|
|
|
|
|
Primary Knowledge Bases of
Joint Faculty and Their Contextual Applications |
As we engage in strategic planning for our respective programs and for the Joint
Doctor of Education program in Agricultural Education, we need to describe and identify
our collective teaching and research capabilities. What are our joint knowledge
bases and the contextual applications in which we apply that knowledge? How do we
describe each knowledge base and each category of contextual application as it relates
to this degree program and to the overall mission of our respective departments?
Brief descriptions follow along with a listing of the joint faculty most closely
associated with each knowledge base and contextual application.
To learn more about the contextual areas within the department click on “Understanding the Contextual Areas.” |
|
Knowledge Bases |
Description: “…the knowledge is expressed in articulated understandings, skills,
and judgments which are professional in character and which distinguish more productive
[faculty members] from less productive ones” (Reynolds, 1989:ix). “This body of
knowledge is undergirded by theory, research, and a set of professional values and
ethics.” (Corrigan and Haberman, 1990:195).
Planning and Needs Assessment
Primary: Jimmy Lindner, David Doerfert, Manuel Piña, Glen Shinn, Cruz Torres Secondary:
Barry Boyd, Chanda Elbert, Mark Kistler, Alvin Larke, Jr., Andy Vestal, William
Younger
Description: Confirming and Communicating Our Knowledge Base: Planning and needs
assessment are functional elements that are critical for successful education and
training programs. Allison Rossett defined needs assessment as systematic efforts
that we make to gather opinions and ideas from a variety of sources on performance
problems or new systems and technologies. Edgar Boone described planning as a deliberate,
rational, continuing sequence of activities through which the educator acquires
a thorough understanding of and commitment to the organization’s functions, structure,
and processes, and becomes knowledgeable about and committed to a tested conceptual
framework for programming, continuous organizational renewal, and linkage of the
organization to its publics. The goal of planning and needs assessment is to achieve
results, not to develop complex methodologies. Albert Einstein advised that “everything
should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.”
Planning is a continuum essential to organizational success. Planning forces educators
and administrators to think through issues and alternatives. Planning is proactive
decision-making that includes defining and analyzing projects, forecasting events,
sequencing activities, identifying resources, tracking and managing events, and
determining the most effective strategies to achieve the objectives. Planning can
be organized at three levels: (1) strategic planning addresses the basic mission
over an extended period of time, often five years or more;
(2) long-range planning, typically two to five years, specifically looks at resources,
finances, and changing environments to determine ways to accomplish the overall
strategic plans of the organization; and (3) tactical planning involves people who
are responsible for achieving the objectives within a specified period of time,
usually one budgeting period. Various approaches, techniques, and tools have been
developed to help in the planning process.
Examples of approaches that improve planning effectiveness include: (1) SWOT analysis,
an assessment of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats to present
and future scenarios; (2) GAP analysis, an approach to determine where an organization
is today, where it wants to go in the future, and how it is going to get there;
(3) MBO or management by objective, a system that focuses on results, not activities,
by establishing and communicating objectives that are consistent, specific, measurable,
time-bound, and achievable considering available resources.
Techniques that improve planning include: (1) written surveys, used to solicit information
from a large number of people; (2) focus groups, structured small group meetings
to collect information and understand relationships; (3) nominal group technique,
a brainstorming session that ranks planning strategies; and (4) the Delphi technique,
used to elicit and refine expert opinion based on iterative and controlled-feedback
interactions.
Planning tools that are widely used include: (1) Gantt charts, used to schedule
work as separate tasks, estimate the time for completion, and the required completion
date are combined in a graphic chart that facilitates work scheduling; (2) Program
Evaluation and Review Technique or PERT, a computer analysis that enables educators
and managers to determine the correct and economically efficient sequence of tasks
in the completion of a complex project, and (3) Critical Path Method or CMP, a network
tool that enables managers to analyze potential bottlenecks in a project. Planning
tools are often incorporated into software packages such as Microsoft Project 98.
