Xldocl Via-mp \ Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2012 with funding from University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign http://archive.org/details/analysisappraisaOOhemp AN ANALYSIS AND APPRAISAL OF FFA AND VOCATIONAL AGRICULTURE CONTESTS AND AWARD PROGRAMS IN ILLINOIS 1961 by PAUL E. HEMP Assistant Professor of Agricultural Education College of Education University of Illinois Urbana, Illinois. TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE I Definition of the Problem and the Procedures Used 1 II Summary and Recommendations 3 III Participation in Contests and Award Programs in Illinois 17 IV Distribution of Sectional and State Awards 25 V Report of Sectional Programs 33 VI A Summary of Teacher Opinion Regarding Contests and Award Programs 46 VII The Opinions and Participation Records of 500 Senior Students 60 VIII Findings from Research and Opinions of Agricultural Leaders and Educators 69 REFERENCES 77 APPENDK 80 ii XHtc£l kamf CHAPTER I DEFINITION OF THE PROBLEM AND THE PROCEDURES USED The Problem for Study The principal purpose of this study is to analyze and appraise vocational agricul- ture and FFA contests and award programs in Illinois. Before one can analyze and appraise programs fairly he must know the present status of these programs and he must know the beliefs of teachers and students regarding these programs. Specifi- cally, this study was undertaken to secure information about the following: 1. What vocational agriculture and FFA contests and award programs are conducted at the sectional, district, and state level by the FFA, the teachers, and the state staffs? 2. To what extent have students and schools participated in these activities? 3 . To what extent have awards and top honors been distributed among the schools and among the vocational agriculture students of Illinois? 4. How are these contests and award programs organized and conducted? 5. How do teachers believe contests and award programs should be organized and conducted? 6. What changes are contemplated and what changes have been recently made in contests and award programs? 7 . How do students and teachers rate the educational value of these contests and award programs ? 8. To what extent do the contests and award programs in Illinois make use of the new and recent developments in agricultural science and educational thought . Methods and Procedures 1. One experienced teacher from each of the 25 sections was interviewed by the writer using a survey form entitled, Report of Sectional Programs . Teachers interviewed were selected because of their broad experience with contests and award programs. 2. One-hundred fifty teachers of vocational agriculture selected at random from within sections were sent the Teacher Attitude Survey Form . One- hundred teachers responded by filling out these forms. 3. A group of 517 senior students of vocational agriculture from 100 schools where teachers had agreed to fill out the Teacher Attitude Survey Form com- pleted the Senior Survey Form . 4. Records of participation in contests and award programs and records of awards won were obtained from the State Board of Vocational Education. 5. A review of literature was made. 6. State staffs of supervisors and teacher educators in agricultural education, the advisory board for the Agricultural Education Division, a group of 20 teachers enrolled in a short course program, a committee of teachers ap- pointed to study award programs , and other groups were asked to react to the objectives and procedures. -1- Acknowledgments The data were collected during the 1959-60 school year by the writer. Mr. Donald Miller, recently a graduate assistant in agricultural education, University of Illinois and presently, teacher of vocational agriculture at New Holland, Illinois helped summarize the data. Funds for meeting the costs of travel and statistical analyses were provided by the Bureau of Educational Research, College of Education, University of Illinois. Acknowledgments are due the 25 teachers who provided information about ac- tivities in their sections and the 100 teachers who completed survey forms and had their senior students complete forms on contests and award programs. State reports were made available by Mr. H. R. Damisch, State Supervisor of Agricultural Edu- cation and Mr. V. E. Burgener, formerly Executive -Secretary of the Illinois Associ- ation FFA, and Mr. G. Donovan Coil, Executive-Secretary of the Illinois Association FFA. Members of the staff of the Division of Agricultural Education, University of Illinois provided valuable assistance during the planning and write-up stages of the study. The Vocational Agriculture Service, College of Agriculture, provided facil- ities for reproducing copies of the study. -2- CHAPTER II SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS In order to summarize the major findings of this study and to develop a ratio- nale for change, the writer offers the following summary and recommendations: To what extent have chapters and vocational agriculture students participated in 15 Foundation Award programs? 1. About 2800 students participated in production award programs, im- provement award programs, Star Farmer programs, and public speak- ing contests held at the section level during 1959. (About 16,000 students were enrolled in high school vocational agriculture classes in Illinois.) 2. During the 1955-59 period more than 1000 students participated in each of the following section award programs: swine production, corn pro- duction, beef production, dairy production, sheep production. 3. During the 1955-59 period fewer than 800 students participated in each of the following section award programs: farm safety, soil and water management, farm electrification, farm beautification, public speaking, poultry production, farm mechanics. 4. The only noticeable trends in number of participants in 15 foundation award programs during the 1955-59 period were a decline in the number of participants in poultry production award programs and an increase in the number of students participating in farm mechanics and farm beau- tification award programs . 5. In 1959, two sections had no entries in the soybean production award program and one section had one entry. Two sections had only two entries in the farm safety award program and eight sections had only one or two entries each. One section had no entries in the soil and water management award program and six sections had one or two en- tries. Farm electrification, farm and home beautification, and poultry production award programs were other areas where fourteen sections had one or two entries only. 6. More than half of the chapters in Illinois did not participate in farm safety, farm electrification, farm beautification, and soil and water management award programs during the 1955-59 period; however, fewer than 13 per cent of the chapters failed to participate in the swine, corn, and beef production award programs during this five-year period. To what extent have chapters and students participated in judging contests? 1. The number of sections holding sectional judging contests of various types in 1958-59 was as follows: Land Use Selection 23 Livestock Judging 17 Dairy Cattle Judging 15 Grain Judging 14 Poultry Judging 11 -3- 2. The estimated number of students participating in these various sec- tion contests in the 1958-59 school year were as follows: Land Use Selection 1662 Livestock Judging 1532 Dairy Cattle Judging 1247 Grain Judging 1117 Poultry Judging 844 3. Participation in section judging contests is limited to 5 or 6 boys per school in all sections except Section 23. 4. The number of schools and the number of teams participating in the State Judging Contests during the 1955-59 period has decreased about 30 - 40 per cent. 5. In 1959, 225 schools participated in State Judging Contests. To what extent have chapters and students participated in other contests and award programs? 1. About 1/3 of the students enrolled in vocational agriculture in Illinois participated in section fairs and shows. 2. In 1957, two hundred and seventy one chapters participated in the Pro- gram of Work Contest and in 1958, three hundred and sixteen chapters participated in this event. It should be noted however that 100 of the 1957 group did not report on their chapter accomplishments and that 118 of the 1958 group did not report on the accomplishments of the chapter. 3 . One hundred and thirty four chapters participated in section parlia- mentary procedure contests in 1957 and 139 chapters participated in these contests in 1958. A chapter team in parliamentary procedure competition consists of a chairman, a secretary, and three floor mem- bers. 4. State Farmer degree programs do involve most of the chapters of the state; however, since this degree is an individual award the number of total students competing in the program during any one year is small (slightly more than two per cent of the state membership) . 5. According to a survey of 100 teachers, 61 per cent of the chapters participated in the Safe Corn Harvest Program in 1957 and 57 per cent participated in 1958. This, too, is a chapter project rather than an individual or team activity. -4- To what extent have foundation awards and contest awards been distributed among all the schools of the state and among all of the vocational agriculture students of the state? 1 . Section awards in the five improvement areas have been won by a relatively small number of chapters. During the 1955-59 period nearly 2/3 of the chapters in the state received no section, district, or state recognition in the five improvement award areas. 2 . Awards in the eight production areas have been distributed more evenly throughout the state than have improvement awards; however, over 1/3 of the chapters of the state received no section, district, or state awards in the eight production areas, public speaking, or Star Farmer programs during the 1955-59 period. 3. Awards from parliamentary procedure contests and the farm safety award program have been won by a small group of schools over and over. Four- teen chapters won section parliamentary procedure contests three or more times during the five year period, 1955-59. 4. A large number of schools (419) had students who received State Farmer degrees during the 1955-59 period. 5 . Awards in the State Chapter Contest have been monopolized by a small group of chapters. Over a five-year period eighteen chapters won all of the 46 "Gold Emblem" awards given in Illinois. Five chapters received 22 of the 46 "Gold Emblem" awards. 6. In 14 award areas (production awards, improvement awards, and Star Farmer award) 40 per cent of the chapters won the 347 section plaques given during 1959. What fairs and shows were held in each of the 25 sections and how are they con- ducted ? 1. All sections held at least one section fair or show, and 19 sections hold a second fair for poultry and/or grain. 2. Most of the classes at section fairs provided for placings made on the basis of external appearance only. 3. At most fairs a modified Danish system of placings has been used. 4. Twenty-five leading teachers interviewed by the writer listed as their most successful practices those practices which consider production records, efficiency factors, costs of production, and other important factors in the placing of entries. There was a feeling among most teach- ers that too much emphasis has been put on type, and not enough attention has been given to efficient production. 5. Only five sections in the state held grain or poultry shows on school time. Section livestock fairs are usually held in the summer. What judging contests were held in the sections and how were they conducted? 1 . Eleven of the 15 sections holding dairy cattle judging contests include at least one production ring in the contest; however, most contests include only one ring of animals to be placed in part on production records. -5- 2. In livestock judging, nine sections included one production ring of swine, and three sections included market grading exercises. 3. Poultry judging was usually based on production features which can be observed by the naked eye. In nine sections eggs were judged or graded, and in eight sections dressed birds were judged or graded. 4. Most grain judging (9 out of 11 sectional contests) followed the traditional pattern of identifying weed and crop seeds and judging grain as seed. In 1960-61, many sections are requiring students to identify weed slides. 5 . Successful practices used in conducting judging contests which were identified by the 25 teachers interviewed include the following: a. Include in the contest production data, efficiency factors, market grades, etc. b. Modernize contests by having boys do what a farmer needs to be able to do. c. Use judging contests as teaching devices, not evaluation devices. 6 . Nineteen of the 23 section land use selection contests were held on school time, and 21 of the 33 livestock, grain, dairy, and poultry judging con- tests were held on school time. Virtually all of the other sectional contests and award programs are held when school is not in session. What other contests and award programs were available in each of the 25 sections and how were they conducted? 1. All sections cooperated in the production award and improvement award programs. All but 2 sections had parliamentary procedure contests, and all sections had public speaking and chapter program of work con- tests. 2. There is a trend developing in the selection of award winners which allows for interview of the applicants either at school or on the farms. The feeling in many sections is that a paper application is too narrow a base to make a valid and fair selection. 3. Public speaking contests have been conducted according to a pattern which follows the state, regional, and national level. The writer found this to be true of all contests and award programs which go beyond the sec- tion level. Variance in procedures and techniques do exist, however, in programs which stop at the section level . 4. In many contests and award programs some sections swap judges with neighboring sections. How do 100 Illinois teachers regard contests and award programs? 1. Contests and award programs which were engaged in by the highest per- centage of chapters were livestock fairs, production awards, livestock, dairy, and land judging contests, and State Farmer Degree programs. 2 . Activities engaged in by the lowest percentage of teachers were meat and dairy products judging, improvement awards, poultry activities, safety activities, Star Farmer activities, and parliamentary procedure contests. 3. When teachers were asked to rate contests and award programs on the basis of their educational worth, they rated State Farmer Degrees, land -6- judging, production awards, livestock fairs, public speaking, and Star Farmer awards highest. 4. Lowest ratings were given to poultry fairs, dairy products and meat judging, FFA chapter program of work contests, grain judging contests and poultry judging contests. 5. Thirty-six per cent of the teachers said poultry judging contests and poultry shows should be eliminated. About 1/4 of the teachers said grain shows and grain judging contests should be eliminated entirely. 6. Even though fewer than five per cent of teachers thought State Farmer Degrees, Star Farmer awards, livestock fairs, livestock judging con- tests, production awards, and land use selection contests should be elim- inated, 66 - 82 per cent of the teachers felt these activities needed to be changed or revamped. 7 . Some of the teachers who did not recommend elimination of certain con- tests did favor stopping them at the section level. 8 . About half of the teachers were against adding any new contests and award programs. Some teachers felt that new contests might be substi- tuted for some of the old contests. 9. The change in livestock judging contests which was suggested most often by teachers was to select animals on the basis of production data and market grades rather than on type alone . 10. Several teachers thought livestock judging contests should be scheduled at different times of the year so that the teaching of livestock selection could be accomplished in the fall when students have to select animals for farm- ing programs. 11. The change in dairy cattle judging contest which was mentioned by the greatest number of teachers was to switch from judging on type to judging on basis of production records and type. 12 . Major changes suggested by teachers in crop judging contests include identification of plants rather than seed, grading grain and roughage on a commercial basis rather than judging for seed, and addition of new crops such as hay, silage, and oats-for-feed to the contest. 13. Land use selection contests received the highest rating from the teachers included in this study. The main suggestion for change is a closer coor- dination between teachers and Soil Conservation Service personnel in or- ganizing and conducting these contests. 14. More than one-third of the teachers included in this study were of the opinion that poultry judging contests should be eliminated entirely. This suggestion might well be interpreted to mean that these contests ought to be eliminated at least in sections where poultry is no longer a major enterprise. Changes which teachers thought ought to be made in poultry judging contests were to place more emphasis on production, include grading of eggs and dressed birds, and hold contests at the section level only. -7- 15. Very few (2 per cent) of the teachers favored outright elimination of section livestock fairs but many were critical of the way these fairs are conducted. Suggestions mentioned by teachers for changing fairs included the following: a. Use a broader base rather than type alone for placing entries. b. Establish classes which are designed for kinds of livestock farmers now raise and get away from a "purebred breeder's show. " c. Better public relations, more emphasis on reasons, and more premium money were suggestions offered by a few teachers. 16. Twenty- two per cent of the teachers surveyed favored outright elimi- nation of grain fairs. Forty- five per cent of the teachers suggested that these fairs be modified by using field inspections to ascertain what a student has done on the farm, by considering cost of production and effi- ciency factors in the final placings, by grading market grain, and by holding grain fairs in connection with grain judging activities. 17. More than half of the teachers failed to respond to the question concerning ways of changing poultry fairs. Nineteen teachers favored the elimination of fairs and three teachers said poultry fairs should be a part of the livestock fair. Other suggestions mentioned most often were to pay more attention to production, establish classes for hybrids, and include egg and dressed bird classes. 18. Suggestions made by teachers for changing State Farmer Degree programs and Star Farmer award programs include the following: a. Visit boys on their farms to substantiate the information on the application. b. Consider opportunity as well as absolute achievement in selecting winners. c. Boys who meet standards for State Farmer Degrees should get the degree. The two per cent quota system now prohibits this. d. Application forms and the selection date need to be changed. e . Competition in the State Farmer Degree program should be carried out among boys from all over the state and not among the applicants of one section. 19. Only three per cent of the teachers included in this study favored the elimination of production awards; however, seven teachers said these programs should be stopped at the section or local level. Suggestions for changing these award programs include interview of boys on their home farms to check on information given on the applications, require- ment of minimum standards so that award would not come "cheap" in some sections, and more attention to be given to efficient production and less to size of the program. 20. Seven teachers favored eliminating improvement award programs. Thir- teen teachers favored leaving them as they are, and sixty teachers sug- gested needed changes as follows: a. Student interviews and on-farm visits are needed to substantiate paper reports . -8- b. Stop improvement awards at section or local level. c. Try to tie these programs to the instructional program. 21. Five teachers said the program of work contest should be eliminated entirely. Three teachers favored stopping it at the section, level and two teachers said the contest should be stopped at the local level. The chief criticism of the contest was that programs of work are often padded and too much emphasis is put on just having a program of work rather than doing something about it. 22. Only five teachers commented on the Chapter Safety Program and even they admitted that they knew little or nothing about it. What has been done at the local level to prepare for contests and award programs ? 1. About half of the teachers indicated that local elimination contests were held to select the chapter representative in eight production award areas. 2. The percentage of teachers who said local elimination contests were held to select chapter representatives to section improvement award pro- grams, judging contests, and other programs ranged from 23 per cent to 49 per cent. 3 . Only one school mentioned having a written policy statement regarding the use and place of contests and award programs in the total vocational agriculture program. 4. About half of the teachers said they used class time to prepare for land use selection, livestock judging, and dairy cattle judging contests, and from one-fourth to one-third of the teachers said they use class time to prepare for parliamentary procedure, public speaking, poultry judging, and grain judging contests. 5 . Contests and award programs affect the instructional programs in some schools in the following ways: a. Use class time to prepare for contests. b. Teach content necessary to win a contest rather than content nec- essary for success in farming. c. Force teaching of certain areas at the wrong time of the year or at a time when teacher would not normally teach it. d. Use contests as a goal rather than a teaching device. To what extent did 500 senior vocational agriculture students participate in con- tests and award programs? (Note: This is a description of participation using a longitudinal approach.) 1. Fifty-three per cent of the seniors studied had participated in livestock judging contests . Eight per cent of the seniors had never participated in any of the contest and award programs included in this study and another ten per cent had participated in only one of these activities during their high school careers. (The reader is reminded that over 80 per cent of the seniors studied had been in vocational agriculture and FFA for four years . ) -9- 2 . The activities participated in by the highest percentage of seniors in- cluded team activities such as judging contests and parliamentary pro- cedure contests. Production and improvement award programs , which allow only one student per school to enter, involved a lower percentage of the seniors studied. 3. Fewer than three per cent of the seniors included in this study had ever participated in farm electricity, poultry production, soil and water management, and farm safety award programs at the sectional level. How 500 senior students regard contests and award programs? 1. Contests and award programs which have the greatest educational value are State Farmer Degree programs, land use selection, livestock judg- ing, and dairy cattle judging according to 500 senior students included in this study. 2. Senior students rated poultry judging contests, parliamentary procedure contests, and public speaking contests lowest in educational value. 