FFA Member Perceptions of
State Career Development
Event Preparation
Edward Franklin
Department of Agricultural Education
College of Agriculture and Life Sciences
University of Arizona
FFA Career Development
Events
• Career Development Events (CDE) demonstrate the
meaningful connections between classroom
instruction and real-life scenarios.
• CDE’s build on what is learned in agricultural
classrooms, supervised agricultural experiences,
and FFA activities.
• “When students prepare for these CDE’s they are
practicing or applying previous learning from the
classroom and laboratory” (Newcomb, McCracken,
Warmbrod, & Whittington, 2004, p. 274).
Faculty Concerns
• College faculty members responsible for
organizing career development events had
expressed concern over low scores posted
by winning individuals and teams in past field
day events.
• They believe students competing in a statelevel event that qualifies a team to represent
the state at a national level should be more
prepared.
FFA Member Comments
• Student contestants were often overheard
saying things as:
– “I have no idea what I am doing”, and
– “my advisor told me today I would be in
this event”.
• The question of preparation of students for
competition became a concern.
FFA Advisor Concerns
• Does the content of events reflect the curriculum
taught in the local high school classroom?
• Field day staff heard complaints of event material
being:
– “too difficult”, or
– “not close to what I teach my kids”, and
– “events should be run similar to National FFA
CDE activities”.
“New Wrinkle”
• 2001 – CALS Field Day piloted the use of
CDE Scoring Software and scantron forms.
– Three events were selected (Dairy,
Equine, Livestock) and tabulated.
• 2002 – CALS elects to move all 16 events to
the scantron scoring system.
• 2002- present – all CALS CDE field day
events continue to use the scantron scoring
system.
Change in CDE Scoring
Format
• The purpose of the change was three-fold:
– To streamline the scoring and tabulation
process of individual events minimizing
scoring errors;
– To align appropriate state events with the
National FFA Career Development Events in
the manner that they are conducted; and
– To familiarize FFA members and advisors
with the scoring process utilized at the
national level.
Need for Study
• In teacher-preparation, we introduce the role of CDE’s
to the total agricultural education program.
– Role of teachers as “Coaches”
– Time to train teams
– Involvement of community to serve as CDE
coaches.
– If CDE’s reflect what is taught in the classroom,
shouldn’t CDEs’ be taught in the classroom?
• This study was conducted to respond to questions
about the level of preparation of students for
competition in career development events.
• It is the preparation and process that is the focus of this
study.
Literature Review
• Factors resulting in the success of students
competing in a national-level livestock judging event
(Herren, 1982),
• Student scores on a national-level agriculture
mechanics CDE (Buriak, Harper, and Gliem, 1985),
• Student perceptions of benefits of participating in a
national-level contest (Gamble, 1986),
• Prediction of student achievement in a state-level
agriculture mechanics CDE related to specific student
characteristics (Johnson, 1991; 1993),
• Perceived value of FFA contests and awards by
students and adults (Blakely, Holschuh, Seefeldt, Shinn,
Smith & Vaughn, 1993).
• Additional research presented shows FFA advisors
are influential in student participation in FFA activities
and CDE competitions (Blakely, Holschuh, Seefeldt,
Shinn, Smith & Vaught, 1993; Deeds & Thomas,
1999).
• Over a third of the students indicated they had not
studied the subject matter related to the CDE’s in
class (Deeds & Thomas, 1999).
• Less than half of the students indicated that they
were very familiar with the forms used in the CDE
(Deeds & Thomas,1999).
Conceptual Framework
Student Characteristics
Age, Gender, Years in
Agricultural Education
Students
Perceived Level of Preparation
Motivation for
Participation in CDE
Coach of CDE
Team
Frequency and
Length of Practice
Purpose & Objectives
•
Determine how well prepared students
were for participation in the numerous state
FFA career development events and what
methods instructors were using to prepare
student of the state level competitions.
Objectives
• Specific objectives were to:
1. Develop a demographic profile of FFA members
participating in the state career development events.
2. Determine when and how often students practiced for the
career development events
3. Determine who served as the coach for specific CDE’s
teams.
4. Determine the level of preparation for the CDE’s as
perceived by students.
5. Determine how student selected CDE’s for participation.
6. Determine what activities student perceived would improve
their preparation.
Methodology
• A descriptive study of the students participating in
state level career development events.
• Conducted using a researcher-developed
instrument modified from research conducted by
Deeds and Thomas (1999) in Mississippi.