Learner-centered Instructional Design
Primary: Matt Baker, Barry Boyd, Richard Cummins, Kim Dooley, Larry Ermis, Theresa
Murphrey, Keith Zamzow
Secondary: Cindy Akers, Steve Fraze, Julie Harlin, David Lawver, James Smith, Gary
Wingenbach
Description: Learner-centered instructional design considers a myriad of characteristics,
processes, interactions, and delivery methods. All of these are important contributors
to learning in both the traditional and the distance settings. Asynchronous modes
allow learners to complete work in their own time and location rather than being
in the classroom at a specified time and they control their contributions to learning
events. Learners are involved in the assessment of their own learning and have input
into the path of the instruction. In turn, adequate learner support is guaranteed
through instructors, staff, and the teaching organization.
For insights into some principles underlying learn-centered instructional design,
see the paper, “Learner-Centered Psychological Principles: A Framework for School
Redesign and Reform” (http://www.apa.org/ed/lcp.html). Delivery Strategies Primary:
Cindy Akers, James Christiansen, John Dillingham, Deb Dunsford, Steve Fraze, Julie
Harlin, Tim Knezek, Alvin Larke, Jr., Tim Murphy, James Smith, Christine Townsend,
Joe Townsend, Andy Vestal, Gary Wingenbach, William Younger Secondary: Matt Baker,
Gary Briers, David Doerfert, Theresa Murphrey Description: Delivery strategies are
predetermined structures, networks, mediums, and factors related to the dissemination
of information and/or knowledge and the acquisition of skills, interests, understandings,
appreciations, values, and ideals. The structures, networks, and mediums used vary
according to the resources available and the audiences being served. Delivery strategies
are used to bring about changes in behavior in what people do and how they view
issues, problems, conditions, relationships, needs, and other aspects of the world
around them. Delivering and disseminating information and/or knowledge occurs in
formal and informal settings and can involve an individual, small groups, or large
groups, whether in synchronous or asynchronous modes. One way to approach understanding
the “knowledge areas” of our department is to consider the components normally included
in the formal design of instruction. Most models have similar components. They typically
begin with an analysis of instructional need, then progress through some process
to select and prepare materials and methods to be employed in order to facilitate
or optimize learning, and then culminate in a systematic evaluation of the entire
process. Delivery strategies are the central--methods and materials--item in these
models. They are perhaps best described as the application of two disparate fields
of study; namely, teaching methods and technologically mediated communication systems.
They are, simply put, a systematic attempt to optimize the delivery of an instructional
message to a particular audience. Delivery strategies are teaching methods, placed
in context. They are communications technologies, applied to learning and teaching.
We discover delivery strategies by optimizing teaching methods in the context of
technological delivery systems. For the longest time, teaching methods assumed the
co-location of the learner and instructor, both in geographical and temporal space.
Examples of more modern delivery strategies would include the “instructor-led lecture”
method delivered live via streaming media on the World Wide Web (WWW), or the “student
presentation” method delivered via an interactive videoconferencing system, or the
“class discussion” method delivered via asynchronous threaded discussion boards.
In every case, the teaching method is mediated through (and affected by) the technology
used. Decisions about the appropriateness of the teaching methods and the technologies
employed are a balance among the desired educational outcomes, the learners, the
learning environment, and the kinds of curriculum materials that are available or
can be developed. For more information on delivery strategies, look at these two
sources: Virginia Tech’s Instructional Design Site (http://www.edtech.vt.edu/edtech/id/portal/index.html)
July 2000 article in the The Agricultural Education Magazine (http://aged.tamu.edu/faculty/murphy/pubs/2000-07AgEdMag.pdf)
Evaluation and Accountability Primary: Scott Cummings, Chanda Elbert, Mark Kistler,
David Lawver Secondary: Deb Dunsford, Glen Shinn Description: Organizations are
accountable for monitoring and reporting program accomplishments, particularly progress
towards pre-established goals. The tools of program evaluation, in turn, are used
to measure program performance, including activities conducted (process), the direct
products and services delivered by a program (outputs), the results of those products
and services (outcomes), and/or public benefit of outcomes (impact). The knowledge
area of Evaluation and Accountability relates to examining the philosophy, methods,
and issues of accountability and evaluation necessary to meet legislative and stakeholder
expectations. Special emphasis is given to the analytical tools used in program
assessment systems (performance measurement, program evaluation, and cost/return
analysis) including: • Evaluability assessment—determining if a program meets the
preconditions for evaluation • Developing a performance measurement system for accountability,
program evaluation, and cost/return analysis • Utilizing performance measurement
tools in monitoring for organizational accountability and program evaluation • Applying
appropriate evaluation research designs in measuring organizational and program
accomplishments Program evaluation is a systematic study conducted periodically
or on an ad hoc basis to assess how well a program is working. The need for accurate
and reliable evidence of impact over time requires measurement techniques and evaluation
models whose validity and reliability have been established. The focus of program
evaluation is on achievement of program objectives in the context of other aspects
of program performance or in the context of factors that could impact program effectiveness.
Some evaluations also compare alternative programs or what might happen in the absence
of a program. Advanced evaluation research models also can provide accurate and
reliable evidence of impact over time by utilizing measurement techniques and evaluation
models whose validity and reliability have been established. Performance measurement
(often referred to as accountability) focuses on whether a program has achieved
its objectives, expressed as measurable standards. It calls for an ongoing monitoring
and reporting of program accomplishments, particularly progress toward pre-established
goals. Information on three types of performance measures normally is collected
and reported for a twelve-month period of time: • Process: type or level of program
activities conducted • Output: direct products and services delivered by the program
• Outcome: results of those products and services In essence, projections for activities,
outputs, and outcomes are made at the beginning of the program year and provide
the foundation for performance-based budgeting. Program accomplishments are determined
by comparing actual results to projected results. Because organizations cannot afford
the cost of measuring impact of all its programs, priorities must be developed.
One way of establishing such priorities is on the basis of potential public benefit.
Research, Measurement, and Analysis Primary: Gary Briers Secondary: Scott Cummings,
Kim Dooley, David Lawver, Jimmy Lindner, Tim Murphy Description: A systematic and
objective search for reliable knowledge through understanding and evaluating the
research of others as well as the planning and conducting of original research through
quantitative and qualitative methods. Measurement and analysis are forms of research
that involve determining or establishing conditions against a benchmark and then
determining causes, implications, and effects. Dr. H. M. Hamlin, a university agricultural
educator of note a generation or more ago, described research something like this:
Research is an unusually persistent and systematic attempt to answer significant
questions. His definition is elegant for its simplicity yet broadness. It encompasses
all kinds of scholarly activity in which one pursues persistently and systematically
the answer to significant questions or problems. So, research tools are those "attempts"
at answering questions, using systemacy and persistence! Those attempts may be highly
quantitative (numerical and statistical), qualitative, philosophical, historical,
etc. The tools one uses to conduct research have arisen from the general concept
of science (e.g., the "scientific method"), to the more specific concept of social
sciences (e.g., via the fields of psychology, sociology, anthropology, etc.), and
even the traditions of the humanities (e.g., philosophy). Often, it is these traditions
that might determine or "dictate" what researchers define as systematic. Educational
research is an even newer tradition, and agricultural education contributes to that
(those) research tradition(s). One of the outcomes of research ("scholarly inquiry")
in agricultural education is often a report of that research. One measure of its
"scholarship" is that the research is reviewed by peers and communicated. Journals
are often used as a vehicle to meet those criteria. See the journals below for examples
of those kinds of evidence. Journal of Agricultural Education Online (http://aged.tamu.edu.jae)
Journal of Extension (http://www.joe.org/) The Journal of International Agricultural
Extension (http://ag.arizona.edu/aed/aiaee/volumes/journal.htm) The Journal of Agricultural
Education and Extension (http://www.bib.wau.nl/ejae/)
|
|
|
|