Tools of the Trade

Building Working Relationships in Agricultural Marketing

David G. Kraenzel
Agribusiness Development Specialist/Lecturer
Extension Agricultural Economics
North Dakota State University
Fargo, North Dakota
Internet Address: kraenzel@ndsuext.nodak.edu

Overview

As we in Extension shift our emphasis in new directions to meet challenges posed by the brand new millennium, focus on the human resource aspect of our learning partnerships gains in importance. Apps (1996), for example, introduced us to the "whole person" approach in teaching and learning. The use of this approach in the building of everyday working relationships in agricultural marketing presents one challenging area of attention where we as Extension educators can have significant impact on our clientele's future.

This article compares and contrasts two types of agricultural markets: commodity and agricultural product; discusses some market characteristics and opportunities; and then offers some useful educational strategies for building clientele working relationships in both types of markets.

In the "old days," when there were many buyers and sellers in agriculture, there was less need for cooperation in working relationships. Buying and selling transactions were often viewed as one-time deals, with little thought about repeat business. In fact, in many cases the approach was adversarial in nature. This common "I win-you lose" (control-oriented) perspective prevailed and provided some protection (at least psychologically) against the pitfalls of a "let the buyer beware" business setting.

As buyers and sellers gradually have become fewer and larger, we have seen an emerging need for "win-win" (commitment-oriented) approaches that seek mutual gain (Milligan, 1998; Fisher & Ury, 1999). These approaches center on finding mutual interests that both parties may have in common rather than on taking a position and using argument to gain compromise. Agreement options are then created based on the identified mutual interests discovered through discussion.

Comparing and Contrasting Commodity and Product Markets

One way to understand the differences between control-oriented perspectives and the commitment-oriented perspectives is to compare and contrast the characteristics of traditional commodity markets and agricultural product markets.

As a result of forward-thinking Extension programs leading us to the new millennium, producers in today's agriculture are increasingly knowledgeable and sophisticated in their marketing approach. For example, efforts such as the National Extension Leadership Development Project (NELD) helped blaze a trail into the 21st Century, as reported by Adrian (1993) and Apps (1994). Furthermore, participants understand the characteristics of commodity markets and more specialized product markets.

Commodity Markets

Cattle producers sell large volumes of a uniform and undifferentiated commodity, where transactions are anonymous (one doesn't know the end user). Decision-makers have limited price, quantity, and quality information available from intermediate sources. Efficiencies usually come from forces and influences not directly engaged in primary food chain activities, such as production or processing. The production and marketing effort is quantitative (objective) in nature.

In the wheat industry, we observe pressure to double train size to over 100 cars per train for transport to terminal markets. Often, the lack of control over these changes by participants along the food chain creates uncertainty and instability in the economic atmosphere from the participant perspective. Storage of nonperishable output continues to be advantageous, thus allowing deliberation time prior to buying or selling. Because buying and selling takes place with a market and is reactive in nature, this situation doesn't necessarily demand the building of relationships. However, the building of relationships is beneficial in other marketing areas, such as input purchasing, storage prices, and other transactions ancillary to the actual sale of the commodity.

Product Markets

Product markets, on the other hand, call for varying volumes of differentiated products through specialized distribution channels. The seller and end buyer are more apt to know one another, and relationships become key to sales stability. Product volumes are typically smaller than in the commodities situation. Food chain participants initiate improvements such as product development or better service to remain competitive. We already see a shift towards product differentiation as a market strategy in the cattle industry, as evidenced by the Certified Angus Beef Initiative. This movement uses the basic working relationship of cooperation.

The buying and selling process in product markets is iterative in nature, demanding that decision-makers have more current and accurate price, quantity, and quality information. Successful marketing and sales are proactive and occur faster than in raw commodity markets (from the producer's perspective). Working relationships are more qualitative (subjective) in nature.

Producer-owned cooperatives that process raw commodities into final products require specially trained marketing personnel. Producer skills in marketing are required in order to properly manage these personnel or perform the functions themselves. Profits depend on timely decisions based on complete information as well as negotiated terms, conditions, and special agreements. Thus, this situation calls for the building of working relationships in the market.

Teaching/Learning Leadership Implications for Extension

Three key questions frame our view of the future when we as Extension educators begin to focus more clearly on issues of relationship building.

Future Direction?

What is the future direction affecting Extension teaching and learning leadership in relation to these emerging circumstances and opportunities?

The future direction involves increasing use of subjective, qualitative Extension frameworks and models to complement the traditional objective, quantitative frameworks and models in educational program planning in agricultural marketing. This allows clientele to take advantage of the increasing market opportunities that arise from this knowledge and the skills and attitudes required to be successful.

Much can be gained from understanding the fundamentals of these two basic markets. There is opportunity with this knowledge to prosper in either market, both markets simultaneously, or in some combination. In fact, the complementary nature of the two models may lead clients to master both and in effect become "bilingual" with regard to market knowledge, skills, and attitudes. The probability is, however, that individuals or organizations will be stronger in one or the other.

