70-14-,IQ 8
UTZINGER, James Duane, 1932- EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES IN HORTICULTURE FOR OHIO YOUTH.
The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1969 Agriculture, general
University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan
M
THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES IN HORTICULTURE
FOR OHIO YOUTH
DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University
By
James Duane Utzinger, B.S., M.S. ***** *
The Ohio State University 1969
Approved by
Department of Agricultural Education ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The author is grateful to a number of persons for their valuable support, encouragement, and cooperation
in this study: To my adviser Ralph E. Bender for the many ways in
which he provided assistance and encouragement during my
program of graduate studies.
To other members of my graduate committee, Ralph J. Woodin and Clarence J. Cunningham of the Department of
Agricultural Education and E. K. Alban and Dale W.
Kretchman of the Department of Horticulture and Forestry
for their excellent guidance and suggestions made through out the course of study. To Freeman S. Howlett for his encouragement and support during my program of graduate studies. To the staff members in the Department of Agricultural Education and Horticulture and Forestry at The Ohio State University who completed the survey instrument. To J. R. Warmbrod of the Department of Agricultural Education for his many helpful suggestions relative to the conduct of the study.
To James E. Dougan and Darrell L. Parks of the
Agricultural Education Service, Ohio Department of
Education, for assistance in obtaining program information and suggestions as to potential respondents.
To Rowena Workman, state chairman of the Ohio Junior
Garden Club Program and Peter J. Wotoweic of the Horti
culture Division of the Cleveland City Schools for pro
viding valuable youth program information.
To Eldon S. Banta, Secretary, Ohio State Horticul
tural Society; Wilbur A. Gould, Secretary, Ohio Canners
and Pood Processor's Association; D. C. Kiplinger,
Secretary-Treasurer of the Ohio Florist's Association; K. W. Reisch, Executive Secretary, Ohio Nurseryman's
Association; and E. C. Wittmeyer, Secretary, Ohio
Vegetable and Potato Grower's Association for identifying industry leaders and providing covering letters for
opinionnaires forwarded to the leaders.
To the Ohio horticulture industry leaders, staff members of the Ohio Cooperative Extension Service, the
state guidance supervisors of the Ohio Department of
Education, The Ohio public school administrators and curriculum specialists, and the Boy Scout executive officers who participated in the study. To Starr Spence, Irene Close, Carole and Teresa
Richards, Judy Utzinger, and Phyllis Bice for their valuable secretarial assistance in completing the study.
To T. E. Willke and Mike Allen of the Statistical
* * * 1 1 1 Laboratory at The Ohio State University for assistance in the analysis of the data.
To my wife, Doris, for her inspiration, patience, understanding, and many hours of typing in support of this study.
To my daughters, Karen, Annette, and Elaine and their grandmothers Dora Schleppi and Helen I. Utzinger for cooperating in their own special way to make it possible for the study to progress and be completed. VITA April 3, 1932 ...... Born, Franklin County, Ohio
June, 1954...... State University, Columbus, Ohio
December, 1954 - December, 1956 . . . . Army, Lieutenant, U.S.A.R.
March, 1958 ...... versity, Columbus, Ohio
June, 1959 ...... State University, Columbus, Ohio
1959-1963 ...... General Science and Biology Teacher, Pleasant View High School, Grove City, Ohio
1962...... Participant, National Science Foundation Institute for Teachers of Science and Math ematics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
1963-1965 ...... Vocational Horticulture Teacher, Pleasant View High School, Grove City, Ohio
March-July 1965 ...... Consultant in Agricultural Education, National Center for Advanced Study and Research in Agricultural Education, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
1965-1967 ...... Teacher of Vocational Horticulture, Pleasant View High School, Grove City, Ohio, and Cooperating Teacher, Department of Agricultural Education, The Ohio State University v 1967- Extension Horticulturist Ohio Cooperative Extension Service, The Ohio State University
ARTICLES AND PUBLICATIONS
"Vocational Horticulture in the Secondary Schools" Grower Talks, Geo. J. Ball Inc., Volume 29, June, 1965.
Horticulture-Service Occupations, The Center for Research and Leadership Development in Vocational and Technical Education, Columbus: The Ohio State University, 1965. (A program of instruction consisting of a course outline and twelve instructional modules developed as a part of a national project to produce curricular materials for instruction in off-farm agricultural occupations.) Co-author. Ohio Cooperative Extension Service Circular 262, "The Second Year Vineyard 4-H Grape Project," Columbus: The Ohio State University, October, 1968. Ohio Cooperative Extension Service Circular 281, "Managing the Producing Vineyard 4-H Grape Project," Columbus: The Ohio State University, January, 1969. Ohio Cooperative Extension Service Circular 280, "Vegetable Gardening 1," Columbus: The Ohio State University, January, 1969. Ohio Cooperative Extension Service Bulletin SB 17, Vegetable Exhibitor's Guidebook, "Plan and Plant for Blue Ribbons," Columbus: The Ohio State University, July, 1969.
FIELDS OF STUDY
Major Field: Agricultural Education. - Professors Ralph E. Bender, Clarence J. Cunningham and
Ralph J. Woodin
Major Field: Horticulture. Professors E. K. Alban and Dale W. Kretchman
vi TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...... ii VITA ...... V
LIST OF TABLES ...... vi.il
LIST OF FIGURES ...... xiv INTRODUCTION ...... 1
CHAPTER I. NATURE OF THE STUDY ...... 4 II. DESIGN AND CONDUCT OF THE STUDY ...... 18
III. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ...... 31 IV. EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES IN HORTICULTURE
FOR OHIO YOUTH, 1960-1967 ...... 44 V. RESPONDENT PERCEPTIONS AND OPINIONS RE GARDING YOUTH EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES IN HORTICULTURE...... 107
VI. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS 168
APPENDIX A. SURVEY INSTRUMENT AND CORRESPONDENCE. . . 193 B. REFERENCE MATERIALS AND TABLES...... 214
C. ALLIED STUDY MATERIALS ...... 242
BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 253
vii LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Summary of Youth Participation in Ohio Horti cultural Programs by Organization and By Year, Ohio, 1960-1967 ...... 47 2. Descriptive Summary of Agencies and Organiza tions Offering Educational Opportunities in Horticulture to Ohio Youth, 1960-1967 ...... 50 3. Number of Ohio Youth Taking Advantage of Educa tional Opportunities inHorticulture in 1967 . 52
4. Youth Enrollment in School Gardens Programs, Ohio, 1960-1967 ...... 54
5. Youth Enrollment in Vocational Horticulture Programs in Ohio Secondary Schools, 1963-1967 . 64
6. Youth Enrollment in 4-H Club Horticultural Projects, By Project, Ohio, 1960-1967 ..... 74
7. Youth Enrollment in the Junior Garden Club Program of the Ohio Association of Garden Clubs, 1960-1967 79 8. Youth Participation in Boy Scouts of America Merit Badge Projects in Horticulture, 1960-1967 86
9. Youth Enrollment in the National Junior Horti cultural Association, By Project and By Year, Ohio 1960-1967 101 10. Enrollment in Youth Gardens Department, Ohio State Fair, 1960-1967 ...... 104 11. Respondent Experience in Working With Youth Programs...... 109
12. Respondent Experience in Working With Youth Programs in Horticulture ...... Ill
13. Type of Respondent Experience in Horticulture . Ill
14. Respondent Experience as Educational Program Administrators or Board of Education Members . 112
viii Table Page
15. Future Importance of Horticulture in Contrib uting to the Standard of Living in Our Society. 115
16. Respondent Opinions as to the Proportion of Citizens Who Can Profit From Horticultural Knowledge in the Future ...... 116
17. Opinions of Agricultural Educators Regarding the Educational Values of Horticultural Instruction as Ranked in Order of Mean Score • Values...... 118
18. Opinions of Non-Agricultural Educators Regard ing the Educational Values of Horticultural Instruction as Ranked According to Mean Score V a l u e s ...... 120
19. Opinions of Horticultural Industry Leaders Regarding the Educational Values of Horticultur al Instruction as Ranked According to Mean Score Values ...... 121
20. Suggested Educational Values of Horticultural Instruction ...... 123 21. Principal Roles of Horticulture Courses for Youth of Various Age Levels ...... 126
22. Potential Value of High School Programs in Vocational Horticulture for Meeting Youth Needs and Providing Trained Personnel for Industry ...... 129
23. Potential Value of Public School Programs in Avocational Horticulture for Meeting the Needs of Youth for Making Productive Use of Leisure Time and Consumer Education...... 131 24. Respondent Opinions as to the Adequacy Level of Present Youth Educational Opportunities in Horticulture in the Respondent's Home Community 133
25. Opinions of Agricultural Educators in Explana tion of the Lack of Avocational Horticulture Programs in Most Ohio Public Schools as Ranked in Order of Mean Score V a l u e s ...... 138 Table Page 26. Opinions of Non-Agricultural Educators in Explanation of the Lack of Avocational Horticulture Programs in Most Ohio Public Schools as Ranked in Order of Mean Score V a l u e s ...... 140
27. Opinions of Horticultural Industry Leaders in Explanation of the Lack of Avocational Horticulture Programs in Most Ohio Public Schools as Ranked in Order of Mean Score V a l u e s ...... 142
28. Opinions of Agricultural Educators Regarding the Value of Selected Factors in Acquainting and Interesting Youth in Horticulture as Ranked in Order of Mean Score Values ..... 144
29. Opinions of Non-Agricultural Educators Regard ing the Value of Selected Factors in Acquaint ing and Interesting Youth in Horticulture as Ranked in Order of Mean Score Values ...... 145
30. Opinions of Horticultural Industry Leaders Regarding the Value of Selected Factors in Acquainting and Interesting Youth in Horti culture as Ranked in Order of Mean Score Values 146
31. Suggested Methods For Acquainting and Interest ing Youth in Horticulture ...... 148
32. Opinions of Agricultural Educators As to the Best Means For Providing Citizens With Horti cultural Information Required for Avocational Horticulture Pursuits as Ranked in Order of Mean Score V a l u e s ...... 149
33. Opinions of Non-Agricultural Educators as to the Best Means for Providing Citizens With Horticultural Information Required for Avoca tional Horticultural Pursuits as Ranked in Order of Mean Score Values ...... 151
34. Opinions of Horticultural Industry Leaders Regarding the Best Means for Providing Citizens With Horticultural Information Required For Avocational Horticultural Pursuits as Ranked in Order of Mean Score Values...... 152
x Table Page 35. Respondent Opinions as to Those Who Should Make Proposals for Initiating Horticultural Programs in Ohio Schools ...... 154
36. Appropriate Grade Level for Making Initial Horticulture Course Offerings in the Public Schools ...... 157 37. Types of Students Which Can Best Be Served By Vocational Prggrams in Horticulture .... 159
38. Types of Students Which Can Best Be Served By Avocational Prggrams in Horticulture . . . 159
39. Opinions of Agricultural Educators as to the Potential Value of School-Year, Semester, and Six-Week-Unit Horticultural Course Offerings for Providing Ohio Youth With Educational' Opportunities in Horticulture...... 161
40. Opinions of Non-Agricultural Educators as to the Potential Value of School-Year, Semester, and Six-Week-Unit Horticultural Course Offer ings for Providing Educational Opportunities in Horticulture to Ohio Youth . , ...... 162
41. Opinions of Horticultural Industry Leaders as to the Potential Value of School-Year, Semester, and Six-Week-Unit Horticultural Course Offer ings for Serving Ohio Youth ...... 164
42. A Desirable Educational Program in Horticulture for Ohio Y o u t h ...... 165 43. Youth Enrollment in 4-H Club Horticulture Pro jects, By Project, and By Sex, Ohio, 1960-1967 215
44. Respondent Experience in the Horticulture Industry...... 218 45. Respondent Experience in the Horticultural Educational W o r k ...... 219
46. Respondent Experience in Horticultural Research 220
47. Respondent Opinions Regarding the Educational Values of Horticultural Instruction...... 221
48. Opinions of Agricultural Educators Regarding
xi Table Page the Educational Values of Horticultural Instruction...... 222
49. Opinions of Non-Agricultural Educators Re garding the Educational Values of Horticul tural Instruction...... 223
50. Opinions of Horticultural Industry Leaders Re garding the Educational Values of Horticultural Instruction...... 224
51. Factors Explaining the Lack of Public School Avocational Horticulture Programs as Perceived By Agricultural Educators ...... 225 52. Factors Explaining Lack of Public School Avoca tional Horticulture Programs as Perceived by Non-Agricultural Educators ...... 226 53. Factors Explaining Lack of Public School Avoca tional Horticulture Programs as Perceived by Horticultural Industry Leaders ...... 227
54. Opinions of Agricultural Educators Regarding the Value of Selected Factors in Acquainting and Interesting Youth in Horticulture .... 228 55. Opinions of Non-Agricultural Educators Regard ing the Value of Selected Factors in Acquaint ing and Interesting Youth in Horticulture . . 229
56. Opinions of Horticultural Industry Leaders Regarding the Value of Selected Factors in Acquainting and Interesting Youth in Horticulture ...... 230
57. Opinions of Agricultural Educators as to the Best Means for Providing Citizens With Horticultural Information Required for Avoca tional Horticulture Pursuits ...... 231
58. Opinions of Non-Agricultural Educators as to the Best Means for Providing Citizens With Horticultural Information Required for Avoca tional Horticulture Pursuits ...... 232
59. Opinions of Horticultural Industry Leaders as to the Best Means for Providing Citizens With Horticultural Information Required for Avocational Horticulture Pursuits ...... 233 Table Page
60. Respondent Opinions as to Those Who Should Make Proposals for Initiating Horticultural Programs in the Public Schools ...... 234 61. Potential Value of Various Types of Horti cultural Programs for Serving Ohio Youth as Perceived by Agricultural Educators...... 236 62. Potential Value of Various Types of Horti cultural Programs for Serving Ohio Youth as Perceived by Non-Agricultural Educators . . 237
63. Potential Value of Various Types of Horti cultural Programs for Serving Ohio Youth as Perceived by Horticultural industry Leaders. 238
xiii LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page 1 Geographic Distribution of All Respondents . . 195
2 Geographic Distribution of Agricultural
Educator Respondents ...... 196
3 Geographic Distribution of Non-Agricultural
Educator Respondents ...... 197
4 Geographic Distribution of Horticultural
Industry Leader Respondents ...... 198
xiv Introduction
Much attention is presently being given to the implications of a rapidly expanding population for food supply, health, and world peace.
The people of the world are served by an agriculture which provides the products needed for food, fiber, and the beautification of the environment. It is imperative that a number of our citizens engage in agricultural pursuits related to research, teaching, and industry if human needs for agricultural products are to be supplied. Certainly few can view, or be aware of, the plight of starving and poorly clothed people living in a depressing environment, and fail to appreciate the role of agriculture in our way of life. As the world population expands, agricultural and educational leaders have a responsibility to plan programs which will help insure an adequate food supply. As land resources are utilized more and more for non-agricultural purposes, intensive types of agriculture, such as horti culture, will likely receive much greater attention.
A supply of trained horticulturists is of vital importance to developing newer and better crop varieties
1 and in discovering better methods for producing crops.
Persons with suitable training are needed to conduct educational programs in horticulture essential to the production of the intensively cultivated food crops. The citizenry needs to be informed as to the scope and impor tance of horticulture in our way of life if legislators and agricultural policy makers are to support this field of endeavor. Educational programs must educate the future leaders needed to conduct agricultural programs. Efforts must be directed toward acquainting many of today's students with the scope and opportunities in horticultural pursuits.
Unless programs are designed and implemented to attract and encourage young people to pursue careers in horticulture, our society could experience a serious shortage of the qualified people needed in this important agricultural area. Aside from the food producing aspect of horticulture, many people find horticultural-type hobbies enjoyable and personally satisfying activities. Landscaping, gardening, and flower arranging are but a few ways for productively using leisure time. Gardening was found in a national study to be the most popular adult hobby.
The question might well be raised as to how our educational system can best assist the extensive number of citizens interested in making productive use of leisure time through horticultural pursuits and also prepare the needed future horticultural industry and educational leaders.
In order to gain information and knowledge toward answering such a question, this research study was selected and developed as a dissertation topic. CHAPTER I THE NATURE OF THE STUDY The Problem The purpose of this study was to collect and present information of potential value for educational leaders in providing adequate, desirable educational programs in horticulture for Ohio youth.
Objectives
Specific objectives guiding the development of the study were as follows:
1. To identify and describe the Ohio youth educa
tional programs in horticulture during the
period 1960-1967, and to ascertain the extent of youth participation in such programs. 2. To secure the opinions and perceptions of agricultural educators, non-agricultural edu cators, and horticultural industry leaders concerning the:
(a) Goals and educational values of youth programs in horticulture.
(b) Factors which may limit the implementation
of youth educational programs in horti culture.