3 . Senior students who have participated in a particular contest or award program usually rate the activity higher than do students who have not participated. 4. Seniors who participated in a contest or award activity four years rate the activity lower than students who participated only three years. 5 . Seniors who had won an award in a particular activity usually rate the educational value of that activity higher than students who had won no award or students who had won an award at the local level only. What are the research findings which should be considered in revamping contests and award programs ? 1 . There is very little relationship between type and production in dairy cattle. 2. For 95 per cent of the dairy farmers, variations in milk production are at least twenty times as important as are variations in type. 3. Of the components that make up a type score, dairy character appears to be most closely associated with production. Selection on dairy char- acter alone is about four times as effective in raising milk yield as is selection on total type score. However, progress through selection can be increased only two or three per cent if dairy character is considered along with production records when predicting breeding value for milk yields. Furthermore, few judges actually agree on what dairy char- acter really is. 4. In order to get a reasonably reliable measure of a person's judging ability at least 20 rings of animals would have to be judged by that per- son. 5. At the present time livestock judges have had very little success in picking on hoof the hogs and beef cattle which have the best carcasses. 6. The ideal, show-ring type of beef animal does not score well in car- cass contests. 7. The tremendous progress made in breeding better animals has been accomplished by selecting animals for rate of gain, producing ability, carcass characteristics, etc. -10- 8. Poultry producers face their critical selection job when they buy baby chicks . One can now buy chicks bred for high production making the culling of chickens a rather useless activity. 9. Drill box surveys of the seed farmers are planting show that much re- mains to be done to get farmers to buy and use quality seed. 10. A contest cannot be justified solely on the basis that it is enjoyable or has public relations values. 11. Farmers who purchase quality, certified seed from reputable dealers have little need to judge or select seed samples on the basis of the criteria commonly used in judging contests. The important task is choosing a variety and interpreting information on seed labels correctly. 12. Progress made in increasing the yielding ability of grain has not come about by selecting grain on the basis of show ring standards. Performance records are the basis for improved varieties . Recommendations for Change One important purpose of this research is to suggest changes that might be made in contests and award programs. The writer has found that changes are being made in some sections. New ideas have been tried and some have proved successful. New procedures found to be successful in one section certainly merit the consideration of teachers in other sections . One should not overlook the findings of research in contemplating and planning the future. To do so would be educational suicide. No attempt will be made here to develop a formula for success which can be followed by all teachers or groups in Illinois. The following suggestions are made for the con- sideration of teachers and others who wish to improve the contest and award programs in vocational agriculture: General Recommendations 1. Schools are encouraged to have their advisory councils help develop written policies to govern the place of contests and award programs in the total vocational agriculture program. The purposes of contest ac- tivities and the part they are to play in the education of youth should be thoroughly understood by the public as well as on professional school people . 2. Teachers should view contests and award programs as one of many teaching devices available to them. Teachers should not allow the winning of contests to become an educational goal either for themselves, for their students, or for the public. In some communities a re-edu- cation of the public regarding the place of contests may be required to remove false impressions that have been developed over the years. 3 . Evaluation of a department of vocational agriculture should include many criteria. Overemphasis on winning contests by teachers and state staffs gives the impression that this criterion is the primary one in evaluation. 4. Teachers should not ask their students to participate in any contest or award program which clings to outdated objectives and procedures or teaches false values. -11- 5 . Teachers should avoid the practice of teaching only a fraction of what needs to be taught in connection with a particular job. For example, if one teaches students to select gilts on the basis of type and ex- cludes from consideration the use of production records and other valuable tools, he engages in miseducation. 6. This study shows that little variation exists in contests and award pro- grams which extend from the local to the national level . 7. Teachers in each section should survey the farms and the students' farming programs to ascertain whether their present contests and award programs are justified. In many sections poultry, dairy, and soybeans are minor enterprises. 8. More attention should be given to scheduling contest activities at the time of year most teachers should be teaching the problem areas con- cerned . 9 . More students should be encouraged to compete with themselves . An undue emphasis is often placed on competing with another person or another group and too little emphasis is given to the form of competition where a student tries to beat his old record. 10. Contests and award programs should not be evaluated exclusively in terms of their effect on the FFA chapter or their effect on winners. The evalu- ation process should include provisions for checking the effect contests have on people and particularly on the losers. 11. Teachers should examine the possibility of holding demonstrations or schools in place of some of our contests. At least two sections of the state hold land use selection schools with no competition for prizes. 12. The concomitant learnings resulting from contests and award programs need to be considered in replanning these programs . Concomitant learn- ings are side learnings or accompanying learnings. They may be desirable or bad. 13. Awards in parliamentary procedure contests, improvement award programs, and program of work contests have been won by a relatively small group of chapters. The possibility of limiting a chapter from winning an award year after year should be explored. 14. An attempt should be made to get away from "paper contests". More evidence for selecting winners in foundation areas should be obtained through interviews with the candidate preferably on the farm. 15. Most of the worth-while learning connected with contests and award pro- grams takes place at the local level. The primary concern of teachers should be quality teaching of all students and not the development of excellence in a few students. 16. There is need to spread participation and awards over a larger percentage of students in a school just as there is a need to spread participation and winning among more chapters of the state. This recommendation should not keep teachers from being selective in choosing the contests and award programs which they believe will help them attain worth-while educational objectives. This study shows that over 75 per cent of the schools partici- pate in dairy cattle judging contests yet dairy farming has become a -12- specialized business important in relatively few areas of the state. 17. College teachers, state supervisors, and others who provide pre-service and in-service training for vocational agriculture teachers should attempt to bring their instruction up to date particularly with respect to livestock and seed selection. Teachers who graduated from college several years ago may need help in learning about carcass grading, livestock and grain grading, performance testing and other important aspects of selection. 18. In attempting to induce change in contests and fairs teachers should recognize that they must deal with the vested interests of professional livestock judges, breed association, and purebred breeders, and the tradition which goes along with fairs and shows. Teachers who want to promote change must overcome the inertia of those who wish to stand still. In some instances new content will have to be added to the curriculum and old content deleted. Teachers need the help of advisory councils in re- sisting the pressure of groups which want the agriculture department operated to serve their own selfish interests. 19. Several teachers expressed the opinion that contests and award programs disrupted their instructional program. The statement "Let's get back to teaching agriculture, " implies that preparation for and participation in contests is not teaching. If contests activities are disrupting rather than supporting our teaching efforts they have no place in the school pro- gram. One way of improving contests and award programs would be to shape them in such a way so that they contribute to worthwhile educational objectives most teachers accept. Some danger signals we need to consider in evaluating the contests and award programs are as follows: a. Does the activity force the teaching of a problem area or unit which you ordinarily would not and should not teach or does the contest activity force one to teach content at the wrong time of the year? b. Does the experience provided by the contest duplicate experiences provided at home or in the local school? c . Do students learn content or develop attitudes at contests which contradict what teachers have tried to teach in the classroom? d. Is the contest the best medium for teaching what needs to be taught? 20. Most of the section contests and award programs are held during times when schools are not in session. In four sections no section contests or award programs are held on school time, and in ten sections only one section contest or award program is held on school time . If contests and award programs disrupt the regular instructional program it must be the preparation for these events and not the contest or award program activity which is disruptive. 21. Education has to do with changing behavior. If contests and award pro- grams are to be justified on the basis of their educational value, these activities should be designed to help teachers evaluate students, not animals or crops. -13- Recommendations for Changing Production and Improvement Award Programs 1. Production award programs have been well received by most teachers and students in Illinois, but the five improvement award programs have been less successful. This study shows that the cumulative record books for improvement programs published by the Vocational Agriculture Service have helped to stimulate interest in improvement award programs. The publi- cation and sale of these booklets should be continued. New efforts should be made to stimulate sound and worthwhile improvement projects in students' farming programs . We face the danger of restricting improvement projects to the five areas for which awards are offered. Teachers should not allow the improvement awards program to keep them from encouraging improvement projects in farm accounting, dairy herd improvement, and other phases of farming which are important in the local community. 2 . The award programs are not called contests but in many respects these activities have taken on all the characteristics of contests. The fact that some schools have dominated the winning year after year leads one to believe that collecting plaques has become a major activity of some teachers and that teachers can become expert at winning if they learn the tricks of the trade. In order to minimize the influence of the teacher who has learned how to fill out forms properly and to verify the data offered on application forms, the possi- bility of interviewing candidates and observing on-farm programs should be investigated. On-farm observations of students' programs would also enable the selection committee to consider opportunity as well as absolute achieve- ment in selecting winners and to separate a student's accomplishments from his father's accomplishments. 3. In several sections only one or two entries are made in some of the award programs . The lone entry may or may not be worthy of winning a section plaque. To avoid having awards come too cheap the possibility of establishing minimum standards which must be met in order to receive a sectional plaque should be investigated. It is possible that entries could be grouped according to the Modified Danish system with the stipulation that lone entries need not be given an "A" award if it is mediocre or poor. 4. The improvement awards program is a good example of how the carrying of a contest beyond the sectional level to the state and national level freezes the program according to the national pattern and thwarts the teachers from bringing about desirable changes. If this program could be stopped at the section level the Danish system of placing could be used and other aspects of the program could be modified to fit the unique needs of students in a given section. •14- Recommendations for Changing Judging Contests 1 . Land use selection contests were ranked highest in educational value of all judging contests by the teachers included in this study. This activity can be improved in some sections by a closer cooperation between teachers and Soil Conservation Service personnel. There is no reason to believe that the educational value of land use selection would be hampered if it were handled as a demonstration or a "land use selection school". Land use selection is perhaps valuable enough in and of itself so that no artificial means of moti- vation are necessary to get students to participate. 2. There appears to be little need for poultry judging contests in most sections. In sections where poultry is an important enterprise a sectional activity in- cluding the grading of eggs and dressed birds could be held if these learning experiences could not be provided at the local level; however, such an activity would probably be more educational in nature if it were not carried out in the form of a contest. 3. Crops judging contests in their present form are of doubtful value. They may be doing more harm than good. On the basis of the ratings of teachers and students and other evidence the writer recommends the elimination of crop judging contests. 4. Dairy cattle judging should involve the use of production records as well as type. 5. Livestock judging should be restricted to animals to be selected for breeding and animals to be selected for feeding. There is little excuse for selecting finished animals although carcass grading may be a valuable activity for students. The identification of market grades has value because of its use in the markets. 6. The word "judging" should be eliminated and the term "selection" employed. 7. More emphasis should be placed on production records, backfat data, rate of gain and feed efficiency data and less emphasis on show ring standards or breed characteristics and type. 8. Animals intended for feeding purposes should be graded, not placed. 9. Sections should explore the possibility of substituting a market grading demonstration or a livestock selection school for their present contest. 10. For those who want to retain a livestock judging contest the pattern established by Section 15 should be studied. Sections interested in marketing schools should investigate what is being done in Section 5. Recommendations for Changing Fairs and Shows 1. Field inspection of growing crops, evaluations of approved practices used by the student, attention to efficiency of production, and records should be used in evaluating crop projects . 2 . The grain show which encourages students to pick and polish seed and the show where grain is judged as seed should be discontinued. -15- 3. The Danish system of placing should be used in preference to a rank- order placing. 4. Sections desiring to revamp their grain shows should investigate the pro- cedures being used in Sections 9 and 10. 5 . At livestock fairs evaluations are made of animals entered not of what a boy has accomplished at home. It would be well if fair awards could be made on the basis of costs of production, rate of gains, etc. as well as on the animal. Market shows and sales where animals are graded, sold, and butchered with the records of cost of production being considered might be explored as a possible substitute for present shows. 6. In most sections a separate poultry show is not justified. Recommendations for Changing Other Programs 1. The new plan of interviewing State Farmer candidates is a step in the right direction. We should continue to move in a direction in contests and award programs which will lead to the grasping of more handles for evaluation. A constant effort to verify statements, to separate the students' accomplish- ments from those of his father and teacher, to consider opportunity as well as achievement, and to promote objectivity in selection procedures should be made. 2 . Program of work contests were not popular with most teachers included in this study. There is a feeling among some teachers that an FFA program should be evaluated in the community by the vocational agriculture advisory council. The contest has led to a ridiculous padding of programs and an overemphasis on FFA work. Here is another contest which has been pushed to its present form by the desire to win at the national level. This study did not come up with an alternative suggestion but merely suggests that the pro- gram of work contest is ranked by teachers as one of the least valuable con- tests. 3. Most teachers are not familiar with the Chapter Safety Program. Very few chapters participate in it and few teachers were able to comment on it. 4. About half the teachers surveyed rated parliamentary procedure contests "excellent" or "good. " Slightly over 40 per cent of the teachers surveyed had participated in this activity in 1957-58 and 1958-59. This study shows that a few schools have won most of the sectional awards in parliamentary procedure. Apparently, teachers who are active in parliamentary procedure contests are satisfied with the present contest. Teachers need to make sure their students understand the weaknesses in parliamentary procedure and the appropriate situations when parliamentary procedure is most effective. -16- CHAPTER IE PARTICIPATION IN CONTESTS AND AWARD PROGRAMS IN ILLINOIS Contests and Award Programs Included in this Study . Thirty contest and award programs available to FFA members or students en- rolled in high school vocational agriculture courses were included in this study. The activities studied are those which are sponsored by the Illinois Association FFA, the Illinois Association of Vocational Agriculture Teachers, and the National or State FFA Foundation. Some of these contests and award programs are held at the section level only, but many are held at section, district, state, regional, and national levels. The writer concerned himself in this study only with, contest and award programs operating at the state level or below. The 30 contests and award programs which have been studied and the levels at which each activity is available to most students are shown in Table I. See Table I. Table I shows the contests and award programs included in this study which are held at section, district, and state levels. Competition in these activities at the local chapter level may be organized at the discretion of the local teachers of vo- cational agriculture. Since contests at the local level vary greatly and are of an informal nature no attempt was made to find the extent of participation in local con- tests other than to gather the information from the summary of teacher reports pre- sented in Chapter VI. The reader should recognize that not all the contests and award programs in which students of vocational agriculture participate have been listed in Table I. These students and schools that win state contests and awards are usually eligible to proceed to regional and national competition. Furthermore, most students are eligible to compete in a vast array of contests and award programs sponsored by commercial companies, service clubs, local and county farmers' organizations, and others. In many instances the local chapter of FFA sponsors several awards and contests for members of the local chapter and small groups of schools sometimes cooperate to sponsor contests and award programs. Number of Students Participating in Section Foundation Award Programs . Participation in Foundation Award Programs at the section level for the period, 1955-59, is shown in Table II. See Table II. In interpreting the figures in Table II the reader should remember that a student may enter more than one sectional award program and that sections range in size from about 10 to 25 schools. From Table II the reader can observe that 13,523 entries were made in 15 Foundation Award Programs during the five-year period, 1955-59. The number of entries in each of the award programs is given in Table III. See Table in. Two conclusions may be drawn from Table in. First, production award programs such as swine, corn, and beef production involve many more students than improve- ment award programs such as farm safety, farm electrification, farm beautification, soil and water management, and farm mechanics. Secondly, the number of students participating in the Foundation Award Programs has moved up and down during the period 1955-59 but no consistent trend is indicated. Interest in the poultry production awards has gone down and interest in the farm mechanics awards and farm beautifi- cation awards has gone up. The decline in entries in the regular speaking contest may be attributable to the recent initiation in many sections of an extemporaneous public speaking contest. -17- TABLE I CONTESTS AND AWARD PROGRAMS STUDIED AND THE LEVELS OF COMPETITION GENERALLY AVAILABLE IN ILLINOIS Activity Levels Of Competition Sectional District State 1. State Farmer Degree 2. Star Farmer Award 3 . Dairy Production Award 4. Sheep Production Award 5. Poultry Production Award 6 . Beef Production Award 7 . Swine Production Award 8. Corn Production Award 9 . Soybean Production Award 10 . Small Grain Production Award 11. Farm Mechanics Award 12 . Farm Electrification Award 13 . Soil and Water Mgt . Award 14. Farm Safety Award 15. Farm and Home Beautification Award 16. Public Speaking Contest Award 17. Livestock Judging Contests 18. Dairy Cattle Judging Contests 19. Poultry Judging Contests 20. Crops Judging Contests 21. Meat Judging Contests 22 . Dairy Products Judging Contests 23. Voc. Agr. Livestock Fairs 24. Voc. Agr. Poultry Fairs 25. Voc. Agr. Grain Fairs 26. Land Use Selection Contests 27 . Parliamentary Procedure Contests 28. Chapter Safety Contests 29. Chapter Program of Work Contests 30. Safe Corn Harvest Program X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Xa Xa X X X X X X X X a. Available only when 25 schools indicate a desire to participate in a state judging event. b. All chapters may participate but no competitive event is held. -18- TABLE H NUMBER OF STUDENTS PARTICIPATING IN SECTIONAL FOUNDATION AWARD PROGRAMS IN EACH OF 25 SECTIONS IN ILLINOIS, 1955-59* Section No. 1955 1956 1957 }958 1959 Total 1 115 115 117 124 164 635 2 113 111 125 116 125 590 3 73 103 95 113 85 469 4 83 73 86 83 87 412 5 139 144 142 121 144 690 6 74 84 72 54 66 350 7 102 111 115 96 111 535 8 93 93 87 120 135 528 9 115 127 140 147 148 680 10 122 125 132 130 148 657 11 91 91 110 97 98 487 12 126 129 117 111 118 601 13 58 75 50 57 68 308 14 74 77 83 82 81 397 15 118 147 129 116 129 639 16 71 80 86 83 89 407 17 116 140 125 132 141 654 18 80 100 88 94 87 449 19 142 168 154 162 151 787 20 75 105 95 75 77 427 21 114 109 119 118 156 616 22 169 184 176 162 165 856 23 105 118 93 96 94 506 24 70 76 86 82 55 369 25 93 98 107 95 92 485 Total 2,531 2,783 2,729 2,666 2,814 13,523 ♦Includes eight production award areas, five improvement awards areas, Star Farmer, and public speaking. Participation in Foundation Award Programs at the district and state levels is usually 100 per cent of those eligible. At the district level the 25 sectional winners in each of the 15 foundation award areas are eligible to compete , and at the state level, five district winners may compete. The distribution of sections according to the number of entries in each of the fourteen Foundation Award Programs in 1959 is shown in Table IV. According to the data given in Table IV, two sections had no entries in soybean production award programs and two sections had no entries in Farm Safety in 1959. One section had no entries in Soil and Water Management, and thirty award programs at the section level attracted only one or two entrants. Over 60 per cent of the sec- tion award programs attracted more than five entries each. -19- TABLE in NUMBER OF STUDENTS PARTICIPATING IN FIFTEEN FOUNDATION AWARDS PROGRAMS IN ILLINOIS AT THE SECTION LEVEL (1955-1959) Award Area 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 Total 1. Star Farmer 167 177 183 154 178 859 2. Corn Production 283 294 309 303 322 1511 3. Soybean Production 147 160 169 169 187 832 4. Small Grain Production 147 176 162 166 189 840 5. Swine Production 323 344 335 325 338 1665 6. Dairy Production 242 250 229 227 231 1179 7. Beef Production 278 306 293 289 306 1472 8. Poultry Production 150 168 155 124 124 721 9. Sheep Production 209 222 230 243 234 1138 10. Farm Mechanics 115 147 148 153 171 734 11. Farm Safety 66 77 85 85 95 408 12. Farm Electrification 80 104 99 91 100 474 13. Farm Beautification 87 102 101 108 120 518 14. Soil & Water Mgt . 