The whole-person approach to educational leadership in building relationships is here to stay. Apps (1994) defines this basic leadership philosophy as "an approach that combines thinking and feeling, matters of the head and matters of the heart. At the core of this approach is for leaders to have a well-thought-out personal philosophy of leadership."

The use of a human resource framework facilitates the focus on a whole-person approach to building working relationships. Bolman and Deal (1997) provide an in-depth discussion of this framework. Another excellent reference is offered by Hatch (1997). Table 1 presents a comparison of characteristics associated with industrialism and post-industrialism in the United States displayed in Hatch's book. This presentation summarizes future directions that collectively affect our clientele and the marketing environment they will be required to operate in.

Leadership Challenges?

What are the new educational leadership challenges we face? There are two very important challenges that Extension must meet.

The foremost challenge is to provide educational programs that provide new frameworks for building relationships. These frameworks should address such subject matter areas as interpersonal relationships, working relationships, negotiations, and cooperation. Related areas include alliances, partnering, market structures, food chain structure, and food product distribution systems.

The second challenge is for Extension to continue to provide an example by demonstrating the required knowledge, skills, and attitudes within our own organization. We might call this a rededicated initiative to "practice what we preach and preach what we practice."

Leadership Strategies?

What are some effective leadership strategies we may consider in meeting these new adult education leadership challenges?

Some educational strategies that may prove useful in meeting these new challenges include the following.

• A "focus" strategy concentrating on one subject matter area such as interpersonal skill development necessary to build relationships or developing negotiation skills through learning partnerships.
• Storytelling as a strategy to introduce new ways of thinking and doing things in food chain working relationships.
• Team building to include special teams to handle relationship building and cooperation to meet strategic marketing opportunities and threats that arise.

Conclusion

As facilitators, we in Extension must recognize that adversarial (control-oriented) marketing approaches are increasingly giving way to more positive "win-win" (commitment-oriented) approaches seeking mutual gain in working relationships. Relationship building and associated knowledge, skill, and attitude development become vital keys to our clientele's success. This surfaced need calls for Extension leadership initiatives in teaching and learning programs concentrating on awareness, knowledge, and skill development in these areas. The general outcomes of such programs center on increasing traditional farm income and revenue stability, and securing new marketing opportunities.

References

Adrian, J. G. (1993). NELD story: The first three years of the national extension leadership development program. Madison: University of Wisconsin Extension.

Apps, J.W. (1994). Leadership for the emerging age. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Apps, J.W. (1996). Teaching from the heart. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Bolman, L.G. and Deal, T.E. (1997). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership. 2nd Edition. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Fisher, R., & Ury, W. (1997). Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in. New York: Penguin Books USA Inc.

Hatch, M. J. (1997). Organizational theory: Modern, symbolic, and postmodern perspectives. New York: Oxford University Press.

Milligan, R. (1998, June). Managing change in agriculture. Regional Workshop. Cornell University Series. Sioux Falls, South Dakota.

How to Write Low Literacy Materials

Juanita E. Miller
State Extension Specialist
The Ohio State University
Columbus, Ohio
Internet Address: miller.9@osu.edu

Extension professionals frequently have to write fact sheets, newsletters, and educational materials that appeal to and are effective with low literacy people. Approximately 40 million Americans age 16 years and older have low literacy skills (U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, 1993). Forty-three percent of people with the lowest literacy skills live in poverty; 17% receive food stamps; and 70% have no job or a part-time job (Family, Career and Community Leaders of America, 2000).

Thus, to help low literacy people understand what they need to know, professionals and paraprofessionals need to be able to write materials at a low literacy level. This article is a guide to assist you in writing low literacy text.

According to the National Center for Education Statistics (1993), literacy is "…the ability to read, write, and speak in English and compute and solve problems at the levels of proficiency necessary to function on the job and in society, to achieve one's goals, and develop one's knowledge and potential." There are three types of literacy skills.

• Prose literacy is the knowledge and skills needed to understand and use information from text.
• Document literacy is the knowledge and skills required to locate and use words and symbols in materials such as job applications, transportation schedules, maps, tables, and graphs.
• Quantitative literacy is the knowledge and skills required to apply arithmetic operations, either alone or sequentially, using numbers embedded in printed material. Quantitative literacy is needed for balancing a check book and figuring out interest or loans as two examples (National Center for Education Statistics, 1993).

This article addresses prose literacy as it applies to writing text for low literacy audiences.

Low literacy material is text written for people with limited ability to read and write. The text is characterized by easy words and short sentences to accommodate readers who have trouble recognizing letters and understanding hard words. To write low literacy text you need to know your audience and have a feel for the reading capabilities of the group. Once you have determined the reading level of your audience, you should write your educational materials with the needs of your target audience in mind.

Quick Tips for Writing Low Literacy Materials

Many of the tips below should be familiar to you because they hold true for the writing of all types of materials. Others, however, are especially important when you want to reach low literacy audiences.

