Effectiveness of Agriculture and Natural Resources Program Area Committees- Part 2

Darrell A. Dromgoole, Associate Professor and Extension Specialist, Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service.

Scott Cummings, Associate Department Head and Program Leader: Professor and Extension Specialist, Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service.

In the last installment of Next Step to Success, we examined research findings by Dr. Whit Weems, formerly with Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service regarding the purpose of Agriculture and Natural Resources Program Area Committees (Weems, 2011). In this installment, we will examine his findings related to the responsibilities associated with serving on an Agriculture and Natural Resource Program Area Committee.  In order to determine participants perception related to their responsibilities, the researcher posed three questions. Table 1 provides an analysis of the participant’s responses to these questions (Weems, 2011):

The researcher reported that the lowest response was for evaluating programs sponsored by the committee (Weems, 2011). The researcher reported that 71.2 %  (n=131) of the participants agreed or strongly agreed that it was their responsibility as a committee member to assist the County Extension Agent with the evaluation phase of the program development model (Weems, 2011). It was further reported that only 5.9% (n=11) disagreed or strongly disagreed with 22.8% (n=34) remaining neutral as it related to assisting the County Extension Agent with the evaluation phase (Weems, 2011). In analyzing the responses to the question related to Program Area Committee members assisting the County Extension Agent with the implementation of programs 75.7% (n=140) of the participants either agreed or strongly agreed that they should assist the County Extension Agent with the implementation of programming (Weems, 2011). Weems(2011) reported that the highest response in terms of agreeing or strongly agreeing related to their assisting the County Extension Agent with the planning phase of the program (88%, n=162).

This research clearly indicates that Agriculture and Natural Resource Committee members in Texas have a broad understanding of the responsibilities associated with serving on a Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service Program Area Committee (Weems, 2011). The lowest mean responses however related to their involvement in the evaluation process (Weems, 2011). The researcher recommended that Extension continue utilizing program area committees in the planning, implementation and evaluation components of program development and implementation but Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service should provide training to enhance committee members understanding of the critical role they play in evaluations of programs (Weems, 2011).

In Future Next Step to Success more insights gleaned from this research will be reported.

Reference

Weems, W.H., (2011). A study to determine the effectiveness of Agriculture/Natural Resource Program Area Committees on the Texas AgriLife Extension Service Program Planning. Unpublished manuscript, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX.