Marcus Ashlock received the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Agricultural Education in May 2006.

Marcus will be moving to Manhattan, Kansas, where he has accepted an assistant professor position in agricultural communications at Kansas State University.

His study was based on Oklahoma beef producers’ perceptions of the susceptibility of the Oklahoma beef industry to a terrorist attack, and the sources of information Oklahoma beef producers use and trust when they seek information about agriculture during a crisis. Participants in his study were randomly selected from a population of 48,000 beef producers in Oklahoma. All 470 respondents completed a telephone survey conducted by the Oklahoma Agricultural Statistics Service.

Marcus found that Oklahoma beef producers perceived the beef industry was susceptible to an agroterrorism event; believed the feedlots to be at an elevated level of threat; were confident in their own operation’s bio-security measures; believed their own operation was not susceptible to an agroterrorism event; and did not believe they had enough information about protection from terrorism to the beef industry.

Producers looked to their veterinarians when seeking information about animal health issues and any agriculturally related crisis; and preferred to receive information through county extension publications. They also perceived the local veterinarian as the most trusted and reliable source of information available. The OSU Cooperative Extension Service, through the county extension agents and the local area livestock specialists, and the USDA were also trustworthy and reliable sources.

Danna Kelemen received the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Agricultural Education in May 2006.

Danna will be moving to Washington, D.C., where she will join her husband who is a lobbyist for AARP. Danna looks forward to spending time with her 4-year-old daughter and getting adjusted to the lifestyle in our nation’s capitol! She would eventually like to work in academia, teaching part-time or at an adjunct faculty level.

Danna’s study sought to examine if the use of a process writing model curriculum improved the writing performance of students in an agricultural-context communications course. The study was confined to students enrolled in a course section of AGCM 3103 during the 2005 fall semester at Oklahoma State University.

The findings of this study indicated the majority of students enrolled in the AGCM 3103 course were male, 21 years of age, and exhibited no difference in their writing ability. The process writing model curriculum was shown to have a statistically significant effect on the students’ overall grade in the course, as well as on the two post-test writing assignment measures.

Conclusions drawn from her study indicated a process writing model curriculum did result in a significant increase in student writing performance. Students’ perceptions on writing were varied based on a number of variables, while students’ attitudes were moderate to positive about the course and the benefits afforded them. Students indicated methodology and instructor style had a direct effect on how much they learned in the course, and students stated they preferred a writing course that would help prepare them for the future.

Danna also found that students’ opinions were mixed on the type of skills needed to be a good writer, but did agree proficient writing skills, at a minimum, were important for college graduates and a needed ability in life.

Brent Young received the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Agricultural Education in May 2006.

Brent has recently accepted a position at North Dakota State University where he will be an assistant professor in Agricultural Education.

Brent’s study tested the idea that students who participated in a contextualized, mathematics-enhanced high school agricultural power and technology curriculum and aligned instructional approach would develop a deeper and more sustained understanding of selected mathematics concepts than those students who participated in the traditional curriculum and instruction.

His study included teachers and students from 32 high schools in Oklahoma (16 experimental classrooms; 16 control classrooms). Students were enrolled in an agricultural power and technology course during the 2004-2005 school year. The experimental design he   used was a posttest only control group; where the unit of study was the classroom.

He concluded that the math-enhanced curriculum and aligned instruction did not significantly affect students’ mathematics ability as measured by a traditional test of student math knowledge, by an “authentic” assessment of student ability to use math to solve workplace problems, or by an examination used to determine students’ need for math remediation at the post-secondary level. In addition, the experimental group students’ technical competence in agricultural power and technology did not diminish as a result of the study’s experimental treatment. However, the measure of students’ need for mathematical remediation at the post-secondary level and the traditional test of student math knowledge did reveal results that held practical significance and favored the experimental group students.