1. Keep writing style simple.
2. Use active voice and conversational style.
3. Sequence main points in a logical manner.
4. Make your sub-points clearly correspond to the main point.
5. Use short words and sentences.
6. Avoid double negative expressions.
7. Use the same word consistently rather than synonyms to avoid confusion.
8. For lengthy materials, use a table of contents to point the way.
9. Write short summaries at the end of long sections.
10. Use a larger type than 12 points for the text.
11. Enlarge or bold the type in headings and subheadings.
12. Use extra white space to separate sections.
13. Use age appropriate illustrations.
14. Place illustrations close to the related text.
15. Use simple grids, site maps, and other visuals to ease the reading of text.

Testing Reading Level

There are several tests that measure reading level. The Fog Index, developed by Robert Gunning, is easy to understand and requires a minimum amount of text to execute the test. To find the Fog Index of material you have written, follow these steps.

1. Take a sample of approximately 100 words, stopping at the end of the sentence nearest to a 100-word count. Thus, the sample could run from somewhere in the 90's to 104 or so words.

   Number of words in the passage: ______

2. Count the number of sentences in the sample: ______

3. Get the average number of words per sentence by dividing the number of words in the sample by the number of sentences in the sample: ______

4. Count the number of polysyllabic words (words with three or more syllables) in the sample. These are considered to be hard words. Count each hard word only the first time it appears in the sample. Omit from this count proper nouns and easy compound words. Also omit from this count any three-syllable words made up of a two-syllable word and one of the following endings: -s, -es, -'s, -ed, -er, -ing, -est, or -ly.

   Do count as a hard word any two-syllable words made up of a two-syllable word and one of the following endings: -or, -ier, -iest, or -ily.

   Number of hard words: ______

5. Add the average number of words per sentence (#3) to the number of hard words (#4): ______

6. Multiply this sum by .4: ______

   Approximate Grade Level of Your Material: ______

Some Good Examples

Good examples of low literacy writing styles are available all around us. The commercial market offers examples of simple text and layout with lots of visuals and white space. Many of the "for Dummies" books show good use of white space, visuals, and short sections of printed text. Also, look for more good examples in junk mail that seeks to get your attention quickly with a simple message.

The "quick tips," the Fog Index, and examples like the ones described above will help you get started in writing low literacy educational materials.

References

FCCLA students taking action for literacy. (2000). Columbus, OH: Ohio FCCLA [On-line].
Available: http://www.ode.state.oh.us/ctae/fcs/fccla/stateproj/literacy.htm

Kirsch, I. S., Jungeblut, A., Jenkins, L., & Kolstad, A. (1993). Adult literacy in America. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.

U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment. (1993). Adult literacy and new technologies: tools for a lifetime, OTA-SET-550. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Classes on the Internet: A "How to" Guide

Kathleen Klotzbach-Shimomura
Family and Consumer Sciences Educator
Rutgers Cooperative Extension
Flemington, New Jersey
Internet Address: shimomura@aesop.rutgers.edu

Barbara O'Neill
Family and Consumer Sciences Educator
Rutgers Cooperative Extension
Newton, New Jersey
Internet Address: oneill@aesop.rutgers.edu

Gary Huntzinger
Cook College Computing Services
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
New Brunswick, New Jersey
Internet Address: huntzinger@aesop.rutgers.edu

Have you ever spent a lot of time researching a class and preparing PowerPoint slides only to have a relatively small class attendance? Perhaps you've wondered about other ways to share information with clientele and have them benefit from all your hard work. The good news is that, thanks to the Internet and improved communications technology, it is now possible to "teach" classes, using PowerPoint slides, on the Internet.

This article describes how several faculty members at Rutgers Cooperative Extension (RCE) have done this and provides suggestions for others who decide to disseminate information in a similar manner. You can find several existing programs on the RCE presentations Web site at http://www.rce.rutgers.edu/presentations.

The Software You'll Need

To get started, you will need to have access to RealPresenter™ software by RealNetworks. RealPresenter™ is available as RealPresenter™ Basic G2, which is free, and the more robust RealPresenter™ G2 Plus which sells for $69.95. You can learn more about these products by visiting the RealNetworks Web site at http://www.realnetworks.com.

You'll need RealPlayer® by RealNetworks to view RealPresenter™ presentations. RealPlayer® is available for free at http://www.real.com. It is important to review the minimum system requirements before installing either RealPresenter™ or RealPlayer®.

RealPresenter™ works with Windows 95, 98, NT 4.0, and 2000. RealPresenter™ installs itself as a PowerPoint plugin and supports PowerPoint versions 97 and 2000. RealPresenter™ will appear as an item on the PowerPoint menu bar. A desktop icon will also be created during the installation for direct access to RealPresenter™ where you can manage your presentations and modify the program settings.

Developing Your Presentation

The process of developing a presentation is fairly straightforward.

