJuergen Peters, University of Minnesota Extension Service, Waseca County

Jerrold Tesmer, University of Minnesota Extension Service, Fillmore CountyJerrold Tesmer, University of Minnesota Extension Service, Fillmore County

Daniel Martens, University of Minnesota Extension Service, Benton Daniel Martens, University of Minnesota Extension Service, Benton CountyCounty

Producers

We appreciate the time and interest afforded by the farmers inWe appreciate the time and interest afforded by the farmers in

Pope, Waseca, Fillmore, Benton, and Dakota Counties Pope, Waseca, Fillmore, Benton, and Dakota Counties

who participated in the Focus Group sessions.who participated in the Focus Group sessions.

Helping hands

Mark Hauck, Benton Conservation DistrictMark Hauck, Benton Conservation District

Lawrence Zilliox, University of Mn Extension Service, Douglas CountyLawrence Zilliox, University of Mn Extension Service, Douglas County

Other county Extension staffOther county Extension staff

4141

Citation, project reportCitation, project reportLand application of manure:Land application of manure:Minnesota livestock producers' practices and educational Minnesota livestock producers' practices and educational

needsneeds

Focus group and questionnaire resultsFocus group and questionnaire results

(Feedlot Rules Education Project Evaluation)(Feedlot Rules Education Project Evaluation)

AuthorAuthor for for

John Vickery, PrincipalJohn Vickery, Principal Water Resources Center Water Resources Center

John Vickery ConsultingJohn Vickery Consulting University of Minnesota University of Minnesota

Minneapolis, MNMinneapolis, MN St. Paul, MN St. Paul, MN

November, 2002November, 2002

http://wrc.coafes.umn.edu/outreach/focus-groups.htmhttp://wrc.coafes.umn.edu/outreach/focus-groups.htm

4242

Theoretical context, Theoretical context, Principles of adult educationPrinciples of adult educationCharacteristics Characteristics of adult learners according to Knowles of adult learners according to Knowles

asassummarized by Lieb (1991) include:summarized by Lieb (1991) include: Adults are Adults are relevancy-orientedrelevancy-oriented. They must see a reason for . They must see a reason for

learning something. Learning has to be applicable to their learning something. Learning has to be applicable to their work or other responsibilities to be of value to them.work or other responsibilities to be of value to them.

>>Therefore, instructors must identify objectives for adult >>Therefore, instructors must identify objectives for adult participants before the course begins . . . . .participants before the course begins . . . . .

Adults are Adults are autonomousautonomous and and self-directed.self-directed. They need to They need to be free to direct themselves. be free to direct themselves.

>>Their teachers must actively involve adult participants >>Their teachers must actively involve adult participants in the learning process and serve as facilitators for them. in the learning process and serve as facilitators for them. Specifically, they must get participants' perspectives Specifically, they must get participants' perspectives about what topics to cover . . . . about what topics to cover . . . .

4343

Theoretical context, Learning Theoretical context, Learning stylesstylesKolb Learning Styles InventoryKolb Learning Styles Inventory Respondents reverse rank order distinct sets of four Respondents reverse rank order distinct sets of four

response choices to complete each of twelve response choices to complete each of twelve sentences that are explicitly about learning. sentences that are explicitly about learning.

Combine those rankings to give a numerical rating Combine those rankings to give a numerical rating that indicates how much the respondent relies on four that indicates how much the respondent relies on four learning learning modesmodes along two continuums: along two continuums: ‘‘Concrete experience—Concrete experience—Abstract conceptualization’Abstract conceptualization’ continuum continuum ‘‘Reflective observationReflective observation—Active experimentation’. —Active experimentation’.

Combine each mode with each of the modes on the Combine each mode with each of the modes on the other axis/continuum, to produce a score in each of other axis/continuum, to produce a score in each of four learning four learning stylesstyles——diverging, diverging, assimilating,assimilating, converging, and accommodating.converging, and accommodating.

Example, the combination of ‘Reflective observation’ Example, the combination of ‘Reflective observation’ and ‘Abstract conceptualization’ is a measure of and ‘Abstract conceptualization’ is a measure of ‘Assimilating’.‘Assimilating’.

4444


Trede and Miller (2000): Across all topics Trede and Miller (2000): Across all topics (overall results) the learning percentage of (overall results) the learning percentage of respondents in each category was respondents in each category was

Assimilator, 49.1% Assimilator, 49.1% Accommodator, 14.6%, Accommodator, 14.6%, Diverger, 14.9%, Converger, 21.4%.Diverger, 14.9%, Converger, 21.4%.