4 tional opportunities in horticulture to Ohio youth. 3. To make specific suggestions and recommendations for future Ohio youth educational prpgrams in horticulture using the findings of the study. Basic Assumptions The following assumptions were made for purposes of this study: 1. Respondents of the three respondent groups had the necessary qualifications to provide the type of information requested in the survey so more than one instrument was unnecessary and direct comparison could be made between groups. 2. The survey instrument was worded and constructed so that it could be accurately interpreted by the respondents and answered with the type of information actually sought in the study. 3. The respondents selected to render opinions regarding youth educational opportunities in horticulture included the best persons in Ohio to evaluate present program strengths and weak nesses and suggest desirable future program features. 4. Information obtained from the respondent groups, along with that obtained from statistical reports and census data, would provide considerable basis for making recommendations for future program ming. Limitations of the Study The following limitations to the study were recog nized by the investigator: 1. As the study involved a purposive sample rather than a random sample, the results of the study as derived from the survey instrument are representative only of those included in the study, and the findings cannot be generalized' to all agricultural educators, non-agricultural educators, or horticultural industry leaders. 2. The study was limited to the extent that the survey instrument may have forced decisions or failed to provide satisfactory alternative replies in some cases. 3. The study was limited to the extent that any institutions or agencies providing youth educa tional opportunities in horticulture in the State of Ohio during the period 1960-1967 may not have been identified and included in the study due to lack of knowledge or records of such programs. 4. The study was limited to some extent because of limited previous research efforts in the area. 5. The study was limited in that a number of respondents who could have provided valuable information may not have been included in the study. Need for the Study In the opening statement of his book, Janick indi cates the nature and value of horticultural pursuits for man as follows: Horticulture is concerned with those plants whose cultivation brings rewards, whether monetary or personal pleasure, sufficient to warrant the expenditure of intensive effort. This art, which entails judicious timing and many skills, has an ancient tradition.! Despite horticulture's long history and its potential vocational and aesthetic benefits for man, many workers close to the field believe that the extent of opportuni ties and the potential values of horticulture are not widely known to many in our society. Adriance, in ^Jules Janick, Horticultural Science San Francisco: W. H. Freeman and Company, 1963. p. 9. 8 an article entitled "What Is Wrong With Horticulture?" in the 1955 edition of the Proceedings of the American Society for Horticultural Science, alludes to this problem when he states: In the first place we may not be keeping up with all the modern developments or possibilities for further development as some of our colleagues. More than likely, however, the greater part of our difficulty stems from the abysmal lack of knowledge on the part of our fellow man with regard to horticulture.2 He further continues to say: What then is the problem we face today, as re gards the general attitude toward horticulture? We all recognize the fact that there is an apparent lack of interest in our subject as a major field of study in college and as a future profession. This situation is even more difficult to understand coming at a time of remarkable ex pansion in so many of the horticultural indus tries. The fundamental explanation for this apparent lack of interest must surely be involved in a general lack of knowledge regarding horti culture. 3 If there is in fact a lack of understanding about horticulture, what should be done to increase such under standing? How many of our citizens need to understand . the nature and significance of horticulture? How is understanding about horticulture to be developed in our citizens? Are present educational opportunities in horticulture satisfactory for meeting the needs of Ohio Guy W. Adriance, "What Is Wrong With Horticulture?" Proceedings of the American Society for Horticultural Science, 62:434-439. p. 434. ^Ibid. p. 434. 9 youth in this agricultural area, or are additional pro grams desirable? If additional programs are desirable, of what kind should they be? In order to answer such questions specific information is needed. Details are needed to document contentions relative to the adequacy of present programs in providing youth educational opportunities in horticulture. Another aspect of the need for the study centers around the urbanization of the population and the impli cations of this phenomenon for agricultural education. David R. McClay, writing in the September 1964 edition of the Agricultural Education Magazine, indicated some implications of the relocation of our population for agricultural education when he says: A half century ago, one out of three people lived on a farm, less than one in ten lives there today. This relocation of our population has changed peoples' interests and attitudes. People have become re-oriented from production agriculture to those aspects which have a more direct bearing on their life. Vocational education programs are needed in urban schools which will equip young men and women with knowledge and skills in agriculture required for certain important careers common to urban and suburban areas. Vocational education programs in ornamental nursery work, turf management for parks and golf courses, greenhouse work, grounds and estate management service, garden store management, landscape contractors, flower store management, growing vegetables and small fruits for market, and similar areas represents likely directions for vocational agriculture in urban schools. 10 As homeowners, city dwellers need to know enough about agriculture to be able to select animal pets or the variety of shade tree which will give them the greatest pleasure. Perhaps even the tensions and frustrations of city traffic or the long day at the office may be relieved through avocational horticultural interests. Consumer education in the selection of food should be a part of every person's education. A general agriculture course, pri marily exploratory in nature, taught in the elemen tary or secondary schools would be a step in the right direction. Avocational and consumer adult courses in agriculture should be encouraged.4 Yet another need for the study centers around the implications of educational programs in horticulture for the industry. Commercially, horticulture is an important industry in the State of Ohio. According to the 1964 census of agriculture, nursery and greenhouse products, flower and vegetable seeds, plants, flowers, and bulbs in the State had a value of $51,536,594. Nursery products such as trees, shrubs, vines, and ornamentals were valued at $11,975,267, while cut flowers, potted plants, and florist greens and bedding plants had a value of $24,359,474. Vegetables under glass; flower and vegetable seeds; vegetable plants, bulbs and mushroom sold for $15,203,853, while vegetables other than Irish and sweet potatoes sold 4 David R. McClay, "Our Future in the Urban School" Agricultural Education Magazine, September, 1964, pp. 59-60. 11 for $13,011,995. The value of the above mentioned pro ducts contributed approximately 140 million dollars to the Ohio economy in 1964. Ohio is one of the leading states in the production of horticultural crops. The state ranks first in the production of greenhouse vegetables, second in the pro duction of tomatoes for processing, third in the produc tion of landscape plants, and is fourth in the production of floral crops. In order to sustain this important horticultural segment of agriculture, our educational system must edu cate researchers, teachers, and industry personnel. Munger alludes to the importance of horticulture as a profession when he says: The time has arrived when it is easy to take pride in being a horticulturist. Food surpluses have disappeared and those who show the way to produce more food are appreciated as never before. But the population and world food problem do not mean less appreciation for ornamental horticulturists in my opinion. We already see greater attention to the quality of our environment, and as people come to live under increasingly crowded conditions, more intensive culture of ornamental plants will be needed to provide the natural beauty that man instinctively desires.5 Besides the important aspect of vocational oppor- 5 H. M. Munger, "Interactions and Horticultural Science" Proceedings of the American Society for Horti cultural Science 91:899-904, 1967. pp. 903. 12 tunities for youth, there is a very important avocational aspect of horticulture. The American people are interested in horticultural pursuits. This was well illustrated by the findings of a national study conducted through the Research Department of the Union Fork and Hoe Company of Columbus, Ohio. Gardening was found to be the most popular adult hobby in the United States. According to the findings there are about 81,000,000 home gardeners who work in the nation's 45,000,000 gardens.^ Considering that such a large percentage of the population has a gardening interest and in view of the demand for skilled horticulturists in industry and pro fessions, efforts should be directed to determining the extent to which Ohio citizens are provided with educational opportunities in horticulture as youth. In addition to the vocational horticulture courses in the public schools which prepare interested youth for horticulture careers, perhaps horticulture courses in the public schools could be valuable for preparing future gardeners for avocational pursuits. Horticulture information learned in the school could assist citizens in making productive use of leisure g Mimeographed News Release of the Union Fork and Hoe Company of Columbus, Ohio. (See Appendix C) time and could help to save consumers some of the dollars now lost as a result of mistakes in plant selection, in planting, in purchases of undesirable, low quality plant materials, and in building in areas subject to flooding. Professor Childers, writing in Volume 80 of the Proceedings of the American Society for Horticultural Science alludes to the possibilities for horticultural instruction in the public schools when he says: Horticulture is taught in a few high schools. Perhaps it should be taught in more since there is considerable general interest among both boys and girls in gardens, lawns, ornamentals, house plants, and landscaping. Certainly such a course should have as important a place in the high school curriculum as home economics, manual arts, and music.? Summary of the Need for the Study 1. In order to meet the future needs of Ohio youth in the area of horticultural education, it is necessary to have some basic information regard ing the existing programs. This study was de signed to secure information which may be help ful to the following groups in deciding upon the future agricultural education prpgrams for serving youth in the rural, suburban, and urban areas of Ohio. 7 Norman F. Childers, "Horticulture Students-Recruitment, Training, and Future," Proceedings of the American Society for Horticultural Science 80:673-678. 1962. p. 1677. 14 (a) Agricultural educators (b) Administrators of horticultural programs (c) School officials responsible for policies, programs, and curriculum (d) Horticultural industry personnel (e) Officials of youth organizations providing educational opportunities in horticulture 2. Opportunities in horticulture are unknown to many of our citizens. Information is needed as to how to provide adequate educational opportunities in horticulture to Ohio youth so that they might learn of opportunities in the field. 3*. There have been few or no previous efforts to determine with, and take advantage of, educational opportunities in horticulture. This study provides information concerning past and present efforts to educate youth in horticulture and supplies opinions of qualified educators and industry leaders as to desirable program attributes. 4. Horticulture is an important industry in Ohio. There is a need to educate the future horti cultural industry leaders and supporting professional educators in horticulture subject matter to sustain the industry. Youth 15 educational programs in horticulture can ful fill an important function for sustaining one of Ohio's important agricultural industries. 5. The study provides in a consolidated report, information descriptive of the educational programs in horticulture for Ohio youth. At the present time the information is available but found in widely scattered sources. Methodology in Brief Information relative to existing educational oppor tunities in horticulture for Ohio youth was obtained from statistical reports of agencies and organizations providing such opportunities during the period 1960-1967. This information was supplemented by interviews and correspondence with organization officials,by census data, and by review of the available literature describing each of the program offerings. Opinions of 55 agricultural educators, 35 non- agricultural educators, and 66 horticultural industry i leaders regarding various aspects of horticultural educa tion programs were obtained through the use of a 20-item' opinionnaire distributed and returned in early spring, 1969. The data were tallied and summarized using the resources of the Statistical Laboratory located in the 16 Department of Mathematics at The Ohio State University. The principal statistical procedure employed in the study was Duncan's New Multiple Range Test. Definitions of Terms for Purposes of This Study Horticulture - A specialized branch of agriculture concern ed with the production, handling, marketing, and use of plants or plant parts for food and home landscape beautification. The subject matter of horticulture is that of fruit science; vegetable science; floricul ture and flower arranging; ornamental plants; landscaping, arboriculture, and nursery crops; and food processing. Vocational Horticulture - Programs providing technical horticultural instruction to students for the specific purpose of preparing them for occupational entry in the horticultural industry. Avocational or "Enrichment” Horticulture - Prpgrams pro viding horticultural instruction to stu dents for the purpose of assisting them in becoming more knowledgeable consumers and users of horticultural products and in exploring ways of making productive and 17 satisfying use of leisure time through such hobby type horticultural activities as flower arranging; landscaping; and flower, fruit, and vegetable gardening. Youth - Males and females ages 8 through 21 years. Disadvantaged Youth - Youth handicapped in learning because of economic, social, and cultural deprivation. Educational Programs - A series of learning experiences designed to accomplish the specific goals of an agency or individual in a particular subject matter. In summary, horticulture is a form of agricultural education suitable for rural, suburban, and urban audiences. Those with interests in horticulture can pursue professional, technical, vocational, avocational, and commercial interests. The extent to which Ohio youth have opportunities to learn about and pursue the various horticultural pursuits is the issue of importance in this study and is reported upon in subsequent chapters. CHAPTER XI DESIGN AND CONDUCT OF THE STUDY Introduction The study was conducted in two phases. In Phase I, information descriptive of the Ohio youth educational program during the period 1960-1967 was collected from census data, statistical reports, review of program literature, and interviews and correspondence with officials of organizations providing course work or pro ject experience in horticulture. In Phase II, 156 selected Ohio educators and horti cultural industry leaders provided information relative to youth educational programs in horticulture in response to a 20 item opinionnaire mailed in March of 1969. Procedures used to conduct the two phases of the study are described in this chapter. Phase I Procedure To learn of the numbers of youth participating in Ohio horticulture programs and determine enrollment trends, youth organization records, statistical reports, and census data for the period 1960-1967 were identified and studied. Records for an 8-year period were considered sufficient to establish participation and enrollment trends. Infor- 18 19 mation for 1968 was not included in the study because statistical reports for this year were not available at the time the data were originally collected and because it was assumed that such information would not be greatly different from that collected for the previous 8-year period. Examination of available data for 1968 tended to support this assumption. Considerable information descriptive of the programs was initially gained from a review of the literature distributed by the various organizations. A listing of the materials reviewed is found in Appendix B. Additional information concerning each program was obtained by interview or correspondence with the following persons: Peter J. Wotoweic, Horticulture (Garden) Division, Cleveland Public Schools; James E. Dougan, State Super visor, and Darrell L. Parks, Assistant State Supervisor, Agricultural Education Service, Ohio Department of Educa tion; Richard E. Young, State 4-H Club Office; Rowena Workman, Ohio Association of Gardens Clubs Inc.; Fred Morrison, Boy Scouts of America; William M. Brooks, Department of Horticulture, The Ohio State University; C. A. Pollock and Margaret Coon, Youth Gardens Department, Ohio State Fair; and William Davidson, Flower and Garden Foundation Director, Kansas City, Kansas. 20 After the information describing each program was collected, it was written as it would tentatively appear in this report and forwarded to the appropriate organiza tion official as mentioned above for their review. Upon receiving the material as commented on and returned by the reviewers, it was re-written as necessary and prepared as second draft copy for review by the in vestigator's Reading Committee. Results of this phase of the study are reported in Chapter IV, "The Ohio Youth Program in Horticulture - 1960-1967." Phase II Procedure The second phase of the study involved obtaining opinions of those considered to be well qualified to provide information regarding desirable types of horti culture programs for Ohio youth. Agricultural and non-agricultural educators and horticultural industry representatives were selected as respondent groups in the study. It was considered im portant to have the opinions of representatives of each of these three groups, as more effective horticulture programs for youth would be expected when there is cooperation between the groups. It is desirable that the horticultural industry leaders assist in planning and 21 supporting the horticulture programs taught by agricultural educators and administered by both agricultural and non- agricultural educators. A portion of the agricultural educator respondent group had experience and education in agriculture, but not necessarily in the area of horticulture. These respondents included teacher educators in the Department of Agricultural Education at The Ohio State University, Agricultural Educa tion supervisors of the Ohio Department of Education, and selected staff members of the Ohio Cooperative Extension Service. Agricultural educators with specific responsi bilities in the area of horticulture included in the study were staff members in the Department of Horticulture at The Ohio State University and the Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center, and administrators of public school horticultural programs. All staff members in horticulture at The Ohio State University and the Ohio Agricultural Research and Develop ment Center were surveyed except those new to the staff who had not had time to become sufficiently familiar with the Ohio educational system to render opinions of the type called for in the opinionnaire. All Agricultural Education Service supervisors, teacher education staff members, and State 4-H staff members were included in the survey. 22 Horticultural industry respondents were selected for the study through the use of a panel consisting of E. S. Banta, Ohio State Horticultural Society; W. A. Gould, Ohio Canners and Food Processor's Association; D. C. Kiplinger, Ohio Florist's Association; K. W. Reisch, Ohio Nurseryman's Association; and E. C. Wittmeyer, Ohio Vege table and Potato Grower's Association. Each panel member was asked to provide a minimum of 20 industry leaders in their organization who would receive the opinionnaire. An attempt was made to get good geographical cover age of the state insofar as industry patterns permitted. The pattern of the response is shown in Figure 4, Appen dix A. Non-agricultural educators included in the study were all state guidance supervisors, selected school prin cipals, and selected school administrators responsible for curriculum. School administrators were selected on the basis of suggestions and recommendations of James E. Dougan and Darrell L. Parks of the Agricultural Education Service of the Ohio Department of Education, Several of the principals were those in schools offering vocational horti culture programs of some type, or who had previous experience with horticultural programs in the public schools. A sampling of administrators working specifically with 23 curriculum was taken from the Educational Directory of the Ohio Department of Education to determine interest and perceptions of youth educational programs in horticulture by this group. The sample was selected from those specifi cally listed as curriculum directors and was picked to represent certain geographical areas not represented by agricultural educators and horticultural industry leaders. The 13 respondent groups comprising the study were categorized into three major categories for purpose of analysis as follows: Group 1 - Agricultural Educators 1. Teacher Education Staff, Department of Agricul tural Education, The Ohio State University 2. Horticulture Staff, Department of Horticulture and Forestry, The Ohio State University and Horticulture Staff, The Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center 3. Agricultural Education Supervisors, Agricultural Education Service, Ohio Department of Education 4. Selected state, area, and county staff, Ohio Cooperative Extension Service 5. Administrators of public school horticultural programs Group 2 - Non-Agricultural Educators 1. State guidance supervisors, Ohio Department of Education 24 2. Selected Ohio public school principals 3. Selected Ohio public school curriculum directors Group 3 - Horticultural Industry Leaders 1. Ohio Canner's and Food Processor's Association 2. Ohio Florist's Association 3. Ohio Nurseryman's Association 4. Ohio State Horticultural Society 5. Ohio Vegetable and Potato Grower's Association Opinionnaire Development The survey instrument was developed over a 3-month period to obtain information requiring the opinions of educators and horticultural industry leaders. Items in cluded in the opinionnaire were synthesized on the basis of the ideas gathered from the review of the literature preparatory to the study and on the previous experience of the investigator in youth educational program work in horticulture. In addition, provisions were made for re spondents to provide suggestions and comments to open- end type questions. Both staff members in the Department of Agricultural Education and Horticulture and Forestry at The Ohio State University, who had considerable research experience, were consulted at various stages of the instrument development for their suggestions as to content and format. As the instrument was finalized, it 25 was subjected to pre-testing by the investigator's co workers before it was forwarded to other respondents. Timeliness was considered crucial in the study and efforts were made to get the instrument into the hands of the respondents before the spring season ushered in considerable horticultural industry and research activity. Opinionnaires were mailed during the period of March 26-April 7 for return by April 20, 1969. Opinionnaires for staff members in the Department of Agricultural Education and Horticulture at The Ohio State University, Agricultural Education Service super visors, and the Ohio Cooperative Extension Service per- • sonnel were mailed with a covering letter from the inves tigator. Opinionnaires to the horticultural industry representatives were forwarded with covering letters from the panel members who were secretaries of the organ izations. Opinionnaires for state guidance supervisors, and school principals and supervisors, were sent with a covering letter from James E. Dougan, State Supervisor of Agricultural Education and Ralph E. Bender, Chairman, Department of Agricultural Education, The Ohio State University. Copies of the survey instrument and covering letters are found in Appendix A. 26 Opinionnaire Returns A 77 per cent response was received from the 208 persons contacted in the study. It was anticipated that problems of non-response might be encountered with the horticultural industry leaders who would become increasingly busy as the spring season progressed. In recognition of this anticipated problem, 106 survey instruments were sent to industry leaders. From these instruments the investigator aimed for at least a 50 per cent return. Such a return would provide a respondent group somewhat comparable in size to the agricultural and non-agricultural educator groups. The result was that a greater than 50 per cent return was realized from the horticultural industry leaders and thus this group constituted the largest group for which the findings are reported. Due to the unequal size of the respondent groups, the procedure was to categorize re sponse by groups to facilitate comparison and to avoid undue weighting of the findings by a larger group with a particular orientation. Due to the time schedule established for the study, the good initial response of a 77 per cent return, and the fact that a purposive sample was involved in the study, no intensive effort was made for follow up of non-respon dents. Most non-respondents were horticultural industry 27 leaders, some returning the survey instrument with a note indicating that they were too busy at that time to complete it. A list of the respondent groups and the per cent return from each group is included in Appendix A. Analysis of Data After conferences with T. W. Willke of the Statistical Laboratory in the Department of Mathematics at the Ohio State University, data cards were key punched through the direction and guidance of Mike Allen, employed by the Laboratory. The program selected for computer processing involved frequency counts and cross tabulation procedures and is referred to as BMD 08D, Cross Tabulation with Variable Stacking Program. This program computes two-way frequency tables of data input. Frequency tables are computed from specified ranges of the original variables, variables after transgeneration, stacked variables or combinations. Means, standard deviations, and correlation coefficients for each of the variables are resultant out puts of the program. Print-out sheets provided frequency counts, mean scores, and standard deviations for each of the items responded to by the three respondent groups included in the study. The print-out sheets were carefully reviewed 28 for accuracy. The figures were tested by hand tabulations and computations to verify that the results on the sheet in fact represented the responses found on the opinion naires. Many of the tables important to the study were inter preted on the basis of frequency of response and percentage figures. However, much of the information resulting from the survey was of such a nature that it was statistically analyzed using Duncan's New Multiple Range Test. Duncna's New Multiple Range Test, developed by Duncan in 1955, is a statistical procedure used to compare each treatment mean with every other treatment mean. The pro cedure for determining if significant differences exist between means using Duncan's New Multiple Range Test is as follows:® 1. Determine the standard error of the mean using the formula (error mean square) r 2. Consult a table of significant studentized ranges at the desired protection level (.01 or .05) and at the appropriate degrees of freedom for the values (significant ranges) for the means involved in the comparison (p = 2, 3, 4, 5 etc.). g Robert G. D. Steel and James H. Torrie. Principli and Procedures of Statistics. New York: McGraw Hill Book Company. 