Keep It Short

First, you need to create a PowerPoint slide show of 10 to 20 slides. With approximately 1 minute of narrative per slide, this will result in a 10- to 20-minute presentation, which is probably the maximum that computer users will want to sit through. Fewer slides and more narration are another approach, but the key concept is to keep the presentation short and to the point. If you have a longer presentation you developed as a public class session, you can delete slides to create an abbreviated online version.

Don't put too much information on a slide. The more text, the smaller the point size necessary to make it all fit on the slide, and the more difficult it will be to read on the screen.

Animate It

Once you have developed your PowerPoint slides, you can animate them for increased viewer interest. RealPresenter™ supports animations (e.g., spiral, fly from bottom, vertical blinds) but does not support animation timing. You must manually advance through the animations when recording your RealPresenter™ presentation.

To add animation, place a slide in slide view in PowerPoint, and click on the "Custom Animation" button under "Slide Show." From there, a dialogue box will open with tabs for "Order & Timing" and "Effects." Click on "Effects," select the slide object to be animated, and then select the desired effect. The "Order & Timing" tab allows you to change the sequence in which slide objects appear. When you have animated all slide objects, including images, click "OK" on the dialogue box to confirm the slide settings. A small icon below the bottom left corner of the slide, in slide sorter view, will indicate that custom animation is present.

Write Your Narrative

Next, you need to develop a narrative your slides. An easy way to do this is to print the slides and write a narrative that matches the content of each slide. Try to keep the narration to 1 minute or less per slide. Your speaker notes are a good starting point for developing the narration. Don't read the text on the slide--expand upon it.

Practice your narration to see how it flows and how long it runs before you do the RealPresenter™ recordings. Once you have completed the recordings, RealPresenter™ packages up the entire presentation in a form that is ready to be distributed over the Web. RCE uses RealNetworks RealServer software to distribute the presentations through our Web site.

Try Incentives

To evaluate the long-term effectiveness of classes on the Internet, try using incentives. Simply offer an Extension publication or a printed copy of the slide presentation. (Note: to protect authors' intellectual property rights, viewers cannot print the slides directly from the Internet.) In the process, you'll need to ask learners to provide their name and mailing address. You'll then have their mailing address for sending a follow-up evaluation form to assess behavioral change.

Some Examples from RCE

We designed a separate Web page for each presentation. The Web page contains the presentation title, a brief description of the presentation, the name and title of the author, the length of the presentation, links to view the presentation, a list of additional resources (e.g., books, journal articles, and Extension fact sheets), and links to additional online sources of information. There are actually two links to the same presentation. Your type of Internet connection determines the link you select. One link is for modem connections and the other is for LAN connections. RealServer and RealPlayer® optimize the transmission of the presentation for the speed of your Internet connection.

The first presentation we developed for the online format was Healing Herbs: Safety and Effectiveness, an instructional program designed to provide information about herbal remedies. The program provides a brief overview of the history of herbal remedies, 10 commonly used herbs, and the current regulatory dilemma revolving around herbal remedies. The quality, safety, and effectiveness of herbal remedies are discussed, as well as cautions and interactions with some prescription drugs. An evaluation form is included for viewers to complete and return to the author via e-mail. Viewers also have the option and information available to purchase the curriculum.

Subsequent online presentations include: Investing With Small Dollar Amounts, What Everyone Needs to Know About Finances, Secrets of The Millionaire Next Door, and Last-Minute Financial Catch-Up Strategies for Baby Boomers. These, too, contain an optional form to collect evaluation data from learners and information about purchasing the curricula. Plans are underway to include additional presentations in a variety of subject matter areas, as well as PowerPoint slides and abstracts from research poster sessions.

Conclusion

Extension educators are in the information dissemination business, and our business environment is changing. The world is moving at a fast pace, and consumers are demanding access to products and services all day, every day. In other words, today's learners want "education on demand."

Placing PowerPoint presentations on the Internet is an effective way to reach time-stressed learners and provide 24/7 access to Extension information. Not only does it help learners whose busy lives or employment preclude class attendance, but it also enables Extension educators to reach a widespread audience for whom county, state, and national boundaries are irrelevant.

Field Tours--An Old Tool That Can Still Work

Stephen E. Hawkins
Assistant Director, Purdue Agricultural Centers
Internet Address: seh@aes.purdue.edu

Ben Southard
Department of Agronomy
Internet Address: bsouthard@purdue.edu

Purdue University
West Lafayette, Indiana

Extension professionals have acquired new tools of information delivery over the past 15 years in the form of electronic media and the Internet. Although predictions by Patton (1987) of electronic information distribution have come to fruition, county Extension offices have not disappeared as predicted. Having new tools does not mean that old tools do not still work.

Traditional Extension methods are still significant in reaching progressive producers and diffusing research findings and new practices through influential producers. Focused, commodity-specific field tours using multiple disciplines have been identified by several authors as the best use of clientele contact time (Braund, 1995; Suvedi, Lapinski & Campo, 2000).