82 102 94 89 92 459 15. Public Speaking (Regular) Total 155 154 137 140 127 713 2,531 2,783 2,729 2,666 2,814 13,523 TABLE IV DISTRIBUTION OF SECTIONS ACCORDING TO THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES RECORDED IN 15 SECTION FOUNDATION AWARD PROGRAMS - 1959 Number of Entries: Total Award Program 1-2 3-5 6-10 11 or more Sections 1. Star Farmer 1 6 16 2 25 2. Corn Production 8 17 25 3. Soybean Production 2 1 7 8 7 25 4. Small Grain Production 7 15 3 25 5. Swine Production 6 19 25 6. Dairy Production 4 11 10 25 7. Beef Production 1 4 20 25 8. Poultry Production 4 12 9 25 9. Sheep Production 4 13 8 25 10. Farm Mechanics 9 14 2 25 11. Farm Safety 2 8 9 6 25 12. Farm Electrification 6 14 5 25 13. Farm & Home Beautification 4 10 11 25 14. Soil & Water Management 1 6 12 6 25 Total 5 30 95 132 88 350 -20- One of the questions which the writer attempted to answer is, "To what extent do the entries in Foundation Award Programs come from the same schools year after year?". Schools which had an entry in each of fourteen section award programs from 1955-59 were identified and the number of schools participating in these activ- ities at each of six frequency levels was calculated. A summary of these data appears in Table V. TABLE V PERCENTAGE OF FFA CHAPTERS PARTICIPATING IN FOURTEEN SECTION AWARD PROGRAMS AT EACH OF FIVE FREQUENCY LEVELS, (1955-59) (N=485 Chapters) Percentage Frequency of Participation* Award Program Five Four Three Not at Times Times Times Twice Once All 1. Star Farmer 8. 9. 13. 16. 24. 30. 2. Corn Production 25. 21. 17. 12. 12. 13. 3. Soybean Production 10. 10. 10. 12. 18. 40. 4. Small Grain Production 10. 9. 11. 14. 20. 36. 5. Swine Production 32. 20. 16. 11. 11. 10. 6. Dairy Production 15. 14. 17. 15. 15. 24. 7 . Beef Production 20. 20. 19. 16. 12. 13. 8. Poultry Production 6. 8. 9. 17. 19. 41. 9. Sheep Production 10. 14. 17. 21. 17. 21. 10. Farm Mechanics 9. 9. 7. 12. 20. 43. 11. Farm Safety 5. 4. 5. 6. 13. 67. 12. Farm Electrification 5. 5. 6. 8. 16. 60. 13. Farm Beautification 8. 4. 6. 6. 18. 58. 14. Soil & Water Mgt. 5. 5. 5. 9. 13. 63. * Percentage rounded off to nearest whole number. The data in Table V show that over half of the 485 active chapters did not participate in farm safety, farm electrification, farm beautification, and soil and water management during the five-year period, 1955-59. On the other hand, about 90 per cent of the chapters participated at least once in the corn, beef, and swine production award programs during the period studied. Number of Students Participating in Judging Contests Teachers interviewed by the writer were asked to estimate the number of students participating in sectional judging contests during the 1958-59 school year. A summary of this information is presented in Table VI. -21- of Contests Number of Held Participants 23 1662 17 1532 15 1247 14 1117 11 844 TABLE VI NUMBER OF STUDENTS PARTICIPATING IN SECTION JUDGING CONTESTS HELD IN ILLINOIS, 1958-59 Contest No. Land Use Selection Livestock Judging Dairy Judging Grain Judging Poultry Judging Total 6,402 The reader can observe in Table VI the number of sections which held judging contests in 1958-59. Most sections allow five students from a school to participate in a judging contest with the three high participants comprising the school team. Ex- ceptions to this rule can be found in Sections 11, 15, 19, 20, 22, 23, and 24. Section 23 is the only section in the state which allows a school to bring all vocational agri- culture students to the section judging contests. Ten students may participate in the livestock and dairy judging contest in Section 11, and ten boys may participate in livestock judging in Section 15. Sections 20 and 24 allow teachers to bring more than five students to a contest but only a designated team of five may officially compete for awards. In Section 19, livestock, dairy, grain and poultry judging teams are limited to three students while in Section 22, six students comprise a land use selection team. The number of schools and teams participating in Illinois State Judging Contests has been decreasing since 1955. Figure I has been prepared to show the trend in participation in the state contests. The State Judging Contest in Illinois is open to all vocational agriculture departments and participation is not dependent on winning at a lower level. In recent years meat judging and dairy products judging contests have not been held. See Figure I. Number of Students Participating in Section Fairs and Shows The number of students and the number of entries entered in each of the 25 sectional fairs in 1955 and 1958 are shown in Table VII. See Table VII. The figures in Table VII show that between 5,000 and 6,000 vocational agri- culture students participated in section fairs in 1955 and 1958. This number repre- sents about one-third of the total vocational agriculture enrollment in Illinois. Number of Students Participating in other Contests and Award Programs Complete participation data for the five-year period 1955-59 were not obtained for all of the contests and award programs studied. For the years 1957 and 1958 the following numbers of chapters participated in the Program of Work Contest and the 25 Parliamentary Procedure Contests: Activity 1957 1958 Program of Work Contest 271 316 Parliamentary Procedure Contests 134 139 -22- o R tn § a 05 3 h o 03 i— i 2 2 o 03 > h5 03 03 Q H 03 11 O o lO "<* CO CO CM CM H s o -23- TABLE VII NUMBER OF STUDENTS AND NUMBER OF ENTRIES RECORDED IN EACH OF 25 SECTION VOCATIONAL AGRICULTURE FAIRS* 1955 and 1958 Number of Students Participating Number of Entries Sect. No. 1955 1958 1955 1958 1 256 255 690 725 2 210 206 703 686 3 204 214 531 570 4 216 180 512 474 5 224 272 544 739 6 146 154 456 514 7 248 229 731 666 8 299 343 845 850 9 254 313 775 877 10 249 330 805 784 11 193 201 584 611 12 287 311 1002 901 13 178 222 672 672 14 183 225 749 672 15 192 183 693 674 16 163 163 590 508 17 159 200 611 623 18 140 154 627 618 19 297 174 1071 938 20 168 193 340 485 21 256 117* 774 287* 22 253 269 635 554 23 235 241 521 676 24 231 251 642 561 25 310 273 892 1017 Total 5,553 5,673 16,995 16,682 *Includes both the summer and fall fairs in sections where both are held, except 1958 figures for Section 21 include only the September fair. Of the total number of chapters participating in the Program of Work Contest in 1957 100 did not complete their entries and 118 of the 1958 group did not complete their entries. These chapters did construct a program of work and submitted it in the fall but did not follow through and complete the follow-up phase of the activity. The reader should recognize that the Program of Work Contest is a cooperative activity involving the entire chapter but the Parliamentary Procedure Contest is held with teams of five students competing. In 1958, one hundred and thirty nine chapters participated in section parliamentary procedure contests. These contests involved at least 695 students. -24- CHAPTER IV DISTRIBUTION OF SECTION AND STATE AWARDS A summary of the number of vocational agriculture students participating in 30 contests and award programs at the section, district, and state levels hos been pre- sented in Chapter in. In Chapter IV, an attempt will be made to describe the distri- bution of awards or top honors in the contests and award programs. In organizing this section of the report the writer seeks to answer the following questions: 1. To what extent have section and state awards in each of several award areas been dispersed among the 500 chapters of the state? 2. To what extent have all awards been dispersed among the chapters of the state. The period chosen for study ,vas the five-year period from 1955-59. Only the 500 FFA chapters active three or more years during this period were considered in this phase of the study . Winners in Foundation Award Programs, Parliamentary Procedure, and Land Use Selection From 1955-59, a total of 604 section winners, 115 district winners, and 23 state winners were selected in the improvement awards program. Winners were selected at the section, district, and state levels in farm mechanics, soil and water manage- ment, farm electrification, farm safety, and farm and home beautification award pro- grams. At the section level plaques are given to the boy selected as winner in each of the five areas. In each of the 25 sections, 25 plaques could have been awarded during the 1955-59 period in each of the five improvement areas. The extent to which these plaques were distributed among the 500 chapters of the state is shown in Table VIII. See Table VIE. The following conclusions may be drawn from Table VIII: 1. Thirty six per cent of the FFA chapters in Illinois won the 604 section plaques awarded from 1955-59 in the five improvement areas. 2. Three per cent of the chapters (13 in number) won 28 per cent of the plaques. 3. Fourteen per cent of the chapters (71 in number) won 77 per cent of the plaques. 4. Sixty four per cent of the chapters received no section plaques in any of the five improvement areas. District and state winners were, of course, selected from section winners because competition at each level is restricted to those students declared winners at the next lowest level. Another group of awards available at the section, district, and state levels are the eight production awards, public speaking awards, and Star Farmer awards. In these ten areas 1,245 winners out of a possible 1,250 were selected at the section level. Fifty winners could have been selected in each section during the five-year period and, of course, no limits are placed on the number of awards one school can win. The ex- tent to which these awards were distributed over the entire population of Illinois FFA chapters is shown in Table DC. See Table DC. -25- TABLE Vm DISTRIBUTION OF 604 SECTION PLAQUES IN FIVE IMPROVEMENT AWARD PROGRAMS DURING THE 1955-59 PERIOD Number of Plaques Won Num ber of Chapters Total Plaques Won 18 2 36 15 1 15 14 3 42 13 2 26 12 1 12 11 2 22 10 2 20 9 19 8 4 32 7 9 63 6 5 30 5 10 50 4 15 60 3 16 48 2 30 60 1 79 79 318 Totals 500* 604 * Number of FFA Chapters active three or more years during the 1955-59 period, TABLE DC DISTRIBUTION OF 1,245 SECTION AWARDS IN TEN FOUNDATION AWARD PROGRAMS DURING THE 1955-59 PERIOD * Number of Awards Won Number of Chapters Total Awards Won 23 1 23 19 1 19 17 1 17 16 1 16 15 1 15 13 5 65 12 6 72 11 1 11 10 3 30 9 '6 54 8 15 120 7 12 84 6 24 144 5 26 130 4 29 116 3 36 108 2 66 132 1 89 89 167 Totals 500# .1,245 * Includes 8 production award areas, Star Farmer awards, and public speaking. # Number of FFA chapters active three or more years during the 1955-59 period. -26- The data presented in Table IX may be summarized as follows: 1. Sixty five per cent of the Illinois FFA chapters shared in winning 1,245 awards. 2. Five per cent of the chapters won 26 per cent of the awards. 3. Twenty seven per cent of the chapters won 74 per cent of the awards. 4. Thirty five per cent of the chapters received no section awards, from 1955-59 in these ten award areas. District and state winners were selected in all cases from the section winners. Part of the data presented in the two previous tables were combined to show that a great many awards were won by a relatively few chapters. The number of chapters winning eight or more section awards in fifteen foundation areas during the 1955-59 period is shown in Table X. TABLE X DISTRIBUTION OF 749 SECTION AWARDS IN FIFTEEN FOUNDATION AREAS DURING THE FIVE-YEAR PERIOD, 1955-59 * Number of Awards Won Number of Chapters Total Section Awards 34 1 34 32 1 32 26 3 78 23 2 46 22 3 66 21 1 21 20 2 40 19 5 95 17 2 34 16 3 48 15 2 30 14 3 42 13 7 91 12 2 24 11 3 33 10 1 10 9 19 8 2 16 Totals 44 749 * Includes plaques or top honors won in eight production award areas, five improvement award areas, plus Star Farmer award, and public speaking contests. The figures in Table X show that 44 chapters (8.8 per cent of the total number in Illinois) won 749 awards which is 36 per cent of the total section awards made in fifteen foundation areas from 1955 to 1959. -27- The same type of illustration may be made for the year 1959. In 14 foundation award areas, 350 section awards could have been presented. The three hundred and forty seven awards actually given out were won by 40 per cent of the chapters. Table XI has been prepared to show the distribution of section awards in 1959. TABLE XI DISTRIBUTION OF 347 SECTION AWARDS IN FOURTEEN FOUNDATION AWARD PROGRAMS, 1959 Number of Awards Number of Chapters Total Awards Won 7 17 6 2 12 5 3 15 4 11 44 3 24 72 2 45 90 1 107 107 283 Totals 477 * 347 * Number of active chapters, 1959-60 In comparing the tables presented thus far in this chapter, the reader may have observed that section awards in production areas were distributed more evenly among the chapters of the state than are awards in the improvement areas. As pointed out in Chapter III, participation in production programs was also more widely distributed among the chapters than is participation in improvement programs. The writer obtained lists of section winners in parliamentary procedure contests and land use selection contests and with lists of winners of foundation award programs determined the frequency of distribution of award winners at six levels of accomplish- ment. The frequency distribution is shown in Table XH. See Table XII. The following conclusions might be drawn from the data in Table XII: 1 . Farm safety awards and parliamentary procedure awards were restricted to fewer schools than awards in other areas. 2. More chapters were "repeat winners" in the five improvement award areas than in the eight production award areas. Recipients of the State Farmer Degree State Farmer Degrees are conferred annually by the Illinois Association of the FFA upon no more than 2 per cent of the state membership. Students apply on appropriate forms and recipients are selected from a large group of applicants. From 1955 to 1959, the Illinois Association conferred 1,674 degrees on its members. These degrees were awarded to FFA members from 419 Hapters. The percentage of chap- ters in each of the 25 sections receiving State Farmer Degrees and the number of degrees conferred in each section was shown in Table XIII. See Table XQI. -28- TABLE XII NUMBER OF FFA CHAPTERS WINNING SECTION AWARDS AND CONTESTS AT EACH OF FIVE FREQUENCY LEVELS (1955-59) (N = 500 Depts.) * Activity Five FFA Chapters Frequency of Winning Four Three Two One None Star Farmer 1 Corn Production 1 Soybean Production Small Grain Production 1 Swine Production 1 Dairy Production Beef Production Poultry Production Sheep Production Farm Mechanics 2 Farm Safety 2 Farm Electrification Farm Beautification 3 Soil & Water Management Public Speaking 1 Parliamentary Procedure 3 Land Use Selection 2 1 2 2 1 3 1 2 6 3 2 5 1 3 3 5 18 69 407 5 14 68 410 5 21 60 413 3 23 57 414 4 19 62 412 6 22 58 413 5 19 60 413 6 20 67 407 4 21 67 407 5 19 56 416 8 19 22 443 7 21 46 423 7 . 18 43 427 7 19 40 429 3 25 56 414 8 15 29 442 9 13 53 422 * Departments included were active three or more years between 1955 and 1959. The data in Table XDJ show that a high percentage of the chapters in most sections had members who became State Farmers. The range in the number of degrees won by any one section during the five-year period was from 40 to 90. In order to show more clearly the percentage of Illinois chapters receiving various numbers of State Farmer Degrees during the 1955-59 period, Table XIV was prepared. See Table XTV. Only 17. 3 per cent of the chapters received no State Farmer degrees during this period. About three per cent of the chapters of the state received 10 or more degrees during this period. Winners in the State Chapter Contest . Chapters may participate in the State Chapter Contest by submitting programs of work and reports of accomplishment. Entries receive gold, silver, and bronze plaques, or are given honorable mention. A review of the chapters participating in this contest during the 1955-59 period was made to determine how many chapters had been rated in the upper three categories two or more times. The five-year award record of eighteen chapters is shown in Table XV. See Table XV. -29- TABLE XIII DISTRIBUTION OF STATE FARMER DEGREES AMONG THE 26 SECTIONS OF ILLINOIS, 1955-59 Section No. of Chapters Percentage of Chapters No. of Degrees Number Receiving Degrees Receiving Degrees * W&ft i i§ 95 II % 19 100 n % 22 88 82 4 17 85 65 § id 90 83 6 12 §8 44 1 16 84 56 8 19 86 74 19 73 n 10 21 84 n 11 u 82 62 12 14 61 59 13 15 88 48 14 16 73 56 15 17 74 75 16 15 88 41 if %1 85 75 18 15 83 40 19 i§ 82 90 20 13 87 62 21 16 76 78 22 20 83 88 23 14 82 64 24 11 58 51 25 21 4i§ 100 ft MM * Based on number of chapters active in the section two years or more except for new chapters which Were counted only if they had been aetive at least three years during the 1955-59 period. -30- TABLE XIV DISTRIBUTION OF STATE FARMER DEGREES EARNED IN ILLINOIS DURING THE FIVE-YEAR PERIOD, 1955-59 No. of State Farmers No. of Percent of Degrees Earned Schools Total 88 17.3 1 86 17.0 2 74 14.6 3 66 13.0 4 50 9.8 5 41 8.1 6 34 6.7 7 14 2.8 8 20 4.0 9 17 3.4 10 5 1.0 11 6 1.2 12 1 .2 13 < >r more 6 1.2 TABLE XV AWARDS WON BY 18 GOLD EMBLEM CHAPTERS IN THE STATE CHAPTER CONTEST, 1955-59 Chapter 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 A Gold Gold Gold Gold Gold B Gold Gold Gold Gold Gold C Gold Gold Gold Gold Silver D Gold Silver Gold Gold Gold E Gold Gold Bronze Gold Gold F Gold Gold Silver Gold Silver G Silver Silver Gold Gold Gold H Gold Gold Silver Gold Honorable Mention I — Silver Gold Gold Gold J Bronze Gold Silver Gold Bronze K — Silver Gold Gold Silver L Silver Silver Gold Gold — M — Bronze Gold Silver Silver N Silver — Silver Gold — O Gold Silver Silver Silver — P Silver Bronze Gold Silver — Q Bronze Silver Gold — R Gold — — — Bronze -31- The data in Table XV may be summarized as follows 1 Forty-six "Gold Emblem Chapter" awards were given in the State Chapter Contest during the period, 1955-59. Only 18 chapters shared in these 46 awards. Five chapters received 22 of these awards. Nine chapters received 34 of these awards. All but three of these 18 chapters were rated "Gold, " "Silver, " or "Bronze" at least four of the five years included in this study. Other Programs No attempt will be made to describe the distribution of awards among students and chapters in section fairs and shows or in the Chapter Safety Contest . One winner is chosen each year in the Chapter Safety Contest. The Safe Corn Harvest Program is one of the 30 activities included in this study, but a winner is not selected. Co- operating chapters are given certificates, which serve as records of their partici- pation . -32- CHAPTER V REPORT OF SECTIONAL PROGRAMS One teacher from each of the 25 sections was interviewed by the writer to secure additional information about the nature of the contest and award programs in each section. Teacher s were asked to supply information about the following items: 1. Contest and award programs available in the section. 2. Organization and operation of fairs and shows. 3. Organization and operation of judging contests. 4. Organization and operation of award programs. 5. Organization and operation of other contests and award programs. 6 . Major changes made during past five years and changes planned for the future. 7. Successful features of each of these contests and award programs. 8. Estimated number of students participating in judging contests last year. In addition to the data obtained from teachers by the writer, additional information was obtained by securing fair catalogs, judging contest rules, etc. from as many sections as possible. The data secured from both the personal interviews and the section records have been summarized in this chapter under the following headings: 1. Fairs and shows. 2. Judging events. 3 . Award programs . 4. Other section contests and award programs. Omissions may exist in the listing of sections which follow a particular practice because complete information was not obtained from all sections. Fairs and Shows Kinds of Fairs and Times Held Each of the 25 sections in Illinois provide one or more fairs for students of voca- tional agriculture. Nineteen sections sponsor two separate fairs, one for livestock and horticultural products, and one for poultry and grain; however, five sections pro- vide poultry and grain classes at the section livestock fair. One section has no ex- hibition program for either grain or poultry. Section 11 holds a market lamb show in June in cooperation with a 4-H group. The sections which sponsor each of five types of fairs are as follows: Livestock, grain, and poultry fair: Section 1, 2, 3, 6, 11 Livestock and poultry fair: Section 5, 7, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 18 Livestock fair: Section 4, 8, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 Grain fair: Section 5, 7*, 9, 10, 12*, 13*. 14, 15, 18 ■33- Grain and poultry fair: Section 8, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22*, 23, 24, 25 (The asterisk designates sections which hold judging contests in connection with fairs.) Section livestock fairs are usually held for one day in July or August. Three sections (21, 24, 25) hold their fairs in September. Three sections (1, 2, 11) have a two-day, livestock fair. At least six sections (1, 4, 10, 15, 16, 18) hold their livestock fairs in connection with a county or local fair. Section grain shows and section poultry shows are held in the fall on Saturday by ten sections. Five of the sections hold these shows on a school day in the fall, and one section has a poultry and grain show as a night event in the fall. Classes Provided at Section Livestock Fairs The writer obtained premium lists and sectional fair rules from 23 of the 25 sections holding summer livestock and horticultural fairs. The information about grain and poultry classes was obtained from all but four of these sections which hold grain and/or poultry shows and from these sections which include grain and poultry classes as a part of their summer fairs. An attempt has been made to indicate the classes which are not common to most fairs and to indicate the sections which have sponsored these classes. Swine: 1. Class for grade or crossbred gilt: Section 6, 7, 10, 20, 23, 24, 25 2 . Slaughter hog judged by probing backfat: Section 23 3. Breeder-feeder litter: Section 12, 14, 16, 20 4. Production class (with 56-day weights): Section 6 5 . Production litter (show part or all of litter and provide information on 56-day weights, farrowing date, etc.): Section 5, 10, 17 6. Market hogs are graded: Section 2 7. Classes for market hogs based on weight: Section 20 and others Beef: 1 . Production class (cow and calf, on type only) : Section 14 and others 2. Herd (1 bull and 3 females): Section 15 3. Pen of 3 steers (not trimmed and not broken to lead): Section 2 4. Lightweight and heavyweight steer classes: Section 3, 5, 6, 18 and others Dairy: 1. Production class — 50 per cent on type and 50 per cent on production (milk record, butter fat record, length of lactation and age of cow con- sidered: Section 6, 10 2. Classes for grade dairy cattle: Section 1, 2, 7, 10, 15, 16, 24, 25 3. Classes for dual-purpose cattle: Section 4, 9, 10, 13, 15, 19, 24 4. Breeder's herd: Section 6, 7 5. Classes for crossbred cattle: Section 15 -34- Sheep: 1. Market lamb show held in June and lambs are graded choice or prime, good, common, and cull: Section 11 2. Classes for grade breeding sheep: Section 1, 6, 24, 25 3. Flock class: Section 20 Poultry: 1. Classes for chickens: Section 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25 2. Classes for ducks: Section 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 21, 22, 25 3. Classes for geese: Section 2, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 21, 22, 25 4. Classes for turkeys: Section 1, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 21, 22, 23, 25 5. Eggs are weighed, graded, and candled plus data on flock submitted with record book: Section 20 6. Egg classes: Section 1, 6, 7, 8, 10, 13, 15, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25 7. Classes for hybrid chickens: Section 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 13, 22, 25 8. Classes for crossbreds or "other breeds": Section 7, 12, 15, 18, 22, 23 Other animals: 1. Horse or pony classes: Section 2, 11, 14, 25 2. Rabbit classes: Section 5, 7, 9, 11, 14, 17, 18, 19 3. Goat classes: Section 10 Crops: 1 . Class to exhibit stalk of corn and growing soybean plants : Section 6 2. Class for crop plant transplanted in a bucket with approved practices used listed on a cardboard sign: Section 11 3. Classes limited to field-run corn and small grains, soybeans, etc. as it comes from the picker or combine: Section 20 4. Class for corn picked from 25' linear feet with a pint of shelled corn and the cobs placed with exhibit: Seetton 20 5. Class for twenty pounds of ear corn to be shelled and placed on test weight, shelling percentage, and moisture: Section 15 6. Class for best display of 3;-5 crops from a single farming program: Section 5 7. Class for silage: Sectionr20, 25 8. Classes for single ear or 10 ear samples: Section 8, 12, 13, 18 9. Classes for popcorn: Section 8, 13, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 25 10. Classes for oats, soybeans, or wheat: Section 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 12, 13, 15, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 25 11. Hay classes: Section 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 13, 19, 20, 25 -35- 12. Grain sorghum classes: Section 13, 22, 23 13. Barley and rye classes: Section 13, 15, 22, 25 14. Legume and grass seed classes: Section 13, 15, 22, 25 15. Shelled corn classes: Section 5, 8, 12, 13, 15, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 25 16. Corn production class: Section 17 bases placings on bushel of "mine-run" corn (10 points), record book (20 points), soil testing (30 points), fertilizing (40 points) . 17. Market grain classes: Section 20 grades all grain entries and requires boys to submit record of growing practices along with record books. 18. Corn yield contest: Section 19 requires boys to complete four worksheets on each corn entry. Placings are based on yield (50 per cent), cost of production (40 per cent), and quality of shelled peck samples (10 per cent) 19. Field inspection of crop projects: Section 9, 10 Crop projects visited by committee of teachers who judge project on fertility practices, cultural practices, erosion control practices, harvesting prac- tices, and returns. Fall grain show is held but placings based primarily on what boy does on the farm. Horticultural Products: 1. Honey: Section 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 19, 22, 23, 25 2. Vegetables: Section 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 25 3. Garden display: Section 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 10, 14, 15, 21, 22 4. Fruits: Section 11 Special Awards: 1. Grand champion or reserve champions selected: Section 2, 3, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 24, 25 2. School exhibits: Section 1, 2, 6, 7, 13, 14 3. Fitting and showmanship: Section 1, 21 4. Clean pens award: Section 1 5. Breed association awards: Section 10 6. Awards from commercial concerns: Section 1, 2, 3 Methods of Awarding Prizes The "X" system of awarding premium money is commonly used in Illinois. This system is described in the Section II Fair Catalog as follows: "An X value will be designated to A, B, and C placings in each division. a. Beef and dairy: A = 16X, B = 14X, and C = 12X b. Swine and shop: A = 12X, B = 10X, and C = 8X c. Poultry, grain, and misc. : A = 6X, B - 4X, and C = 2X d. Ponies: A = 10X, B = 8X, and C = 6X -36- After all the entries have been placed by the judge and recorded, the total number of X's will be determined. In order to find the value number of a single X, the total number of X's will be divided into the total money available for the fair, which will probably be $3, 000. " In Illinois, nine sections (2, 12, 17, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, and 25) use a straight Danish system to determine placings. Under this system entries are grouped into three or more classes (A, B, C) with the A's receiving blue ribbons, the B's, red ribbons, and the C group receiving white ribbons. No ranking of entries within the A group is accomplished and premiums for all entries within each group are the same. A modified Danish system is used by sections 1, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, and 19. In these sections the entries in each class are grouped into three or more groups, but the top five or top ten are ranked and in some cases extra money is given for some of the top placings. In thirteen sections (1, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 15, 16, 18, and 19) some ranking of Group A entries is accomplished in some or all of the classes. Six sections (1, 8, 11, 14, 15, 19) provide extra premium money for some of the top-ranking entries. General Procedures and Special Rules Many of the operating rules and procedures used in section fairs are common to many sections and no attempt will be made here to list all of the rules and procedures used in Illinois. The writer has reviewed fair catalogs from most of the sections, and in doing so, selected the following procedures and rules which are unique: 1. Partnership may be with parents, guardian, or sibling, based on 50 per cent ownership for two, 33 1/3 per cent for three, or 25 per cent for four partners. (Section 15) 2. Animals in breeding classes need not be purebred but must show characteristics of the breed. (Section 8 and 24) 3. Record books must be up to date and will be checked at the fair along with health papers. (Section 20, 21, 24, and 25) 4. Steers, barrows, and wethers are graded. (Section 4) 5. No sheep breeding classes provided in Section 1,8, and 14 and no market sheep classes in Section 8. 6. Soybeans show in variety classes where there are three or more entries. (Section 19) 7 . Poultry is to be judged on production and evidence of good care and management with no regard for breed characteristics. (Section 20) 8. A market score card is used for corn. (Section 5) 9. Test weight is taken on corn and oat samples. (Section 8) 10. A demonstration on probing hogs is given at the section fair. (Section 17) 11. Moisture tests and/or test weights are run on corn. (Section 18, 20, 21) Successful Practices used in Section Fairs In personal interviews with an experienced tev her in each section the writer asked, "What special features or practices are used in your section fair which seem to be successful or to contribute appreciably to its educational value?" The responses of 25 teachers are as follows: -37- *1. A packer-buyer grades the market hogs. *2. A class is provided for a pen of three steers. This class orients the students' thinking to commercial standards rather than show-ring standards. 3. Fair books are sent out in May so teacher can get entries made early. 4. Judging begins at 7:30 A.M. 5. A "market show" not a "barrow show" is held. 6 . Every entry gets a prize . *7. Steers, barrows, and wethers are graded (listed twice). 8 . Judges give reasons for their placings (listed three times) . *9. The "X" system for awarding premiums is used (listed twice). *10. The Illinois Swine Herd Improvement Association scorecard is used in production classes for hogs. ♦11. A field inspection of grain projects is made (listed twice). *12. Classes established for grade animals (listed twice). *13. Production classes established for swine and dairy. *14. Live specimens of plants and approved practice charts are exhibited. *15. Market lamb show held in June. 16. Each school is given a number and cards are used for entries. Each boy has a numbered headband. 17. A class for a 20 lb. sample of ear corn has helped us stress corn marketing. Shelling percentage is calculated. *18. Barrows are classified into weight classes. 19. A probing demonstration is held to determine thickness of backfat in hogs. *20. Production classes have been established for corn and swine. *21. New beef class based on production and records has been established. *22. A committee has been appointed to study fairs (listed twice). 23. A corn class based on yield, quality, and cost of production has been established. *24. Grain is graded. Grain is brought in just as it comes from the combine. 25. Dairy and beef premiums are twice the hog and sheep premiums. The preceding practices marked with an asterik (*) are practices initiated within the last five years in the sections reporting. Other changes in section fairs made during the past five years or planned for the future are as follows: 1. Class added for hay. 2. A two -day show is held. 3. A breeder-feeder litter class has beer dded (listed twice). 4. Classes for rabbits and apples added. Single ear, three ear, and ten ear corn classes were dropped. -38- 5. A fat heifer class (market) has been added. 6. Animals need not be registered. 7. Bull calf class dropped. 8. Poultry show moved from fall to August. 9. Auction provided for sale of market animals. 10. Any breed with three or more entries has a separate class (listed twice). 11. New classes established for grade dairy animals. 12. Added crossbred swine class (listed twice). 13. Separate classes for each soybean variety have been established. 14. Beef steers are classified by weight. 15. Beef animals are subject to mouthing by veterinarian. 16. Record books are checked at fair. 17 . Barrows were probed but this practice was discontinued after two years. 18. Classes for ponies and saddle horses have been added. Kinds of Judging Contests and Time Held There is variance among the sections in the kinds of judging contests held in 1959-60. Table XVI has been prepared to show the kinds of judging contests provided in each of the 25 sections. TABLE XVI KINDS OF JUDGING CONTESTS HELD IN THE 25 SECTIONS OF ILLINOIS. 1959-60 Contest Section 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Total Land xxx xxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 23 Dairy x xxx x xx x xx xxxxx 15 Livestock xx xxx x xxxx xx xxxxx 17 Poultry x x xxxx xxxxx 11 Grain x x xxxx x x_x xxxxx 14 As shown in Table XVI, 11 sections provide opportunities for vocational agriculture students to participate in five different section judging events; however, these contests are not always held at separate times. The sections which hold combinations of judging contests are as follows: ■39- Dairy and poultry contest: Section 1 Dairy and livestock contest: Section 11, 13, 14, 16, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24 Dairy, livestock, poultry, and grain: Section 18, 25 Dairy contest: Section 9 (6 and 7 cooperate) Livestock and grain: Section 1 Livestock contest: Section 3, 6, 7, 9, 15, 18 Grain contest: Section 11 (12, 13 with grain show) Grain and poultry contest: Section 7*, 14, 16, 19, 21, 22*, 23, 24 (*with grain or grain and poultry show) The reader should not assume that the lack of an organized section judging contest means that students are denied the opportunity to participate in judging events. Sec- tion 2 has county livestock and dairy judging activities. In Section 10, one county has a land use selection contest, and another county sponsors a land use selection demon- stration. Land use selection contests are held at the section level in 23 of the 25 sections. Eighteen sections hold these contests in the fall, and one section (20) holds its contest in April or May. Information on time of year held was not obtained for the other four sections. Fifteen sections use a full school day for their land use selection contests, and four sections hold these contests on the afternoon of a school day. One section (15) reported that its land use selection contest is scheduled on Saturday and two sec- tions (9, 17) hold these contests in the late afternoon after school has been dismissed. In addition to the land use selection contests 33 other section contests are held in Illinois annually. These contests include the judging of livestock, dairy, poultry, and grain. Livestock and dairy contests are held in the spring in 15 sections. Livestock judging contests are held in the fall in four sections (1, 6, 11, 15). Grain and poultry contests are held at various times with six sections holding them during the fall semester and seven sections holding them during the spring semester. Of the 33 livestock, dairy, grain, and poultry judging contests held, eleven are scheduled on Saturday, one on Lincoln's birthday and the others on school days. Organization of Judging Contests Each of the 23 sections holding land use selection contests use a scorecard for judging land. Seventeen sections used the scorecard supplied by Vocational Agri- culture Service, and three sections use the old edition of this scorecard. Two sections use a scorecard developed by teachers in their sections. Six sections use an official scorecard but leave out the sections on color and structure. Dairy judging contests are held in 15 sections in Illinois. Nine sections (1, 6, 7, 9, 14, 19, 21, 22, and 24) include one ring of cows to be judged, at least partially, on production. One section (11) has a production ring when possible, and Section 18 reported that half of their rings are judged on production. Livestock judging contests are held in 17 of the 25 sections. Nine sections (1, 9, 11, 14, 15, 18, 19, 24, and 25) include in this contest one production ring of swine. Three sections (1, 3, and 15) include the grading of market animals in their judging contests. The contest held in Section 15 is particularly striking because it differs drastically from the livestock judging contests held in other sections. The Section 15 contest usually includes the following rings: -40- 1 ring of gilts or boars (production records used) 1 ring of sows and their pigs (production records used) 1 ring of beef cows and their calves (production records used) 1 ring of beef heifers (type) 1 ring of feeder pigs (type) 1 ring of 10 fat steers to be graded 1 ring of 10 feeder steers to be graded 1 ring of 10 fat hogs to be graded Teachers in Section 5 have replaced their livestock judging contest with a carcass grading school for teachers designed to help teachers "do a better job of teaching the selection of the type of livestock the market demands. " x Poultry judging contests are held in 11 of the 25 sections. In most sections live birds are judged on the basis of visible indications of production. Five sections (1,7, 19 21 23, and 24) have students grade eggs and four sections have students judge eggs as a part of the poultry judging contest. Dressed birds are included in eight of the poultry judging contests, and in six of these contests dressed birds are graded. Section 21 includes a ring of eggs to be graded and a ring of market birds to be graded. Participants are required to candle the eggs in Sections 14 and 21. Grain judging contests are held in 11 of the 25 sections, usually in connection with the poultry judging contest. Nine of these contests follow a traditional pattern, which includes the identification of weed and crop seeds and judging grain as seed. Corn is usually judged on its market quality but only those characteristics which participants can see or feel are considered. Two contests which deviate from the traditional . pattern are those in Section 1 and Section 11 contests. Section 1 has a contest which includes 10 samples of corn and 10 samples of oats to be graded (test weights and moisture percentage given), 10 samples of hay to be classified according to USDA grades, and 10 samples of silage to be graded "excellent", "good", "fair, " or "poor". Section 11 also provides contest participants with test weights and moisture readings. Using scorecards obtained from the Board of Trade, participants use market grades in placing grain samples. Successful Practices Used in Judging Contests The 25 teachers who supplied information about judging contests to the writer were asked to identify the special features or practices used in their section judging contests which seemed to be successful or to contribute appreciably to their educational value. The responses of teachers are listed below: 1 Frank Crawford. "Marketing School Held by Agriculture Teachers, " Illinois Vocational Progress , May 1960, pp. 128-130. *1. Grading of hay and silage added to contest (listed twice). *2. Grading of livestock added to the contest (listed twice). 3. Judges explain reasons for placings (listed twice). 4. Judging contest held on county basis. 5 . Awards eliminated entirely and boys still come . *6. Land judging may be held on county basis. One county has a land use selection demonstration but no scores are kept. *7. Use judging as a teaching device, not an evaluation device. *8 . Have fifth animal for judge to use before contest to explain what he is looking for. *9. Take 10 boys to contests. *10 . Added production rings (listed four times) . *11. Grading of grain added. 12. Made our own scorecard for use in land judging. ♦13. Use weed and crop plant identification this year. 14. Grain judging held with grain show. 15. Use local agriculture teachers to place rings. 16. Stress term "selection", not "judging". 17. Contests used as a tool to get interest. *18. Eliminated sheep, dairy, poultry, and grain judging. *19. Added a "feeder pig" ring. *20. Boys help score cards (listed three times). *21. Do grading work instead of judging. 22. Hold land judging school for teachers prior to contest. *23 . Conduct "air-lift" in connection with land use selection. *24. Added eggs and dressed birds, (listed three times) 25. Official placings are made by teachers who were coaches of the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th place teams of previous year. *26. Teachers bring as many boys as they wish. 27. Keep teachers free to supervise boys and defer scoring until following week. *28 . Have contest away from school. 29. Use a "practice hole" and SCS man explained scorecard and gave some instruction to all. Practices in the preceding list which are marked with an asterisk (*) are practices initiated within the last five years. Other changes in judging contests made during the past five years or planned for the future are as follows: -42- 1. Grading beef steers (listed twice). 2. Substitute a teachers' marketing school for livestock judging contests. 3. Plan to add carcass grading work. 4. Use entire field instead of an area forty feet square in land use selection. 5. Plans are made to add an air lift activity to the land use selection contest. 6. Grading eggs and ten meat birds (listed twice), 7. Production ring of dairy added. 8. Committee appointed to study contests (listed twice). 9. Timothy added to grain judging. 10. A local feed company sponsors a dinner for all winning teams and winning individuals of any of the judging contests plus advisors. Kinds of Award Programs and Time Held Production awards in small grains, soybeans, corn, swine, beef, dairy, sheep, and poultry and improvement awards in farm mechanics, farm electrification, soil and water management, farm safety, and farm and home be autifi cation are available in all 25 sections. Also, the Star Farmer Award is given in each of the 25 sections. Section award winners are selected in late afternoon or evening during the month of January in 21 of 25 sections. Three sections select winners on a Saturday, and one section delays the task until early February. How are Award Winners Selected? All but three of the 25 sections in Illinois make use of the evaluation guide avail- able from the State Supervisor's Office to assist them in determining winners. Usually the sections use committees made up of teachers who have no boys entered in a partic- ular award area to determine the winners; however, in eight sections (3, 5, 6, 7, 20, 23, 24, and 25) teachers from a neighboring section do the judging. Section 8 reported they plan to visit the three high candidates for Section Star Farmer awards in order to choose a winner. Two sections (14, 22) indicated that persons other than teachers were used to help select award winners. Successful Practices Used in the Awards Program Practices listed by 25 teachers as successful practices which contribute appre- ciably to the educational values of the section awards program are as follows: *1. Hold a section foundation awards banquet (listed three times). *2. Swap judges with another section (listed four times). 3. Use of cumulative record books for improvement awards. *4. Interview all possible winners in production awards and improvement awards program. *5 . Have noon luncheon with sponsoring committee and judge award programs in the afternoon. 6 . Have printed cards on blocks to designate where each group of record books belong. -43- Practices marked with an asterisk (*) in the above list are practices initiated within the past five years. Other changes made in the awards program include the following: 1. Interview every boy entered in the foundation awards program. 2. Plan to visit top three candidates for Star Farmer award. 