1960, p. 107. Multiply the significant ranges by s— to find the least significant ranges. Record the least significant ranges below the significant studentized range values in tabular fashion. Rank the means to be compared in ascending order. Test for significant differences between means by testing the differences in the following order: (a) largest minus smallest (b) largest minus second smallest (c) largest minus third smallest etc., until all are compared with the largest (d) second largest minus smallest (e) second largest minus second smallest etc. until all are compared with the second largest (f) continue the procedure until the second smallest is compared with the smallest Except for one case, each difference is considered significant if it exceeds the corresponding least significant range. If the difference does not exceed the least significant range it is declared not significant. The exception is that no difference between two means is declared significant if the two means involved are both contained in a larger subset with a non significant range.® 9Ibid, p. 108. 30 In reporting the results of the test as applied to the data of this study, means not significantly differing from each other are marked with the same letter. Those means not marked with the same letter are significantly different. Standard deviations are reported in several of the tables of the study as this statistic was utilized in testing the data using Duncan's New Multiple Range Test. CHAPTER III REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE Introduction In this chapter information is presented regarding the nature and significance of horticultural pursuits for man. The information deals with the sociological and psychological aspects of horticulture. The importance and meaning of horticultural subject matter and activities to the individual is discussed. It is the investigator's intention that this chapter would assist the reader in developing insights of value when reading the contents of Chapters IV and V. Horticulture Defined Horticulture is a branch of agriculture concerned with intensively cultured plants directly used by man for food, for medicinal purposes, or aesthetic gratification,10 Within the area of horticulture is the subject matter dealing with vegetables, flowers, fruits, orna mental plants, and food processing. According to Janick, the aesthetic use of plants is a unique feature of horti culture, distinguishing it from other agricultural ^®Janick, op. cit., p. 3. 31 32 activities. The ornamental aspect of horticulture has led to its universal popularity. In the United States ornamental horticulture is undergoing a renaissance brought about by an increased standard of living co-incidental with the development of suburban living. The satis faction of this bent in the American family has created an expanding industry out of that part of horticulture that had been mainly confined to amateurs and fanciers.H Gardening of National Importance The above viewpoint of Janick is supported by results of a study conducted by the Union Fork and Hoe Company of Columbus, Ohio, over a period of 18 months and made among 712 garden clubs and 5,160 heads of families with incomes of $6,000-12,000. The study revealed a number of impor tant facts regarding horticultural habits and practices across the country. Among the significant findings of the study were these: 1. There are about 81,000,000 home gardeners who work in the nation's 45,000,000 gardens. 2. City gardeners have jumped from 3,200,000 to 4,400,000. 3. Sixty-four per cent of the gardening population are women, while 36 per cent are men. X1Ibid. p. 3. 33 4. Gardening is the most popular adult hobby. 5. The young marrieds plant earlier and bigger gardens initially than their counterparts of 10 years ago. 12 Another horticultural industry study, conducted by Ernest Dichter of the Institute for Motivational Research Inc. also revealed some interesting findings regarding the popularity and significance of horticultural pursuits. Gardening was found to be most preferred as a leisure time activity by the respondents. Gardening was followed as a most preferred leisure time activity by reading books, visiting or entertaining friends, do it yourself activities, TV viewing, home decorating, and going to the movies respectively. When asked to indicate why they liked gardening, the respondents gave these reasons in order of frequency: 1. Makes me feel like I have accomplished some thing. 2. It is relaxing. 3. It is fun. 4. Increases my skill and knowledge. 12Mimeographed News Release of the Union Fork and Hoe Company of Columbus, Ohio. (See Appendix C) 34 5. Makes me feel like a more important person. 6. Offers mental stimulation. 13 7. Fulfills my feeling of social responsibility. The trend in the American culture is toward the pursuit of leisure time activities which satisfy the need for creative expression. This need and desire is resulting in people reaching for new ideas-new outlets offering the opportunity for creative fulfillment. ^ Gardening was considered by the respondents to be a creative activity as was revealed when they were asked to give one word that really described gardening. The replies were as follows: per cent Work 10 Challenging 30 Fun 15 Idiotic - Creative 45 100 The study also revealed that the typical gardener engages in more than one type of gardening activity as, for example, lawn care and the culture of shrubs, perennials, and annuals. 13 "To Buy or Not to Buy," A report of a study conduct ed by Dr. Ernest Dichter, Institute of Motivational Research Inc. and sponsored by Geo. J. Ball Inc., Pan American Seed Company, and Jiffy Pot Company of America. (See Appendix C for the sample used in the study.) 14Ibid., p. 5 35 The Values and Functions of Horticulture That horticulture can be a satisfying and rewarding pursuit for persons of all walks of life is illustrated well in the remarks made to one of the interviewers in the Dichter study. The wife of a real estate broker told the interviewer: Flowers just add to the beauty of life. Now what I have said I believe is basically true, but to own flowers does not necessarily mean money and a beautiful home. Some of the prettiest flowers, most loved and cared for plants, have been grown in slums and in coffee cans. Now I'm sure you would probably frown on that, but the owners do not realize they are slums nor do they know that the coffee can is not pretty. They only see the flower. Know what I mean? -*-5 Another young man expressed his impression of horti culture this way: There is a different feeling about vegetables and flowers if you grow them yourself. To plant your own vegetables and flowers is more satisfy ing than to buy them. I also like to garden and watch things grow because my garden depends upon me.- I am the oily one who cares for those plants, the only one who reaps the harvest and the only one who gets the credit. It is just because of me that my garden is there, because of me the plants are useful in our world. You also get a good feeling when you walk through your garden . at dusk, you know you have accomplished something. In a letter from officials of the Cleveland City Gardens Division to parents of children enrolled in the 15Ibid., p.17 ^Flower and Garden Magazine, December, 1968, p. 29. 36 Cleveland Public Schools Home Garden Program the follow ing statement is made: One of the numerous advantages of a garden project is the development of character. A successful garden requires continuous effort throughout the growing season. Self discipline is required to develop good work habits and to do what needs to be done on time. Growing a garden develops patience and perserverance. These are valuable character traits that will serve your child throughout life. Horticultural pursuits can enable citizens to make worthy and productive use of leisure time as listed as one of the seven cardinal principles of education, In addition, horticulture is considered to have such functions as follows: 1. Laision function — Horticulture serves to draw together distant fields of work to reach a single goal. 2. Biological or science function — The plant emerges as the central theme of all the horti culturist's efforts. 3. The affairs or business function — Horticulture makes both financial and nutritional contributions to our way of life. 4. The art and home function — Horticulture shows the many ways in which plants appeal to the everyday man and the artist. 5. The social function — Horticulture (gardening) becomes a safety valve of society. 17 Adriance, op. cit., p. 434. 37 Ralph J. Woodin in an editorial in the September, 1964 issue of the Agricultural Education Magazine, pro vided an example of how horticulture as a form of agri cultural education can fulfill a social function in our society by acting as one of the safety valves of society. In his article Dr. Woodin referred to "potential dynamite for the entire social system, which certainly has impli cations for the need of some type of safety valve. To put Dr. Woodin's comments in their proper context the following information is presented. There are good reasons why vocational agriculture should be offered by some large city schools. In many cities there is a menace of rapidly growing slum areas filled with potential dynamite for the entire social system. The city's educational system is usually looked upon as the best means of coping with this problem and of improving the next genera tion's citizenry. A big city school administrator in discussing the problem recently put it this way: The problem of our youngsters who graduate or who quit school is one of finding a satisfactory first job within six months after leaving school. If they don't find that job, you will find them in trouble with parents, their institutions, and with the law in a very short time. Our school has to help make them employable before they leave. This is where vocational education comes into the picture - perhaps a different type of vocational education than has been previously offered. Agri cultural education has a place in occupational training - particularly for the disadvantaged student. There are opportunities for these students to find employment as horticultural and park workers, as greenskeepers, as food and produce handlers. Agri culture can tap an inherent interest which some of these students have as a result of family background or bent. Agriculture can be a useful vocational offering if the city has suitable employment 38 opportunities which require agricultural training and if student interest in such careers can be developed.18 One concern of this study is that of the potential role of horticulture as vocational and avocational educa tion for Ohio youth. Considering the nation as a whole, and thinking in terms of agricultural education as pre- vocational or non-vocational education it is found that there are very few programs of such a nature in the United States. Research in this area of agricultural education has been scant. Agricultural education as offered in the public schools of the nation has traditionally had a vocational orientation as provided initially in the Smith-Hughes Act of 1917. For each pupil in general or non-vocational courses in agriculture in the United States in the year 1960-1961 there were 12 pupils in vocational agriculture. It was not until 1963 in Ohio, however, that vocational agriculture included courses in vocational horticulture. Heimlich, in a 1964 Masters Thesis at The Ohio State University, indicated that in 1962-1963 only about 1.5 per cent of the Ohio public school enrollment was in non- ^■®Ralph J. Woodin "No Bed of Roses," Agricultural Education Magazine, September, 1964, p. 59. 19 The Center for Vocational and Technical Education, "Review and Synthesis of Research in Agricultural Education," Columbus: The Ohio State University. August, 1966. p. 35. 39 vocational agriculture courses. His observation regarding this was as follows: If a general appreciation of agriculture and its opportunities are to be offered to 98.5 per cent of the public school students not now taking a course in agriculture, there is a need for many non-voca tional agriculture c o u r s e s . 20 It was interesting to note that at one time the Ohio legislature prescribed agriculture as a required course of study for elementary schools in rural areas. Section 7761-1 of the Ohio code reads as follows: Agriculture shall hereafter be taught in all the common schools of all villages and rural school districts of the State of Ohio, which are supported in whole or in part by the State and may be taught in city school districts at the option of the board of education. Such agri cultural instruction shall be under the general supervision of the county superintendent of schools.21 Section 7761-1 of the Ohio Code was repealed be tween 1940-1943, and agricultural education is no longer a required course in any Ohio school today. Any agri cultural education courses taken by Ohio youth at the present time is on a voluntary basis. Heimlich further found that only four Ohio schools offered horticulture as a non-vocational course in 1963-1964. 20 Heimlich, Richard E., "The Non-Vocational Programs in Agriculture in the Public Schools in Ohio." Columbus: The Ohio State University. Unpublished Masters Thesis, 1964. p. 2. 21Ibid., p. 2 40 All these courses were offered in the Cleveland area. Most of' the students in these horticulture programs are from urban areas. The courses in horticulture enrolled only 1.3 per cent of the students from the schools where it was offered.22 In surveying school administrators as to why agri culture programs were not included in the school curricu lum, Heimlich obtained the following explanations: 1. Urbanization of the school attendance area 2. Lack of interest 3. Lack of facilities 4. The belief that the subject matter of non- vocational agriculture was being taught in other 23 courses of the school. In evaluating the above explanation for a lack of agriculture programs, Heimlich indicated that, "It appeared to the writer that most of the administrators considered agriculture as farming only." Of importance to proposals supporting greater opportunities for youth to study non-vocational agriculture are the potential values of such courses, 22Ibid., p. 3 23Ibid., p. 5-8 41- Al-Salman's study of the program of pre-vocational education in agriculture in the State of New York reveal ed that the three most important objectives for such pre- vocational education as listed by a jury were as follows: 1. Aquaint pupils with career possibilities, agri cultural problems, and sources of information. 2. Provide opportunities to explore the extent and importance of farming and other agricultural occupations in a community. 3. Develop an understanding and appreciation for the importance of agriculture to producers and con- sumers.^ 24 Heimlich suggested that the educational values of non-vocational agriculture courses included the following: 1. Urban youth not familiar with rural life could gain an understanding of the importance of agriculture to our way of life. 2. Students could learn of opportunities for agri cultural vocations. 3. Students would learn of the need for the conser vation and wise use of natural resources needed for a continued bountiful supply of agricultural produce. 24 Center for Vocational and Technical Education, op. cit., p. 36 42 4. Non-vocational courses in agriculture in Ohio public schools could serve students not enrolled in vocational agriculture c o u r s e s . 25 George Gerber, in his 1959 Masters Thesis, indicated the potential educational values of horticultural instruc tion in a school gardens program when he indicated that gardening was: 1. An integral part of our lives. 2. Part of our heritage. 3. A way for urban children to open up new avenues of interest and enjoyment. 4. A possible beginning of interests which change the course of children's lives. 5. A part of the better school systems of the United States26 In summary, horticulture is popular with many people. Many citizens have discovered the satisfactions and rewards of horticultural pursuits. Perhaps others, including a number of Ohio youth, could profit from opportunities to get acquainted with the vocational and avocational opportunities in horticulture. If agricultural educators 25 Heimlich, op. cit., pp. 1,2. 26 Gerber, George E., "A Proposed Garden Club Program for the Columbus Public Schools," Unpublished Masters Thesis, The Ohio State University, 1959. pp. 1 43 and horticultural industry personnel do not insure that adequate educational opportunities in horticulture exist for the youth of Ohio, who will see to it the youth have these opportunities? CHAPTER IV THE OHIO YOUTH PROGRAM IN HORTICULTURE 1960-1967 Introduction In order to evaluate, plan, and further develop educational programs, it is necessary to have accurate descriptions of the programs. From this descriptive base, program analysis, and evaluation can be made. Utilizing the results of program analysis and evaluation, any program weaknesses can be identified and potentially desirable practices not present in the existing program can be planned and developed for possible adoption. As a result of this process, it is possible to have improved and expanded programs providing greater educational oppor tunities for those who can benefit from such programs. In this chapter, the investigator reports the results of his inquiry into the nature of existing educational opportunities in horticulture for Ohio youth. The investigation revealed that educational opportun ities in horticulture were currently available to Ohio youth through eight different programs. There was considerable variation noted in the intensity and duration of instruction offered, the numbers served by each pro gram, and the types of opportunities made available 44 45 through the programs. Descriptive information relative to each program is given in this chapter immediately following an overview of the existing programs. An Overview of the 1960-1967 Ohio Youth Educational Pro gram in Horticulture Of the eight agencies offering educational oppor tunities in horticulture to Ohio youth, only two of the agencies were public school oriented programs. One of these programs, the Cleveland School Gardens Program, served the majority of Ohio youth enrolled in educational programs in horticulture during the 1960-1967 period. The Program had an average enrollment of 20,112 pupils during the 6-year period for which data were avail able. The second public school oriented program, the Vocational Horticulture Program as conducted in local schools and supervised by the Agricultural Education Service of the Ohio Department of Education, served an average of 588 students per year after the program was initiated in 1963. The six primarily out-of-school programs providing educational opportunities in horticulture in varying degrees of intensity, included the Ohio 4-H Club Program, the Junior Garden Club Program, the Boy Scouts of America 46 Program, the National Junior Horticultural Association Program, the Youth Gardens Program at the Ohio State Pair, and the Young America Gardens Program. Only one out-of-school program, the 4-H Club Program, served more than 1000 youth with educational opportunities in horticulture during the period 1960-1967. Table 1 re veals the enrollment pattern and trends for the eight Ohio programs providing educational opportunities in horticulture to youth during the 1960-1967 period. Other than for the opportunities provided by the Cleveland Public Schools, the only other avocational education opportunities in horticulture for Ohio youth are those provided through out-of-school youth organ izations. Such organizations also offer opportunities for exploration of vocational opportunities in horti culture. These opportunities are chiefly through project type activities rather than through instruction in the formal classroom setting or on-the-job work experience. It follows that the extent of learning of horticultural information by the youth in out-of-school organizational programs depends upon the quality of the project work and the abilities of organizational leaders to provide desirable learning experiences for the members. As is the case with classroom instruction, the quality of the horticultural program is dependent, in a large part, upon TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF YOUTH PARTICIPATION IN OHIO HORTICULTURAL PROGRAMS BY ORGANIZATION AND BY YEAR, OHIO, 1960-1967 Organization 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 Average School Gardens a 20,706 a 19,748 20,754 19,440 20,758 19,267 20,112 Program (Cleveland) 4-H Club 5209 5414 5294 5484 5733 5408 5627 5790 5495 Junior Garden 928 916 1003 810 809 796 6uo 826 845 Clubs Vocational 643b 660b 721b 293° 625° 588 Horticulture, Ohio Secondary Schools Boy Scouts of 275 430 491 575 476 548 501 538 479 America Merit Badge Programs in Horticulture Youth Gardens, 48 37 38 51 57 52 67 97 55 Ohio State Fair National Junior 42 36 57 22 36 21 16 20 31 Horticultural nn TABLE 1 (CONTINUED) Organization 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 Average Youth America aaaa a a a a Gardens TOTAL 27,539 27,333 28,525 26,986 27,930 27,163 ___ aData unavailable *U Enrollment figures for 1963, 1964 and 1965 include all programs where vocational horticulture was taught either full time or on a part time basis. Enrollment figures for 1966, and 1967 include only full time horticulture programs employing the services of a full time vocational horticulture teacher. 49 the (1) talents, abilities, and leadership given to the program by the person or persons in charge of the program; (2) the aptitude, ambition, and initiative of the students; (3) the availability of adequate facilities; and (4) admin istrative support. Numbers served by a program do not necessarily reflect the quality of the program but do serve to indicate where opportunities are available and the extent to which the opportunities are being used. A brief summary of the eight agencies providing youth educational opportunities in horticulture to Ohio youth is given in Table 2. It should be noted that three of the agencies providing youth educational opportunities in horticulture, the National Junior Horticultural Assoc iation, the Boy Scouts of America, and the Flower and Garden Foundation are national organizations with head quarters outside of Ohio. However, the National Junior Horticultural Association and the Boy Scouts of America do have program direction from officials within the state while the Young America Garden Program does not. Utilizing Bureau of the Census data, the author calculated that there were some 2,852,453 youth of ages 8 to 21 in Ohio during the year 1967. Considering that some 27,163 Ohio youth were enrolled in horticultural activities of some type in 1967 (Table 1}, calculations TABLE 2 DESCRIPTIVE SUMMARY OF AGENCIES AND ORGANIZATIONS OFFERING EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES IN HORTICULTURE TO OHIO YOUTH, 1960-1967 Type of Program In-School Age Group Agency Con Sponsorship, Financial or Out-of- Served ducting the Parent Organ Support School Pro Program ization, or From gram Program Sup ervisor Cleveland In-school 8-18 Horticulture Cleveland City Board of School Division, Cle Board of Education Gardens veland Board Education funds and Program of Education student fees for kits Vocational In-school 14-18 Local schools Agricultural Ohio School Horticulture Education Ser Foundation vice, Ohio Program Department of Education 4-H Club Out-of 10-19 Local 4-H Ohio Coopera Federal, school Club tive Exten state, & sion Service county gov ernment appropria tions - 4-H Foundation Junior Garden Out-of- 10-21 Local clubs Ohio Associa Ohio Associa Clubs school (1960-1967) tion of Garden tion of Gar 8-19 Clubs, Inc. den Clubs (at present) lno- U, o TABLE 2 (CONTINUED) Type of Program In-School Age Group Agency Con Sponsorship, Financial or Out-of- Served ducting the Parent Organ Support School Pro Program ization, or From gram Program Sup ervisor Boy Scouts of Out-of- 11-21 Local troops Boy Scouts of Boy Scouts America school of 23 Ohio America of America Regional Parents Councils and Scouts National Junior Out-of- 13-21 State N.J.H.A. National Head- National Horticulture school (1960-1967) Office quarters N.J.H. level Association 14-21 A. Amherst, National (at present) Mass. Foundation - State level- As can be arranged Youth Gardens Out-of - 8-18 Junior Fair A Department Ohio State school Division, of the Ohio Fair and Ohio State State Fair Interested Fair Sponsors Young America Out-of- 6-19 Flower & Gar- Flower & Garden Flower & Gardens Contest school den Foundation Foundation Rose-Garden Rosedale Sta- dale Station Foundation tion, Kansas Kansas City Rosedale City, Kansas Station - Participant m fees - K Kansas City 52 indicate that 1 per cent of the youth population 8 to 21 years of age, in Ohio took advantage of the existing opportunities to study horticulture. This information is seen in Table 3. TABLE 3 NUMBER OF OHIO YOUTH TAKING ADVANTAGE OF EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES IN HORTICULTURE IN 1967 1 2 3 Ohio Youth 8 to Ohio Youth 8 to 21 Ohio Youth Taking 21 in 1967a Enrolled in Horti Advantage of Edu culture activities cational Oppor in 1967b tunities in Horti culture in 1967 (Per Cent) 2,852,453 27,163 0.95 Census data for ages 1 to 14 in 1960. These youth would have been of ages 8 to 21 in 1967. The data did not reflect census changes due to movements into and out of state during this time period. U Does not include youth receiving instruction in horticulture at technical schools and universities in 1967. Source: Column 1, United States Census of Population, 1960, Ohio, Detailed Characteristics, U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Census, Table 94, 37-443 Column 2, Table 1 53 School Gardens Programs Throughout the years a few school gardening pro grams have come into existence for a period of time, and then disappeared from the school curriculum. From time to time, new programs are originated to provide educational opportunities in horticulture to youth. Throughout the years, one school gardens program has survived, flourished, and been most successful. Established in 1904, the gar dening program of the Cleveland City Schools has attracted national attention. In 1967, the program provided educa tional opportunities in horticulture to some 19,267 Ohio youth. A review of Table 4 indicates that the program serves an average of 20,112 pupils annually. According to avail able data, high enrollment for the period 1960-1967 was 20,758 pupils in 1966, while the low enrollment was 19,267 pupils in 1967, The most popular project carried in the Cleveland program is the home garden project with an average partici pation of 10,756 pupils annually. In addition, an average of 3,984 pupils enroll in individual garden projects (tract gardens) while an average of 5,456 pupils partici pate in the third grade adventure in garden making activity each year. School officials informed the investigator that there is often a large waiting list of participants TABLE 4 YOUTH ENROLLMENT IN SCHOOL GARDENS PROGRAMS3 , OHIO, 1960-1967 Project 1960b 1961 1962b 1963 1964 . 1965 1966 1967 Average Home Garden --- 12,307 --- 10,748 11,290 9,590 10,600 9,501 10,756 (Individual) Garden Projects --- 3,443 --- 3,698 3,946 4,254 4,296 4,266 3,984 Tract gardens Third Grade 4,956 5,302 5,518 5,596 5,862 5,500 5,456 Adventure in Garden Making TOTALS --- 20,706 --- 19,748 20,754 19,440 20,758 19,267 20,112 The Cleveland Public Schools Garden Program was the only known Ohio School program in existence for the entire period 1960-1967. Data unavailable Source: Annual reports of the Supervisor of the Horticulture Garden Division to the Cleveland Board of Education. 55 wishing to enroll in the tract gardens program. In the case of the home gardens projects, teachers make home visits to supervise the project work. In this way teachers acquire a working knowledge of the environ mental circumstances of the pupils and provide instruction at the project site. As a climax activity to the gardening activities, a number of garden exhibits are held throughout the city. Awards such as prize money, ribbons, acknowledgement certificates, and agricolas (gardening oscars) are made in connection with the exhibits and a city-wide recognition program is held usually in November. In the home garden project, pupils in grades 4 to 12 have an opportunity to select and enroll in any of a number of gardening projects including Advanced Flower Garden, Herb Garden, Plan It Yourself Garden, Vegetable Gardens No. 2, Flower Garden, and Window Box or Dooryard Garden. The projects change somewhat over the years. In 1968 the following projects were available to interested pupils. 1. Green Thumb Garden This project is for all first-year gardeners or those with little space. The garden size is 8 feet by 7 56 to 10 feet. Crops grown include tomatoes, peppers, onions, dwarf marigolds, dwarf zinnias, radishes, kohlrabi, green beans, carrots, beets, and lettuce. 2. Vegetable Garden This project requires a plot of 12 feet by 7 to 10 feet. Crops grown include all the vegetables as grown in the Green Thumb Garden plus spinach, parsley, and squash. 3. Flower Garden This garden requires a plot 10 feet by 6 to 9 feet. Flowers grown include portulaca, dwarf zinnia, pet unia, balsam, zinnia, marigold, and gladiolus. This gar den can be adjusted to best fit available space. 4. Window Box or Dooryard Garden Window boxes are not furnished in the project. Suggested box sizes are 6 to 8 inches wide, 5-6 inches deep, and 30 inches or more long. Balsams, zinnias, marigolds, petunias, and black eyed susans are grown in this project. 5. Fence or Trellis Garden This project may be planted in a narrow strip along a fence to cover a building. The garden may also be planted in porch boxes, and trained on strings or trellis for shade and privacy. 57 6. Indoor Potted Plant Garden This garden is for those who have no yard space for an outdoor garden. For each of the above projects, seeds, bulbs, sets, cuttings, fertilizer, and in some cases, perticides are provided in the garden kit. An enrollment fee, which varies with the project, is charged. The fees, however, cover only a portion of the project cost and the various projects are subsidized by the Board of Education funds. Regular gardens are visited twice during the summer months by teachers who observe results and provide assist ance as required. Indoor gardens are visited once by the teachers. In addition to the above projects in home gardening, a Landscape Planning Contest was offered in 1968. The competition involved planning a landscape design for making an entrance planting, a foundation planting, a corner planting, a service and parking area, an outdoor classroom area, a formal garden, and an alcove or other interesting feature. Third grade pupils interested in learning about gardening are provided with opportunities to do so through the third grade planting kit and picture page instructions. The kit contains one tomato plant, one packet of green bean seeds, one packet of zinnia seeds, three gladiolus 58 corms, and fertilizer. No particular planting plan is followed. The planting is done where space is available. Pupils in this project are not visited and no recognition certificates are given. The tract gardens are conducted in all sections of Cleveland where there is fertile, fenced-in land with facilities for successful garden making. Gardens are made in the tract areas by pupils ranging from kindergarten through the high school grades. Children in special sight saving, crippled and braille classes are included in the program. Usually enrollments exceed the space available on the tracts for full season gardening. The tract garden areas are used by pupils in grades K through 12 for early spring gardens of onions, radishes, and leaf lettuce prior to the main gardening season. In addition to the home gardens, tract gardens, third grade gardening adventure, exhibition fairs, the Garden Division of the Cleveland Public Schools also pro vides materials and supplies for classroom projects, science and garden units, and special services. In the classroom projects, pupils participate in such projects as seeding and plant growing projects, potting paper whites, potting rooted English ivy cuttings, making and potting softwood cuttings, forcing bulbs, and Arbor Day tree plantings. 59 Materials are provided for such units of instruction as "Rocks and Soils," "Plants and How They Grow," "How to Plant and Care for a Garden," and "Christinas Trees and Greens." Special services provided by the Horticulture Division include such services as school and landscape pro jects, schoolyard bulb planting projects, school decorative plants, and teacher workshops in horticultural subject matter areas. Vocational Horticulture Program Several Ohio high schools offer vocational courses in horticulture. According to information gathered in August of 1968, 19 full time vocational horticulture units were in operation in the state of Ohio. Programs vary in terms of numbers and types of students served, facilities and resources available for conducting the program, and results obtained. Detailed descriptions of the educational opportunities in vocational horticulture in Ohio schools would require a consideration of each individual program which is beyond the scope of this particular study. However, there are some features in common concerning Ohio vocational horticulture programs which can be described. Vocational horticulture programs in Ohio high schools are administered and supervised by the Agricultural 60 Education Service of the Ohio Department of Education. Schools must meet the criteria specified by the Agricul tural Education Service in order to qualify for state financial support to the program. Criteria have been established for the determination of approval of units in vocational agriculture under the Ohio School Foundation Program. Criteria used to approve programs is based on number of students enrolled, number of classes meeting each day, and the amount of teacher time devoted to the vocational agriculture-horticulture program. Whole units, three-quarter units,.half units, and one-quarter units may be approved for re-imbursement to schools under the Foundation program. Horticulture instruction is principally offered in three types of programs. The programs are as follows: 1. Two-year programs in area or joint-vocational schools. 2. Three-or-four-year programs in departments of comprehensive high schools. Such programs are often companion units with vocational agricul ture units. 3. Programs conducted by vocational agriculture teachers who teach horticulture classes in addition to conducting a complete program of vocational agriculture. Many times this arrange 61 ment serves as a transition between vocational agriculture instruction and horticulture instruc tion in areas or rapid urbanization. The curricula offered may be quite varied, but most of the programs offer intensive instruction in the areas of ornamental horticulture, landscape maintenance, and green house operation. These areas of instruction are emphasized because of vocational opportunities existing for trained 27 personnel in these areas. Programs in vocational horticulture in Ohio schools are designed to develop the following competencies in the students: 1. To make an intelligent choice of ornamental horticulture occupations. 2. To identify horticultural plants. 3. To propagate ornamental horticulture plants. 4. To produce, grow, use, and maintain ornamental plant materials. 5. To manage, and use soil and other plant growing materials. 6. To recognize and control plant pests, (insects and disease). 27Department of Agricultural Education Mimeograph, Townshend Educator, "Horticulture As A Course Offering in Agricultural Education" Vol. XIV No. 2: Columbus: The Ohio State University, June 1967, pp. 7, 10. 62 7. To recognize and control weeds. 8. To use and maintain plant growing structures. 9. To market horticultural and plant materials. 10. To manage and care for lawns and turf. 11. To maintain, operate, and repair small power equipment and hand tools used in horticultural enterprises. 12. To communicate effectively with people. 13. To keep and evaluate accurate records. 14. To maintain favorable employer-employee-customer relationships (grooming, attitude, dependability, responsibility, etc.) In order to provide the necessary experiences requir ed to prepare students for skilled occupations in horticul ture, leaders must provide adequate facilities. The facilities considered to be essential in vocational horti culture instructional centers include the following: 1. Classroom 2. Laboratory 3. Instructor's planning and conference room 4. Greenhouse complex 5. Outdoor growing a r e a 2 9 The extent and adequacy of the facilities indicated 28 Agricultural Education Service, Ohio Department of Education, "A Curriculum Guide for Vocational Horticulture." Columbus: 1967 pp. 4,5. ^Ibid. pp. 14,15. 63 above vary from program-to-program within the state. According to officials of the Agricultural Education Service of the Ohio Department of Education the major problems encountered in conducting vocational horticulture programs in the State are those listed below: 1. Procurement of competent teachers. 2. Informing and recruiting potentially successful students* 3. Soliciting the support of the horticultural and allied industries. 4. Upgrading and improving the job-entry wage scale as well as the opportunities for educational advancement. A study of the information in Table 5 reveals that an average of 588 Ohio high school students took advantage of educational opportunities in horticulture as offered through vocational horticulture courses in the public schools during the period 1963-1967. 64 Although not revealed by the data, a number of girls enroll in the programs. TABLE 5 YOUTH ENROLLMENT IN VOCATIONAL HORTICULTURE PROGRAMS IN OHIO SECONDARY SCHOOLS, 1963-1967 Year Enrollment . . 1963a 643 1964a 660 1965a 721 1966b 293 1967b 625 Average 588 Notes No vocational horticulture programs in Ohio prior to 1963. aEnrollment figures include all programs where vocational horticulture was taught either full time or on a part time basis. ju Enrollment figures for these years include only full time horticultural programs employing the services of a full time vocational horticulture teacher. Source: Statistical data provided by the Agricultural Education Service, Ohio Department of Education, August, 1967. 65 Bernard Nirode, in a study of the experience pro grams conducted in vocational horticulture programs in Ohio high schools in 1966, reported the following features regarding the program: 1. The 22 Ohio high schools offering vocational horticulture during the 1965-1966 school year reported 509 students enrolled in the programs. These 509 students represented about 4 per cent of the total vocational agricultural enrollment in ohio. 2. Eighteen per cent of the vocational horticulture courses offered in 1965-1966 were 3 years in length while 32 per cent were 2 year programs. 3. Half of the vocational horticulture courses offered during 1965-1966 were 1 year courses or courses combined with vocational agriculture. 4. Nine selected topics were taught in some grade level in vocational horticulture classes by at least 70 per cent of the teachers. 5. Some topics such as landscaping, were taught at all grade levels. 6. Fifty-one of the experience programs in horti culture were conducted at home, 27 per cent at cooperating businesses, and 14 per cent at the school. 66 7. Eighteen and one-*half per cent of the students conducted their experience program in the school greenhouse or had no experience program. 8. The teachers responding in the study recommended 500 square feet for home flower or garden pro jects or 10,000 square feet for nurseries as minimum standards for experience programs. 9. The teachers recommended 200 hours per year per student for home placement experience, 200 hours for school placement, or 300 hours for commercial placement. 10. Available physical facilities in existing voca tional horticulture programs are as follows: a) 68 per cent of the schools have land labora tories. b) 59 per cent of the schools have glass green houses . c) 41 per cent of the schools have cold frames. d) 18 per cent of the schools have plastic greenhouses. e) 18 per cent of the schools have hot beds. f) 14 per cent of the schools have other land used for laboratories. g) 5 per cent of the schools have lath houses. 67 11. The average total space available per student in the glass greenhouse was 66 square feet. 12. Seventy-seven per cent of the teachers considered a work room to be essential to vocational horti culture programs, 73 per cent considered a glass greenhouse to be essential to the program, while 59 per cent considered a school owned land laboratory essential. 13. Teachers in the study recommended the average size for facilities to be as follows: a) Glass greenhouse - 2239 square feet b) Work room - 11,053 square feet c) Plastic greenhouse - 761 square feet d) Cold frame - 115 square feet 30 e) School owned land laboratory - 3.7 acres 4-H Club Work Educational opportunities in horticulture are avail able to Ohio youth through project work in the 4-H Club Program. The 4-H club prpgram is a youth educational pro gram of the Cooperative Extension Service. The program is 30 Bernard R. Nirode, "Experience Programs Conducted in Vocational Horticulture Programs in Ohio High Schools in 1966," A Field Study Presented to the Faculty of the College of Agriculture, The Ohio State University, March 1967. pp. 34,35. 68 an important segment of the Land-Grant College System and has as its primary purpose the development of character and good citizenship in youth. In 4-H, the club members learn practical skills in a wide variety of projects in agricul ture, home economics, citizenship, and personal development. They learn to apply the latest scientific facts to discover the "why” as well as the "how" of what they do and at the 31 same time enjoy friendships and recreation. In 4-H club work the members have opportunities to: 1. Explore careers and improve employability. 2. Acquire knowledge of science and scientific methods. 3. Learn agricultural production and management principles. 4. Value and conserve natural resources. 5. Engage in community development. 6. Improve family and home living. 7. Create desirable relationships with others. 8. Promote safety and health. 9. Appreciate cultural arts and use leisure creatively. 31 Federal Extension Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, "This is 4-H," Washington D. C., 1967. p. 2. 69 10. Increase leadership competence, 11. Become responsible citizens. 12. Share in international development and under standing.32 Nearly all of the 4-H projects and associated activ ities are referred to as project work. Each provides an opportunity for sampling many work related situations and brings young people into direct association with experienced adults engaged in related activities. Each project also has built-in stages of proficiency and challenge. These educational projects are the core around which "learning- 33 by-doing" experiences are built. The projects carried by 4-H club members may be defined as a unit of investigation on a particular subject. Pride of ownership is considered to be essential to good project work. Members are asked to be responsible for the money, time, efforts, and materials needed to complete the project. Advisors are asked to see that ownership is established and that work is done by the member. The 4-H program in Ohio is conducted through the 32Ibid. p. 16. 33 Federal Extension Service, U. S. Department of Agriculture, "The Many Faces of 4-H." Washington, D. C. p. 3. 70 Ohio Cooperative Extension Service. Extension members of the state 4-H staff include a state 4-H leader, who is an assistant director of the Ohio Cooperative Extension Ser vice; an associate state 4-H leader; and five assistant state 4-H leaders. Each of these state staff members assume subject matter coordination with certain of the subject departments of the Ohio State University College of Agriculture and Home Economics. The State 4-H office in this manner has access to state Extension staff special ists in conducting the 4-H educational program. The 4-H program in each of Ohio's 10 extension areas is coordinated by an area Extension agent, 4-H, with his or her office in the area Extension center. The area Extension agent, 4-H works with the county Extension agents, 4-H, to develop and coordinate 4-H educational programs within the counties of the extension area. The 4-H program is open to all Ohio youth 10 to 19 years of age. The youth often enroll in more than one project each year. Project gradation is desirable to pro vide challenging and broadened experiences to those club members wishing to carry club work in one area over a period of years. Ohio 4-H club projects in horticulture are described below: 71 Your First Flower Garden Purpose: To learn about and gain skill in planning, planting and caring for a flower garden. To learn to prepare attractive flower exhibits. To gain a greater appreciation of flowers and flower gardening. Age: 10 and older and without previous experience. Learning Experiences: 1. Obtain at least 2 seed catalogs. 2. Grow at least 6 different kinds of annuals from seed. 3. Exhibit at least 2 specimen flowers at a show. 4. Visit at least 3 gardens of adult garden club members in the community. 5. Keep a record of activities. 6. Do all own work. 7. Attend 4-H club meetings. Flower Gardening II Age: For those with some experience. Learning Experiences: 1. Send for at least 3 flower seed catalogs. 2. Grow 10 or more different kinds of annual flowers. 3. Grow 5 or more kinds of perennials. 4. Collect seeds of your flowers, label and exchange for new ones. 5. Complete garden re cord to be kept in 4-H member's book. 6. Exhibit of one artistic arrangement to be made at a flower show. Flower Gardening IV Age: For those who have completed Flower Gardening II. Learning Experiences: 1. Send for at least 5 catalogs. 2. Grow 15 or more different kinds of annual flowers. 3. Grow at least 15 different kinds of perennials. 4. Grow at least 3 kinds of annual or perennial vines on trellis, fence, porch, or buildings. 5. Plant shrub cuttings, taken last fall, in your garden. 6. Keep a garden scrap book. 7. Develop some feature, as bird bath, seat trellis, tub pool, in your garden. 8. Complete records to be kept in 4-H member's book. 9. Make an educa tional exhibit of shrub cuttings, garden furniture, etc. Flower Gardening V-Home Beautification Purpose: To study the planning of home grounds, with the cooperation of the parents. It is the applica tion of all previous flower projects. Also shows some of the many possibilities of this work as a professional or commerical career. Age: For those who have completed Flower Gardening IV or age 15. 72 Learning Experiences: 1. Send for at least 3 nursery catalogs, listing trees, shrubs and ever greens. 2. Develop a landscape plan for your home. 3. Learn all the flowers, shrubs and vines listed in 4-H club flower circulars. 4. Develop one part of your yard with a shrub background (using shrubs you have grown from cuttings), in cluding a feature such as a bird bath, lily pool, rock garden, trellis or seat. 5. Complete record to be kept in 4-H member's book. 6. Exhibit land scape plans, whether by drawings or models. 7. Plan and plant at least part of the foundation planting of your home. 8. Plan and plant a screen planting of shrubs for some undesirable object or view. 9. Plant several shade trees in your yard if needed. 10. Plant a few evergreen trees. Fruits Establishing My Vineyard Purpose: To develop ability to establish either a home or commerical grape planting. Age: 10 and older. Learning Experiences: 1. Select a planting site. 2. Select a variety to plant. 3. Prepare the soil. 4. Plant the vines. 5. Fertilize your planting. 6. Water the planting. 7. Control weeds. 8. Prevent and control diseases and in sects. 9. Keep records. Strawberry Purpose: To give experience and training in grow ing, harvesting and marketing a crop of strawberries. Age: 10 and older. Learning Experiences: 1. Grow 200 or more plants. 2. Learn approved practices for setting, mulching, harvesting, etc. 3. Keep records. 4. Make an exhibit. Vegetable Gardening X Age: 10 to 12. Learning Experiences: 1. Grow a vegetable garden at least 10* by 15' in size. 2. Make a collection of at least 10 seeds. 3. Make a novelty display using vegetables. 4. Learn to identify 10 kinds of vegetable seeds. 5. Prepare an exhibit. The Family Vegetable Garden Age: 12 and minimum of experience. 73 Learning Experiences: 1. Either plan own garden of larger scale than Vegetable Gardening I, or take entire care of home family garden. 2. Grow at least 12 different vegetable crops including: (a) tomatoes and cabbage, (b) 2 root crops as carrots, beets, turnips, parsnips, salsify, (c) 2 different pod crops as green beans, peas, lima beans, (d) 3 leafy crops as lettuce, chard, kale, spinach, (e) 3 others as sweet corn, peppers, squash, broccoli, onions, cucumbers, radishes. 3. Exhibit plates of any vegetable grown. Special Crops Age: 14 and minimum of experience Learning Experience: 1. Concentrate on 1 or 2 crops. 2. Suggested minimum size: tomatoes-1000 plants; cabbage-1000 plants; melons-500 hills; pickles-500 hills; beans-1/10 acre; popcorn-1/10 acre; sweet corn-1/10 acre; early potatoes-1/2 acre. 3. Ex hibit standard market package of each crop. Tomato Production for Processing Purpose: To grow tomatoes for processing and on contract with a cooperating canning company. Age: 12 or older Learning Experiences: 1. Grow one or more acres of tomatoes under contract with a cooperating canning company. 2. Follow recommended field practices. 3. Deliver total yield to contracting center. 4. Keep records and complete by Nov. 1. 5. Exhibit one hamper.35 During the 8 year period, 1960-1967, an average of 5,495 4-H club members carried horticulture projects each year. Although not revealed in Table 6, the enrollment in horticulture projects consisted of both boys and girls in a ratio of approximately three boys to each two girls "Ohio 4-H Projects," 4-H Circular 131, Cooperative Extension Service, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, 1969 edition. TABLE 6 YOUTH ENROLLMENT IN 4-H CLUB HORTICULTURE PROJECTS, BY PROJECTS, OHIO, 1960-1967 Project Year 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 Average Flower Gardening I 1132 1141 1012 1028 1243 1166 1203 1482 1176 Flower Gardening II 432 427 365 388 344 418 389 412 394 Flower Gardening III 141 143 126 144 116 109 157 121 132 Flower Gardening IV 32 68 43 63 35 43 55 55 49 Flower Gardening V 34 27 32 34 37 41 39 22 33 Lawn and Garden Maintenance 215 173 211 207 270 215 262 332 236 Vegetable Gardening for Beginners 1703 1825 1860 2061 2107 1895 1943 1953 1918 Family Vegetable Gardening 808 906 895 852 873 850 923 833 868 Special Crops 255 172 191 190 156 144 141 223 182 Tomatoes for Processing 44 57 64 34 30 25 23 28 38 Potato I 249 273 291 268 296 276 352 106 264 Potato II 54 75 86 95 77 77 — — 77 Potato III 23 10 16 21 30 16 — — 19 Strawberry 107 117 102 99 119 133 140 146 120 Grapesa 77 — TOTAL 5209 5414 5294 5484 5733 5408 5627 5790 5495 aNew project in 1967. Source: Ohio Cooperative Extension Service, "4-H Statistical Results," 1960-1967 75 enrolled. An interesting feature about 4-H enrollment in horticulture projects is the relative stablility in numbers over the years. The greatest difference in enrollment during the 8 year period was 581 members, the difference between the low enrollment of 5,209 in 1960 to a high enrollment of 5,790 in 1967. Fourteen different horticultural projects consisting of six ornamental horticulture projects, seven vegetable projects and one fruit project were available to Ohio 4-H club members during 1960-1967. One project, the grape project in 1967, was added during the 8 year period. The potato project was dropped during the period although some youth continued to carry the project presumably because a supply of old books was still available. After deciding upon a specific horticulture pro ject or projects, the club members may meet either bi weekly or monthly from February through September or longer depending upon the procedures followed by the club advisor. The members elect officers, and at their meetings have business, educational, and recreational-social sessions. Members are encouraged to exhibit their project results at county fairs. Often top award winning project members in local competition also participate in the State Fair. 76 Recognition for participation in 4-H club work is in the form of certificates, pins, and/or educational trips. Project work is often evaluated at fairs where ribbons and premium awards are given as recognition for project results. All members have opportunities to attend 4-H camp, demonstration days, and officer's training sessions. Club members doing an outstanding job in club activities usually are given opportunities to attend state and national club congresses, and other appropriate educational programs. The Junior Garden Club Program Educational opportunities in horticulture are avail able to Ohio youth through the Junior Garden Club Program, conducted as a part of the total program of the Ohio Association of Garden Clubs, Inc., usually in cooperation with the Ohio 4-H Club program. During the period 1960- 1967 these opportunities in horticulture were open to youth ages 10 to 21 years. At the present time, youth of ages 8 to 19 may participate in the prpgram. The Junior Garden Club Program, as a part of the highly organized Ohio Association of Garden Clubs program, offers many varied opportunities in horticulture to Ohio youth. 