Utilization of Advisory Councils in Pennsylvania Secondary Agriculture Education Programs
Open Access
- Author:
- Masser, Douglas Timothy
- Area of Honors:
- Agricultural and Extension Education
- Degree:
- Bachelor of Science
- Document Type:
- Thesis
- Thesis Supervisors:
- Daniel Douglas Foster, Thesis Supervisor
Daniel Douglas Foster, Thesis Honors Advisor
John Ewing, Faculty Reader - Keywords:
- advisory councils
agricultural education - Abstract:
- Advisory councils have been found to be a vital component of the program planning process in agricultural education programs. They provide a link from the community to the programs, allowing collaboration in the planning and improvement process. With limited data specific to Pennsylvania available, the purpose of this descriptive research study was to describe how Pennsylvania agricultural educators use and perceive agricultural education advisory councils. The frame consisted of 241 Pennsylvania secondary agriculture educators of which 171 participants responded, yielding a response rate of 71%. The results of the study found that 90.6% (n=155) of educators indicated that they do have an advisory council. Advisory councils have an average of 11 members from both the school and community with two meetings held annually. The programs with advisory councils reported that 19.4% have a program of work and the teachers in these programs perceive the functions of an advisory council in a positive light, with the average responses ranging from mildly agree to very strongly agree on Likert-scale items. Teachers also indicated that the perceived influences of the council on all aspects of the program should be increased from where they are currently in the programs. A limited number of teachers, 10.1%, indicated that their program did not have an advisory council with 23.5% of the non-advisory board respondents identifying that advisory councils are not essential to the program. A frequent write-in response (n=5) was that teachers had no need for a council because their programs were not Pennsylvania Department of Education approved programs. The results confirm findings from previous studies that a vast majority of programs have an advisory council. Further investigation is needed on how those community resources are being used and how the goals of the program are accomplished with almost 80% of teachers indicating that no program of work exists for the advisory council. Professional development that shares best practices is recommended.