3. Move selection of award winners to Saturday. Other Section Contests Other contests held at the section level are parliamentary procedure contests, public speaking contests, and the program of work contest. Parliamentary procedure contests are held in all sections but two (9 and 13). Public speaking contests, both regular and extemporaneous, are held in all sections but Section 12 which holds the "regular" speaking contest only and Section 22 which has only the extemporaneous contest. A few sections sponsor contests not yet mentioned in this report; for ex- ample, Section 1 has a Section Chapter Sweetheart Contest and Section 14 holds a Demonstration Contest. In some sections county events are held such as the Mercer County Farm Planning Activity in Section 4, the County Contour Staking Activity in Section 9, and a three-school basketball tournament in Section 4. Organization of Parliamentary Procedure, Public Speaking, and Chapter Program of Work Contests The writer secured the dates of all parliamentary procedure and public speaking contests except those in Section 15, 20, and 23. Dates of the contests for other sections are as follows: 1 . Eight sections hold their parliamentary procedure contests in the fall of the year (Section 6, 7, 14, 17, 18, 19, 22, 24). 2. Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 10, 11, 12, 16, 21, and 25 hold their parlia- mentary procedure contests in January, February, or March. 3. All sections hold their public speaking contests in February, March, or April . 4. The program of work contest is always judged by a committee of teachers whose chapters are not entered except for Sections 6 and 7 who judge each other's program. This job is usually accomplished in April or May. Public speaking contests are judged by persons other than agriculture teachers in 16 of the 25 sections. In three sections agriculture teachers and others serve as judges, and in one section agriculture teachers do all the judging. Section 6 holds their speaking contest with Section 7 and the two sections judge each other's entries. Parliamentary procedure contests are judged by agriculture teachers in the section in eight of the 23 sections holding contests. Five sections use both their own agriculture teachers and other persons, and three sections use outsiders exclusively to judge the parliamentary procedure contests . Sections which work with another section in judging the contest are Sections 6, 7, 5, 12, 16, and 17. The writer found almost no variance among the sections in the way public speaking contests and parliamentary procedure contests were organized and in the scorecards used for selecting winners. Some teachers indicated that if a school is interested in achieving success in a contest program which does not stop at the section level, you are almost forced to follow the procedures and patterns established at the highest level, -44- No other reasons were given by teachers for not deviating from the recommended scorecard in parliamentary procedure contests. Twenty-five teachers indicated special features or successful practices used in connection with parliamentary procedure, public speaking, and program of work contests: *1. An examination worth 100 points which covers all motions was added to our parliamentary procedure contest. *2. Exchange judges with another section (listed five times). 3. No equalization after contest is over. *4. Tried to distribute contests throughout year. *5. Only extemporaneous speech contest is held in our section, but 1st and 2nd place boys may go on to either the regular or extemporaneous contest at the district level. -45- CHAPTER VI A SUMMARY OF TEACHER OPINION REGARDING CONTESTS AND AWARD PROGRAMS Procedures Used to Collect Data The opinions of Hlinois vocational agriculture teachers were collected by sending questionnaires to 155 teachers selected at random from within the 25 sections. (2) A copy of the questionnaire appears in the appendix of this report. Usable returns were received from 100 teachers, and the information from these returns has been summar- ized in this section of the report. Participation in Contests and Award Programs From a list of 30 contests and award programs, teachers were asked to check those in which their students participated during 1957-58 and 1958-59. The percentage of schools participating in each of these 30 activities is shown in Table XVII. See Table XVH. The contests and award programs which had attracted the least attention were safety activities, improvement award programs, and poultry activities. It should be explained that the last two items listed in Table XVH, dairy products judging and meat judging, are available only at the state level and that neither of these contests was held in 1957-58 or 1958-59 because of lack of interest. Furthermore, the reader should recognize that some activities are held on both a section and state level while others, such as land use selection, are held on a section level only. Teachers' Ratings of Contest and Award Programs Each of 30 contests and award programs was rated by teachers as excellent, good, fair, or poor. Teachers were instructed to base their ratings on the educational value of the contests and award programs. The number and percentage of teachers rating each activity excellent or good are shown in Table XVIII. See Table XVHI. The contests and award programs which received the highest ratings by teachers were not always those in which a high percentage of schools participated. For example, public speaking, Star Farmer Awards, and poultry production awards were rated ex- cellent or good by more than three-fourths of the teachers. Yet, as shown in Table XVHI, fewer than half of the schools participated in these activities in 1957-58 or 1958-59, Table XVIH shows that teachers gave low ratings to poultry and grains fairs, all judging contests except land use selection, program of work and parliamentary procedure con- tests, and improvement award programs. Are Changes Needed in Contests and Award Programs? Teachers cooperating in this study were given an opportunity to suggest needed changes. One section of the questionnaire allowed respondents to suggest changes needed in 12 contest or award program areas. In this part of the questionnaire some teachers suggested the elimination of certain activities. In another part of the ques- tionnaire teachers had an opportunity to list contests or award programs which should (2) Stratified-random sampling was accomplished by using a table of random numbers. -46- TABLE XVH CONTEST AND AWARD PROGRAM ACTIVITIES RANKED ACCORDING TO THE PERCENTAGE OF SCHOOLS PARTICIPATING IN 1958-59 (N = 100 ) Activity 1. Voc. Agr. Livestock Fair 2. Livestock Judging Contest 3. Swine Production Award 4. Beef Production Award 5 . Corn Production Award 6. Chapter Program of Work Contest 7. Dairy Cattle Judging Contest 8. Land Use Selection Contest 9. Voc. Agr. Grain Fair 10. State Farmer Degree 11. Sheep Production Award 12. Safe Corn Harvest Program 13 . Dairy Production Award 14. Grain Judging Contest 15. Soybean Production Award 16. Public Speaking Contest 17. Small Grain Production Award 18. Farm Mechanics Award 19. Pari. Procedure Contest 20. Star Farmer Award 2 1 . Poultry Judging Contest 22. Farm and Home Beautification 23. Poultry Production Award 24. Voc. Agr. Poultry Fair 25 . Farm Electrification Award 26. Soil and Water Management Award 27. Farm Safety Award 28. Chapter Safety Contest 29. Dairy Products Judging Contest 30. Meat Judging Contest Percentage Part. Percentage Part in 1958-59 in 1957-58 93. 92. 88. 84. 86. 78. 85. 75. 82. 72. 81. 71. 75. 73. 72. 73. 72. 69. 62. 59. 62. 64. 57. 61. 56. 57. 52. 61. 50. 48. 48. 50. 47. 43. 46. 38. 43. 40. 43. 40. 42. 49. 37. 30. 37. 39. 36. 38. 32. 29. 32. 36. 29. 27. 21. 20. 3. 4. 0. 0. be dropped. Table XE has been prepared from data included in these two sections of the questionnaire. The percentage of teachers who favored outright elimination, revision of the present structure, and maintenance of the present structure of each of 12 activities is shown in Table XLX. The percentages calculated on the basis of the number of teachers responding to each of the 12 parts of the question. See Table XDC. -47- TABLE XVIH CONTEST AND AWARD PROGRAM ACTIVITIES RANKED ACCORDING TO THE PERCENTAGE OF TEACHERS RANKING THESE ACTIVITIES EXCELLENT OR GOOD Excellent and Good Ratings Activity Percentage* Number 1. State Farmer Degree 89.2 83 2. Land Use Selection Contest 84.6 77 3. Beef Production Award 83.2 79 4. Swine Production Award 82.1 78 5. Voc. Agr. Livestock Fair 82.0 82 6. Dairy Production Award 80.9 72 7 . Public Speaking Contest 80 . 4 74 8. Star Farmer Award 80.2 89 9. Sheep Production Award 79.8 71 10. Corn Production Award 79.8 75 11. Soybean Production Award 76.9 70 12. Small Grain Production Award 75.6 68 13. Poultry Production Award 75.3 64 14. Safe Corn Harvest Program 74.7 68 15. Farm Mechanics Award 73.0 65 16. Livestock Judging Contest 70.1 68 17. Soil and Water Management Award 68.2 58 18. Farm Electrification Award 67.8 57 19. Chapter Safety Contest 67.2 42 20 . Dairy Cattle Judging 62 . 4 58 21. Farm Safety Award 61.4 51 22. Farm & Home Beaut. Award 57.5 40 23. Pari. Procedure Contest 56.5 48 24. Voc. Agr. Grain Fair 51.2 44 25. Poultry Judging Contest 47.7 41 26. Grain Judging Contest 43.8 39 27. Chapter Prog, of Work Contest 42.7 41 28. Meat Judging Contest 36.4 20 29. Dairy Products Judging Contest 34.0 17 30. Voc. Agr. Poultry Fair 32.9 25 * Teachers who checked "no opinion" were not used in calculating percentages. Which Contests and Award Programs Should be Dropped? The data in Table XTX show that more than one-third of the teachers included in this study were in favor of eliminating entirely poultry judging contests and poultry fairs. More than one-fifth of the teachers favored the elimination of grain fairs and crop judging contests. Fewer than five per cent of the teachers favored the elimination of land use selection contests, production awards, livestock judging contests, livestock fairs, State Farmer Degrees, and Star Farmer Awards. Although no figures are presented in Table XK for parliamentary procedure contests, it is interesting to note that 16 per cent of the teachers who returned questionnaires indicated that parliamentary procedure contests should be dropped. -48- TABLE XIX PERCENTAGE OF TEACHERS WHO SUGGESTED EACH OF THREE TYPES OF CHANGES IN CONNECTION WITH CONTESTS AND AWARD PROGRAMS Percentage Responses Eliminate Changes Needed No Change the and Needed N Activity Listed 1. Poultry Judging Contests (76) 36.8 48.7 14.5 2. Poultry Shows (52) 36.5 46.2 17.3 3. Grain Shows (80) 27.5 56.3 16.2 4. Crops Judging Contests (82) 23.2 64.6 12.2 5. Improvement Awards (80) 8.8 75.0 16.2 6. Chapter Opportunities (Program of work contest, Safe Corn Harvest Program, 5.8 73.3 20.9 and Chapter Safety) (62) 8.0* 69.4 22.6 7. Dairy Cattle Judging Contests (86) 5.8 73.3 20.9 8. Land Use Selection Contests (81) 4.9 66.7 28.4 9. Production Awards (86) 3.5 80.2 16.3 10. Livestock Judging Contests (91) 3.3 82.4 14.3 11. Livestock Shows & Fairs (83) 2.4 77.1 20.5 12. State Farmer Degrees & Star Farmer Award (75) 1.3 77.3 21.4 * ] Five teachers thought program of work contests should be eliminated. Some teachers explained why and how contests and award programs should be cut back. Representative comments made by teachers include the following: 1. "Hold all production awards to the section level" 2. "Awards should stop at the section level. The greatest good is at the local level but section level awards stimulates action at the local level. " 3. '1 am not qualified to say which activities should be dropped. This should be voted on in sections and districts. " 4. "We don't need a contest to teach something. " 5. "Departments should use more discretion as to which ones to enter and there should be less pressure to enter everything. " 6. "In some areas, dairy, sheep, and poultry contests should be dropped. " Should New Contests or Awards Programs be Added? Teachers were asked whether new contests and award programs should be added to the present program. Twenty- seven per cent of the teachers said, "No", 26 per cent did not respond to the question, and 47 per cent responded by making comments. Eleven teachers thought a new farm mechanics skills contest should be added, and three teachers suggested a class for farm mechanics projects be included in section fairs. A few teachers suggested that demonstrations (not contests) be added which would cover land appraisal, livestock grading, and livestock selection. Teachers who objected to adding any new contests or award programs gave the following reasons for not adding new programs : -49- 1. "To think of a new one is beyond my mental capacity. " 2. "None. Let's teach agriculture for a change. " 3. "Too many now. We are being criticized for our extensive contest program. 4. "None. Too many now to have time to instruct in basic fundamentals of agriculture and farm operation. " 5 . "We have plenty but need to improve those we have . " Changes Which Need to be Made in Livestock Judging Contests Only three teachers out of the 100 responding thought livestock judging contests should be eliminated; however, most of them thought the nature of these contests should be changed drastically. The change suggested most often by teachers was to stop "judging" animals on the basis of type and particularly "show ring standards" and to start "selecting" animals on the basis of production data and market grades. Twenty-nine teachers said that practical grading work should be done, and seventeen teachers suggested that more emphasis be placed on production. Comments which are representative of this type of thinking were as follows: "Have more livestock grading work and combine the carcass and meat judging with live animal judging. Discontinue breed judging and con- centrate more on the commercial animal. " "More emphasis should be on weight for age, production, etc. " "Judging should be efficiency-centered". "We need data on age, feed consumption, rate of gain, and feed efficiency. Also, we need to have more grading, slaughter carcasses for loin eye, back-fat data, etc." "Production of beef at lower costs and time should be emphasized more than conformation. " "The name should be changed to livestock selection contest. Eliminate the conventional four animals per ring and use a more realistic setting; for example, a cow comes into a sale ring - how much should one bid for her?" "Livestock judging should be set up as a judging school. If a teacher sets out to win a contest he must forget teaching agriculture and concentrate on judging. We are supposed to be teachers, not judges. Judging requires much practice in training a team. Soon we reach a point where practice ceases to be educational and merely become repetition. Also, this required practice very rarely fits in with a good course outline that is functional, seasonal, and fits the immediate needs of individual students. " Only one teacher indicated that judging contests should move in the opposite direction; namely, staying closer to breed standards. A number of teachers registered a complaint against contests which go beyond the local or section level. Some comments were as follows: "After surveying it for years I believe the only good contest is a local one. With section and state contests we are like the athletes — trying for ex- cellence in just a few persons. " "I am not in favor of national contests. " -50- "The contest should stop at the section level. " Six teachers indicated that section elimination contests should be held with only the top two or three teams per section going on to the State Judging Contest. One teacher said he favored the present arrangement of allowing any school to enter the State Judging Contest. One teacher said we need to stress the educational value of contests rather than the "to win" values. There seemed to be some sentiment for changing the time of the State Judging Contest. Six teachers suggested the contest be held during the school year such as October or May. One person commented that livestock judging should be a freshmen contest and should follow the freshmen unit on selection. Other suggested changes mentioned by only three or fewer persons included the use of outside judges, more attention given to judges' reasons, better display of swine (state contest), and easier rings. Changes Which Need to be Made in Dairy Judging Contests The reader may recall from Table XTX that slightly over 70 per cent of the teachers responding to the item regarding changes needed in dairy judging contests suggested specific ways these contests should be improved. Approximately half of the 63 suggestions for changing dairy judging contests mentioned the need for increased use and better use of production records as a basis for selecting dairy animals . Several teachers mentioned that a better method of using production records in selection contests was needed. Other changes suggested less frequently by teachers may be summarized as follows: 1. Cows should be graded, not placed. 2. Use outside judges rather than persons who know the cows. 3 . Hold contest during school year . 4. Restrict state contest to top one or two teams in each section. 5. Include more rings of heifers, calves, and grade animals similar to what boys select for their farming programs. 6. More emphasis and attention given to reasons. Changes Which Need to be Made in Crops Judging Contests Nineteen of the 100 teachers cooperating in this study suggested the elimination of crops judging contests. Fifty- three persons thought these contests should be changed. The change listed most frequently by teachers is the identification of weed and crop plants rather than seeds. Some thought both plants and seeds should be identified. Fourteen teachers suggested that identification of plants supplement or replace seed identification. Teachers frequently suggested grading grain and roughages on a commercial basis rather than judging rings of grain as seed. One teacher said, "Now days few farmers raise their own grass and legume seed. Most of it is purchased from firms whose seed has met U. S. Government requirements. I suggest more emphasis on grading corn, oats, silage, and hay for commercial use rather than seed. " Another teacher suggested that, "Grain should be judged on the market basis not the show ring basis. Also, a spray program for weeds could be worked out. M -51- UWVtKSlTY OF ILLINOIS. LIBRARY Eight teachers thought that new crops, such as hay, silage, and oats-for-feed should be added to the contest. Four teachers suggested that the state contest be held during the school year, and three persons favored making the state contest open only to top section teams. A few persons indicated that growing crops, not seed, should be judged. Changes Which Need to be Made in Land Use Selection Contests Land use selection contests rank highest in educational value of all judging contests according to the opinions of teachers included in this study. The land use selection contests were rated excellent or good by 84. 6 per cent of the teachers. Under the sec- tion "suggestions for change" sixteen teachers said, in effect, that land use selection is the best contest we have. The primary need for improving the contests seems to be in closer cooperation between teachers and the Soil Conservation Service personnel to see that closer agreement is reached on the fundamentals. Several teachers felt that too many differences existed in the interpretation of the score card by SCS men, teachers, and students. Some persons felt the contest should be standardized throughout the state. Some of the weaknesses of land use selection contests and suggestions for improvement are as follows: 1. Soil types differ widely in sections. Contests should be rotated. 2. Contest is open only to five boys per school. Allow more students to participate or hold contest on a county basis. 3. Too much variation in interpreting score card. Hold training schools for teachers. 4. Structure, color, and texture are difficult to evaluate. We need samples to use in our teaching. 5. An entire farm or field rather than a hole should be classified. 6. The potential of the soil should be stressed more, possibly include soil test information. Changes Which Need to be Made in Poultry Judging Contests Twenty-eight teachers or 36. 8 per cent of those who suggested changes in poultry judging contests indicated that these contests should be eliminated entirely. Thirty- seven teachers offered suggestions for changing poultry judging contests in order to improve their educational value. The changes suggested most often by teachers are as follows: 1. Place more emphasis on production. 2. Eliminate contest in sections where poultry is no longer important. 3 . Include grading of eggs and dressed birds . 4. Hold state contest during school year. 5. Use official judges who do not know the birds. 6. Give a demonstration on judging before contest begins. 7 . Hold to section level . -52- Changes Which are Needed in Livestock Fairs Only two teachers suggested the elimination of section fairs and shows; however, several more were very critical of section livestock fairs as they are presently or- ganized. Some of the critical comments made by teachers include the following: 1. "Too much loss of weight on steers, too much disease. Fair idea is alright but most boys don't stay with purebreds after they graduate. " 2. "Fairs are of value only to registered breeders. This is less than ten per cent of our farmers. " 3 . "Some are good but people in the community are opposed because of diseases, transportation problems, time required, purebred and registered problems, strain, stress, etc. I agree and feel that lessons learned here could be learned through judging contests, production tests, recording keeping, etc. I would favor some changes in this direction. " 4. "Fairs are not too practical. They should be set up on a basis of returns per $100 feed fed and other efficiency factors. Grade all animals. " 5. "Let the breeders have their show. Rate the production boys at home by an inspection committee as to their ability' to produce and feed a certain enterprise. Give them an A or C rating as a hog producer after an on- the-farm inspection. " 6. "Have we turned them over exclusively to a few breeders? " 7. "More money is lost in purebred showing (fairs of our type) than is won. " 8. "I personally don't think much of them; however, public will have to be educated for public relations purposes . As long as the State puts up the money we will have them. I believe more demonstrations on production and selection should be set up during our vocational agriculture fairs. " Fifteen teachers of vocational agriculture suggested that a broader base be used for placing rather than using type alone. Suggestions were made by these fifteen teachers that production records, rate of gain, feed efficiency, backfat data, carcass inspection, farming program records, cost per lb. of gain, etc. be used to help determine placings. Twelve teachers indicated that new and different classes should be established. These teachers said classes for grades, crossbreds, and hybrids should be established even for breeding animals. Market animals should be put in weight classes and the animals should be graded, not placed. Production classes consisting of a dam and her offspring, pens of three to five market animals, and classes for meat- type hogs were called for by some teachers. One teacher explained that classifications based on birth dates are not realistic. For example, pigs must be farrowed after February 1. but on many farms where multiple farrowing systems are used it is impractical to farrow pigs shortly after February 1. Two teachers thought animals should not have to be regis- tered and one teacher thought classes for horses should not be allowed. Four teachers offered suggestions regarding the management of fairs. One of the suggestions had to do with allocating state funds to the sections on the basis of entries shown in the fair held the previous year. Another idea was to allow one teacher to serve as fair manager for more than one year in order to get away from inefficiency. The other suggestion on management had to do with simplification of fair reports. Additional suggestions made by teachers included more emphasis on reasons for placings, more premium money, better methods of publicizing fairs, addition of farm mechanics classes, and reduction of the number of blue ribbons awarded under -53- the Danish system of placing. Changes Which Need to be Made in Grain Shows Twenty-two of the 100 teachers included in this study said grain shows should be eliminated. Forty-five teachers made suggestions for improving grain shows. These suggestions have been summarized as follows: 1 . Thirteen teachers said grain shows should move in the direction established by Section 9, 10, and other sections where placings are based largely on a field inspection of the growing crops and where emphasis is placed on pro- duction practices used. 2. Eight teachers thought placings should be based, at least in part, on cost of production, cultural practices, efficiency of production, etc. The idea expressed here was that this information would be furnished by the exhibitor at the section grain show. No field inspection was mentioned as a part of this suggestion, although some teachers suggested showing the growing plants rather than seed samples. 3. Nine teachers made suggestions to the effect that crops be graded, not placed as seed, and that classes be set up to discourage picking and pol- ishing individual kernels to make a pretty sample. 4. Three teachers said the grain show could be justified if it was held in connection with grain judging or some other event. 5. Three teachers said judges should explain thoroughly why each sample was placed as it was. 6. Suggestions mentioned once included increasing premiums, changing from a day event to a night event, increasing public relations aspects of the show, and awarding plaques on the day of the show. Changes Which Need to be Made in Poultry Show s Nineteen of the 100 teachers included in this study thought poultry shows should be discontinued, and twenty-four teachers indicated that these shows should be modified in one way or another. Three teachers said poultry fairs should be held only in connection with section livestock fairs or section judging events. Five teachers sug- gested that production information should be stressed more in the placings, and two teachers felt that classes for dressed birds and eggs should be included. Three teach- ers stated that the practice of combining hybrids and miscellaneous breeds into one class made the placing of birds difficult and meaningless. One teacher thought poultry kept solely for the purpose of exhibition should be eliminated and that students should have a real productive enterprise in order to be eligible to show. Changes Which Need to be Made in State Farmer Degrees and Star Farmer Awards Only one teacher suggested that the State Farmer Degree program should be dropped. Two teachers suggested that Star Farmer Awards be discontinued. Teach- ers' suggestions for change will be presented in three parts; namely, changes per- taining to both State Farmer Degrees and Star Farmer Awards, changes in the State Farmer Degree program, and changes in the Star Farmer Award program. Teacher comments which pertain to both programs have been summarized as follows: -54- 1. Seven teachers said, in effect, that we need to substantiate some of the claims made on application forms, that we should consider opportunity as well as absolute achievement, that we should see to it that sons of wealthy farmers are not rewarded more than other boys, and that we should separate what the boy really accomplishes on his own from what Dad has done for Mm . 2 . Three teachers said a mistake had been made in moving the selection date ahead because awards were now based on only three years of work and some of the motivation for completing the fourth year of a farming program satisfactorily had been eliminated. Comments directed more specifically at State Farmer Degree programs may be summarized as follows: 1. Ten teachers favored the new "interview" system. Three teachers opposed it and one teacher said all State Farmer applicants should be visited on their home farms. 2 . The scholarship requirement was attacked by three teachers because grade standards vary from school to school and such factors as the girl-boy ratio in a given class may eliminate a boy who would be awarded the degree if he were in a different situation. 3 . Four teachers thought that standards ought to be set higher or all boys meeting the present standards should receive the degree even though this number may be more than two per cent. 4. Three teachers said too much attention is paid to size of program giving the advantage to boys in the higher economic classes and boys who are "only sons". 5. One teacher said a new application form is needed to go along with the new record book, and another teacher said inflation has made it desirable to raise required earnings to $1000. 6. One man said degrees should not be divided among schools. He said a piece of tape should be put on the application over the name of the school so that the best boys were selected. 7. Two teachers said the degree program took too much time at the State FFA Convention . One man suggested that the keys be given to the teacher to award at home and that only certificates be presented to the boys as the convention. Several comments made by the teachers were directed specifically at the Star Farmer Awards program. These comments have been summarized as follows: 1. Two teachers said to stop Star Farmer Awards at the section level. 2. Two men said Star Farmer Awards should be discontinued altogether because students spend too much time trying to please a selection committee. 3. Four teachers said each section Star Farmer applicant should be visited on his home farm. 4. One teacher said only seniors should be eligible for the Star Farmer Award. 5. One teacher said no Star Farmer Award should be presented in a section if the applicants were all unworthy of the award. -55- Changes Which Need to be Made in Production Awards Programs Three teachers included in this study said production awards should be eliminated. Fourteen persons said these programs were alright as they are presently conducted, and sixty-nine teachers made suggestions for changing the production awards program. Five teachers said production awards should be stopped at the section level, and two teachers said these awards should go no further than the local level. Nine teachers showed concern over padded reports and dishonest claims made by applicants. One teacher said production awards were often the result of the teacher's ability not the boy's. Another teacher said, "Let's keep trying to eliminate the liars, and let's be careful about too much push for the wealthy and not enough for the others. " One teacher said, "Paper contests are very hard to judge properly. Often it is a judgment of the teacher's work. " One way of finding out more about what students have actually done is to interview the student at school or on the farm. Ten teachers suggested that applicants for pro- duction awards be interviewed and three teachers said they favored a farm inspection of each applicant's program at least on the district and state level. Apparently, some teachers are fearful that the production awards program may degenerate into a "record book contest". Twenty teachers called for a better method of selecting winners. Most of these 20 teachers said evaluative criteria should include moi on efficiency factors and less on size of program. Selection procedures should be stand- ardized throughout the state and minimum standards should be set up. Two teachers said awards often come cheap because of lack of competition in some areas . Poultry wa given as the example of an area where interest is sometimes low. One teacher suggest© a standard score sheet for each enterprise . Factors listed on the score sheet might be cost per cwt gain, number of head, rate of gain, approved practices, etc. In order to win an applicant would need to qualify on at least seven of the ten factors. Two teachers said the crop production awards fail to recognize the student who has a good crop rotation project or the student who grows a different crop each year rather than the same crop for four years. It was suggested that good land use be rewarded, not the production of individual crops. Other changes suggested by only one teacher included a production awards program for sophomores, a change in judging dates back to April, and special classes for small programs . Changes Which Need to be Made in Improvement Awards Seven of the teachers included in this study responded, "Eliminate them entirely, " when asked what changes ought to be made in improvement awards programs. Thirteen persons said not to change them and sixty teachers responded with ways the programs should be changed. The following statements summarize the changes suggested by the sixty teachers: 1. Four teachers said these awards should stop at the section level and two teachers said they should stop at the local level. 2. Thirty -four teachers said they doubted the honesty of the reports. Some of the terms used by teachers to describe this situation were "padded entries, " "a paper contest, " "so much hog wash, " "gawdy, " "showy, " "not authentic, " and "excessive and colorful verbalism. " 3. Fourteen teachers said student interviews and visits to the farms of students were needed to determine what applicants had really accomplished. Several teachers said a method of separating the boy's work from Dad's was needed. -56- 4. Three teachers said the opportunity the boy has to do work in a given area is usually a big factor in determining winners . 5 . Five teachers thought the new record books provided by Vocational Agri- culture Service were helpful. 6. One teacher said electricity should be included as a part of farm mechanics and should not be a separate award field. One person said teachers need to incorporate improvement awards program into their teaching. One teacher said some of the awards come cheaply because of lack of interest. Another teacher said the improvement projects his students carry out do not fit the improvement awards program. Changes Which Need to be Made in Program of Work Contests, Chapter Safety Programs , and Corn Picker Safety Programs Five teachers said the program of work contest should be eliminated entirely. Three teachers said it should be stopped at the section level, and two teachers said this contest should be stopped at the chapter level. The viewpoint of several teachers towards the program of work contest was expressed by one man in this way, "I doubt if there are very many realistic, down-to-earth, farmers' agriculture teachers who can honestly go along with it. I also doubt if there are any self- respecting superintendents who have much respect for it. For the past two years I have helped judge them on a section level and I feel they are 99 per cent liar contests. This would not be bad if the teachers did all the lying but in some cases they are making liars out of FFA members. I believe it's doing more harm than good and unless it can be improved, it should be thrown out completely and the sooner the better. " Thirteen teachers shared the view that programs of work were often padded and that the program of work contest was a contest among teachers, not boys. As one teacher said, "This contest is a big joke. Even fourteen year old boys can see many padded, so-called programs of work. Let a committee in the community judge the program of work and score it. " Several teachers pointed out the fact that some winning programs of work are printed commercially or fashioned purposely to win an award. Three teachers said an attempt should be made to find out what chapters have really accomplished rather than basing awards on paper entries only. One person suggested interviewing the chapter president and chapter adviser at the section level . One teacher thought that the chapter contest may receive attention at the expense of vocational agriculture. He said too much emphasis is placed on simply having a program of work not necessarily doing it. One teacher objected to what he called illogical requirements. He said, '1 doubt if very many chapters have 50 manuals or would want them yet this requirement has to be met to be considered a superior chapter. " Only five teachers commented on the Chapter Safety Program. They said, in effect, that safety is important and should be taught but that they knew very little about the Chapter Safety Program. Only five teachers had anything to say about the Safe Corn Harvest Program. They said it is important and should be continued if chapters do not take too much time from school and handle the program wisely. -57- Are Local Elimination Contests Held to Determine Section Entries? Teachers were asked to indicate the activities for which local elimination contests were held in order to choose section entries. The percentage of schools holding local elimination contests for 22 activities are as follows: Production Awards — Beef 56% Swine 56% Corn 55% Sheep 54% Soybeans 51% Small Grains 51% Dairy 50% Poultry 50% Improvement Awards — Farm Mechanics 34% Farm Electricity 29% Soil and Water Management 29% Farm and Home Beautification 27% Farm Safety 23% Judging Contests — Livestock Judging 49% Dairy Cattle Judging 42% Grain Judging 40% Land Use Selection 39% Poultry Judging 30% Other Programs — Public Speaking 38% Parliamentary Procedure 33% Star Farmer Awards 31% State Farmer Degrees 27% Some teachers said their chapters are small and they have to enter anyone who had the interest and time to participate. In some cases the teacher, a committee of boys, or a class decides who should go to a contest. As one teacher pointed out, students eligible for individual award programs are usually compared and the best entry is chosen, but this process is not usually considered a local elimination contest. One teacher said, "Department policies state that it (contest or award program) must have a definite relationship to the overall educational program of the department and emphasis shall be placed on training all boys or the total group rather than training a few for pur- pose of attempting to win contests. " Amount of Class Instruction Provided Students in Order to Prepare Them for Participation in Contests and Award Programs The writer asked teachers to indicate how many class periods had been devoted to instruction designed to prepare students for participation in contests and award programs. The question was difficult for some teachers to answer because a decision had to be made as to whether a given amount of instruction had been a normal part of the teaching pro- gram or something additional taught because of contest and award opportunities. In -58- interpreting the teachers' responses to this question, the writer drew the following conclusions: 1. About half of the teachers had provided class instruction in livestock, dairy, and land judging which had been designed to prepare students for contests. 2 . From one-fourth to one-third of the teachers had provided class instruction designed to prepare students for participation in parliamentary procedure, grain judging, public speaking, and poultry judging contests. 3 . From one-tenth to one-fifth of the teachers had provided class instruction designed to prepare students for participation in production awards pro- grams, improvement award programs, and program of work contests. 4. Three explanatory statements added by teachers are revealing. They are as follows: "Some class time is given to all events but outside time is given to special groups. " "Our preparation in class consists of reviewing contest rules and selecting teams by peer selection. " "All students get some instruction; however, it is not designed specifically for competition. Where possible, the competition is used to determine abilities developed. " Some teachers pointed out that contests and award programs did not force them to change their instructional programs from what they thought it should be to more super- ficial programs. One teacher replied, '1 would teach the things I do even if there were no contests. Contests merely force teaching at a different time than I like for some as I believe parliamentary procedure should be taught the first two months of the school- year. " Two teachers said they teach vocational agriculture and use contests only as a teaching device. One teacher explained that he had freshmen study livestock judging, sophomores study dairy judging and juniors and seniors study grain judging. Once students study these areas and have been on a team, they cannot be on the same team again. This practice gets away from concentrating instruction in a particular area on a few boys and repeating instruction over and over each year with the same group in order to develop a high degree of proficiency with a few individuals. -59- Chapter vii the opinions and participation records of 500 senior students Students Included in the Sample A group of 500 senior students who were enrolled in vocational agriculture during the 1959-60 school year were included in the sample chosen for study. These students were from schools where teachers had cooperated in filling out the Teacher Survey Form. Of the 100 teachers who completed teacher questionnaires and agreed to have their students complete the Senior Survey Form, 83 followed through by getting the completed Senior Survey Forms completed and returned on time. The seniors included in this study were considered a representative sample of all senior vocational agriculture students in Illinois who attend schools where the vo- cational agriculture teacher had been teaching more than two years. Schools were selected by using a table of random numbers to get a 20 per cent sample from the defined population. Table XX has been prepared to show the years of vocational agriculture and FFA experience of the 500 senior students who returned completed questionnaires. TABLE XX PERCENTAGE OF 500 SENIOR STUDENTS WITH 0-4 YEARS OF VOCATIONAL AGRICULTURE AND FFA EXPERIENCE Percentage of Students Years of Experience Vo-Ag FFA 1 1. % 1. % 2 4. % 3. % 3 14. % 13. % 4 81. % 82. % The figures in Table XX show that over 80 per cent of the senior students included in this study were enrolled in their fourth year of vocational agriculture and were in their fourth year of FFA work. Four Year Participation Records of Senior Students Students were asked to complete a Senior Survey Form indicating their partic- ipation in 24 contest and award programs. Grade levels where participation took place, level of participation (local, section, district, state) and highest level of awards won (local, section, district, state) were determined for each of the students cooperating in the study. In addition to describing their participation records, stu- dents were asked to rate eleven contest and award activities as being very high, me- dium, or very low in educational value. A copy of the Senior Survey Form appears in the appendix. The percentage of senior students who had participated at least once during their high school careers in each of 24 contest and award programs are shown in Table XXI. -60- TABLE XXI PERCENTAGE OF SENIOR STUDENTS WHO HAD PARTICIPATED IN 24 CONTEST AND AWARD ACTIVITIES DURING THEIR HIGH SCHOOL CAREERS (N = 500) Activity Percentage of Students Who Had Participated 1. Livestock Judging Contest 2. Land Use Selection Contest 3. Voc. Agr. Fairs 4. Dairy Cattle Judging Contest 5. Parliamentary Procedure Contests 6. Grain Judging Contest 7 . Poultry Judging Contest 8 . Corn Production Award Program 9. Swine Production Award Program 10. Public Speaking Contest 11. State Farmer Degree 12 . Beef Production Award Program 13. Farm Mechanics Award Program 14. Star Farmer Award Program 15 . Farm Safety Award Program 16 . Dairy Production Award Program 17. Sheep Production Award Program 18. Small Grain Production Award Program 19. Soybean Production Award Program 20 . Farm & Home Beautification Award Program 21. State Fair (FFA entry) 22 . Farm Electricity Award Program 23 . Poultry Production Award Program 24. Soil and Water Mgt. Award Program 53.2 48.0 47.0 42.4 35.0 32.8 28.8 26.4 18.4 18.4 17.8 14.8 9.8 9.2 8.6 8.2 8.0 8.0 7.4 7.4 6.6 5.2 5.0 4.6 The activities in Table XXI are listed in rank order with the activities drawing the highest percentage of students appearing at the top of the list. Fewer than half of the senior students had participated in most of the 24 activities listed. More than half of the seniors had participated in livestock judging contests. Fewer than 10 per cent of the senior students had ever participated in half of the activities listed in Table XXI. The data from the completed questionnaires show that eight per cent of the senior students had never participated in any of the 24 contest and award programs and another 10 per cent had participated in only one of the activities during their high school careers. The grade levels at which senior students had participated in 24 activities are presented in Table XXII. See Table XXII. The data in Table XXII show that a slightly higher percentage of students had participated in production and improvement award programs and State Farmer and Star State Farmer programs at the senior level than at the junior level. These 15 award programs are not open to freshmen and sophomore students. The data in Table XXII also show that there was a gradual increase in participation from the freshmen to the senior level in public speaking, land use selection, and parliamentary -61- TABLE XXII PERCENTAGE OF 500 SENIOR STUDENTS WHO PARTICIPATED IN CONTEST AND AWARD ACTIVITIES AT EACH OF FOUR GRADE LEVELS Activity Fresh. Soph. Jr. Sr. 1. State Farmer Degree * * 7.6 13.8 2. Star Farmer Award 2.8 7.0 3. Dairy Production Award 5.8 7.4 4. Sheep Production Award 5.4 6.4 5. Poultry Production Award 2.8 4.4 6. Beef Production Award 10.6 11.8 7. Swine Production Award — 14.6 14.8 8. Corn Production Award 19.4 23.6 9. Soybean Production Award — 5.8 6.4 10. Small Grain Production Award 5.0 6.6 11. Farm Mechanics Award 5.8 8.8 12. Farm Electricity Award 3.4 4.4 13. Soil and Water Mgt. Award — 2.2 3.6 14. Farm Safety Award 6.2 6.0 15. Farm & Home Beautification Award 6.2 6.0 16. Public Speaking 8.4 10.8 11.6 13.6 17. Voc. Agr. Fairs 28.0 36.6 38.2 30.8 18. State Fair (FFA) 2.0 3.0 4.2 3.8 19. Livestock Judging 25.0 32.4 41.4 31.0 20. Daily Cattle Judging 20.0 28.0 28.4 23.2 21. Poultry Judging 14.6 17.2 14.8 10.4 22. Grain Judging 20.2 19.8 16.4 13.4 23. Land Use Selection 13.2 22.6 31.4 35.4 24. Parliamentary Procedure 17.4 18.2 20.4 25.4 * Freshmen and sophomores not eligible procedure contests. On the other hand, in shows and fairs, livestock judging, and dairy cattle judging there had been an increase in participation the first three years and a decline in the senior year. Since senior students completed the Senior Survey Form during the second semester of the senior year, it is reasonable to assume that some had not yet had an opportunity to participate in shows and contests scheduled late in the year. The percentage of senior students who had participated in each of 24 contest and award activities at local, section, district, and state levels is given in Table XXm. See Table XXIH. The data in Table XXIII show that more students had participated in State Farmer Degrees programs, state livestock judging contests, state dairy cattle judging con- tests, state poultry and grain judging contests, and state fair exhibition than in the other state activities studied. This is probably due to the fact that competition in the six activities mentioned is open to all vocational agriculture students in Illinois. Other contest and award activities at the state level are open only to those who win at a lower level . -62- TABLE XXIH PERCENTAGE OF 500 SENIOR STUDENTS WHO HAD PARTICIPATED IN CONTEST AND AWARD ACTIVITIES AT EACH OF FOUR LEVELS Percentage Participation Activity Local Sect. Dist. State 1. State Farmer Degrees 9.6 ___ ___ 11.8 2. Star Farmer Awards 8.2 6.0 1.0 .2 3. Dairy Production Awards 6.6 4.6 .6 .2 4. Sheep Production Awards 7.2 4.6 .6 .2 5. Poultry Production Awards 4.4 2.6 1.2 .6 6. Beef Production Awards 13.4 7.8 .8 .2 7. Swine Production Awards 16.8 6.4 .6 .0 8. Corn Production Awards 22.2 8.8 .8 .2 9. Soybean Production Awards 5.6 3.6 .6 .0 10. Small Grain Production Awards 7.0 4.0 .4 .0 11. Farm Mech. Award 9.0 4.2 .4 .0 12. Farm Elect. Award 4.2 2.4 .8 .0 13. Soil & Water Mgt. Award 3.8 2.6 .4 .2 14. Farm Safety Award 8.0 2.8 • 8 .4 15. Farm & Home Beautification Award 6.2 3.6 1.4 .4 16. Public Speaking 15.8 4.8 1.4 .2 17. Voc. Agr. Fairs 19.0 34.2 .6 1.6 18. State Fair (FFA) 1.8 3.4 19. Livestock Judging 38.0 23.8 1.4 10.4 20. Dairy Cattle Judging 29.8 16.2 1.4 7.6 21. Poultry Judging 20.8 10.6 1.0 3.8 22. Grain Judging 23.4 17.2 .4 3.6 23. Land Use Selection Contest 31.6 30.2 .6 .4 24. Parliamentary Procedure Contest 29.2 15.8 .4 .0 On the section level the highest percentage of senior students had participated in section fairs and shows, land use selection contests, livestock judging, grain judging, dairy cattle judging, parliamentary procedure contests, and poultry judging contests. Fewer than three per cent of the 500 senior surveyed had participated in farm elec- tricity, poultry production, soil and water management, and farm safety award pro- grams at the section level. The participation records of 500 senior students have been summarized. In order to show the percentage of students who have won awards at the local, section, district, and state levels in each of the 24 contest and award programs, Table XXIV has been prepared. See Table XXIV. In Table XXIV the reader may observe that vocational agriculture fairs and shows, land use selection contests, grain judging contests, parliamentary procedure contests, livestock judging contests, and parliamentary procedure contests had been the most fruitful source of awards at the section level . No information concerning the kind of awards used by teachers at the local level is given, but one example is the chapter medal presented in some of the Foundation Award programs. -63- TABLE XXIV PERCENTAGE OF 500 SENIOR STUDENTS WHO HAD WON AN AWARD AT THE LOCAL, SECTION, DISTRICT, OR STATE LEVEL IN EACH OF 24 CONTESTS AND AWARD ACTIVITIES Kind of Award Won _^= =>; i Activity Local Sect. Dist. Stat/J 1. State Farmer Degree 5.6 ___ _ —— 6,2 2 . State Farmer Award 5.8 1.4 .2 f/.O 3 . Dairy Production Award 4.4 .6 .2 0.0 4. Sheep Production Award 4.0 .8 .4 0.0 5 . Poultry Production Award 2.6 1.4 .8 0.0 6 . Beef Production Award 6.4 1.8 .2 0.0 7 . Swine Production Award 7.2 1.6 o.