Individuals with the Assimilator learning Individuals with the Assimilator learning style:style: “ “ . . . Prefer to grasp knowledge through . . . Prefer to grasp knowledge through

abstract conceptualization (using logic and abstract conceptualization (using logic and analyzing information) and then transform it by analyzing information) and then transform it by reflective observation (learning by watching reflective observation (learning by watching others). others).

4545


They tend to learn best by inductive reasoning and They tend to learn best by inductive reasoning and testing theories and ideas. testing theories and ideas.

This implies that educational providers in This implies that educational providers in agriculture should plan and implement programs agriculture should plan and implement programs that emphasize logic, ideas, concepts, and that emphasize logic, ideas, concepts, and problem-solving rather than just ‘learning by problem-solving rather than just ‘learning by doing.’doing.’

For example, educational meetings for farmers For example, educational meetings for farmers that include presentations emphasizing the theory that include presentations emphasizing the theory and application followed by panel discussions, and application followed by panel discussions, case studies, and other methods which allow case studies, and other methods which allow participants to conceptualize, reflect, and adapt participants to conceptualize, reflect, and adapt the presented infothe presented info

??

4646

Questionnaire resultsQuestionnaire results

Trede and Miller vs. Present studyTrede and Miller vs. Present study 26 categories of learning activities vs. 26 categories of learning activities vs.

seven formats or activities. seven formats or activities. Likert scale of 1 to 5 vs. rankingLikert scale of 1 to 5 vs. ranking

(1=very ineffective, 2=ineffective, 3=no (1=very ineffective, 2=ineffective, 3=no opinion, 4=effective, 5=very effective)opinion, 4=effective, 5=very effective)

Means in the range of 3.00 to 4.05 vs. Means in the range of 3.00 to 4.05 vs. ranks in the range of 1.81 to 3.81ranks in the range of 1.81 to 3.81

4747

Questionnaire resultsQuestionnaire resultsTrede and Miller, high ratings:Trede and Miller, high ratings:

Use of consultants or specialistsUse of consultants or specialists

Attending field days, Attending field days, Tours and demonstrationsTours and demonstrations Attending a single or series of Attending a single or series of

meetings on a specific topic meetings on a specific topic Studying and analyzing a problem Studying and analyzing a problem

on my own.on my own.

4848

Questionnaire resultsQuestionnaire results In general, our results were not In general, our results were not

especially similar, but then our especially similar, but then our methods, the categories/activities and methods, the categories/activities and their number are not especially their number are not especially comparable. comparable.

If we conflate field days, If we conflate field days, demonstrations, (farm) tours, then demonstrations, (farm) tours, then this is one category for which there this is one category for which there was high interest in both studies.was high interest in both studies.

4949

Qualitative and quantitative Qualitative and quantitative methods in combinationmethods in combinationIn an article exploring the paradigmatic underpinnings, In an article exploring the paradigmatic underpinnings,

limitations, and strengths of each, models of limitations, and strengths of each, models of combination, and examples of application, Schulze combination, and examples of application, Schulze (2003) concludes that(2003) concludes that

“ “. . . the adoption of a pragmatic approach to . . . the adoption of a pragmatic approach to research enables us to bridge the separation between research enables us to bridge the separation between quantitative and qualitative research approaches. By quantitative and qualitative research approaches. By combining quantitative and qualitative research combining quantitative and qualitative research methods, researchers can simultaneously conform to methods, researchers can simultaneously conform to and transcend dominant research conventions, and transcend dominant research conventions, making use of the most valuable features of each. making use of the most valuable features of each. Viewing life through different paradigms as required Viewing life through different paradigms as required enables educators to develop a comprehensive enables educators to develop a comprehensive knowledge base and an understanding of teaching, knowledge base and an understanding of teaching, learning and other human phenomena.”learning and other human phenomena.”

5050

Producers’ assessment of likelihood of attending or participating in educational programming: results for all (N = 51) questionnaire respondents combined (percent) & top choices for topics (counts)

All participants

Count PercentLettered topic / questionnaire item

Topchoice *

Yes Maybe No

A. Calibrating my manure spreader 9 18 47 35B. Manure sampling and nutrient content analysis 17 29 49 22

C. Soil sampling and testing 10 20 29 51

D. Manure application record keeping 11 31 51 18

E. Using UM Extension tables to calculate application rates 7 24 67 10

F. Field selection: soil P levels and manure application rates 16 33 61 6G. Managing sensitive areas 16 41 43 16H. Written nutrient management plan 12 35 57 8I. Applying and incorporating manure 17 34 58 8J. Determining total acres needed for all of my manure 7 47 35 18

*For ‘Top’ choice, respondents were allowed to list up to three choices. Most gave three.Results are given as counts or number of time

Documents

Application of Marketing Techniques to Extension Programming Decision Making: Minnesota livestock producers’ preferred topics, informational formats, and