77 An Ohio Association of Garden Clubs official serves as the junior garden club chairman to direct and coordin ate the state program. The chairman works with the Association's 14 regional directors and junior garden club chairman, and the county adult adviser to conduct the state program. This organizational pattern offers an effective vehicle for program direction and coordination throughout the state. Many educational materials are utilized to promote and conduct the program. Available materials include the following: 1. Junior Garden Club Kit - This kit provides information describing requirements for junior garden clubs and suggestions to adult clubs for organizing a junior club, club registration forms, descriptive information regarding the outstanding Junior Garden Club and Typical Junior Gardener Contests, project book informa tion, and the junior garden club handbook and pin. 2. The Junior Garden Club Handbook - This 11-page publication provides complete instructions re-• garding operating procedures for junior garden clubs. The publication also includes informa tion regarding the club pledge, slogan, and 78 song; a message to parents; suggested projects, and a planned 5-year program of projects pro viding for a gradation of educational exper iences; suggestions for giving demonstrations; procedures for installing club officers; pro ject descriptions and specific requirements; project workbooks and how they are to be organ ized and used; suggestions to junior garden club leaders; duties of the club chairman; and the requirements for junior garden clubs. 3. "The Garden Path" - This quarterly magazine is the official publication of the Ohio Association of Garden Clubs Inc. A regular feature of the publication is the section dealing with the Junior Garden Club Program. 4. 4-H Club project books - Several Ohio 4-H pro ject books are utilized in the Junior Garden Club Program. These project books include the following: Flower Gardening I, II, III, IV, V; Buckeye Bug Catcher I, II, and III; Vegetable Gardening for Beginners; The Family Vegetable Garden; Special Crops; Tree Planting; Ohio Birds; Let's Explore the Outdoors; Lawn and Garden Main tenance; and 4-H Wildlife Production. 79 During the period 1960-1967 there were an average of 68 junior garden clubs in the State of Ohio. The number of clubs ranged from a low of 49 clubs in 1966 to a high of 76 clubs in 1960. The highest club enrollment was 1003 members in 1962 and the lowest enrollment was 36 668 members in 1966. Specific enrollment figures for the Junior Garden Club Program are shown in Table 7. TABLE 7 YOUTH ENROLLMENT IN THE JUNIOR GARDEN CLUB PROGRAM OF THE OHIO ASSOCIATION OF GARDEN CLUBS, 1960-1967 Year Enrollment 1960 928 1961 916 1962 1003 1963 813 1964 809 1965 796 1966 668 1967 826 Average 845 Source: Enrollment figures provided by the State Chair man of the Junior Garden Club Program, November, 1968. 36 From data supplied by the state junior garden club chairman, November 27, 1968. 80 Specific requirements exist for junior garden clubs. These requirements are summarized below: 1. The club must be sponsored by an adult club affiliated with Ohio Association of Garden Clubs. Such a club may also be registered with the 4-H program. 2. The club must have 5 or more members and must have an adult to serve as its leader. Members must be between 10 and 21 years of age. Child ren under 10 may be associate members. It is suggested that the children be grouped accord ing to age. 3. The club must hold at least 8 meetings during the year. These may be: a. During the school year, once each month b. During the growing season, every two weeks c. Monthly during the entire year 4. The club must be organized and have officers elected by May 15th. 5. The club must be registered each year with the Ohio Association of Garden Clubs Junior Garden Chairman by June 1st. Registration forms will be sent by the Chairman upon request. Only those clubs officially registered will give the adult sponsoring club credit in their year book scoring. 4-H registration dates vary with counties. 6. Each member should keep a project book of his or her progress. Those affiliated with 4-H are furnished these books by the local county ex tension office. Club year books should be sent to the regional and state chairman of junior clubs. 7. Applications for Outstanding Junior Garden Club Award and for Typical Junior Gardener Award should be sent to the state chairman by November 1st. Special blanks for entering these contests may be secured from the state chairman.37 37Ibid. 81 It is the intention that once a Junior Garden Club group is organized it will continue over a period of five years. The 5-year program should be planned in advance and may be set up as follows: First year— Annuals and Perennials 1. Habit of growth 2. Season of bloom 3. Types of seeds 4. Methods of propagation 5. Methods of cultivation 6. Plant food needed 7. Insect and disease control Second year — Shrubs 1. Methods of propagation 2. Season of bloom 3. Habits of growth 4. Uses 5. Trimming- when and how 6. Insect and disease control Third year — Trees 1. Habits of growth 2. Uses 3. Suitability 4. Study of leaves and bark Fourth year— Flowers and Their Use 1. Beautify home grounds 2. Enjoyment of growing them 3. Sharing 4. Flower arrangement 5. Conditioning and drying Fifth year — Home Landscaping 1. Make a landscape plan for your home grounds and do some planting.38 The subject matter taught in the Junior Garden Club program varies from group to group, depending upon the 82 interests and needs of the members. Groups may use dif ferent subject matter areas each month. Here is an example of a month-by-month subject matter approach to teaching in the Junior Garden Club program: September- Flower identification October- Tree identification November- Propagation of shrubs from cuttings December- Home made Christmas decorations January- Scrapbooks February- Birds and bird feeders March- Forcing branches into early bloom April- Arbor Day program May- Wild flowers June- Insects and disease control Learning experiences for junior garden club members include: 1. Conducting project work- The projects may or may not be those made avail able through the 4-H club program. Junior gar den club officials strongly advise clubs to take advantage of the 4-H club program of pro jects and activities. In this way the members can benefit from the graded program of project activity over a 5-year period. The project books define the activities and records to be accomplished as learning experiences. Project books for junior gardeners are consider ed to have these purposes: (a) It is necessary for those who grade junior 83 activities to get a complete picture of all junior activities and a project workbook helps give an understanding of the work. (b) A project workbook helps the gardener learn more about varieties, growing habits etc. of the plants he grows. (c) The project workbook is a permanent record 39 of the juniors gardening activities. 2. Demonstrations All club members are encouraged to give a demon stration sometime during the year. The demon stration may be given at regular club meetings, at adult club meetings, or at P.T.A. or other school programs. 3. Field trips to places of horticultural interest. 4. Making collections of horticultural specimens. 5. Other learning experiences as related to social activity, holding offices, sharing ideas with other club members, etc. Awards and recognition for participation in the program consists of (1) ribbons and premiums won as a result of winning exhibits at educational fairs or shows, 39Ibid. 84 (2) awards for winning demonstration contests, and (3) awards for winning entries in the Typical Junior Gardener contest and the Outstanding Junior Garden Club Contests. Boy Scouts of America Merit Badge Projects Ohio boys of ages 11 to 21 have educational oppor tunities in horticulture through the program of the Boy Scouts of America. Scouting is learning to grow into responsible man hood, learning to be of service to others.40 An integral part of Scout work is the Merit Badge Program. Merit badges are used in Scouting to increase the skill of the Scouts in activities they enjoy and to provide opportunities for boys to try out new activities that might result in new interests. Merit badges are awarded in some 107 activity or subject matter areas. Three of the 107 areas involve the subject matter of horticulture and include gardening, landscaping, and fruit and nut growing. In addition to the horticulture projects, merit badges can also be earned in a number of other agricultural subjects. These merit badges may be earned 41 by completing the 4-H Club or FFA projects in the subject. 40 Boy Scout Handbook, Boy Scouts of America, Seventh Edition, New Brunswick: Boy Scouts of America, 1965. p.9. 41Ibid. p. 359. 85 The Boy Scout Handbook specifically points out that gardening and landscaping merit badge projects are par ticularly suited to Scouts living in suburban areas who may be interested in obtaining merit badges in the plant cultivation group which includes eight different projects. A study of Table 8 indicates that enrollment in Boy Scout merit badge projects in horticulture ranged from a low enrollment of 275 projects in 1960 to a high enroll ment of 575 projects in 1963. Vegetable gardening was the most popular horticulture merit badge project with Boy Scouts while fruit and nut growing was the least popular project. Landscaping projects were only somewhat more popular than fruit and nut growing projects but con siderably less popular than the vegetable gardening pro ject. In addition to carrying merit badge project work in horticultural areas, Ohio Boy Scouts also carried an average of 62 agriculture projects and 85 botany projects 42 per year during the period 1960-1967. The above information indicates that many Boy Scouts do have an interest in agricultural-horticultural subject matter areas and are taking advantage of educational ^From survey information TABLE 8 YOUTH PARTICIPATION IN BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA MERIT BADGE PROJECTS IN HORTICULTURE, 1960-1967 ...... Enrollment . Project 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 Average Gardening (Vegetable) 237 355 379 477 375 439 382 411 382 Fruit and Nut Growing 6 38 53 27 28 38 25 18 29 Landscaping 32 37 59 71 73 71 94 109 68 TOTAL 275 430 491 575 476 548 501 538 479 Source: Survey of 23 Ohio Regional Boy Scouts of America Council Executive Officers. 0 0 a t 87 opportunities in horticulture as offered through the Boy Scout Program. Considering that projects such as fruit and nut growing and landscaping could extend over a rather long period of time it appears that shorter term projects such as vegetable gardening are more popular with boys interested in exploring a wide number of interest areas as available through the total program of Scouting. Vegetable Gardening Merit Badge Requirements 1. Grow at least six vegetables in the family gar den or other suitable plot from preparation of soil through harvesting. 2. State the food value of nine common vegetables, including three root or tuber crops, three vegetables which bear fruits above ground, and three leafy vegetables. 3. Tell what you did to control insects or diseases which attacked your garden. Tell where and how to use a contact insecticide, a stomach poison, and a fungicide. 4. Do three of the following: (a) Test one hundred garden seeds for germination. (b) Make a hot or cold frame, or grow plants in same. (c) Clean, grade, bunch, or pack any three vegetables for market. I 88 (d) Exhibit one or more vegetables you have grown at a harvest festival, fair or other suitable occasion. (e) Make a storage bin or pit for home use. (f) Preserve or store a portion of the crop grown and describe the process. (g) Carry out equivalent project approved by the counselor. Alternate Requirements As a 4-H'er, complete a club project in this subject or as an FFA member meet these or equivalent requirement 43 through an FFA supervised farming program. Fruit and Nut Growing Merit Badge Requirements 1. (a) Point out on a map of the United States the chief regions where 10 different kinds or varieties of fruits and or nuts are grown. (b) List the kinds and varieties of fruits that can be grown economically in your area. 2. Select a suitable site for a fruit or nut orchard, vineyard, or berry patch, and submit a plan for planting it. 43 Boy Scouts of America, Merit Badge Series "Garden ing" Boy Scouts of America: New Brunswick. February, 1968. 89 3. Take full care of fruit or nut trees, grape vines , or berry plants throughout a crop season or for one year. Keep accurate records of costs, observations, and yield, or help take care of a fruit or nut orchard or vineyard of at least one acre through a full crop season. 4. Prune a tree, vine, or bush properly. Explain why pruning was necessary. 5. Describe three of the most harmful insect pests and two diseases most harmful to fruit or nut crops in your locality. Explain how you would control each without hurting birds or other wildlife, or destroying useful insects. 6. Do one of the following: (a) Plant at least five fruit or nut trees to improve your home grounds, Scout camp, or other appropriate site for years to come. (b) Bud or graft a fruit or nut tree success fully with some better variety. (c) Pick or gather your fruit or nut crop (Requirement 3). Show how to grade and pre pare it for market. Figure out its current market value in your locality. (d) Exhibit your crop at a fair, or visit your state and county fair and compare samples 90 of your crop with those exhibited. (e) Help preserve some of your crop for sale or future home use. Alternate Requirement Complete a 4-H club project in this subject or meet the above equivalent requirements through the supervised 44 farming program of the FFA. Landscaping Merit Badge Requirements 1. Describe two examples of landscaping in your locality, and tell what improvements, if any, you would suggest. 2. Explain how at least five trees have been used for landscaping in your community. Give several of their advantages and disadvantages. 3. Give the main characteristics of at least 15 shrubs used either in formal or informal land scape work. 4. (a) Make a working drawing or a model of a por tion of the grounds around your own house using plantings of your own selection to blot out some untidy place such as laundry yard, garbage can, compost heap, back porch or other ugly view, and carry out the project. ^ B o y Scouts of America Merit Badge Series "Fruit and Nut Growing: Boy Scouts of America: New Brunswick, July 1964. 91 (b) Make a working drawing of a flower garden arranging plants so there will be contin uous showing of flowers for a season. Plant and take care of it. 5. Keep a record of the project (Requirement 4) or garden (Requirement 4b) showing time it took, cost of shrubs, seeds, plants, trellis, wood, etc. Alternate Requirement Complete a 4-H club project in this subject or meet the above or equivalent through the supervised farming 45 program of the FFA. The Young America Gardens Program Some Ohio youth take advantage of opportunities to gain recognition for their gardening efforts through the Young America Gardens Contest sponsored by the Flower and Garden Foundation, a non-profit organization interested in helping young Americans learn gardening. The foundation is located at Rosedale Station, Kansas City, Kansas. This 45 Boy Scouts of America Merit Badge Series "Land scaping" Boy Scouts of America: New Brunswick. May, 1967. 92 particular contest is publicized primarily through the Flower and Garden Magazine and probably is a contest not known to most Ohio youth or adults other than those who may read the Flower and Garden Magazine, The contest was offered initially in 1960 and is open to youth ages 6 to 19, Entrants are charged a small fee for enrollment in the contest to help defray postage and handling costs. The program has no structured educational program in gardening and any assistance received by the youth comes from those interested in providing them with information or from references sought after and read through the in itiative of the gardener. Adults serve in the capacity of youth sponsors in the contest and sponsor names and addresses must appear on the enrollment forms. Any adult may sponsor any number of contestants. The contest is presently limited to the first 5,000 entries from across the nation. In attempting to learn how many Ohio youth take advantage of the Young America Contest, it was learned that enrollment figures by state are not maintained; there fore, no accurate indication of the extent of Ohio youth' participation in this contest during the period 1960-1967 can be given. In a reply from the Flower and Garden Director to a letter from the investigator, it was only indicated that the response from Ohio had been very good 93 in the past. A copy of the letter from the Foundation Director is found in Appendix C. Participants in the contest receive a variety kit of vegetable and flower seed packets which are to be planted to establish a garden. Each participant cares for the garden in conjunction with an adult sponsor who oversees the garden project and co-signs the entry which must be forwarded to the Foundation by September 1 of the year in which the project is carried. The sponsor can be a parent or other adult relative, teacher, 4-H leader, or other interested adult. The participant is encouraged to do as much work as possible and each step of the contest must be completed for the entry to be eligible for the judging. The participant is judged upon the basis of answers to garden ing questions, a short story about the garden, and one or more photographs that show him/her in the project gar den. The contest is planned on a regional basis to equalize opportunities. The three regions into which the partici pants are grouped into the Eastern Region, Mid-Western Region, and Western Region. The contest is conducted in two divisions based on age, teen and pre-teen. Awards for winning entries in the contest consist of cash awards, bicycles, and expense paid trips. 94 The National Junior Horticultural Association Program The National Junior Horticultural Association, known from 1935 to 1964 as the National Junior Vegetable Growers Association, was first organized as a part of the Vegetable Growers Association of America Program. At the time of the Association's inception, the projects were limited to those involving only vegetables and included only a grading contest. The name change in 1964 was made to include all horticultural crops rather than only vegetables as was the situation in prior years. The production and marketing contest was added in 1940, the demonstration project in 1943, and the achievement, leadership, and experimental horticulture projects in 1964. The Association is administered by the National Junior Horticultural Foundation Inc. The Foundation is financed through voluntary contributions from organizations and individuals representing business, industry, civic, farm, and service groups. These funds are the source for 46 conducting the program on a national level. Each state offering the program of projects and activities of the Association must find ways to finance the program on a state level. 46 Brochure, National Junior Horticulture Association. "NJHA offers a Program for Youth in Horticulture." Amherst: NJHA Foundation 1968. 95 To be successful, the state program of the National Junior Horticultural Association must be well funded. No provisions are made for state organization other than those arranged for by the state chairman. Due to the large geographical expanse of the state, it seems that local organizations coordinated by a state administrative effort can be important to program success. On a national level, the Board of Trustees of the National Junior Horticultural Association is the governing body of the Association on policy, programs, and finances. It is composed of leading representatives from the pro fessions, business, and industry. The eight officers of the Association, elected annually, represent the membership in the program organ- 47 ization and development. In Ohio, the National Junior Horticultural Association Program is administered by the State NJHA chairman. Usually the state chairman is a staff member in the Department of Horticulture, at the Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. Participation in the program of projects and activities is open, without membership fee, to any boy or girl ages 14 through 21. Participants may take part 96 as members of teams or as individuals. 4-H club members and FFA Chapter members may compete in special organized contests. The purpose and objectives of the program are as follows: 1. To promote and sponsor an educational program of projects and activities for youth that relate to a better understanding of the oper ations involved in the production, handling, marketing, processing, storage, and use of horticultural plants and related products. 2. To acquaint youth with the many varied career opportunities, both vocational and professional, available in the horticultural industry. 3. To develop good citizens with a basic under standing of nature and the environment in which they live.*® The program is endorsed by the following organizations: (a) The Contest Committee of the National Associa tion of Secondary School Principals (b) The 4-H Division of the Federal Extension Service (c) The Agricultural Education Service of the 97 Department of Health, Education and Welfare (d) The National Grange (e) The American Society for Horticultural Science (f) The American Horticultural Society (g) The National Council of Garden Clubs (h) The Society of American Florists (i) Many state 4-H and FFA organizations A brief description of the program of projects and activities is as follows: 1. Production and Marketing Project This project deals with the culture of a variety of horticultural crops including fruits, vegetables, flowers, nuts, or orna mentals for home use or for commercial sale. The project evaluation is based on organ ization, cost accounts, cultural practices used, and procedures used in selling or using the products. 2. Experimental Horticulture Project This project is designed for young people who are inquisitive and want to learn more about plants through research and experimen tation. Projects may be those involved with plant nutrition, the relation of light, temperature, or water to plant response, or 98 the effect of various chemicals on plant growth and reproduction. Such projects can be conducted in the school laboratory, at home, or as a part of a cultural project. 3. The Demonstration Project This activity is designed to require careful planning, a through knowledge of subject mat ter, and the ability to explain by word and action the why and how of various practices and uses of horticultural crops. It in cludes four divisions as follows: (a) Production — In this project any practice dealing with the production of horticultural crops may be demon strated, (b) Marketing — This demonstration area is concerned with the preparation of horticultural crops for market. (c) Use — This area involves any demon stration indicating how horticultural crops are used. (d) Artistic Arrangements — This demon stration involves using horticultural products for making flower arrange ments, corsages, and plaques. 99 4. The Judging, Information and Identification Project This project involves a detailed knowledge of: horticultural plants, including such things as their culture,use,and market quality; general horticultural knowledge; and the ability to identify fruits, flowers, vegetables, nuts, ornamentals, insects, diseases, and weeds. 5. The Achievement and Leadership Project This project has as its purpose the recog nition of character, ability, leadership, and participation in horticultural activities and community affairs. Winners in this project receive travel scholarships to attend certain approved educational conferences, conventions, or meetings related to horti culture or agriculture. 6. The Annual NJHA Convention This is a 4-day event held during the second week in December which involves the national Demonstration and Judging, Information and Identification Contests, workshops on horticultural subjects, educational tours, careers, information about horticulture, and 100 the presentation of awards in the Associa- 49 tion's various activities. Ohio youth participation in the National Junior Horticultural Association Program during the 8-year period 1960-1967 is shown in Table 9. An inspection of the table reveals that the most popular NJHA Project was the production of canning and specialized processing crops. Participation in this project ranged from a low of 16 in 1965 to a high of 48 in 1962. A further analysis of the records indicated that most of the youth carrying canning and specialized pro cessing projects were in the north-central and north-west ern areas of Ohio. These youth are supervised by pro cessing company fieldmen, vocational agricultural teachers, 4-H club advisors or other adult advisors who assist them and certify their project work. Ohio boys and girls not in close proximity to processing plants or unable to secure crop contracts do not have opportunities in this particular project area. Enrollment by Ohio youth in projects other than the production of canning and specialized processing crops was extremely limited during the 8-year period, 1960-1967. 49 Brochure, National Junior Horticultural Association, op. cit. TABLE 9 YOUTH ENROLLMENT IN NATIONAL JUNIOR HORTICULTURAL ASSOCIATION, BY PROJECT AND BY YEAR, OHIO 1960-1967 Project Year 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 Production of Canning and 35 34 52 22 34 19 16 20 Specialized Processing Crops Production of Fresh Market 4 1 Crops Variety Evaluation 2 1 — — 1 a — — Grading Contest — — 2 — — a — — Demonstration Contest 1 1 2 — — Judging, Information & — — 3 Identification Experimental Horticulture Leadership & Achievement Contestk discontinued New project area in 1964 Source: Records from the State NJHA office 102 The Youth Gardens Program The Youth Gardens Department of the Junior Division of the Ohio State Fair provides opportunities for youth of ages 8 to 21 to exhibit vegetable and floral crops pro duced in their home gardens. The products may be exhi bited either as individual exhibits or as group exhibits. Group exhibits are encouraged from school garden programs, 4-H groups, FFA chapters, junior garden clubs, and similar organizations. The Department was an outgrowth of the Victory Gardens Program of World War II and provided individuals and groups opportunities to exhibit their gardening results. The Department functions only during the period of the State Fair each year and represents an opportunity for youth to compete with others of their own age group and gain recognition for their gardening efforts. No struc tured instructional sessions or program continuity exists between fairs. Participation may be by any youth of age 8 to 21 who completes and files the necessary entry forms with Fair officials. During the period 1960-1967, the program was open only to youth ages 8 to 18. The major educational opportunities provided by the program are those relating to preparing horticultural crops for exhibition and marketing and the experiences associated with competing against others engaged in similar horticultural pursuits. 103 Both flowers and vegetables may be exhibited as either group or individual exhibits. Premium money and ribbons are awarded to the winning exhibits in each class. The classes include flowers and vegetables commonly grown in Ohio gardens. The classes, premium awards, and opera ting procedures may vary from year to year depending upon the orientation which is given to the Department by the department superintendent subject to the approval and financial support of the Ohio State Fair officials. The Department program is administered by a depart ment superintendent assisted by assistant superintendents and Junior Fair Board members interested in working with the program as designated by the department superintendent. The program is financed by the Ohio State Fair with supplemental support by industry organizations which pro vide trophies and other types of recognition awards. State Fair support to the Department involves providing physical facilities, and funds to pay judges, other authorized personnel, and charges for premium awards and ribbons. Participation in the Youth Gardens Department of the Ohio State Junior Fair Division during the period 1960- 1967 is shown in Table 10. Entries in the program varied from a low of 37 in 1961 to a high of 94 in 1967. 104 TABLE 10 ENROLLMENT IN YOUTH GARDENS DEPARTMENT, OHIO STATE PAIR . 1960-1967...... Year . Enrollment ..... Boys Girls Total 1960 10 28 38 1961 10 27 37 1962 9 29 38 1963 14 37 51 1964 22 35 57 1965 19 33 52 1966 29 38 67 _a _a 1967 97 ^ o t available from records. Source: Youth Gardens Department Records, Junior Fair Office, Ohio State Fair. A further study of the Department records revealed that the majority of the fair entries were made by boys and girls in the Greater Columbus area. Very few entries were made by Ohio youth outside the central Ohio area which, in effect, resulted in the program being primarily a Franklin County program. For the most part, most Ohio counties were not represented in the enrollment figures given for the 1960-1967 period. Further study of the records indicated, that to a considerable extent, the entries made in the Department were by many of the individ uals each year. In addition to a basic mucleus of exhibit 105 ors, new exhibitors were added from time to time who in turn repeated entries in succeeding years. The data re veal that more girls than boys took advantage of oppor tunities in the Youth Gardens Department during the 1960- 1967 period. Considering that all youth making entries may not have followed through in exhibiting products, it is con cluded that in terms of the total Ohio youth population in the age group 8 to 18 during the period 1960-1967, few boys and girls took advantage of opportunities in the Youth Gardens Department. Summary From the information presented in this Chapter, it is seen that in terms of numbers served, the Cleveland School Gardens Program is providing most of the educa tional opportunities in horticulture to Ohio youth. Youth outside the Cleveland area have educational oppor tunities in horticulture through a limited number of vocational horticulture programs in the public schools and through six out-of-school youth organization programs with educational programs of varying degrees of intensity. A pertinent question at this point might be - Why is horticultural education so prevalent and successful in one Ohio school system and lacking in most other school 106 systems of the state? Perhaps if one school system can successfully serve many pupils over a number years, there are desirable educational values of horticultural programs for youth in other Ohio school systems and communities. CHAPTER V RESPONDENT OPINIONS REGARDING SELECTED ASPECTS OF YOUTH EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS IN HORTICULTURE It was important to the study to obtain opinions regarding the various aspects of youth educational programs in horticulture from three major respondent groups. Close cooperation and mutual assistance between agricultural educators, non-agricultural educators, and horticultural industry leaders should exist if programs are to be most successful. Agricultural educators are responsible for classroom teaching and other day-to-day horticultural program acitivity. Non-agricultural educators, including guidance counselors, school principals, superintendents, and curriculum specialists, recommend programs, help recruit students for the programs, and provide adminis trative services. Ideally the horticultural industry would support and be in agreement with the programs of horticulture offered by the various educational agencies, particularly the vocational horticulture programs in the public schools. This chapter reports the opinions of 156 respondents relative to goals and educational values of youth pro grams in horticulture, the factors which may limit im plementation of youth educational programs in horticulture 107 108 and procedures for providing adequate educational programs in horticulture to youth. Respondent Experience Respondents were selected to participate in the study on the basis of experience in educational work and the horticultural industry. Detailed information regarding the extent of respondent experience in horticultural educationr research, and industry work is found in Appendix B. In Table 11 it is seen that over 83 per cent of the respondents had some to considerable experience in work ing with youth programs. Such experience was considered to add a valuable dimension to the study. As a result of such experience the respondents likely had knowledge con cerning youth characteristics and needs which would be valuable in shaping their opinions as to how educational programs in horticulture might be appropriate to Ohio youth. Although most of the respondents in the study had had experience with youth programs in general, it was interesting to note that slightly over half of the res pondents had experience in working with youth programs in horticulture. Although over 68 per cent of the horti cultural industry leaders reported experience in working with youth in general, only 38 per cent indicated any f TABLE 11 RESPONDENT EXPERIENCE IN WORKING WITH YOUTH PROGRAMS Experience Agricultural Non-Agricultural Horticultural All (years) Educators Educators Industry Leaders Respondents Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent 30 or more 12 21.8 12 34.3 2 3.0 26 16.7 20-29 12 21.8 6 17.1 7 10.6 25 16.0 10-19 17 30.9 15 42.9 10 15.2 42 26.9 5-9 4 7.3 2 5.7 17 25.8 23 14.7 Less than 5 5 9.1 0 0 9 13.6 14 9.0 None 5 9.1 0 0 21 31.8 26 16.7 TOTAL 55 100 35 100 66 100 156 100 110 experience in working with youth programs or activities in horticulture. As seen in Table 12 the majority of agricultural educators were experienced in working with youth programs in horticulture; over 76 per cent of the educators re ported this type of experience. Only 40 per cent of the non-agricultural educators had experience in working with youth educational prpgrams in horticulture. In terms of type of experience in horticulture, 84 respondents had industry experience, 65 had experience in educational work, and 21 had research experience. This information is shown in Table 13. Some respondents re ported more than one type of experience. One aspect of the respondent experience of value to the study was that of the experience in roles of educational administrators or policy makers. As seen in Table 14, approximately two-thirds of the respondents reported ex perience as educational administrators or policy makers. A segment of 5.1 per cent of the respondents had 30 or more years of experience in this capacity. Another 9 per cent segment had 20 to 29 years experience, 20.5 per cent had 10-19 years experience, 15.4 per cent had 5.9 years experience, while 17.3 per cent had less than 5 years experience as educational administrators or policy makers. TABLE 12 RESPONDENT EXPERIENCE IN WORKING WITH YOUTH PROGRAMS IN HORTICULTURE Respondent Group Experience Agricultural Non-Agricultural Horticultural All Category Educators Educators Industry Leaders Respondents Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent With exper 42 76.4 14 40.0 25 37.9 81 51.9 ience Without 13 23.6 21 60.0 41 62.1 75 48.1 experience TOTAL 55 100. 35 100. 66 100. 156 100. TABLE 13 TYPE OF RESPONDENT EXPERIENCE IN HORTICULTURE Respondent Group Type of Agricultural Non-Agricultural Horticultural All Experience Educators Educators Industry Leaders Respondents (N = 55) (N = 35) (N = 66) (N = 156) Industry 16 3 65 84 Educational 44 12 9 65 Work Research 17 0 4 21 ! ------1 til TABLE 14 RESPONDENT EXPERIENCE AS EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM ADMINISTRATORS OR BOARD OF EDUCATION MEMBERS Respondent Group Experience Agricultural Non-Agricultural Horticultural All (years) Educators Educators Industry Leaders Respondents Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent 30 or more 5 9.1 1 2.9 2 3.0 8 5.1 20-29 7 12.8 6 17.1 1 1.5 14 9.0 10-19 12 21.8 15 42.9 5 7.6 32 20.5 5-9 8 14.5 4 11.4 12 18.2 24 15.4 Less than 5 8 14.5 9 25.7 10 15.2 27 17.3 None 15 27.3 0 0 36 54.5 51 32.7 TOTAL 55 100 35 100 66 100 156 100 113 This type of experience was considered to be helpful in adding a desired dimension of educational policy consider ations to the study. Future Outlook for Horticulture as Perceived by the Respondents In our rapidly changing society, some features be come obsolete and obscure. Other features tend to remain status quo, while others become prominent and highly successful in terms of acceptance by society. What will be successful at any particular time depends on a number of circumstances, including national security considerations, economic conditions, promotional programs, personalities, leadership ability, and educational patterns. Of interest to the investigator in this study were the respondent perceptions as to the future role of horticulture in contributing to the standard of living in our society. For purposes of comparison, the per ceptions of those closest to the industry and subject matter of horticulture-the industry leaders and agricul tural educators-were compared to a group not so closely associated with the industry and subject matter of horticulture, the non-agricultural educators. As a group, 87.1 per cent of the respondents be lieved that the role of horticulture in contributing to the standard of living in our society in the future would 114 either increase greatly or increase to some extent. Only one respondent indicated that the future importance of horticulture would decline. Nineteen of the 156 respond ents indicated that the future importance of horticulture would remain at about the same level of importance as at present. The findings in Table 15 reveal that all re spondent groups, regardless of the closeness of their association to horticultural subject matter, tended to be optimistic about the future importance of horticulture in our society. Future Importance of Horticultural Subject Matter to the Citizenry as Perceived by the Respondents Certain trends in our society, particularly those related to where our citizens live, the type of environ ment in which they will live, dietary habits, and the amount of involvement desired or required in processing food supply, influence the extent to which horticultural subject matter can be useful to the citizenry. The re spondents in the study indicated that the proportion of citizens in our society who could profit from horticul tural knowledge in the future would increase. As seen in Table 16, 51 of the respondents, or 32.7 per cent, indi cated that the proportion of citizens who could profit from horticultural subject matter in the future would TABLE 15 RESPONDENT OPINIONS AS TO THE FUTURE IMPORTANCE OF HORTICULTURE IN CONTRIBUTING TO THE STANDARD OF LIVING IN OUR SOCIETY Respondent Group Future Im- Agricultural Non-Agricultural Horticultural All portance of Educators______Educators______Industry Leaders______Respondents Horticulture Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Greatly increase 27 49.1 12 34.3 28 42.4 67 42.8 Increase some 25 45.5 18 51.4 26 39.3 69 44.2 Remain about the same 2 3.6 5 14.3 12 18.3 19 12.0 Decrease 1 1.8 0 0 0 0 1 1.0 Decrease Considerably 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 55 100 35 100 66 100 156 . 100 TABLE 16 RESPONDENT OPINIONS AS TO THE PROPORTION OF CITIZENS WHO CAN PROFIT FROM HORTICULTURAL KNOWLEDGE IN THE FUTURE Respondent Group Proportion Agricultural Non-Agricultural Horticultural All Educators Educators Industry Leaders Respondents Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Increase considerably 27 49.1 11 31.4 13 19.7 51 32.7 Increase some 25 45.5 18 51.4 39 59.1 82 52.6 Remain about the same 3 5.4 6 17.2 10 15.1 19 12.1 Decrease 0 0 0 0 4 6.1 4 2.6 Decrease considerably 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 55 100 35 100 66 100 156 100 116 117 increase considerably, while 82 respondents, or 52.6 per cent of the total group, thought there would be somewhat of an increase. Only 2.6 per cent of the respondents indicated that the number of citizens who could profit from horticultural knowledge in the future would decrease, while 19 of the respondents, or 12.1 per cent, believed that the proportion would remain about the same as at present. Respondent Perceptions as to the Educational Values of a Study of Horticulture Agricultural educators considered horticultural instruction to have a number of potential educational values. Data in Table 17 suggest that horticultural instruction designed to assist youth in becoming more selective and knowledgeable consumers of horticultural products, becoming acquainted with career opportunities in horticulture, developing salable skills for occupational entry in the horticultural industry, learning specific skills for producing plants for food and ornamental uses, and gaining a greater appreciation and understanding of the natural world, would be of considerable educational value for youth. Statistically, there was no significant difference between any of the above values of horticultural instruction as expressed by the agricultural educators. 118 TABLE 17 OPINIONS OF AGRICULTURAL EDUCATORS REGARDING THE EDUCATIONAL VALUES OF HORTICULTURAL INSTRUCTION AS RANKED IN ORDER OF MEAN SCORE VALUES Item Mean Score* Standard Deviation Becoming more selective and knowledgeable consumers of horticultural products (fruits, vegetables, house and land scape plants) 4.15'a 0.65 Becoming acquainted with career opportunities in horticulture 4.04 a 0.67 Developing salable skills for occupational entry into the horticultural industry 3.98 a b 0.87 Learning specific skills necessary for producing plants for food and orna mental purposes 3.95 a b c 0.87 Gaining a greater apprecia tion and understanding or the natural world and learning to become more dependable, reliable and responsible citizens 3.93 a b c 0.90 Learning to make productive use of leisure time 3.69 c d 0.94 Improving economic value of property ♦Scale 5=great value, 4=considerable value, 3=some value, 2=little value, l=no value No significant difference at the .05 level between mean scores marked with the same letters. Source: Table 48, Appendix B 119 Considered of somewhat less educational value for youth by the agricultural educators was horticultural instruction for the purpose of assisting students in learning to make productive use of leisure time or in im proving economic value of property. Non-agricultural educators considered the most important potential educational values of horticulture for youth to be those of learning salable skills for occupa tional entry in the horticultural industry, learning spec ific skills for producing plants for food and ornamental purposes, and becoming acquainted with career opportunities in horticulture. Statistically there was no significant difference between any of these potential values of horti cultural instruction. Such findings are presented in Table 18. Non-agricultural educators tended to make less distinction between the suggested educational values of horticultural instruction than did the agricultural educa tors and horticultural industry leaders. According to data in Table 19, horticultural industry leaders considered that becoming acquainted with career opportunities in horticulture, developing salable skills for occupational entry in the horticultural industry, and learning specific skills for producing plants for food and ornamental purposes, would be important educational values of horticultural instruction for youth. Statistically, 120 TABLE 18 OPINIONS OP NON-AGRICULTURAL EDUCATORS REGARDING THE EDUCATIONAL VALUES OF HORTICULTURAL INSTRUCTION AS RANKED ACCORDING TO MEAN SCORE VALUES Standard Item Mean Score* Deviation Developing salable skills for occupational entry into the horticultural industry 4.26 a .0,74 Learning specific skills necessary for producing plants for food and orna mental purposes 4.11 a b 0.80 Becoming acquainted with career opportunities in horticuture 4.06 a b 0.80 Becoming more selective and knowledgeable consumers of horticultural products (fruits, vegetables, house and landscape plants) 3.80 b 0.76 Improving economic value of property 3.76 b 0.77 Gaining a greater appreciation and understanding of the natural world and learning to become more dependable, reliable, and responsible citizens 3.71 b 0.79 Learning to make productive use of leisure time 3.71 b 0.83 *Scale- 5=great value, 4=considerable value, 3=some value, 2-little value, l=no value No significant difference at the 0.5 level between mean scores marked with the same letter. Source: Table 49, Appendix B 121 TABLE 19 OPINIONS OF HORTICULTURAL INDUSTRY LEADERS REGARDING THE EDUCATIONAL VALUES OF HORTICULTURAL INSTRUCTION AS RANKED ACCORDING TO MEAN SCORE VALUES Item Mean Score* Standard ______Deviation Becoming acquainted with career opportunities in horticulture 4.12 a 0.76 Developing salable skills for occupational entry into the horticultural industry 3.92 a b 0.89 Learning specific skills necessary for producing plants for food and ornamental purposes 3.86 a b c 0.89 Becoming more selective and knowledgeable consumers of horticultural products (fruits, vegetables, house and landscape plants) 3.62 b e d 0.81 Gaining a greater appreciation and understanding of the natural world and learning to become more dependable, reliable, and responsible citizens 3.62 bed 0.88 Improving economic value of property 3.40 d 0.79 Learning to make productive use of leisure time 2.76 e 0.89 *Scale- 5=great value, 4=considerable value, 3=some value, 2=little value, l=no value No significant difference at the .05 level between mean scores marked with the same letter. Source: Table 50, Appendix B 122 there were no significant differences between any of these potential educational values of horticultural instruction. Learning to make productive use of leisure time was considered by the horticultural industry leaders to be of the least value as a suggested educational value of horticultural instruction. This suggested educational value was significantly different from all other suggested values. In considering the opinions of the three respondent groups as presented in Tables 17, 18, and 19, it can be seen that each group considered the most important values of horticultural instruction to be those relating to assisting students in becoming more employable through the development of specific skills, in learning of the career opportunities in horticulture and becoming more knowledge able consumers of horticultural products. The respondents tended to put somewhat less value on horticultural instruc tion for the purposes of assisting the student in making productive use of leisure time and improving the economic value of property. The data tend to suggest that the respondents see horticultural instruction for youth as somewhat more valuable as vocational or pre-vocational education than as education for avocational pursuits. In addition to the items provided on the opinionnaire for evaluation by the respondents as reasons for offering 123 horticultural education programs to youth, opportunity was provided for respondent suggestions as to the poten tial educational values of horticultural courses. Five of the respondents provided suggestions as indicated in Table 20. TABLE 20 SUGGESTED EDUCATIONAL VALUES OF HORTICULTURAL INSTRUCTION Suggested Educational Number of Times Value Suggested Learning a hobby for retirement 1 Beautification of Community and country 1 Conservation 1 Beautify school grounds 1 Appreciation of surroundings 1 Respondent Opinions as to the Role of Horticultural Course Work for Students of Various Age Levels Youth as defined for purposes of the study were considered to be boys and girls of ages 8 through 21 years. Of interest in the study was the type of educational role which course work in horticulture could best fulfill for youth of various age levels. Thinking in terms of student 124 categories in the public schools, the 8 to 21 age group was divided into an 8 to 12 age group, a 13 to 15 age group, and a 16 to 21 age group. This grouping corres ponds to youth in the intermediate grades, junior high school, and senior high school. Data indicate that respondents perceived the best educational role of horticultural courses for youth in the 8 to 12 age group to be basic science education as was indicated by approximately 52 per cent of group. Note worthy, however, was the fact that 43.3 per cent of the respondents indicated that horticultural courses would best serve as enrichment education for youth of ages 8 to 12. This division of opinion for the 8 to 12 age group leads the investigator to believe that the distinction between enrichment education and basic science education may not have been clear to the respondents. As defined in the opinionnaire, enrichment horticulture was considered to be instruction for the purpose of assisting students in be coming more knowledgeable consumers and users of horticul tural products and in exploring ways of making productive and satisfying use of leisure time. Productive leisure time pursuits would include such activities as flower arranging,landscaping, and flower, fruit and vegetable gardening. 125 As basic science education, the author, in his definition, intended that the subject matter of horti culture would be used as the vehicle for teaching scien tific principles and concepts such as photosynthesis, respiration, osmosis, germination, and transpiration as might be done in a general science or biology course. Another intended distinction between basic science educa tion and enrichment education was that of the development and handling of some theoretical concepts in basic science education while in enrichment education, instruction would be for specific, practical purposes such as how to care for a house plant, establish and maintain a lawn, prune a tree, or compose a flower arrangement. When considering the best educational role of horti cultural courses for youth of ages 13 to 15, 50.3 per cent of the respondents indicated the best role to be enrichment education, 30.5 per cent indicated the best role as basic science education, while 19.2 per cent considered the best educational role to be that of vocational education. Over 86 per cent of the respondents considered the best educational role of horticultural courses for the 16 to 21 age group to be vocational education. As seen in Table 21 agricultural educators, non- agricultural educators, and horticultural industry leaders TABLE 21 PRINCIPAL ROLES OF HORTICULTURE COURSES FOR YOUTH OF VARIOUS AGE LEVELS Age Level Type of Education (years) Vocational Enrichment Basic Science Total Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Agricultural Educators 8-12 5 9.6 25 48.1 22 42.3 52 100 13-15 13 25.5 23 45.1 15 29.4 51 100 16-21 46 86.8 1 1.9 6 11.3 53 100 Non-Agricultural Educators 8-12 1 3.1 14 43.8 17 53.1 32 100 13-15 3 8.8 20 58.8 11 32.4 34 100 16-21 31 93.9 2 6.1 0 0 33 100 Horticultural Industry Leaders 8-12 1 1.7 23 39.0 35 59.3 59 100 13-15 13 19.7 33 50.0 20 30.3 66 100 16-21 53 82.8 7 10.9 4 .6.3 64 100 All Respondents 8-12 7 4.9 62 43.3 74 51.8 143 100 127 were basically in agreement as to the role of horticultural courses for the various youth age groups. It should also be noted that agricultural educators and horticultural industry leaders tended to think more in terms of horti culture courses as vocational education fro the 13 to 15 year old group than did non-agricultural educators. Respondent Opinions as to the Potential Value of Vocational Horticulture Offerings in the Public Schools A number of Ohio high schools presently offer voca tional horticulture programs to interested students. In order to make an assessment of the potential value of such programs for meeting youth needs and providing trained personnel for industry, the respondents were asked to provide opinions about such programs. As a group, the respondents indicated that the pro grams could be of considerable importance for the purposes of meeting youth needs and providing trained personnel for industry, as indicated by a 42.3 per cent response. Slightly over 30 per cent of the respondents were of the opinion that the programs could be of great importance. No respondents considered the prpgrams to lack any value, although 4.4 per cent indicated that such programs would be of very little value. A comparison of the response patterns in Table 22 128 reveals that that the agricultural educators, non-agri cultural educators, and horticultural industry leaders were basically in agreement as to the potential importance of the vocational horticulture offerings in the public schools. Respondent Opinions as to the Potential Value of Avocational Horticulture Offerings in Public Schools Although no Ohio public schools other than those in the Cleveland area offer avocational opportunities in horticulture to pupils, it was considered desirable for purposes of this study to obtain the opinions of the respondents regarding the potential value of such programs. As a group, the respondents indicated that avoca tional course offerings in the public schools would be from some to considerable value in meeting the needs of youth for making productive use of leisure time and con sumer education. Only 16.1 per cent of the respondents indicated that avocational horticulture courses would have great value for the stated purposes, however. A study of Table 23 indicates that the most optimis tic respondent group for the potential value of avocational horticulture course offerings in the public schools was the agricultural educators group. The least favorably disposed group towards avocational horticulture course offerings TABLE 22 THE POTENTIAL VALUE OF HIGH SCHOOL PROGRAMS IN VOCATIONAL HORTICULTURE FOR MEETING YOUTH NEEDS AND PROVIDING TRAINED PERSONNEL FOR INDUSTRY . Respondent Group Importance Agricultural Non-Agricultural Horticultural All Educators Educators Industry Leaders Respondents Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Great 18 32.7 11 31.4 18 27.3 47 30.1 Considerable 23 41.8 16 45.7 27 40.9 66 42.4 Some 10 18.2 7 20.0 19 28.8 36 23.1 Very little 4 7.3 1 2.9 2 3.0 7 4.4 None 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 55 100 35 100 66 100 156 100 H1 to VO 130 in the public schools were the horticultural industry leaders. Although 45.7 per cent of the non-agricultural educators indicated that avocational course offerings in horticulture had considerable potential value, 40 per cent indicated that such courses would have only some potential value. The response pattern in Table 23, indicates, to some extent, basic differences between the industry group and educator respondent groups. The educator groups tend to be somewhat more receptive to non-vocational education al possibilities for youth educational programs than do the industry respondents with a strong vocational orient ation. In Tables 21, 22, and 23 the respondents indicated the principal educational values of horticultural instruc tion to include those of assisting students in becoming more employable through the development of specific skills and in learning of career opportunities in horticulture. In Table 22 data indicate that slightly over 30 per cent of the respondents considered vocational horticulture pro grams in Ohio high schools to be of great potential value for meeting youth needs and providing trained personnel for industry. Some 42 per cent of the group considered such programs to be of considerable value. Data in Table 23 indicate that only slightly over 16 per cent of the TABLE 23 THE POTENTIAL VALUE OF PUBLIC SCHOOL PROGRAMS IN AVOCATIONAL HORTICULTURE FOR MEETING THE NEEDS OF YOUTH FOR MAKING PRODUCTIVE USE OF LEISURE TIME AND CONSUMER EDUCATION ______Respondent Group______Importance Agricultural Non-Agricultural Horticultural All Educators______Educators______Industry Leaders Respondents Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Great 12 21.8 5 14.3 8 12.3 25 16.1 Considerable 25 45.5 16 45.7 20 30.8 61 39.4 Some 17 30.9 14 40.0 33 50.8 64 41.3 Very little 1 1.8 0 0 4 6.1 5 3.2 None 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 55 100 35 100 65 100 155 100 132 respondents considered that avocational horticulture pro grams would be of great value for meeting youth needs, while 39 per cent considered that such programs would have considerable value. Over 41 per cent of the respond ents indicated that such programs would have only some value. These findings tend to suggest that the respondents perceive that horticultural instruction for youth should have somewhat more vocational orientation than avocational orientation. Respondent Opinions as to the Adequacy of Present Youth Educational Opportunities in Horticulture According to 103 of the respondents, or over two- thirds of the total group surveyed, an insufficient number of opportunities currently exist in the respondent’s home communities to meet the needs of youth who could profit from horticultural instruction. As seen in Table 24, twenty-three of the respondents, about 15 per cent of the total group, indicated they believed that sufficient educational programs currently existed in their communities, while 21 of the respondents, or about 14 per cent of the total group, indicated that they did not know about the adequacy level of educational opportunities in horticulture in their home communities. TABLE 24 RESPONDENT OPINIONS AS TO THE ADEQUACY LEVEL OF PRESENT YOUTH EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES IN HORTICULTURE IN THE RESPONDENTS HOME COMMUNITY Respondent Grou^> Adequacy Agricultural Non-Agricultural Horticultural All Level Educators Educators Industry Leaders Respondents1 Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Sufficient educa tional programs cur rently exist to adequately meet the needs of the youth who could profit from or axe interested in horticultural instruction 2 3.7 12 35.3 9 13.6 23 14.9 An insufficient num ber of opportunities currently exist to meet the needs of the youth who could profit from horti cultural instruction 43 79.6 20 58.8 40 60.6 103 66.9 At present there are too many agencies and programs provid ing educational opportunities in horticulture such that there is.an undesirable TABLE 24 (CONTINUED) Respondent Group Adequacy Agricultural Non-Agricultural Horticultural All Level Educators Educators Industry Leaders Respondents Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent duplication of effort and compet ition for partici pation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Do not know 7 12.9 2 5.9 12 18.2 21 13.6 Other 2 3.8 0 0 5 7.6 7 4.6 TOTAL 54 100 34 100 66 100 154 100 H U) 135 Information in Table 24 indicates that agricultural educators, non-agricultural educators, and horticultural industry leaders in Ohio agree that insufficient education al opportunities currently exist for meeting the needs of youth who could profit from horticultural instruction. Only in the case of the non-agricultural educators was there a somewhat sizeable group who felt that sufficient educational opportunities in horticulture for youth did exist. The findings indicate that probably more educational opportunities in horticulture should be provided to Ohio youth. The question of prime importance is just how needed programs should be designed and implemented. Three respondents, two agricultural educators and one horticultural industry leader, took advantage of the opportunity presented by an open ended question to state their views regarding the adequacy level of youth educa tional opportunities in horticulture. Their comments were as follows: 1. "The present programs are not properly oriented." 2. "There is a lack of sufficient personnel to teach." 3. "Programs are provided, but they are not of the desired quality." 136 Respondent Opinions in Explanation of the Lack of Avocational Horticulture Programs in Ohio Public Schools Heimlich, in his 1964 Master's Thesis, reported only four schools in the State of Ohio offering avoca- 50 tional horticulture programs. The schools were located in the Cleveland area. According to the information available to the investigator, no avocational programs in horticulture exist in Ohio public schools other than in the Cleveland area at this time. An important aspect of the study was that of attempting to learn of some of the significant factors responsible for the lack of avoca tional horticulture programs in Ohio schools. In each case, agricultural educators, non-agricul- tural educators, and horticultural industry leaders in dicated that one of the important factors explaining the lack of avocational horticulture programs in Ohio schools was that of a general lack of understanding of the nature and significance of horticulture. This finding is in agreement with the conclusions of Adriance as reported in 51 Chapter 1, Another important factor in explaining the lack of avocational horticulture offerings as identified 50op. cit., p. 9. 51 Adriance, op. cit., p. 434. 137 by all respondent groups was that of a lack of qualified teachers. The general lack of understanding of the nature and significance of horticulture coupled with the lack of qualified teachers is a somewhat paradoxical situation. How is one to become interested enough in horticulture to become a teacher if there is a general lack of under standing of horticulture to the extent that persons who might become qualified teachers have limited or non- existant opportunities to learn horticulture? How can the widespread lack of understanding of horticulture be overcome without many qualified teachers? Data in Table 25 indicate that agricultural educators consider the general lack of understanding of the nature and significance of horticulture and lack of qualified teachers to be of considerable importance in explaining the lack of avocational horticulture programs in most Ohio public schools. These reasons were found to be significantly different from all other suggested reasons for explaining the lack of avocational horticulture pro grams in the public schools. Agricultural educators did not consider student disinterest in horticulture or limited educational value of horticulture subjects to be important reasons for 138 explaining the lack of avocational horticulture offerings in Ohio schools. TABLE 25 OPINIONS OF AGRICULTURAL EDUCATORS IN EXPLANATION OF THE LACK OF AVOCATIONAL HORTICULTURE PROGRAMS IN MOST OHIO PUBLIC SCHOOLS AS RANKED IN ORDER OF MEAN SCORE VALUES Standard Factor Mean Score* Deviation There is a general lack of under standing of the nature and sig nificance of horticulture. 4.57a 0.60 There is a lack of qualified teachers. 4.31a 0.86 There is a lack of administrative and organizational structure to conduct the program 3.69 b 1.02 Promotion of such programs by educa tional leaders is limited because of limited potential for meeting student needs 3.26 c 0.93 There is a lack of suitable educa tional materials and teaching aids for conducting such courses. 3.17 cd 0.99 Facilities are too costly in terms of the number which would be served. 3.11 cd 0.99 Most students are not interested in horticulture on either a vocational or avocational basis. 2.59 e 0.93 Limited educational value of such programs for many students. 2.25 f 0.89 ♦Scale 5=very significant, 4=considerable significance, 3-some significance, 2=little significance, l=no significance No significant difference at the .05 level between mean scores marked with the same letter. Source: Table 51, Appendix B 139 Non-agricultural educators, like agricultural educa tors, considered the lack of understanding of the nature and significance of horticulture and the lack of qualified teachers as being important reasons explaining the lack of avocational horticultural offerings in Ohio schools. These educators were of the opinion that the lack of suitable educational materials and limited educational value of horticulture courses were not important reasons for explaining the lack of avocational offerings in Ohio schools. The non-agricultural educators differed from the agricultural educators in that they considered the cost of facilities in terms of the number which would be served to be an important reason explaining the lack of avocational horticulture the schools. Such an opinion was found to be statistically significant, as were the lack of understanding of the nature and significance of horticulture, and the lack of qualified teachers as reasons for explaining the lack of avocational horticulture programs. These findings are seen in Table 26. The opinions of horticultural industry leaders re garding the lack of avocational horticulture opportun ities in Ohio schools were very similar to those of non- agricultural educators except for one opinion. On the 140 TABLE 26 OPINIONS OF NON-AGRICULTURAL EDUCATORS IN EXPLANATION OF THE LACK OF AVOCATIONAL HORTICULTURE PROGRAMS IN MOST OHIO PUBLIC SCHOOLS AS RANKED IN ORDER OF MEAN SCORE VALUES Standard Factor Mean Score* Deviation There is a general lack of under standing of the nature and significance of horticulture. 3.91a 0.92 There is a lack of qualified teachers. 3.72a 0.91 Facilities are too costly in terms of the number which would be served 3.68a 1.16 There is a lack of administrative and organizational structure to conduct the program. 3.13 b 0.99 Promotion of such programs by educa tional leaders is limited because of limited potential for meeting student needs. 3.09 be 1.03 Most students are not interested in horticulture on either a vocational or avocational basis. 3.03 bed 0.90 There is a lack of suitable educa tional materials and teaching aids for conducting such courses. 2.61 cde 0.81 Limited educational value of such programs for many students. 2.30 e 0.99 *Scale - 5=very significant, 4=considerable significance, 3-some significance, 2=little significance, l=no significance No significant difference at the .05 level between mean scores marked with the same letter. Source: Table 52, Appendix B 141 basis of mean score values, the industry leaders ranked the lack of suitable educational materials and teaching aids for conducting courses as the least important reason for explaining the lack of program offerings while the non-agricultural educators placed this item- next to last in importance. Horticultural industry leaders considered the general lack of understanding of the nature and significance of horticulture to be the most important reason for explaining the lack of avocational horticulture offerings in Ohio schools. Such findings are shown in Table 27. Additional comments received from two of the respond ents regarding the lack of avocational horticulture in the public schools indicated that youth at the high school level were not too interested in horticulture and that interest must be developed in the elementary school. It was also mentioned that the lack of such programs in the schools might be related to a lack of communications be tween the educators and the industry. Respondent Opinions as to Methods for Acquainting and Interesting Youth in Horticulture Data supplied by agricultural educators indicate that public school horticulture courses and activities, horticulture project work in youth organizations, individual 142 TABLE 27 OPINIONS OP HORTICULTURAL INDUSTRY LEADERS IN EXPLANATION OF THE LACK OF AVOCATIONAL HORTICULTURE PROGRAMS IN MOST OHIO PUBLIC SCHOOLS AS RANKED IN ORDER OF MEAN SCORE VALUES Standard Factor Mean Score* Deviation There is a general lack of under standing of the nature and significance of horticulture. 4.16a 0.77 There is a lack of qualified teachers. 3.69 b 1.02 Facilities are too costly in terms of the number which would be served. 3.67 b 1.27 There is a lack of administrative and organizational structure to conduct the program. 3.54 be 1.27 Promotion of such programs by educational leaders is limited because of limited potential for meeting student needs. 3.49 be 0.98 Most students are not interested in horticulture on either a vocational or avocational basis. 3.16 cd 1.06 Limited educational value of such programs for many students. 2.93 d 1.06 There is lack of suitable educa tional materials and teaching aids for conducting such courses. 2.90 d 1.06 *Scale - 5=very significant, 4=considerable significance, 3=some significance, 2=little significance, l=no significance No significant difference at .05 level between mean scores marked with the same letter. Source: Table53, Appendix B 143 participation in hobby-type horticultural activities, and inspiration from horticulturally oriented persons are of considerable importance in acquainting and inter esting youth in horticulture. Other than for the factor of horticulture project work in youth organizations, there was a significant difference between public school horti culture courses and activities and all factors suggested for acquainting and interesting youth in horticulture. Career day programs about horticulture and public school science courses were considered by agricultural educators to be of lesser importance for acquainting and interesting youth in horticulture than other suggested methods. There was no significant difference between these two factors, but there was a significant difference between these factors and all other suggested factors for acquainting and interesting youth in horticulture. As indicated in Table 29, non-agricultural educators, like agricultural educators, considered public school horticulture courses and activities to be important methods for interesting and acquainting youth in horticulture. These educators considered career day programs about horti culture to be somewhat less effective as a method for acquainting and interesting youth in horticulture than other suggested methods. 144 TABLE 28 OPINIONS OF AGRICULTURAL EDUCATORS REGARDING THE VALUE OF SELECTED FACTORS IN ACQUAINTING AND INTERESTING YOUTH IN HORTICULTURE AS RANKED IN ORDER OF MEAN SCORE VALUES Standard Factor Mean Score* Deviation Public school horticulture courses and activities. 4.43a 0.66 Project work in horticulture offered by youth organizations (4-H, Boy Scouts, etc.) 4.33ab 0.64 Individual participation in hobby type horticultural activities 4.07 be 0.84 Inspiration from horticulturally oriented persons. 4.05 be 0.87 Orientation provided by families engaged in horticultural business enterprises. 3.82 cd 0.80 Career Day programs about horticulture. 3.52 e 0.71 Public school science courses. 3.45 e 0.84 ♦Scale - 5=great value, 4=considerable value, 3=some value, 2«little value, l«no value No significant difference at .05 level between mean scores marked with the same letter. Source: Table 54, Appendix B 145 TABLE 29 OPINIONS OF NON-AGRICULTURAL EDUCATORS REGARDING THE VALUE OF SELECTED FACTORS IN ACQUAINTING AND INTERESTING YOUTH IN HORTICULTURE AS RANKED IN ORDER OF MEAN SCORE VALUES Factor Mean Score* Standard Deviation Public school horticulture courses and activities 4.26a 0.70 Project work in horticulture offered by youth organizations (4-H, Boy Scouts, etc.) 3.86 b 0.73 Individual participation in hobby type horticultural activities 3.80 b 0.72 Inspiration from horticulturally oriented persons 3.66be 0.87 Orientation provided by families engaged in horticultural business enterprises 3.62 be 0.84 Public school science courses 3.54 bed 0.82 Career day programs about horticulture 3.20 d 0.87 *Scale - 5=great value, 4=considerable value, 3=some value, 2=little value, l=no value No significant difference at the .05 level between mean scores marked with the same letter. Source: Table 55, Appendix B Data in Table 30 indicates that horticultural indus try leaders considered inspiration from horticulturally oriented persons, public school horticulture courses and activities, project work in horticulture offered by youth organizations, and orientation provided by families in 146 TABLE 30 OPINIONS OF HORTICULTURAL INDUSTRY LEADERS REGARDING THE VALUE OF SELECTED FACTORS IN ACQUAINTING AND INTERESTING YOUTH IN HORTICULTURE AS RANKED IN ORDER OF MEAN SCORE VALUES Standard Factor Mean Score* Deviation Inspiration from horticulturally oriented persons 4.80 a 0.90 Public school horticulture courses and activities 4.00 ab 0.88 Project work in horticulture offered by youth organizations (4-H, Boy Scouts) 3.89 abc 0.76 Orientation provided by families engaged in horticultural business enterprises 3.89 abc 0.86 Individual participation in hobby type horticultural activities 3.75 bed 0.81 Career day programs about horticulture 3,44 de 0.72 Public school science courses 3.20 e 0.96 ♦Scale - 5=great value, 4=considerable value, 3=some value, 2=little value, and l=no value No significant difference at .05 level between mean scores marked with the same letter. Source: Table 56, Appendix B horticultural business enterprises, to be of considerable importance in acquainting and interesting youth in horti culture. There was no significant difference between these four suggested methods in this respect. 147 The industry leaders, like the agricultural and non-agricultural educators, considered career days con cerning horticulture and public school science courses to be of lesser importance for interesting youth in horti culture than other methods and procedures. Such differ ences were significantly different. In reviewing the findings in Tables 28, 29, and 30, it appears that the respondents preferred structured, intensive programs such as those offered in the public schools as the most effective method for acquainting and interesting youth in horticulture. The data also suggest that career days as conducted at this time may not be as effective as other methods for acquainting and interest ing youth in horticulture. A number of respondents provided other suggested methods of acquainting and interesting youth in horticulture. These suggestions are reported in Table 31. Respondent Opinions as to the Best Means for Providing Citizens With Horticultural Information Required for Avocational Horticultural Pursuits Respondents considered post high school courses in horticulture, consultations with horticulturally trained personnel, and course work in horticultural subjects in the public schools to be most important methods for 148 TABLE 31 SUGGESTED METHODS FOR ACQUAINTING AND INTERESTING YOUTH IN HORTICULTURE Methods for Acquainting and Number of Times Interesting Suggested Work experience 7 High school counseling 3 Teacher personality and ability in horticulture 2 Advertisements in magazines and television 1 Community activities 1 Garden clubs 1 Horticultural science films on television 1 Personal and letter contact by horticulture faculty 1 Pre-vocational courses during grades 5-9 1 Tours of greenhouse and farms 1 Work opportunities in horticulture 1 providing citizens with horticultural information required for avocational horticulture pursuits. Horticultural information obtained from radio, television, and news papers was considered by respondents to have somewhat less value as a means for providing citizens with needed horticultural information for avocational pursuits than several other suggested methods. From the information in Table 32 it is seen that the agricultural educators placed considerable importance 149 TABLE 32 OPINIONS OF AGRICULTURAL EDUCATORS AS TO THE BEST MEANS FOR PROVIDING CITIZENS WITH HORTICULTURAL INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR AVOCATIONAL HORTICULTURAL PURSUITS AS RANKED IN ORDER OF MEAN SCORE VALUES Standard Educational Activity or Program Mean Score* Deviation Post high school courses in horticulture • a 0.71 Consultations with horticulturally trained personnel 4.16 a 0.79 Course work obtained in horti cultural subjects in the public schools 4.04 ab 0.79 Participation in out-of-school youth educational programs in horticulture 3.80 b 0.65 Horticultural information obtained from radio, TV, and newspapers 3.49 c 0.65 ♦Scale - 5=great value, 4=considerable value, 3=some value, 2=little value, l=no value No significant difference at .05 level between mean scores makred with the same letter. Source: Table 57, Appendix B on post high school courses in horticulture, consultations with horticulturally trained personnel,and course work obtained in horticultural subjects in public schools as a means for providing useful horticultural information to citizens. No significant difference was found between any of these three methods for providing citizens with horticultural information needed for avocational horti 150 culture pursuits. The educators placed a lesser import ance on radio, television, and newspapers as a means for providing horticultural information to amateur horti culturists. The mass media approach to providing citizens with horticultural information required for avocational horticulture pursuits was significantly different from all other suggested procedures. Non-agricultural educators considered course work in horticultural subjects in the public schools and post high school setting to be effective methods for providing citizens with needed horticultural information. There was no significant difference between these two methods. However, post high school courses in horticulture were not significantly different from consultations with horti culturally trained persons or participation in out-of school youth educational programs in horticulture as means for providing useful horticultural information to citizens. This group, like the agricultural educators, placed lesser value on radio, television, and newspapers as a means of providing horticultural education to citizens who could use it. This information is shown in Table 33. Data in Table 34 reveal that horticultural industry leaders placed considerable value on consultation with horticulturally trained persons and post high school 151 TABLE 33 OPINIONS OF NON-AGRICULTURAL EDUCATORS AS TO THE BEST MEANS FOR PROVIDING CITIZENS WITH HORTICULTURAL INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR AVOCATIONAL HORTICULTURAL PURSUITS AS RANKED IN ORDER OF MEAN SCORE VALUES Stan3arcT” Educational Activity or Program Mean Score* Deviation Course work obtained in horti 4.26 a 0.78 cultural subjects in the public schools Post high school courses in 3.97 ab 0.89 horticulture Consultations with horticulturally 3.76 be 0.60 trained personnel Participation in out-of-school 3.66 be 0.80 youth educational programs in horticulture (4-H, Boy Scouts, etc.) Horticultural information obtained 3.14 d 0.55 from radio, TV, and newspapers *Scale- 5=great value, 4=considerable value, 3=some value, 2=little value, l=no value No significant difference at .05 level between mean scores marked with the same letter. Source: Table 58, Appendix B courses in horticulture as a means for providing citizens with needed horticultural information for avocational pursuits. Horticultural subject matter disseminated t>y means of radio, television, and newspaper was considered by the industry leaders to be of lesser value than other suggested methods for providing needed information to 152 citizens for avocational horticultural activities. These differences in values were found to be significant. TABLE 34 OPINIONS OP HORTICULTURAL INDUSTRY LEADERS REGARDING THE BEST MEANS FOR PROVIDING CITIZENS WITH HORTICULTURAL INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR AVOCATIONAL HORTICULTURAL PURSUITS AS RANKED IN ORDER OF MEAN SCORE VALUES Standard Educational Activity or Program Mean Score* Deviation Consultation with horticulturally 4.03 a 0.76 trained personnel Post high school courses in 3.95 a 0.72 horticulture Course work obtained in horticul 3.65 b 0.78 tural subjects in the public schools Participation in out of school 3.60 b 0.85 youth educational programs in horticulture Horticultural information 3.16 c 0.78 obtained from radio, TV, and newspapers *Scale- 5=great value, 4=considerable value, 3=some value, 2=little value, l=no value No significant difference at .05 level between mean scores marked with the same letter. Source: Table 59, Appendix B The investigator would concur that consultations with'horticulturally trained personnel can be quite desir able in providing needed horticultural information to 153 citizens. However, it should be pointed out that this approach to providing horticultural education is limited by the lack of horticulturally trained personnel to pro vide needed information to a potentially very large consumer audience. Other educational methods or prggrams suggested by the respondents for providing horticultural information needed by citizens for avocational pursuits included Extension Service publications, trade references and books, and garden club programs. These suggestions identify potentially valuable means for providing horticultural information to citizens who could use such information for avocational horticulture pursuits. Respondent Opinions as to Those Who Should Make Pro posals for Initiating Horticultural Programs in Public Schools A study of data in Table 35 reveals information of potential value in explaining the relatively few Ohio schools offering horticultural programs with either vocational or avocational orientation to Ohio youth. The response pattern in the case of each respondent group is such that it is difficult to make any accurate assessments as to who should take the initiative for making horticul tural proposals for possible adoption by the policy making TABLE 35 RESPONDENT OPINIONS AS TO THOSE WHO SHOULD MAKE PROPOSALS FOR INITIATING HORTICULTURAL PROGRAMS IN OHIO SCHOOLS Respondent Group Group Who Should Agricultural Non-Agricultural Horticultural All Initiate Educators Educators Industry Leaders Respondents Proposal Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Interested local 14 25.5 9 25.7 4 6.1 27 17.3 citizens Recommendations of 8 14.5 5 14.4 16 24.2 29 18.6 State Department of Education Officials Horticultural in 11 20.0 6 17.1 16 24.2 33 21.2 dustry representa tives Horticultural 4 7.3 2 5.7 10 15.2 16 10.3 society or organ ization rep resentatives Recommendations of 7 12.7 4 11.4 9 13.6 20 12.8 horticultural educators Combinations of the 11 20.0 9 25.7 11 16.7 31 19.8 above agencies TOTAL 55 100 35 100 66 100 156 100 155 boards of school systems. Perhaps one of the problems in making more educational opportunities in horticulture available to Ohio youth is a lack of fixed responsibility for program initiation. The situation is such that each group considers it the other group's responsibility to initiate proposals; consequently few proposals have been initiated. Four each of agricultural educators, non-agricul tural educators, and horticultural industry leaders made the following comments in regard to who should make pro posals for public school horticultural programs to school administrators. 1. Citizens, horticultural educators, and organiza' tion representatives need to convince State Department of Education officials of the need for horticultural programs in public schools. 2. Combination of all agencies for initiating programs (3 respondents). 3. Combination of horticultural educators and industry leaders. 4. A committee which has surveyed community needs. 5. Interest of students. 6. State Department of Education officials and horticultural educators (2 respondents). 7. By whomever controls the funds. 