# 0.0 8 . Corn Production Award 9.2 2.4 ,4 .2 9 . Soybean Production Award 3.2 1.4 .2 0.0 10 . Small Grain Production Award 4.4 .8 .2 0.0 11. Farm Mechanics Award 5.0 .6 0.0 0.0 12. Farm Electricity Award 2.8 .8 .4 0.0 13 . Soil and Water Mgt. Award 3.4 .6 .2 0.0 14 . Farm Safety Award 2.6 1.2 .4 0.0 15 . Farm & Home Beautification Award 3.4 1.2 .6 0.0 16. Public Speaking 3.4 2.0 .8 0.0 17. Voc. Agr. Fairs 8.2 17.8 .2 1.2 18. State Fair (FFA) .6 .6 .2 2.2 19. Livestock Judging 10.2 7.2 .4 3.6 20. Dairy Cattle Judging 9.0 6.2 .6 4.0 21. Poultry Judging 5.6 3.6 .2 1.0 22. Grain Judging 7.2 8.8 0.0 2.6 23. Land Use Selection 11.8 14.6 .2 .4 24. Parliamentary Procedure 9.0 8.6 .2 .2 How 500 Senior Students Rated Contests and Award Programs The students included in this survey were asked to rate eleven contest and award activities in terms of its learning value or educational worth. The student responses have been summarized and the resulting data are presented in Table XXV. See Table XXV. According to the data in Table XXV, the activities which were rated highest by high school seniors are State Farmer Degree programs, land judging contests > livestock judging contests, and dairy cattle judging contests. Fewer than 50 per cent of the students rated poultry judging contests, parliamentary procedure contests, improvement award programs, public speaking contests, livestock and grain shows, grain judging contests and production award programs as "very high" in educational value. It is apparent from Table XXV that a sizeable number of senior students feel that poultry judging contests, parliamentary procedure contests, and public speaking contests are very low in educational value . -64- TABLE XXV PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS RATING ELEVEN CONTEST AND AWARD ACTIVITIES VERY HIGH, MEDIUM, AND VERY LOW IN VALUE (N = 500) ___________== Activity 1. State Farmer Degree 2 . Production Awards 3. Improvement Awards 4. Public Speaking 5 . Showing Livestock and Grain 6. Judging Fatstock 7. Judging Dairy Cattle 8. Judging Poultry 9. Judging Grain 10. Judging Land 11. Parliamentary Procedure Percentage of Students Rating Activity Very High Medium Very Low 83. 16. 1. 45. 52. 3. 38. 57. 5. 39. 48. 13. 41. 52. 7. 58. 39. 3. 52. 42. 6. 27. 49. 24. 45. 48. 7. 64. 32. 4. 34. 49. 17. Relationship between Student Participation and Student Ratings Senior students were asked to rate 11 contest activities "very high", "medium", or "very low" in educational value. In order to compare the ratings of students who had not participated with the ratings of those students who had participated one, two, three, or four years, Figure 2 has been prepared. Figure 2 shows the percentage of senior students, grouped according to their participation record, who rated six activities "very high" in educational value. Four activities, State Farmer Degrees, Star Farmer Awards, production awards, and im- provement awards, were not included in Figure 2 because students may participate in these activities only once or twice. Showing livestock and grain was not included because it includes both section fairs and state fair activities. At least two con- clusions may be drawn from Figure 2. 1. In general, senior students who had not participated in these contest activities rate them much lower than do students who had participated. An exception to this statement is grain judging, which non-participators rated higher than students who had one or two years of participation experience . 2. In all cases, seniors who had participated in these activities four years rated the activities much lower than do seniors who had participated three years. The exact percentages of seniors rating the six activities in Figure 2, as being "very high" in educational value appear in Table XXVI. Students were grouped according to the years of participation in each of the six activities and the percentage rating each activity "very high" is given. See Table XXVI. -65- FIGURE 2 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN YEARS OF PARTICIPATION AND STUDENT RATINGS OF THE EDUCATIONAL VALUE OF SIX PONTEST ACTIVITIES Dairy Cattle Judging 1 -66- TABLE XXVI PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS RATING EACH OF SK CONTEST ACTIVITIES AS "VERY HIGH" IN EDUCATIONAL VALUE (N = 500) Number of Years Student : Participated 1 2 3 4 Land Judging 57% 77% 70% 70% 60% Livestock Judging 51% 60% 66% 69% 60% Grain Judging 62% 51% 44% 65% 56% Dairy Cattle Judging 47% 55% 67% 64% 48% Parliamentary Procedure 24% 49% 38% 65% 36% Poultry Judging 22% 44% 27% 38% 36% The data presented in Table XXVI are the same data used to construct Figure 2. In Table XXVI however, the reader can observe the actual percentage of each group rating the six activities as "very high". The ratings which students gave to these six activities are similar to the ratings given by teachers (See Chapter V) except that students rated grain judging higher and parliamentary procedure contests lower than the teachers did. The reader is cautioned not to carry this comparison too far since different rating scales were used. The relationships between student participation and student ratings of six contest activities have been explored by comparing the opinions of students who participated not at all, once, twice, three times, and four times. The reader's attention is now directed to another comparison; namely, a comparison of the ratings of students who participated not at all with those who participated at the local level only, and those who participated at the section, district , or state levels. Table XXVII has been prepared to show the differences in the ratings of these three groups and again the figures are the percentages of students rating the six activities "very high" in educational value. See Table XXVH. The data presented in Table XXVII show the percentage of senior students rating seven contest activities as "very high" in educational value. For the most part, non- participators rated the contest activities lower than did students who had participated on the local level and students who had participated on the section, district, or state level. It is interesting to note that students who participated in livestock judging, dairy cattle judging, grain judging, and land judging at the local level only, rated these activities almost as high as did students who had participated at the section, district, or state level. In some cases the ratings were higher. Ratings of "Losers" and 'Winners" Compared The ratings of participants who won no awards or participants who won awards at the local level only have been compared with the ratings of participants who won awards at the section level or above. In Table XXVIII the reader may observe the percentage of each group who rated each of seven activities "very high". See Table XXVIII. -67- TABLE XX Vn A COMPARISON OF THE RATINGS OF SEVEN CONTEST ACTIVITIES BY THREE GROUPS OF SENIOR STUDENTS (N = 500) Percentage Rating Activity "Very High" Activity 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Public Speaking Judging Livestock Judging Dairy Cattle Judging Poultry Judging Grain Judging Land Parliamentary Procedure Participated at Participated at Section, District, Non-Participators Local Level Only or State Level 40. 52. 58. 65. 62. 63. 50. 64. 55. 31. 34. 46. 38. 54. 48. 62. 73. 73. e 50. 48. 54. TABLE XXVIII THE PERCENTAGE OF "LOSERS" AND THE PERCENTAGE OF "WINNERS" WHO RATED SEVEN ACTIVITIES "VERY HIGH" IN VALUE Percentage of Participants Rating Activity "Very High" Activity 1. Public Speaking 2 . Judging Livestock 3. Judging Dairy Cattle 4. Judging Poultry 5 . Judging Grain 6. Judging Land 7. Parliamentary Procedure Losers* Winners* 49. 75. 59. 81. 56. 67. 36. 55. 45. 58. 71. 71. 46. 65. * Losers - Won no award or won local award only. * Winners - Won section, district, or state award. The figures in Table XXVHI show that a higher percentage of "winners" than "losers" rate contest activities as "very high" in educational value. One exception to this statement appears in the land use selection contest where the percentages of the two groups rating this activity "very high" were equal. One conclusion we may draw from Table XXVHI is that students who have won a section, district, or state award in a given program rate the educational worth of that program much higher than students who have participated but have not won a section, district, or state award. -68- CHAPTER VEI FINDINGS FROM RESEARCH AND OPINIONS OF AGRICULTURE LEADERS AND EDUCATORS In describing the findings of research the investigator will report from the experiences and opinions of leading farmers and agriculture leaders as well as from formal research conducted at experiment stations and elsewhere. In so doing research is defined in its broadest terms to include action research on the farm or any other attempt by one or more persons to find a suitable solution to a perplexing problem. The future of many of our contests and award programs depend in part on how we answer certain key questions. Some of the questions which are important are listed in this chapter and answers which have either a scientific basis or are fur- nished by qualified leaders are given. (1) How important is type in dairy cattle ? Five research specialists in the United States Department of Agriculture re- cently reviewed che research that had been done on the importance of type in dairy cattle breeding and management. ^ After reviewing the important research dealing with the relationship of type to production, longevity, and merchandising value the five specialists concluded: The research studies reported during the past two decades have established that there is only a slight association between the type as defined on the generally accepted score card and lactation production . Very recent work on longevity has shown that length of productive life in cows is not influenced to a significant ex- tent by selection. There is no question but that dairy type is important in determining the price of animals sold for breeding purposes. It is at least as important as pro- duction and probably more so to some breeders. However, only a small number of dairy farms in this country are dependent for as much as 25 per cent of their income on variation in type of their cattle . For more than 95 per cent of the dairymen, variations in milk production are at least 20 times as important to their income as are variations in type.^ Bayley and his associates go on to say that the dairymen who have herds which are average or below in production can show the greatest improvement by selecting on the basis of production records and paying heed to their management practices. Regarding dairy cattle judging contests the specialists say, It might be well to eliminate judging team contests at the National and State levels . The publicity and recognition often given the members because of this single activity results in an extremely exaggerated concept of type's importance in dairying. * 3. N. D. Bayley, et al. The Importance of Type in Dairy Cattle Breeding and Man- agement , Dairy Cattle Research Branch, United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, D. C. , August, 1960. 4. Ibid. , pp. 13, 14. 5. Ibid. , p. 15. -69- In at least seven studies of records of Ayrshires, Jerseys, and Holsteins, the correlations between official type scores and milk and fat production ranged between 0. 08 and 0. 19. ° A perfect correlation has the value of j_ 1. 0. When one receives a correlation of 0. 19 between types scores and milk production, he has little hope of forecasting production accurately by observing type. In fact, to do so, would result in a forecast which is only two per cent better than a guess. ' D. M. Hall has reported information about the correlation between type and production and the reliability of judging contests scores. 8 He reports that correla- tion between body characteristics and production to be only 10 per cent better than guessing and that to secure a reasonably reliable measure of a person's judging ability at least 20 rings of cows would have to be judged by that person. (2) How important is type in swine and beef cattle selection ? Mr. Dick Hanson of Successful Farming Magazine had this to say in an editorial appearing in the August, 1959 issue — Just what are we trying to teach people through show-ring competition? It can't be economical production, for the pile of corn that goes into fattening a roly-poly grand champion steer would fill a wagon box. It can't be the kind of an animal that fetches the high dollar on the live market, for buyers are inclined to shy away. And it certainly can't be the kind of beef that surveys, experience, and every other indicator tells us the consumer wants. 9 Livestock judges have not been very successful at picking on the hoof the animals which later butcher out the best carcass. In the 1959 International Livestock Show, the two beef animals winning grand champion and reserve champion in the carcass class had been placed 11th and 14th respectively in their breed classes when judged on the hoof. Of course, one may find examples of where the live placing and the carcass placing coincided, but these are exceptions rather than the rule especially in beef cattle. Dr. T. C. Cartwright, geneticist and professor of Animal Husbandry at Texas A & M has this to say regarding type and carcass qualities of beef — There is definitely a split opinion on how a steer should look. Live animal show winners usually don't have a chance in a carcass contest. Carcass winners generally are less fat and have less body depth. 10 Tenderness of meat and rate of gain are closely related according to Cartwright and the most effective beef tenderizer is the sire. 6. Report of Type Committee to American Dairy Sci ence Ass ociation, June, 1956. 7. Index of forecasting efficiency equals 100 x 1 - v 1 - r 8. D. M. Hall, "Contests as Educational Devices," The Agricultural Education Magazine , May, 1947. 9. Dick Hanson, "Across the Editor's Desk.," Successful Farming , August, 1959. 10. See "The Beef-Type Steer is Coming Soon" by Bud Fichte in Agricultural Leaders' Digest , April, 1960. -70- The packing industry have estimated a yearly loss of fifteen million dollars from the mistakes their buyers make. H Professional cattle buyers are undoubtedly among the best judges of cattle yet their judgments often go astray. This may be due in part to the fact that there is little or no correlation between conformation and quality and rapidity of gain. In a recent issue of The Prairie Farmer , inaccuracies resulting in trying to pick out the best hogs on foot are described. A 205-pound barrow was judged best on foot during the Illinois Fair. When slaughtered its carcass quality dropped it to 18th. On the other hand, a 210- pound barrow that placed 22nd on foot was judged best after slaughter. 12 The heritability of carcass traits in swine is high - usually 30 to 60 per cent. In beef cattle desirable traits such as average daily gain, rib-eye area, and tenderness have a heritability of 45 to 69 per cent. Because these traits are highly heritable, selection based on them can affect appreciably the quality of offspring. (3) What progress has been made in selection and breeding of poultry ? Thirty years ago, the average hen in the United States laid 121 eggs per year; today she's laying 206 eggs. Our best flocks average 250 eggs or more per hen. As a result 13 per cent fewer hens on farms last year produced 60 per cent more eggs than their ancestors did in 1930. 13 An example of the type of research in poultry breeding which has led to these remarkable improvements in egg production is the work done by C. W. Knox, genet- icist at the Agricultural Research Center, Beltsville, Maryland. In 1931, Knox and his associates started experimental work to determine the best system of breeding to get improved egg production, egg and body weights, viability and other economic characters. According to the December, 1960 issue of Agricultural Research , "pre- vious research at Beltsville had been concerned mostly with such characters as plumage and skin colors, type of comb, and body size. " 14 A recent review of the records obtained from Knox's experiments show that in- crossbreeding (mating progeny of inbred white Leghorns males and inbred Rhode Island Red females) surpassed crossbreeding, standardbreeding, top-crossing, incrossing, and inbreeding as a system of breeding for increasing egg production. Poultrymen can buy high producing stock such as the birds developed at Beltsville. This fact tends to minimize the importance of poultry judging and poultry culling as a farm practice. Furthermore, the work done by Knox and other geneticists and poultry breeders shows that egg production, hatchability , egg weights and other important economic factors are heritable and can be affected appreciably by sound breeding. 11. F. R. Carpenter, "Editorial" in American Livestock Journal , November, 1960 12. Prairie Farmer , October 1, 1960. p. 14. 13. Agricultural Research Vol. 9. , No. 6, Agriculture Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture, December, 1960. 14. Ibid. -71- (4) What are the recent developments in crop seed selection? What profitable experience is gained when a boy learns to compare four samples of grain on the basis of looks alone? When all of our feed grains are sold on a grade basis, how does a farmer benefit from learning to identify weed seed or buy clover seed by its appearance? We should be teaching boys to buy State inspected seed which is tagged and lists the weeds on the tag. 15 The questions which a farmer should ask when buying seed are as follows: a. Where was it grown? b. Is it certified? c. How does it rate as to purity and germination? d. Has it been treated for seed-borne disease and certain insects? e. How many generations is the seed away from foundation or registered seed? (sometimes applicable) According to Johnson and Fortmann, a recent New York survey shows that seed represents only 6. 9 per cent of the annual crop expenses for producing hay, 6.5 per cent for oats, and 8. 5 per cent for wheat. 16 But the expenditure one makes for seed is a most crucial one so far as resulting yields are concerned. In one survey it was found that the average price of certified wheat seed was only 26 cents higher than the average price paid for uncertified seed. Farmers face two major decisions in selecting and buying seed. One is deciding on the variety to be grown, and this is an extremely important task. The second decision is selecting seed from samples of the chosen variety. If farmers are en- couraged to buy certified seed, then much of the need for picking seed on the basis of size, luster, uniformity, etc. dissipates. Since many teachers agree that the genetic makeup of seed cannot be observed by looking at seed and that farmers and prospective farmers should be taught to buy certified seed or its equivalent, there seems to be little need for rehashing the results of research in this area. Drill box surveys which have been conducted by agronomists throughout the country do point up rather dramat- ically the need for education in the area of selecting and buying seed. These studies are evidence that vocational agriculture teachers and others have a tremendous job to do teaching about seed selection. A seed box survey conducted in Illinois in 1958-59 showed that only 72 out of the 625 wheat growers studied were using certified seed. Only one grower out of 16 who were using their own seed really knew what he was planting. 1? A survey in Minnesota showed that 89 per cent of the farmers were planting grain from their own or their neighbors' farms and 24 per cent of this grain contained so many weeds that, had it been offered for sale, would have violated the state weed law. 18 15. Questions raised by teachers at Section 15 meeting as reported in "Are the Voca- tional Agriculture Contests and Shows Practical, " Illinois Vocational Progress, Mr. Don Higgs, author. 16. A. A. Johnson and H. R. Fortmann, "How Farmers Choose their Next Crop," Crops and Soils , March, 1959. American Society of Agron. , Madison 5, Wisconsin 17. R. H. Garrison, "Sow Seed With Certainty, " Crops and Soils , February, 1960, pp. 10-11. 