• A panel of experts (former teachers, former FFA
members, teacher-educators) reviewed the
instrument for face and content validity.
• Piloted with 56 students competing in CDE activities
during a district-level field day.
• Reliability of the instrument was established at 0.76.
• The instrument contained four demographic questions, and ten
questions regarding preparation for the event and why students
selected to participate in their respective CDE’s.
• The population for the study consisted of all FFA students
participating in state level CDE’s.
• College students assisting with the organization of each event
administered surveys to all FFA contestants during or at the
completion of their individual events.
• A total of 581 instruments were collected with usable data from
the 802 student members who participated in their events.
• Data were analyzed with SPSS (version 11.5) using descriptive
statistics only.
Findings
• Sixteen career development events were conducted
during the spring 2004 field day hosted by the
university.
• The event with the largest number of respondents
was Livestock (73/92 79.3%).
• The smallest number of respondents participated in
the largest-attended event, Horse Evaluation
(34/128, 26.5%).
• The Meats Evaluation CDE failed to return any
completed questionnaires.
• Ag Issues (81.8%) and Job Interview (80%) report
the highest participation of female students.
• Agriculture Mechanics recorded the highest
percentage of a single gender.
– Nearly 93% of the participants of the Agriculture Mechanics
event were male.
• This was the second largest participated event as
reported by the survey respondents.
Objective One –
Student Profile
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Female student participation
Male student participation
Juniors
Sophomores
Freshmen
Seniors
7th graders
Previous CDE experience
Mean Age
15.9 yrs
Mean years in FFA
2.1 yrs
347
288
171
161
133
107
3
374
(54.6%)
(45.5%)
(29.1%)
(27.4%)
(22.7%)
(18.2%)
( 0.5%)
(63.7%)
Event
# of
Participants
Ag Bus Mnt
Ag Issue
Ag Mech
Agronomy
Aquaculture
Dairy Judging
Entomology
Field Crop
Forestry
Horse Eval
Job Interview
Livestock
Meat
Nursery
Range
Total
29
23
99
28
62
64
34
29
34
128
45
92
75
60
23
825
# Surveys
N %
28
22
69
21
62
63
21
29
34
34
45
73
0
58
22
581
96.5
95.6
69.6
75.0
100.0
98.4
98.4
100.0
100.0
26.5
100.0
79.3
00.0
96.6
95.6
70.4
Female
N
%
20
18
5
12
30
38
12
7
12
24
80
41
71.4
81.8
7.5
57.1
49.2
60.3
57.1
24.1
35.3
68.6
80.0
56.2
NR
34
58.6
14
60.9
347 54.6
Male
N %
8
28.6
4
18.2
62
92.5
9
42.9
31
50.8
25
39.7
9
42.9
22 75.9
22
64.7
11
31.4
20 20.0
32 43.8
NR
24 41.4
9 39.1
288 45.5
Objective Two –
When did you practice?
•
•
•
•
•
Before School
During Class
During Lunch
After School
Other (weekends)
95 (16%)
343 (59%)
131 (22.5%)
387 (66.6%)
105 (18.1%)
Note: students marked more than one
response.
Objective Three –
Who coached your team?
• My Ag teacher
399 (69.3%)
– Ag Business Mgnt (46.45%)
• FFA member
98 (17.0%)
– Ag Business Mgnt (39.3%)
• Another teacher
31 ( 5.4%)
• Adult community member 28 ( 4.9%)
• FFA parent
17 ( 3.0%)
Objective FourHow prepared were you?
• Was your CDE taught in your class?
Yes
292 (50.4%)
No
287 (49.6%)
The “No’s”
•
•
•
•
•
Ag Business Management (75%)
Ag Issues (68.2%)
Job Interview (64.4%)
Forestry (58.8%)
Aquaculture (55.7%)
How familiar with the forms
used in your CDE?
Very familiar
159 (27.5%)
- Ag Issues (81.8%)
- Job Interview (75.6%)
- Agronomy (57.1%)
Somewhat familiar
338 (58.4%)
- Range Mgnt. (82.6%)
- Ag Mech. (67.6%)
Never saw them before today
- Ag Business Mgnt (28.6%)
82 (14.2%)
Hours per week spent
preparing for CDE
Less than 1 hour per
week
1-3 hours per week
4-6 hours per week
More than 6 hours per
week
75 (13.0%)
263 (45.4%)
180 (31.1%)
61 (10.5%)
Overall, how prepared
were you for your CDE?
Very well prepared
Somewhat prepared
Not prepared
213 (36.7%)
310 (53.4%)
58 (10.0%)
Reasons cited why FFA members
participated in state-level CDE’s
Advisor recommended it
Previous experience
Related to career goal
Friend’s influence
Chance to come to University
Related to my SAE
Family suggested it
344 (54%)
220 (35%)
189 (30%)
174 (27%)
126 (20%)
125 (20%)
84 (13%)
What would have helped you to
be better prepared for today’s
event?
Knowing more about the CDE activities
Knowing more about the written exam
Knowing more about the forms used
More classroom instruction
Out-of-School Practice
Knowing more about the group activity
Other*
303 (51.6%)
195 (33.2%)
179 (30.5%)
177 (30.2%)
94 (16.0%)
94 (16.0%)
58 ( 9.9%)
*“more practice”, “better coaching”, “know what to look for”,
“having more time”, “state study guide”, and “having the right list”.
Note: Respondents marked more than one answer.
Conclusions
• Participants were likely to be 16 years of age, Junior
class, with 2 years of FFA membership and have
previous CDE experience.
• Females more likely to participate in Job Interview,
Ag Issues, and Ag Business Management.
– Less likely to participate in Ag Mechanics, Field
Crops.
• Males more likely to participate in Ag Mechanics and
Field Crops.
– Less likely to participate in Job Interview, Ag
Issues, or Ag Business Management.
Conclusions (continued)
• Half of the students received instruction about their CDE
in their classroom, yet practice for CDE’s took place
during class time and after school for most of the
students.
• The local advisor was responsible for the majority of
students participating in their CDE.
• The coach of the CDE was likely to be the local FFA
advisor.
– Exception: Ag Business Management
• Overall, students felt they were “somewhat” prepared for
their CDE competition, and “somewhat familiar” with
forms used by in their CDE.
• Students’ felt to be better prepared for CDE’s they need
to know more about the CDE activities.
Recommendations
• Teacher educators need to continue the
discussion of CDE and the role of
advisors/coaches with future teachers of
agricultural education.
• Make sure prospective educators know that the
proper time to introduce the concept of CDE is
during class when course content is covered.
• Advisors should be encouraged to enlist
assistance from other teachers, community
members, and parents with knowledge skill of the
CDE material.
Recommendations
• CDE activities and written exam content
need to be covered more thoroughly with
students.
• CDE material should measure competencies
taught in the classroom.
• Teachers coaching CDE’s such as agriculture
business management, need to find ways of
incorporating the CDE into their classroomteaching curriculum.
Implications
• Need to understand why certain CDE’s “attract”
students?
• Are there barriers to student participation?
• Teachers need to justify why students who feel are
not prepared to compete in CDE’s are brought to a
state-level field day and compete in a CDE.
• Teachers and CDE faculty need to meet to address
CDE content.
– Is it appropriate?
– Is it too challenging?
References
• Blakley, M, Holschuh, M, Seefeldt, B, Shinn, G, Smith, E. and
Vaughn, P. (1993). Perceived values of FFA contests and
awards by students and other adult groups, Proceeding of
the20th annual National Agricultural Education Research
Meeting, Nashville, TN. p. 355-360.
• Buriak, P., Harper, J., Gliem, J. (1986). Analysis of contestants’
scores on the National FFA Agricultural Mechanics Contest
1979-1984. Journal of the American Association of Teacher
Educators of Agriculture, 27 (2) 27-33.
•
• Deeds, J. and Thomas, S. (1999). Student perceptions of
career development event preparation. Proceedings of the
1999 Southern Agricultural Education Research Meeting,
Memphis TN. p.103-110.
•
• Gamble, K. (1986). The personal, educational and occupational
benefits received by participants in the National FFA contests,
Proceedings of the 13th annual National Agricultural Education
Research Meeting. Dallas, TX
•
• Herren, R. V. (1982) Factors associated with the success of
participants in the 1981 national livestock judging contest.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation Virginal Polytechnic Institute
and State University, Blacksburg, VA
•
• Johnson, D. (1991). Student achievement and factors related to
achievement in a state agricultural mechanics contest. Journal
of Agricultural Education 32, (3) 23-28.
•
Thank You!!
• Johnson, D. (1993). A three-year study of student
achievement and factors related to achievement in a
state FFA agricultural mechanics contest. Journal of
Agricultural Education 34, (4) 39-45.
• National FFA Organization. (2004). Career
development events. Retrieved February 17, 2004
from http://www.ffa.org/programs/cde/index.html.