M.S.

Middle school programs in agricultural education are unique educational experiences that provide middle school aged children in Virginia with a basic understanding of agriculture and its applied sciences. Curriculum innovations such as the one for Virginia middle schools provide guidance for teachers in the field and offer a base from which programs can operate. However, the benefits of educational innovations are never fully realized until the teacher in the classroom adopts and implements the changes. The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between teacher characteristics and the adoption of agriscience curriculum in Virginia middle school agricultural education programs. The population for this study consisted of the 57 middle school teachers of agricultural education in Virginia. All of the teachers were surveyed with an 81% response rate obtained. Selected conclusions drawn from the findings were: 1. There are two distinct groups of middle school agricultural education teachers in Virginia, those who are teaching a large part of the approved curriculum and those who are teaching only a small portion of the curriculum. 2. Teacher attitude toward agriscience is a significant predictor of the amount of agriscience curriculum taught. 3. Teacher knowledge of agriscience is a significant predictor of the amount of agriscience curriculum taught. 4. Teacher expectations of agriscience curriculum is a meaningful predictor of the amount of agriscience curriculum taught. Selected recommendations drawn from the findings and conclusions are: 1. Given the existence of the significant contribution of the teachers’ positive attitude toward the amount of agriscience curriculum taught by middle school teachers of agricultural education in Virginia, more effort by teacher education, the Virginia Department of Education, and agricultural interests in Virginia should be devoted to building positive attitudes toward agriscience. 2. Given the significant contribution of the teachers’ knowledge toward the amount of agriscience curriculum taught by middle school teachers of agricultural education in Virginia, more effort is needed by teacher education to prepare prospective teachers in agriscience content and methodology as part of their teacher preparation. The Virginia Department of Education and agricultural interests in Virginia should also commit to teacher training through inservice and other activities involving agriscience education. / Ph. D.

1. This study includes information about 125 departments of vocational agriculture, or 58.6 per cent of the 213 white departments established in the State of Virginia when this study was begun. 2. Data from the teacher trainers and district supervisors of Virginia shows the same trend and results as the data of teachers of vocational agriculture. 3. This study shows 101 or 80.8 per cent of the departments have an advisory council and 24 or 19.2 per cent have none. 4. The average years of experience with using advisory council in present position was 7.4 years, while those not using a council at present was 3.6 years. The teachers using councils serve in present school over twice as long as those not using a council. 5. There were only three teachers with nine or more years of service in present school who did not have an advisory council. 6. The teachers without councils reported an average of 1.7 reasons each for not having an advisory council. 7. Only 12 departments were making use of special councils, and 10 of these also used general councils. 8. The average council in the Southern region is almost the same as the average council in Virginia. / M.S.

An objective questionnaire was used in making this study. The forms were carefully written and designed to assist the veteran in giving the true picture of his progress in addition to the number of veterans dropping the program. After receiving from the teacher of veterans the number of veterans in his department with at least two years of institutional on-the-farm training in vocational agriculture, enough forms were sent to the teacher in charge of the department to give each of these veterans a copy. These forms were mailed to 165 veterans in the state of Virginia. Returns were received from 108 veterans reporting on their progress, although several others came too late to be included in the study. The results on the drop-out part of the questionnaire went to 139 vocational agriculture departments that reported 675 veterans dropping the training program. The tabulation of the data was made at the home of the author on large master sheets which were prepared for this work. Classifications of the data were made to give the desired results of the progress and the number of veterans dropping the program as well as their reasons for dropping out of training. / M.S.

In this thesis the author has conscientiously attempted to portray in clear fashion the status of all V.P.I. graduates, post graduates, and those qualified to teach in vocational agriculture since 1918. The material collected, it is hoped, will serve as a source of information for professors at V.P.I. who have to do with guidance and placement. Furthermore, it is expected that the information contained herein, will show certain pertinent facts concerning the department of vocational education in question. Is the department efficient? Do its graduates secure jobs? Are salaries commensurate with time spent in securing degrees? Does the higher degree have any significance so far as increase in salary or steps in advancement are concerned? Have the V.P.I. graduates obtained positions of unusual responsibility and honor? Has service rendered by these graduates been hit or miss, or has it been constructive and definite over a long period of time? What has been the percentage of V.P.I. agricultural men who have entered occupations allied to farming? Are there any facts which indicate success n these allied occupations? Such questions as the above, and others, are answered in this thesis. In attempting to collect the information mentioned above the author has made use of the Alumni Office files; the records in offices of the various supervisors of Agricultural Education - Dr. W.S. Newman, State Board of Education, Richmond, Va.; Mr. D.J. Howard, Assistant State Supervisor, Winchester, Va.; Mr. T.V. Downing, District Supervisor, Ivor, Va.; Mr. J.O. Hoge, District Supervisor, Blacksburg, Va.; Mr. F.B. Cale, District Supervisor, Appomattox, Va.; department files; Alumni files; Registrar's office; Cormier's thesis and questionnaires. Grateful acknowledgment is made to these men as well as to Professors E.C. Magill, H.C. Groseclose, H.W. Sanders, and other school officials who have rendered valuable assistance in the arduous task of preparing this thesis. / Master of Science