18. Crops and Soils , June- July, 1959, p. 33 -72- W. O. Scott of Illinois made a survey of 1461 oat samples taken from farmers' drill boxes. The findings of this survey may be summarized as follows: 1J * a. Fifty and seven tenths per cent of the seed samples came from the farmers' own farms. Twenty-six and six tenths came from a neighbor's farm. Six- teen and three tenths per cent came from seedsmen including certified seed dealers, and 4.2 per cent came from local elevators and other sources. b. Twelve per cent of the home farm seed, 10 per cent of the neighbor- seed, 8 per cent of the elevator seed, and 4 per cent of the dealer seed were unsalable under the Illinois law. c. Of 1124 seed samples, 70 per cent had been cleaned, 38 per cent had been treated, 59 per cent had been tested for germination, and only 25 per cent had been tested for purity. Surveys in Indiana and South Carolina gave equally alarming facts regarding the quality of seed which is being planted by many farmers. Yet, tests have shown that certified seed produces an extra 4-6 bushels of grain per acre. The reader may well raise the question, "Have we in vocational agriculture con- tributed to the present state of affairs by promoting outdated grain judging contests and grain shows where the emphasis is on 'eyeballing' four samples of grain?" (5) How do educators view contests ? The opinion regarding contests and award programs of a large group of Illinois teachers and Illinois students of vocational agriculture have been reported in Chapters VI and VH. In this section the writer will report the opinions of educators whose writings have appeared in professional journals and magazines. L. J. Phipps, Agricultural Education Division, University of Illinois has this to say regarding the educational value of contests — It cannot be assumed that a contest is worthy because it exists or is proposed or because participation in the contest is enjoyable. Some of our contests in vo-ag are promoted by agencies outside of education to promote primarily their own ob- jectives. Other contests do not mirror the changes in agriculture and therefore promote obsolete objectives. Finally, some contests were poorly organized when started and are still in this status. 20 He raised the following questions which might be used in evaluating existing con- tests: a. Does the contest develop desirable or undesirable attitudes? b. Does the contest develop desirable or undesirable interests? c. Is the contest a real contest or a guessing game? d. Does the contest reward the correct or desired abilities? e. Is the contest an end or a means to an end? f. Does the contest provide an opportunity to think? 19. Crops and Soils , February, 1959, p. 33. 20. L. J. Phipps, "Preparing Boys for Vo-Ag Coi/ jsts," Better Farming Methods , April, 1951, pp. 18-22. -73- g. Does the contest provide for participation in group enterprises? h. Does the contest provide for improvement in operation of the community? 21 Deyoe of Illinois has been one of the nation's foremost advocates of improvements in the teaching of livestock selection. As far back as 1937 articles by Deyoe appeared in The Agricultural Education Magazine which pointed up the need for modernizing our live- stock selection procedures. In an article appearing in the August, 1941 issue of The Agricultural Education Magazine , Deyoe brings out the following points: a. Outward appearances (phenotype) do not provide an accurate index for determining the productivity or performance of an animal, be it in terms of milk, eggs, wool, work, meat, or speed. b. Neither the appearance, productivity (performance), nor pedigree of any animal is an accurate index of its genetic makeup (genotype); and there- fore these are of little value in the determination of transmitting ability (prepotency). One of the oldest fallacies of heredity, and perhaps the most difficult to eradicate, is the belief that "like produces like"! c. A continued emphasis on appearance and pedigree is likely to lead to disappointment for those breeders who seek to produce animals of merit in the characteristics of greatest value. d. Progeny testing is a valuable tool to the breeder who seeks to develop a constructive program of livestock improvement. 22 Supporting evidence for the above statements submitted by Deyoe in the same article include the following: a. At the Maine Experiment Station, eight years of selecting hens by appear- ance failed to increase the level of production in a flock on which males of high producing ancestory were used. Through progeny selection, however, in which males and females were selected on the basis of the egg production of their daughters, the production in this flock was nearly doubled in two years . b. At Michigan State College, from a study of the performance of ewes on the basis of gross income, weight and grade of fleece, weight and quality of offspring, etc. , wide differences were found even between ewes which were similar in type. 2 3 According to Deyoe, 24 teachers need to help students develop standards of pro- duction for livestock which are expressed in terms of measured production. Teachers should help students see the fallacies in judging livestock solely by external appearance and should help students and farmers see why type alone is not a valid criterion of an animal's value. Students have to become record-conscious and must learn to keep and use records which will help them in their livestock selection programs. Instruction must be provided in intelligent purchasing and marketing of meat animals including \rork on market grades and the marketing process. Definite efforts to reform and modify conventional shows and judging contests in which the exclusive or primary em- phasis is on external appearances should be made. 21. Ibid. 22. G. P. Deyoe, "If Not Judging, What Then?", The Agricultural Education Magazine , August, 1941. 23. Ibid. 24. Ibid. -74- McPhee of California has pointed out the advantages and disadvantages of livestock shows. According to McPhee the merits of livestock shows are as follows; a. Gives the boy an added incentive to correctly feed and fit his animals. b. Promotes interest of the boy in process of selection. c. Provides an opportunity for boys to learn the type of animal which the judge considers best for commercial production. d. Provides an opportunity for boys to learn how to show animals. 25 According to McPhee the things which boys see at livestock shows which run counter to the purposes of sound education include the following: a. He often sees animals picked for type which have never produced a litter or dropped a calf. b. He sees animals carried in the show string which should be home in production. c. He sees animals 'gingered' and otherwise doctored to make a flashy appear- ance in the show ring. d. He sees the 'tramp' showman with his picked-up herd of animals in the show bus mess for just one thing — money. 26 In California, as in some other states an evaluation of the traditional livestock show has led to the development of market shows or market days. Students bring in their market animals to these shows, see them graded by market men, and receive reasonable prices at the sale. Usually, at these shows, there are no prizes and the emphasis is on learning about marketing rather than show-ring competition. Another aspect of the contest program which is considered important by school ad- ministrators, teachers, and others is the amount of time used in the preparation for and participation in contests. The statements of Illinois teachers regarding the amount of time used for contest programs have already been presented in Chapter VI. In Kansas, a survey was taken by Finley to determine, among other things, the amount of time used to train vocational agriculture teams for competitive participation in contests. 27 Even though over 50 per cent of the instructors reporting devoted 25 per cent of total class time to competitive contest training, two-thirds of the instructors replied that agri- culture contests did not seriously disrupt their regular teaching schedule. The position of the North Central Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools on the use of school time for contests is expressed in the following excerpt: The loss of class time for preparation and for competition shall be kept to a minimum. Member schools should make a genuine effort to avoid scheduling inter-school contests at times when they are likely to interfere with the classroom program. Athletic and other types of inter scholastic competitions should be scheduled on weekends whenever possible. 28 25. Julian A. McPhee, "Traditional Livestock Shows Evaluated - A California Solution," The Agricultural Education Magazine , August, 1940. 26. Ibid. 27. Philip Bruce Finley, "An Analysis of District Vocational Agriculture Contests in Kansas, Master's Report, 1959, Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas. 28. "Policies and Criteria for the Approval of Secondary Schools, " The North Central Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools, p. 9. -75- (6) Is parliamentary procedure the best way to make group decisions? Some people have questioned the use of parliamentary procedure as a method of arriving at group decisions. Too often groups become bogged down in parliamentary technicalities and produce little in terms of group work. Richard Givens points out the following shortcomings of parliamentary procedure. 29 a. For large assemblies in which each member can be counted upon to know the procedures thoroughly and where sharp debates are inevitable, Robert's Rules of Order are excellent. Small groups of less than ten or twelve should seldom need to become involved in parliamentary procedure except to finalize decisions which have already befen reached through informal discussion. b. Robert's Rules were carefully designed to allow the majority to act and the minority to speak. But the rules as used often tend to create divisions even where they might not otherwise exist. Attention is centered on which "side" of a motion is to "win" - and the methods of winning are as much the skill- ful use of technicalities as the discussion of substance. The rules give a tremendous advantage to the few who know the technicalities over the many who do not. Givens outline 3 a simplified approach which calls for the development of new atti- tudes, a consideration of problems on their merits, and a strategy for reaching deci- sions through deliberation and when possible by consensus. Parliamentary procedure usually violates sound problem solving procedure. According to Knowles, a motion defines a solution and not a problem. 30 yet, in correct parliamentary procedure the making of a motion comes first, even before dis- cussion. Knowles also raises other points which need to be considered. 31 a. Voting is not always the best method of deciding an issue. Consensus or general agreement should be the first goal of group procedures. b. Motion-making sets up a military atmosphere with a group taking sides on an issue even before it has been intelligently discussed. A military atmosphere is usually not the best atmosphere for high quality group thinking. c. No provisions are made for alternative solutions and no provisions are made for defining the real problem in most groups which operate strictly according to parliamentary procedure. 29. Richard Givens. "Simplifying Parliamentary Procedures for Today, " Adult Leadership , Vol. 9, No. 9. March, 1961. 30. MalcolmS. Knowles, "Move Over, Mr. Robert" Adult Leadership, Vol. 1, No. 2, June, 1952. 31. Ibid. -76- REFERENCES 1. Agricultural Research Vol. 9. #6, Agriculture Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture, December 1960. pp 3-4. 2. Announcements and Rules Regarding the 1959 Illinois Judging Contest for Depart- ments of Vocational Agriculture , Voc. Agr. Service, University of Illinois, Urbana. 3. D. Murdock Bannister, "Livestock Judging by a New Set of Rules", Better Farming Methods , December, 1957. 4. N. D. Bayley, et al, The Importance of Type in Dairy Cattle Breeding and Manage- ment , ARS-44-80, Agricultural Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture. August, 1960. 5. V. E. Burgener, "Let's Look at the Whole Picture - Sections Look for Further Improvement in Land Use Selection", Illinois Vocational Progress , February, 1959. 6. F. R. Carpenter, "Editorial", American Livestock Journal , November, 1960. 7. W. A. Craft, "The Development of Swine Testing", The American Livestock Journal , October, 1960, pp. 18-20. 8. Frank Crawford, "Marketing School Held by Agriculture Teachers", Illinois Voca- tional Progress , May, 1960 pp. 128-130. 9. Crops and Soils , February, June-July, 1959. 10. G. P. Deyoe, "If Not Judging, What Then", The Agricultural Education Magazine , August, 1941. 11. G. P. Deyoe, "Some Were Chosen - American Farmer Degree Awarded Eighteen Illinois Young Men", Illinois Vocational Progress , Nov. , 1955. 12. G. P. Deyoe, ,f What is Being Done to Improve Vocational Agriculture Fairs and Judging Contests", Talk made before the annual meeting of the Illinois Vocational Agriculture Conference at the University of Illinois, 1957. 13. Kenneth Diehl and R. E. Dagner, Opinions of Former Students in Vocational Agri- culture Regarding F. F. A. Awards, Division of Agric. Educ. , College of Education, University of Illinois, 1949. 14. C. M. Edwards, 4-H Contest Participation , May, 1953. Dept. of Agric. Eng. Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y. 15. The Education Digest , May, 1960. Article "Essay Contests are Educationally Undesirable". 16. Bud Fichte, "The Beef- Type Steer is Coming Soon", Agricultural Leaders Digest, April, 1960. 17. Philip Bruce Finley, "An Analysis of District Vocational Agriculture Contests in Kansas", Master's Report, 1959, Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas. 18. W. P. Garrigus, "Performance Testing of Beef Cattle", The American Livestock Journal , June, 1960, pp. 18-19. 19. R. H. Garrison, "Sow Seed with Certainty", Crops and Soils , February, 1960, pp. 10-11. 20. Richard Givens, "Simplifying Parliamentary Pi .edure for Today", Adult Leader- ship , Vol. 9. No. 9, March, 1961. -77- 21. Guernsey Breeders Journal, July 23, 1960 and August 7, 1960. 22. D. M. Hall, "Contests as Educational Devices", The Agricultural Education Magazine , May, 1947. 23. Dick Hanson, "Across the Editor's Desk", Successful Farming, August, 1959. 24. Roy Hefty, "Some Ideas Used in Section I - Are Vocational Agriculture Fairs Getting Results?" Illinois Vocational Progress , February, 1960. 25. Don Higgs, "Are the Vocational Agriculture Contests and Shows Practical", Illinois Vocational Progress, May, 1959. 26. The Illinois Future Farmer , Vol. 20 #1. Official publication of the Illinois Association of Future Farmers of America. 27. A. A. Johnson and H. R. Fortmann, "How Farmers Choose their Next Crop", Crops and Soils , March, 1959. 28. Malcolm S. Knowles, "Move Over, Mr. Robert", Adult Leadership , Vol. 1, No. 2, June, 1952. 29. Julian A. McPhee, "Traditional Livestock Shows Evaluated - A California Solution." The Agricultural Education Magazine , August, 1940. 30. "Now a 4-H Beef Carcass Contest", Successful Farming , September, 1960. 31. "Policies and Criteria for the Approval of Secondary Schools", The North Central Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools, p. 9. 32. L. J. Phipps, "Preparing Boys for Vo-Ag Contests", Better Farming Methods , April, 1951, pp. 18-22. 33. The Prairie Farmer , October 1, 1960. p. 14. 34. Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth Convention of the niinois Association FFA , 1956, Board of Vocational Education , Springfield, Illinois (also 1955, 1957, 1958, and 1959 issues) 35. Program Report of the Illinois Association FFA , 1957-58, Board of Voc. Educ, Springfield, 111. 36. Mary Ruth Rapp, Report on A Study of 4-H Awards, 1955, National Committee on Boys and Girls Club Work, Inc. 59 East Van Buren Street, Chicago 5, Illinois. 37. Review of Extension Research, January-December 1956 , Extension Circular 511, United States Dept. of Agric. Washington, D. C. 38. Report of the Illinois Foundation, Future Farmers of America , 1955, 1956, 1957, 1958, 1959, Springfield, 111. 39. Review of Extension Research, January- December 1955 , Extension Circular 506, United States Dept. of Agric, Washington, D. C. 40. Stanley W. Terrill, "Trends in Hog Production", Feedstuffs, 13, 21 : 42-52. 41. Robert W. Touchberry, "Growth of Crossbred and Purebred Heifers", Illinois Research, 1, 3 : 8-9. 42. Robert W. Touchberry and K. A. Tabler, "Selection Indices for Milk and Fat Yield of Holstein Dairy Cattle", Journal of Dairy Science , 42 : 123-126. 43. J. A. Twardock, "Changes in Good Production Practices - New Ideas for Grain Shows", Illinois Vocational Progress , May, 1960. -78- 44. Allan L. Utech, "Don't Hide Your Light in Voc. Agr. Section Fairs", Illinois Vocational Progress , Feb., 1959. 45. Ray Woodward, "We Need to Remodel our Livestock", Farmers Digest , October, 1959. 46. W. W. Yapp, Dairy Cattle Judging and Selection. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. , New York, N. Y. 1959. -79- APPENDIX -80- Section Number REPORT OF SECTIONAL PROGRAMS Contests and Awards Teacher Reporting 1. Check those contests and award programs which are available to students in your section in 1959-60? Poultry Show Grain Show Livestock Show Land Use Selection Grain Judging Livestock Judging Poultry Judging Dairy Judging Parliamentary Procedure Public Speaking Farm Mechanics Award Farm Electrification Award Soil & Water Management Farm Safety Farm & Home Beautification Small Grain Production Award Soybean Production Award Corn Production Award Swine Production Award Beef Production Award Dairy Production Award Sheep Production Award Poultry Production Award Star Farmer Award Program of Work Contest Chapter Safety Program Farm Mechanics Skills Other (indicate kind) 2. Organization of Activities a. Shows and Fairs (poultry, grain, and livestock) . When held (school day) ? Basis of placings (type, production, seed, egg production, market, breeding, etc.) Method of Awarding Prizes (Danish System or other) b. Judging events (land, poultry, grain, livestock, and dairy): Basis of judging Number who can enter from a school When held (School day) ? -81- c. Award programs (14 areas): Criteria for selecting winners When held (date and time of day) d. Other (public speaking, parliamentary procedure, program of work, chapter safety, etc.): Basis for selecting winners: When held (day and time of day) 3. Major changes and outstanding features: a. Activities dropped b. Activities added c. Changes made during past 5 years or changes planned Contest or Program Change Made or Planned What special features or practices are used in connection with your sectional contests and award programs which seem to be successful or to contribute appreciably to the educational value of the activity. (Examples might be new classes, use of production rings, change to grading livestock, etc.) Shows and fairs: -82- Judging events: Award programs : Other sectional events: 4. How many boys participated in the following events in 1958-59, 1959-60? 1 1958-59 1959-60 Grain Judging Poultry Judging Livestock Judging Dairy Judging 5. Where may copies of rules and regulations and other material used in connection with contests and award programs be obtained? -83- Name TEACHER ATTITUDE SURVEY FORM Contests and Award Programs School Section Years experience teaching vocational agriculture in Illinois In other states Parti A. Below you will find 31 contest and award activities. First check in the two left-hand columns the activities your students have entered or participated in during the 1957-58 school year and the 1958-59 school year. Secondly, encircle the appropriate response in the right-hand column to indicate the educational value of each of the 31 activities. E means Excellent G means Good F means Fair P means Poor O means No Opinion My Chapter Participated or Entered in: 1957-58 1958-59 Activity 1. State Farmer Degree 2 . Star Farmer Awards 3 . Dairy Production Award 4. Sheep Production Award 5 . Poultry Production Award 6 . Beef Production Award 7 . Swine Production Award 8 . Corn Production Award 9 . Soybean Production Award 10 . Small Grain Production Award 11. Farm Mechanics Award 12 . Farm Electrification Award 13 . Soil and Water Management Award 14. Farm Safety Award 15 . Farm & Home Beautification Award 16. Public Speaking Contest 17. Livestock Judging Contest 18. Dairy Cattle Judging Contest 19. Poultry Judging Contest 20. Grain Judging Contest 21. Meat Judging Contest 22. Dairy Products Judging Contest 23. Voc. Agr. Livestock Fairs 24. Voc. Agr. Grain Shows 25. Voc. Agr. Poultry Shows 26. Land Use Selection Contest 27. Parliamentary Procedure Contest 28. Farm Mechanics Skills Contest 29. Chapter Safety Contest 30. Chapter Program of Work Contest 31. Safe Corn Harvest Program Encircle Your Rating of Activity E G F P O E G F P O E G F P E G F P o E G F P E G F P E G F P E G F P o E G F P o E G F P o E G F P o E G F P o E G F P o E G F P o E G F P o E G F P E G F P o E G F P o E G F P E G F P E G F P o E G F P o E G F P o E G F P o E G F P o E G F P E G F P o E G F P o E G F P o E G F P o E G F P o -84- PART II A. What changes do you think ought to be made in the following contests and award programs? List changes you would make in setting up activities, in distributing awards, in conducting the events, or in the general makeup of the contest or award programs. 1. Livestock Judging Contest: 2. Dairy Cattle Judging Contest: 3. Crops Judging Contest: 4. Land Use Selection Contest: 5 . Poultry Judging Contest: 6. Livestock Shows and Fairs; 7. Grain Shows: -85- 8 . Poultry Shows : 9. State Farmer Degree and Star State Farmer Awards: 10. Individual Production Awards (Beef, Sheep, Corn, Soybeans, etc.): 11. Individual Improvement Awards (Farm Mechanics, Soil & Water, etc.): 12. Chapter Opportunities (Program of Work, Safe Corn Harvest, Chapter Safety); PART HI A. What contests and award programs should be dropped? B. What new contests and award programs should be added to the present program? PART IV A. For which of the 31 activities listed on page 1 and 2 do you hold local elimination contests in order to select your chapter representative or team? -86- B. List those activities for which you provide class instruction designed to prepare students for participation at the local, section, and state level. C. How many vocational agriculture class periods per year do you devote to prepara- tion for and participating in contests and award programs? -87- Name SENIOR SURVEY FORM Vocational Agriculture and FFA Contests and Awards School Years in Vo. Ag. (count this year)_ Years in FFA (count this year) PARTI Directions: Opposite each of the following activities check (X) the year or years you participated in this event, the level or levels of participation, and the level at which your highest award was won. Use the blank spaces at the bottom of the list to indicate other contests or award programs you have participated in and make appropriate checks. Contest or Award Program Which Yr. Or Yrs. Did You Participate ? Fr. So Sr Level of Participation Local 1 Sect. Highest Level of Awards Won Dist. State Local Sect. Dist. St State Farmer Degree Star Farmer Award Dairy Production Award Sheep Production Award Poultry Production Award Beef Production Award Swine Production Award Corn Production Award Soybean Production Award Small Grain Prod. Award Farm Mechanics Award Farm Electricity Award Soil & Water Management Farm Safety Farm & Home Beautification Public Speaking Voc. Agr. Fairs, Shows State Fair (FFA) Livestock Judging Dairy Cattle Judging Poultry Judging Grain Judging Land Use Selection Parliamentary Proc. Farm Mech. Skills Tractor Driving Demonstration Contest Other (Indicate Kind) -88- PART II How valuable do you consider the following activities to be to an FFA member in terms of learning value or educational worth? With a check (X) please indicate in the blanks provided how you rate each of the eleven activities . Very High In Value Medium In Value Very Low In Value State Farmer Degrees Production Awards such as No. 3-10 on preceding page Improvement Awards such as No. 11-15 on preceding page Public Speaking Showing Livestock or Grain Judging Livestock (fatstock) Judging dairy cattle Judging poultry Judging grain Judging land (soil) Parliamentary Procedure -89- c J ^'^JTYOFiLliNOfS-UnBANA 3 0112 110868525