Francis, Carter, Carusi, and King (2000) discuss the considerations speakers need to establish before accepting an invitation, but that is just one aspect of a meeting or field tour. Once the Extension professional has identified the need for a field tour or workshop, planning a successful event requires assembling the necessary components. The organizers and speakers need to consider specific topics, learning goals, audience, location, content, and evaluation.

We developed a timeline (Table 1) that outlines the necessary tasks involved in planning a Field Tour and specifies the dates by which these tasks should be accomplished. The timeline shown is used for a major field tour that occurs in late summer each year and involves numerous speakers from various disciplines. It can be adapted to less (and more) ambitious educational programs.

We also identified specific areas of responsibility (Table 2) that, if carried out by one individual, could be overwhelming. We have a different individual in charge of each responsibility area, which simplifies and streamlines overall coordination. This group also performs the follow-up evaluations.

A timeline and checklist such as the ones we developed may seem like merely a matter of common sense, but they ensure that everything that needs to be considered is considered and help keep the organizers on track. Last fall, we distributed the timeline and checklist to Purdue Extension field staff. Some of them have already started using these simple tools in planning sessions for their 2001 Field Tours. They might help you, too.

References

Braund, D. G. (1995). Changing paradigms in animal agriculture: The role of academia and industry in technology transfer. Journal of Animal Science, 73, 3173-3177.

Francis, C., Carter, H., Carusi, C., & King, J. (2000) Before you say yes: A planning guide for speakers. Journal of Extension [Online]. 38(4).
Available: http://joe.org/joe/2000august/tt2.html

Patton, M. Q. (1987). Tomorrow's Extension professionals. Journal of Extension [Online]. 25(3).
Available: http://www.joe.org/joe/1987fall/fut1.html

Suvedi, M., Lapinski, M. K. & Campo, S. (2000). Farmer's perspectives of Michigan State University Extension: Trends and lessons from 1996 and 1999. Journal of Extension [Online]. 38(1).
Available: http://joe.org/joe/2000february/a4.html

Questionnaires for Evaluating On-Farm Field Days

Robin Shepard
Department of Life Sciences Communication
College of Agricultural and Life Sciences
University of Wisconsin ­ Extension
Madison, Wisconsin
Internet Address: Rlshepar@facstaff.wisc.edu

Cooperative Extension agents often take advantage of on-farm field days in their educational programming (Norman, Freyenberger, & Schurle, 1997; Bouare & Bowen, 1990). A field day is generally a day-long event held at a local cooperating farm, and it typically includes demonstrations of specific management practices. Field days are often used to compare traditional practices with a new practice or practices (Seevers et. al, 1997; van den Ban and Hawkins, 1996; and Rollins, Bruening & Radhakrishna, 1991).

How the educational communication process is structured for a field day may vary depending upon what techniques are to be featured and the communication expertise of the event organizers. Field days can range from structured presentations about the practices and impacts of those practices to more informal events where participants walk though field plots or view implements at their own pace (Lionberger & Gwin, 1991). In order to evaluate educational experiences such as field days, organizers often deploy questionnaires the day of the event (Taylor-Powell & Renner, 2000).

This article presents three straight-forward categories of questions for an effective Field Day questionnaire as well as suggestions for questionnaire design and delivery.

The Field Day Questionnaire--What to Measure

Perhaps the most difficult challenge in evaluating field day events is determining what to measure. It is important to understand what can realistically be attributed to a one-time event like a field day. To be most effective, field day questionnaires need to focus on their formative value and include questions that will allow organizers to improve future field days. Questionnaires can be designed to assess participant reactions to the practices being shown as well as to organizational aspects of the event. The results can tell educators what about the event worked and what didn't. When used is this way, field day questionnaires assume formative research qualities (van den Ban & Hawkins, 1996).

At its most basic, a questionnaire should tell event organizers whether they have attracted the appropriate target audience to the demonstration. To accomplish this, three categories of questions should be incorporated into an overall field-day survey.

Information Sources

The first category should address preferred information sources and how they heard about the event (See Field Day Questionnaire, Section A). Questions such as these uncover how participants heard about the field day and how future events should be publicized. Information preferences may also address why the farmer came to the event so that materials and information can be tailored to specific needs and/or levels of current understanding and use of practices.

Demographics

The second category should address the demographics of field day participants (See Field Day Questionnaire, Section B). This helps ensure that notice of future events gets to the people who need the information most. It also tells organizers the participants' farm type and size, and distance traveled by participants.

Applicability of Practices

Finally, the third category of questions should address how the practices being demonstrated applied to those attending the field day (See Field Day Questionnaire, Section C). These questions should record both the extent to which demonstrated practice are being used or not used, and the confidence the participants feel that the practices are practical and can be used on other farms.

Questions in this category can also provide a baseline of information from which to measure adoption. Research shows that field days are more likely to attract farmers who want to adapt practices they have viewed to their own farming systems, rather than adopting practices exactly as demonstrated. This indicates that farmers attending field days come to the event with existing knowledge of practices and dispels the commonly held assumption that farmers need basic instruction in the practices being demonstrated (Hakanson, 1992). Realizing the target audience's knowledge base allows educators to tailor future programs to specific needs.

While assessing knowledge levels is appropriate, attitude change is more difficult to measure and is not considered a reliable impact indicator when measured immediately following an event (Harmon & Jones, 1997). It is also not appropriate to simply ascribe behavior change to field day attendance (Scarborough et al., 1997). Behavior change may be a laudable ultimate goal, but the best event organizers can hope to measure at the time of the event is "intent to use" the demonstrated practices. A separate follow-up survey should be sent to participants after a reasonable amount of time has passed in order to gauge actual practice adoption (Barao, 1992; Warnock, 1992). Where the desire is to evaluate change, such as behavior associated with practice adoption, then it is essential to assess existing behavior.

Considerations in Questionnaire/Survey Design and Delivery

Simplicity

Field days usually offer little time or space for farmers to read detailed information or to sit down and fill out a questionnaire, so the questions should be clear and concise. In most cases field day questionnaires should take less than fifteen minutes to complete. Directions should be easy to follow and questions and answers clearly worded. Pre-testing the questionnaire with a small group of farmers, or even at a similar but smaller event, allows you to assess the readability of questions and their intent is understood.

Avoiding Bias, Rhetorical Questions, and Poorly Worded Response Categories

Biased, poorly worded questions, or questions that present no real difference in responses are common stumbling blocks in questionnaire design. Questions with pre-determined categories as answer choices help simplify the process, but the categories must be clearly defined. Instructions such as "check all that apply" or "check one only" should be included for each question. It is usually a good idea to show the questions to colleagues, particularly people who have experience designing similar instruments. Input from others can help you avoid unclear, leading or misleading questions and statements. It also provides extra proofreading. In practice, every time you use a questionnaire it should be reviewed.

Presentation and Appearance

It is essential that the questionnaire have a professional appearance. The questionnaire should attract the farmer's attention. Questionnaires should be interesting and eye-catching to compete in today's graphical information age. White space, graphics, and color grab attention and give the instrument a professional look. Furthermore, the use of plot diagrams and field maps not only can increases understanding but may draw the reader to the questionnaire and encourage its completion.

Providing Time to Fill It Out

It is often difficult to decide the best time to deploy your questionnaire. Expecting farmers to take it with them and mail or return it will guarantee a low response rate. If the event features an introduction or key speaker, pass the questionnaire out while the main speaker is waiting for the crowd to gather. Describe the purpose of the questionnaire, and even designate a specific time when people can complete it. Past experiences have shown that response rates increase when the need for such information is recognized publicly (Coffy, Jennings, & Humenik, 1998).

However, be cautious not to spend too much time on it at this point because farmers will want to be off to view the demonstration plots. Scheduling a specific time during the day to fill out the questionnaire will stress its importance and will also prevent people from filling it out during the talks, which can be distracting or even inconsiderate to speakers.

This method may not work in informal situations such as pasture walks, where there are no scheduled speakers or sessions. In those instances, an alternative may to be place interviewers at entry or exit points to the demonstration plots. In this case, a selection scheme, such as choosing every fifth person, should be devised. That way you will ensure results that truly represent the diversity of the field day attendees rather than just including respondents who are willing.

Using Incentives While Protecting Confidentiality.

It is very important to protect the respondent's confidentiality. However, to ensure high response rates and minimize non-response bias, a little creativity may be in order. For example, the questionnaire may be designed with a space for the respondent's name on a detachable tab, which can be removed and entered in a drawing. This way, the respondent places his/her questionnaire in one box and the tab with their name on it in another, preserving the confidentiality of their responses. Another option might be to offer a small gift, such as a calendar, farm-management publication, or newsletter, for turning in a completed questionnaire.

Conclusions

Field day questionnaires can provide general information about the influence an event has had on farmers' knowledge or their opinions and perceptions of the demonstrations. However, there is limited research that shows a relationship between how people perceive such events or information, and what they ultimately do with the information (Dixon, 1990; LeRouzic & Cusick, 1998). Although they cannot realistically measure future outcomes such as behavior change or practice adoption, field day questionnaires can help us improve on-farm learning. Their major strength may be to tell us how to expand the educational experience, making it more interesting, relevant, and specific to farmer needs.

References

Barao, S. M. (1992). Behavioral aspects of technology adoption. Journal of Extension [On-line]. 30(2).
Available: http://www.joe.org/joe/1992summer/a4.html

Bouare, D., & Bowen, D. E. (1990). Communications methods used by agricultural Extension agents. Journal of Applied Communications, 74(1), 1-7.

Coffey, S. W., Jennings, G. D., & Humenik, F. J. (1998). Collection of information about farm management practices [)n-line]. Journal of Extension, 36(2).
Available: http://www.joe.org/joe/1998april/a4.html

Dixon, N.M. (1990). The relationship between trainee responses on participant reaction forms and posttest scores. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 1(2), 129-137.

Hakanson, K. I. (1992). An evaluation of the sustainable agriculture demonstration program of Wisconsin. Master's thesis, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin.

Harmon, A. H., & Jones, S. B. (1997). Forestry demonstrations: What good is a walk in the woods? Journal of Extension [On-line]. 35(1).
Available: http://www.joe.org/joe/1997february/rb3.html

Le Rouzic, V., & Cusick, M. C. (1998). Immediate evaluation of training events at the Economic Development Institute of the World Bank: Measuring reactions, self-efficacy and learning in a worldwide context. Paper presented at the annual Evaluation Association Meeting, Chicago, IL.

Lionberger, H. F., & Gwin, P. H. (1991). Technology transfer. Columbia, MO: University of Missouri.

Norman, D., Freyenberger, S., & Schurle, B. (1997). County Extension agents and on-farm research work: Results of a Kansas survey. Journal of Extension [On-line]. 35(5).
Available: http://www.joe.org/joe/1997october/a4.html

Rollins, T. J., Bruening, T. B., & Radhakrishna, R. B. (1991). Journal of Applied Communications, 75 (2) 1-9.

Scarborough, V., Killough, S., Johnson, D. A., & Farrington, J. (1997). Farmer-led Extension. Southampton Row, London: Intermediate Technology Publications, in association with World Neighbors, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.

Seevers, B., Graham, D., Gamon, J, & Conklin, N. (1997). Education through Cooperative Extension. Albany, NY: Delmar Publishers.

Taylor-Powell, E., & Renner, M. (2000). Collecting evaluation data: End-of-session questionnaires (Publication No. G3658-11). Madison, Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin-Extension.

Van den ban, A.W., & Hawkins, H. S. (1996). Agricultural Extension. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Science.

Warnock, P. (1992). Surveying client satisfaction. Journal of Extension [On-line]. 30(1).
Available: http://www.joe.org/joe/1992spring/a1.html

Calibration of Boom Sprayers Using Charts to Reduce Math Calculations

F. Richard Beard
Agricultural Engineering Specialist
Internet Address: Rbeard@cc.usu.edu

Howard Deer
Pesticide Specialist
Internet Address: howardd@ext.usu.edu

Utah State University
Logan, Utah

To protect the investment in agricultural pesticides, a boom sprayer should be calibrated at the start of the season and whenever application conditions change. Also, sprayer output should be periodically checked throughout the season to assure proper application rate. Although boom sprayers are calibrated in a variety of ways, each method uses the measurements of nozzle flow rate and equipment travel speed.

The following charts and procedures illustrate how easily the calibration process can be achieved. The charts provided reduce the need for math calculations. They provide Extension educators with information they can use to give producers a quick and easy way to calibrate their boom sprayers.

Travel Speed: Miles per Hour (MPH)

Speed in MPH is based on the number of seconds required to travel 200 feet. Set up a travel speed test area where markers spaced 200 feet apart can be permanently located. Use Chart 1 to determine the actual travel speed. With the transmission in the correct gear and the throttle set in the appropriate position, drive at a uniform speed past the first marker, and begin the time. Use a stopwatch or second hand on a watch. As you pass the second marker, stop the timer.

Complete at least two trips, and average the times. Adjust travel speed up or down to match the exact time, as shown in Chart 1. Re-check the travel speed after each throttle adjustment or gear change. Calibration should be done with the spray tank 50% full and over terrain similar to field-travel, such as rough terrain, rolling hills, etc.

To calculate speed:

MPH = 136.36 ÷ Seconds Required to Travel 200 Feet

If a sprayer travels 1 mph faster or slower than required, it will under or over apply pesticides by 5-8 gallons per acre (based on 20 gallons per acre delivery rate, 3.5 MPH travel speed, 24" nozzle spacing). If an operator intends to apply 20 gallons per acre, this could result in an under or over application of 25-40%.

Delivery Rate: Gallons per Minute (GPM)

The number of gallons delivered per minute by a spray nozzle can be determined by collecting the output in ounces during 1 minute. A plastic container with a 60-ounce graduated capacity should be used. Do not add pesticide to the spray tank. Calibrate using only water, and begin with the pressure gauge set at the appropriate pressure for the nozzles. Adjust the pressure to achieve the appropriate delivery rate. The following chart can be used to convert ounces-per-minute to gallons-per-minute. This procedure should be repeated for each nozzle on the boom.

To calculate delivery rate:

GPM = Ounces Collected Per Minute ÷ 128

Each nozzle is designed to deliver a predetermined volume at a given pressure. For the nozzle to provide the appropriate application rate and develop the correct pattern, it must be supplied with an uninterrupted flow of tank liquid at the correct pressure. Identically sized nozzles should provide the same delivery rate. Old or cheap pressure gauges are frequently inaccurate. Rely on the spray pattern and delivery rate rather than the numerical gauge value.

Spray Pattern: Type, Size, Pressure, Angle, Overlap, Height, Wear, and Blockage

If all of the nozzles on a boom sprayer are the same size and type, then the spray pattern and delivery rate should also be the same. When operating at the correct pressure, if a clean nozzle is above or below the correct delivery rate by 10% or more, then it should be replaced. For example, if a worn tip is designed to deliver 0.20 GPM and it delivers at or below 0.18 GPM or at or above 0.22 GPM, then it should be replaced. Also, if brass or plastic nozzles are being used and two or more nozzles show excessive wear, all nozzles of the same age should be replaced.

Determining spray pattern overlap and measuring uniformity of distribution can be difficult. Visual appraisal of the spray patterns while stationary equipment is operating at the correct pressure will frequently reveal problems. A new nozzle can also be installed for comparison. If the patterns are not the same or spray overlap is incorrect, this may be easily observed. Another way to visually appraise the spray pattern requires access to a large concrete or asphalt area such as a parking lot, driveway, or private road.

On a warm, calm, sunny day, while applying only water, spray a hard flat surface for a distance of 20-30 feet. Make sure the boom sprayer is operating at the appropriate pressure and traveling at the correct speed. The sun should be shining evenly on the surface sprayed, and the surface should be free of debris and dirt. As soon as the test strip is sprayed, stop the spray rig and turn off the sprayer. Closely observe the wet area that was just sprayed. If the spray was applied uniformly, it should evaporate uniformly. For broadcast or band spraying, the wet areas should evaporate uniformly from start to finish. The boom may need to be positioned closer to the surface in some situations.

For broadcast spraying, if the moisture appears as stripes while evaporating, then the nozzles could be worn, the flow might be blocked, or the nozzle overlap or boom height might be incorrect. For band spraying, either wide or narrow strips can be caused by similar problems. Under both spraying conditions, this test will make it obvious if one or more nozzles are not operating correctly. Adjusting and/or replacing components will allow the spray evaporation test to result in fairly uniform evaporation. This is a subjective evaluation, with much room for interpretation and error. To achieve best results, the "spray and observe" process should be repeated three to four times, and the pattern carefully evaluated each time.

If problems are apparent, the malfunctioning nozzles should be cleaned or replaced. If worn, blocked, and/or damaged nozzles are used on a spray unit, the resulting outcome will reflect the pattern sprayed. Under-treated and over-treated areas will be obvious, and misapplications of materials such as herbicides can be easily recognized.

Application Rate: Gallons per Acre (GPA) and Gallons per Minute (GPM)

When applying a pesticide, it is important that label directions are followed. An applicator's failure to follow label directions can result in criminal penalties and/or fines. Do not exceed the application rate specified on the pesticide label. Read and follow the label directions.

Spray operators commonly select a convenient pesticide application rate. Rates such as 10 or 20 gallons of mixture per acre are frequently selected. Higher rates, such as 20 gallons per acre, offer better coverage of the target site, while lower rates, such as 10 gallons per acre, provide greater field coverage per tank-full. For future reference, applicators should keep detailed records of pesticide dilutions, application rates, sprayer travel speed, pressure settings, spray sites, and results.

To calculate application rate:

GPA = GPM x 5940 ÷ MPH ÷ Nozzle Spacing in Inches

GPM = GPA x MPH x Nozzle Spacing in Inches ÷ 5940

GPM x 128 = Ounces per Minute

For band spraying, substitute the band width, in inches, for the nozzle spacing.

When adjusting spray calibration equipment for optimum performance, spray pressure is adjusted for small changes in delivery rate; travel speed is increased or decreased for larger adjustments; and tip replacement is the preferred method for major changes in delivery rates.

Pesticide and Water Mixtures: Quantity of Pesticide per Gallon or Tank

Pesticide labels include information specific to applications rates and target plants or organisms. For agricultural applications, the rates commonly appear as a volume or weight on a per acre basis. Application rates may appear as ounces, gallons, or pounds per acre. Additional information includes the minimum number of gallons of water that should be used to dilute the pesticide. The following chart provides mixing information for commonly used equipment and pesticide formulations.

To calculate pesticide and water mixtures:
Acres Sprayed per Full Tank = Tank Capacity in Gallons ÷ Application Rate in GPA
Gallons of Pesticide per Full Tank = Acres Sprayed per Full Tank x Application Rate in GPA

Care should be taken when filling a spray tank so that the water supply is protected from contamination and back siphoning. Individuals mixing pesticides should wear the appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) as specified by the product label.

General Guidelines

If agricultural spray equipment is maintained and worn nozzles or components are regularly replaced, then a calibration check will require just a few minutes each time a sprayer is operated, and producers are much more likely to do it.

This article is online at http://joe.org/joe/2001february/ent-tt.html.

Copyright © by Extension Journal, Inc. ISSN 1077-5315. Articles appearing in the Journal become the property of the Journal. Single copies of articles may be reproduced in electronic or print form for use in educational or training activities. Inclusion of articles in other publications, electronic sources, or systematic large-scale distribution may be done only with prior electronic or written permission of the Journal Editorial Office, joe-ed@joe.org.