156 8. Professional staff responsible for designing a total school program. 9. Parents and school personnel. Respondent Opinions as to the Grade Level for Making Initial Horticulture Course Offerings in the Public Schools A study of data in Table 36 reveals that the respond ents considered junior high school the most appropriate time for making initial horticulture course offerings in the public schools. Approximately one-fourth of the agri cultural educators and non-agricultural educators, however, considered the primary grades to be an appropriate time for making initial horticultural offerings. Several of the horticultural industry leaders considered high school the most appropriate time for making initial course offerings. It should be noted at this point that considerable emphasis in horticultural instruction is given at the third grade level in the Cleveland schools, although kindergart- ners are provided with some exposure to horticultural sub ject matter. TABLE 36 APPROPRIATE GRADE LEVELS FOR MAKING INITIAL HORTICULTURE COURSE OFFERINGS IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS Respondent Groujp Grade Level for Agricultural Non-Agricultural Horticultural Ail Initial Offer Educators Educators Industry Leaders Respondents ings Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Primary Grades 12 21.8 6 17.1 5 7.6 23 14.7 (grades 1-3) Intermediate Grades 15 27.3 9 25.7 9 13.6 33 21.2 (grades 4-6) Junior High Schools 25 45.4 14 40.0 32 48.5 71 45.6 (grades 7-9) Senior High Schools 3 5.5 6 17.2 20 30.3 29 18.5 (grades 10-12) TOTAL 55 100 35 100 66 100 156 100 158 Respondent Opinions as to the Type Students Which Can Best be Served by Vocational Horticultural Programs According to data supplied by the respondents in the study, courses in vocational horticulture are appro priate to students of all ability levels. Of the 156 respondents,102 indicated that such was the case. Only four of the respondents specifically indicated that course work in vocational horticulture was most appropriate to the gifted. Seventy of the respondents, however, consider ed vocational horticulture to be best suited for the average and below average students. Fifteen of the re spondents indicated that vocational horticulture courses could best serve disadvantaged youth. This information is revealed in Table 37. Respondent Opinions as to the Type of Students Which Can Best be Served by Avocational Programs in Horticulture Of the 156 respondents in the study, 96 indicated that avocational course offerings in horticulture would be appropriate to students of all ability levels. Fifty- six respondents indicated that avocational horticulture courses would be most appropriate to the gifted and above average student. Fifty-four respondents considered the courses most suited to the average and below average students. Such findings are seen in Table 38. 159 TABLE 37 TYPES OF STUDENTS WHICH CAN BEST BE SERVED BY VOCATIONAL PROGRAMS IN HORTICULTURE (N=156) Type of Student Agricul- Non-Agri- Horti- Total tural cultural cultural Educators Educators Industry Leaders . The gifted 2 2 0 4 The above average 6 7 7 20 The average 11 12 23 46 The below average 5 9 10 24 The disadvantaged 5 5 5 15 Some students from 40 22 40 102 each of the above groups TABLE 38 TYPES OF STUDENTS WHICH CAN BEST BE SERVED BY AVOCATIONAL PROGRAMS IN HORTICULTURE (N=156) Type of Student Agricul Non-Agri- Horti Total tural cultural cultural Educators Educators Industry Leaders The gifted 4 2 9 15 The above average 9 9 23 41 The average 8 10 19 37 The below average 4 5 8 17 The disadvantaged 3 3 4 10 Students from each 41 22 33 96 of the above groups . 160 Respondent Opinions as to the Potential Value of School Year, Semester, and Six Week Unit Horticultural Course Offerings for Providing Ohio Youth with Educational Opportunities in Horticulture According to agricultural educators, school-year course offerings in horticulture would be of greater potential value for providing Ohio youth with educational opportunities in horticulture than would six-week offer ings. According to the data in Table 39, however, there was no significant difference between school year and semester course offerings as to potential value for providing youth with educational opportunities in horti culture. Also, there was no significant difference between semester and six-week course offerings as to potential value for providing youth with educational opportunities in horticulture. According to information in Table 40, non-agricul tural educators considered school-year course offerings, semester course offerings, and six-week course offerings from some to considerable value in providing educational opportunities in horticulture to Ohio youth. No signifi cant difference was found between school-year, semester, and six-week unit horticulture course offerings for pro viding educational opportunities in horticulture to Ohio youth. 161 TABLE 39 OPINIONS OP AGRICULTURAL EDUCATORS AS TO THE POTENTIAL VALUE OF SCHOOL-YEAR, SEMESTER, AND SIX-WEEK-UNIT HORTICULTURAL COURSE OFFERINGS FOR PROVIDING OHIO YOUTHS WITH EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES IN HORTICULTURE Standard Type of Program______Mean Score* Deviation School year course offerings in 4.05 a 0.78 public schools dealing with such topics as home landscaping and beautification, flower arranging, basic flower, fruit, and vegetable gardening, the selection and care of plants in the home, etc. Semester course offerings in public 3.93 ab 0.81 schools dealing with such topics as home landscaping and beautification, flower arranging, basic flower, fruit, and vegetable gardening, the selec tion and care of plants in the home, etc. Six week units of instruction in 3.63 b 0.89 avo'cational or vocational horti- culture which can serve as modules or units of instruction in courses such as home economics, general science, vocational agriculture, and biology. *Scale- 5=great value, 4=considerable value, 3=some value, 2=very little value, l=no value. No significant difference at .05 level between mean scores marked with the same letter. Source: Table 61, Appendix B 162 TABLE 40 OPINIONS OF NON-AGRICULTURAL EDUCATORS AS TO THE POTENTIAL VALUE OF SCHOOL-YEAR, SEMESTER, AND SIX-WEEK-UNIT HORTICULTURAL COURSE OFFERINGS FOR PROVIDING EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES IN HORTICULTURE TO OHIO YOUTH Type of Program Mean Score* Standard ______Deviation Semester course offerings in public 3.76 a 0.97 schools dealing with such topics as home landscaping and beauti fication, flower arranging, basic flower, fruit, and vegetable gardening, the selection and care of plants in the home, etc. School-year course offerings in 3.76 a 0.94 public schools dealing with such topics as home landscaping and beautification, flower arranging, basic flower, fruit and vegetable gardening, the selection and care of plants in the home, etc. Six-week units or instruction in 3.64 a 0.92 avocational or vocational horti- culture which can serve as modules or units of instruction in courses such as home economics, general science, vocational agriculture, and biology. *Scale- 5=great value, 4=considerable value, 3=some value, 2=very little value, 1-no value. No significant difference at .05 level between mean scores marked with the same letter. Source: Table 62, Appendix B Like non-agricultural educators, horticultural industry leaders considered semester, school-year, and 163 six-week unit horticulture course offerings from some to considerable value in providing educational opportunities in horticulture to Ohio youth. As indicated in Table 41, there was no significant difference between the various suggested types of course offerings for providing youth with educational opportunities in horticulture. Respondent Opinions as to a Desirable Educational Program in Horticulture for Ohio Youth One of the fundamental concerns of the study was that of a desciption of a desirable educational program in horticulture for Ohio youth. In providing information directed to this concern it is seen in Table 42 that 102 of the respondents, or approximately two-thirds of the group, indicated that a desirable youth educational program in horticulture would include: introductory, exploratory type course offerings in the primary, inter mediate, and junior high grades; voluntary vocational and avocational courses in horticulture in the high school; supplemental project work in youth organizations as desired by each individual. Approximately 20 per cent of the respondents were of the opinion that vocational and avocational horticulture course offerings to all school youth on a voluntary basis would constitute a desirable program. None of the respondents were of the 164 opinion that youth organizations alone should bear the major responsibility for providing youth educational opportunities in horticulture, yet this is the situation in most areas of Ohio as presented in previous findings in this report. TABLE 41 OPINIONS OF HORTICULTURAL INDUSTRY LEADERS AS TO THE POTENTIAL VALUE OF SCHOOL-YEAR, SEMESTER, AND SIX- WEEK UNIT HORTICULTURAL COURSE OFFERINGS FOR SERVING OHIO YOUTHS Type of Program Mean Score* Standard Deviation Semester course offerings in pub- 3.75 a 0.80 lie schools dealing with such topics as home landscaping and beautification, flower arranging, basic flower, fruit and vegetable gardening, the selection and care of plants in the home, etc. School-year course offerings in 3.63 a 0.81 public schools dealing with such topics as home landscaping and beautification, flower arranging, basic flower, fruit, and veget able gardening, the selection and care of plants in the home, etc. Six-week units of instruction in 3.48 a 0.90 avocational or vocational horti culture which can serve as modules or units of instruction in courses such as home economics, general science, vocational agriculture, and biology. . *Scale- 5=great value, 4=considerable value, 3=some value, 2=little value, l=no value. No significant difference at .05 level between mean scores marked with the same letter. Source: Table 63, Appendix B TABLE 42 A DESIRABLE EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM IN HORTICULTURE FOR OHIO YOUTHS Agricultural Non-Agricultural Horticultural All Type of Program Educators______Educators______Industry Leaders Respondents ______Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Introductory, ex- 39 70.9 23 67.7 40 60.6 102 65.8 ploratory type horticulture course offerings in the primary, inter mediate, and junior high grades; volun tary vocational and avocational courses in horticulture in the high school; supplemental pro ject work in youth organizations as desired. Both vocational and 9 16.4 8 23.5 13 19.7 30 19.4 avocational horti culture course offerings to all school youth on a voluntary basis. Voluntary vocational 4 7.3 2 5.9 7 10.6 13 8.4 horticulture offer ings to high school youth inter 165 ested in a vocation in horticulture. TABLE 42 (CONTINUED) Agricultural Non-Agricultural Horticultural All Type of Program Educators Educators Industry Leaders Respondents Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Avocational offer 1 1.8 1 2.9 5 7.6 7 4.5 ings in horticul ture to all school youth on a volun tary basis. Other 2 3.6 0 0 1 1.5 3 1.9 Interested youth 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 should be pro vided with educa tional opportun ities in horticul ture only through the programs of youth organizations such as 4-H clubs, Boy Scouts, etc. and not through the public school TOTAL 55 100 34 100 66 100 155 100 167 Two of the respondents indicated the desirability of (1) diversified cooperative training and (2) a com bination of vocational and avocational course offerings to all school youth on a voluntary basis along with pro vision for interested youth to obtain educational opportunities through the programs of youth organizations as desirable educational programs in horticulture for Ohio youth. This concludes the findings of the survey. CHAPTER VI SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS The Problem The purpose of this study was to collect and present information of potential value for educational leaders in developing adequate, desirable educational programs in horticulture for Ohio youth. Need for the Study The study was conducted for the following reasons: 1. To meet the future needs of Ohio youth in the area of horticultural education, it is necessary to have basic information regarding the existing pro grams. This study was aimed at securing informa tion which might be helpful to the following groups in deciding on future programing in the area of youth education in horticulture: a) Agricultural educators b) Administrators of horticultural programs c) School officials responsible for policies, programs, and curriculum d) Horticultural industry leaders e) Officials of youth organizations providing educational opportunities in horticulture 168 169 2. Opportunities in horticulture are unknown to many of our citizens. Information is needed as to how to provide adequate educational opportunities to Ohio youth so that they may learn of opportunities in horticultural pursuits. 3. There have been limited, if any, previous efforts to determine the extent to which Ohio youth are provided with, and take advantage of, educational opportunities in horticulture. This study provides information of past and present efforts to educate youth in horticulture and supplies opinions of well qualified respondents as to desirable program attributes. 4. The study provides in a consolidated report, infor mation useful in documenting statements regarding educational programs in horticulture for Ohio youth. At the present time, youth horticulture program information is available but found in diverse sources. Objectives Specific objectives guiding the development of the study were as follows: 1. To identify and describe the Ohio youth educa tional programs in horticulture during the period 1960-1967, and to ascertain the extent of youth participation in such programs. 170 2. To secure the opinions and perceptions of agricultural educators, non-agricultural educators, and horticultural industry leaders concerning the: a) Goals and educational values of youth pro grams in horticulture. b) Factors which may limit the implementation of youth educational programs in horticul ture. c) Procedures for providing adequate education al opportunities in horticulture to Ohio youth. 3. To make specific suggestions and recommendations for future educational programs in horticulture for Ohio youth using the findings of the study. Methodology in Brief The study was conducted in two phases. In Phase I, information for describing the existing programs was collected from census data, statistical reports, and by interviews and correspondence with officials of organiza tions providing youth educational opportunities in horti culture. Phase II of the study was designed to obtain opinions regarding desirable youth horticultural program attributes. 171 A purposive sample of 156 respondents provided opinions regarding youth horticulture programs in response to a 20 item opinionnaire. The survey respondents included 66 Ohio horticultural industry leaders, 55 agricultural educators, and 35 non-agricultural educators. The survey information was analyzed by descriptive statistics resulting from the BMD 08D Cross Tabulation with Variable Stacking Computer Program. Duncan's New Multiple Range Test for Significant Differences Between Means was the principal statistical procedure used in the study. The test was used at the .05 protection level. CONCLUSIONS The conclusions and supporting data resulting from this study are as follows: 1. Educational opportunities in horticulture for most Ohio youth are those made available by out-of-school youth pro grams: youth in relatively few Ohio communities have educational opportunities through the program of the Ohio public schools. Such a conclusion is based on findings which revealed that during the period 1960-1967, eight agencies provided most of the educational opportunities in horticulture to Ohio youth on an organized basis. Only two of the programs were conducted through the Ohio public school system, with 172 six programs being conducted primarily as out-of-school youth organizational programs. The agencies providing educational opportunities in horticulture to youth during the period 1960-1967 were the following: a) The Horticulture Program of the Cleveland Public Schools serving an average of 20,112 pupils annually. b) The 4—H Club program of the Ohio Cooperative Extension Service with an average of 5,495 members carrying horticulture projects annually. c) The Junior Garden Club Program of the Ohio Association of Garden Clubs Inc. with an average yearly enrollment of 845 members. d) The Ohio Vocational Horticulture Program con ducted through local schools, and supervised by the Agricultural Education Service of the Ohio Department of Education, with an average of 588 students per year. e) The Merit Badge Program in Horticulture conducted by the Boy Scouts of America with an average of 479 Scout participants annually. f) The Youth Gardens Program at the Ohio State Fair with an average participation of 55 youth each year. 173 g) The National Junior Horticultural Association Program conducted through the Department of Horticulture and Forestry at The Ohio State University with an average of 31 participants per year. h) The Young America Gardens Programs for which the exact number of Ohio youth served in the program per year is unknown due to lack of Ohio statistics. There was considerable variation in the intensity and duration of instruction and types of opportunities available through the programs. 2. Relatively few youth in Ohio are receiving horticultural instruction in a State where horticulture is an important industry and in a nation where gardening is the most pop ular adult hobby. This conclusion is based on the following findings of the study. a) According to U. S. Bureau of Census figures there were some 2,852,453 youth in Ohio between the ages of 8 and 21 years in 1967. During 1967, approxi mately 27,000 youth or 0.95 per cent of Ohio youth between 8 and 21 years of age took advantage of educational opportunities in horticulture. 174 b) Horticulture is an important commercial industry in the State of Ohio. The State ranks first in the production of greenhouse vegetables, second in the production of tomatoes for processing, third in the production of landscape plants, and is fourth in the production of floral crops. The total commerical value of Ohio horticultural crops in 1964 was approximately $140,000,000. c) In a study conducted by the Union Fork and Hoe Company of Columbus, Ohio, it was found that there are about 8,100,000 home gardeners who work in the nation's 45,000,000 gardens. Gardening is the most popular adult hobby in the country. 3. Horticultural instruction can best serve as vocational education for youth 16 to 21 years of age. In the survey, eighty six per cent, or 130 of the 156 respondents, considered the principal role of horti culture courses for youth of ages 16-21 to be vocational education. 4. Horticultural instruction can serve as enrichment educa tion for youth 13 to 15 years of age. Over one half of the respondents in the study con sidered the principal role of horticulture courses for 175 13 to 15 year old youth to be that of enrichment education, 5, Horticultural instruction can serve as enrichment and basic science education for youth 8 to 12 years of age. The respondents were split over the principal role of horticulture courses for 8 to 12 year old youth. Over 51 per cent considered the principal role of such instruc tion to be enrichment education while 43 per cent consider ed the principal role to be basic science education. 6. Vocational and avocational horticultural offerings in public schools have considerable potential value for meeting youth educational needs. Such a conclusion was based on these findings: a) Seventy per cent of the 156 respondents were of the opinion that high school programs in vocational horticulture could be of considerable to great value for meeting youth needs and providing trained personnel for industry. b) Fifty five per cent of the 156 respondents were of the opinion that public school programs in avocational horticulture could be of considerable to great value for meeting youth educational needs for consumer education and for making pro ductive use of leisure time. 176 7. At the present time there are insufficient educational opportunities in horticulture for Ohio youth. This conclusion is based on the opinions of over two thirds of the respondents to the effect that an in sufficient number of opportunities currently existed to meet the needs of Ohio youth who could profit from horticultural instruction. 8. The general lack of understanding of the nature and significance of horticulture and the lack of qualified teachers are important factors in explaining the lack of avocational horticulture offerings in most Ohio schools. This conclusion is based on the following findings: a) The three respondent groups were in agreement that the general lack of understanding of the nature and significance of horticulture and the lack of qualified teachers were important factors explaining the lack of avocational horticulture programs in most Ohio schools. The factor of the general lack of understanding of the nature and significance of horticulture had mean score 177 50 values of 4.57, 3.91, and 4.16. The factor of lack of qualified teachers for explaining the lack of avocational horticulture in Ohio schools had mean score values of 4.31, 3.72, and 3.69 respectively. b) Non-agricultural educators and horticultural industry leaders also indicated that the cost of required facilities in terms of numbers served was an important factor in explaining the lack of avocational horticulture offerings in Ohio public schools. This factor had mean score values of 3.68 and 3.67 respectively. 9. Horticultural instruction can be important in assisting students to become more selective and knowledgeable con sumers of horticultural products. This educational value of horticultural instruction had mean score values of 4.15, 3.80, and 3.62 respectively. 10. Horticultural instruction can be important in assisting 50 Mean score values as reported in conclusions 9-16 and 19 were computed for the responses of agricultural educa tors, non-agricultural educators and horticultural industry leaders respectively. Mean score values are interpreted on the basis of a scale where 5 was of great significance or value, 4 was of considerable significance or value, 3 was of some significance or value, 2 was of little significance or value, and 1 was of no significance or value. X78 students in becoming acquainted with career opportunities in horticulture. This educational value of horticultural instruction had mean score values of 4.04, 4.06, and 4.12. 11. Horticultural instruction can be important in assisting students in developing salable skills for occupational entry in the horticultural industry. This educational value of horticultural instruction had mean score values of 3.98, 4.26, and 3.92. 12. Horticultural instruction can be important in assisting students in learning specific skills for producing plants for food and ornamental purposes. This educational value of horticultural instruction had mean score values of 3.95, 4.11, and 3.86. 13. Horticultural instruction can be important in assisting students in gaining a greater appreciation and understanding of the natural world and in learning to become more depend able, reliable, and responsible citizens. This educational value of horticultural instruction had mean score values of 3.93, 3.71, and 3.62. 14. Public school horticulture courses and activities, project work in horticulture offered by youth organizations, 179 and inspiration provided by horticulturally oriented persons can be important methods for acquainting and interesting youth in horticulture. a) This conclusion is supported by agricultural and non-agricultural educators who were of the opinion that the most important methods for acquainting and interesting youth in horticulture were public school horticulture courses and activities (mean scores of 4.43, and 4.26) and project work in horticulture offered by youth organizations (mean score values of 4.33 and 3.86). Horticultural industry leaders considered inspiration by horticulturally oriented persons (mean score value of 4.08) public school horticulture courses and activities, (mean score value of 4.0) project work in horticulture offered by youth organizations (mean score value of 3.89) and orientation provided by families engaged in horticul tural business enterprises (mean score value of 3.89) to be of most value for acquainting and interesting youth in horticulture. b) All three respondent groups considered career day programs about horticulture (mean scores of 3.52, 3.20, and 3.44) and public school science courses (mean scores of 3.45, 3.54, and 3.20) to be of lesser importance for acquainting and interesting youth in horticulture than other suggested methods. 180 15. Post high school courses in horticulture, consulta tions with horticulturally trained persons'/ and course work obtained in horticultural subjects in public schools can be important methods for providing citizens with horticultural information required for avocational horticultural pursuits. a) This conclusion is based on the respondent opinions that post high school courses in horticulture (mean scores of 4.27, 3.97, and 3.95) consultations with horticulturally trained persons, (mean scores of 4.16, 3.76, and 4.03) and course work obtained in horticultural subjects in public schools (mean scores of 4.04, 4.26, and 3.65) were of most importance for providing citizens with horticultural information required for avocational pursuits. b) Horticultural information obtained from radio, television, and newspapers (mean scores of 3.49, 3.14, and 3.16) were considered to be of lesser value than other suggested methods for providing citizens with horticultural information required for avocational pursuits. 16. There is a lack of agreement as to the agencies which should initiate proposals for horticultural educational programs in Ohio public schools. Diversity of opinion existed among the respondents 181 as to those who should make proposals for initiating horticultural programs in Ohio schools. Slightly over 21 per cent of the respondents indicated that proposals should be initiated by horticultural industry representa tives, 18.6 per cent of the respondents indicated that State Department of Education officials should initiate the proposals, while over seventeen per cent of the group indicated that proposals should be made by interested local citizens. Another 12.8 per cent of the respondents indicated that horticultural educators should initiate the proposals while 10.3 per cent of the group were of the opinion that horticultural society or organization representatives should initiate the program proposals. Approximately one-fifth of the respondents or 19.8 per cent of the total group considered that program proposals should be initiated by various combinations of the above mentioned agencies. 17. Junior high school appears to be the most appropriate grade level for making initial horticulture course offer ings in the public schools. This conclusion was reached on the basis of the following findings: a) Over forty five per cent of the respondents were of the opinion that junior high school was the 182 most appropriate place in the educational pro gram for making initial horticulture course offerings. b) Slightly over one fifth, or 21.2 per cent of the group considered the intermediate grades (grades 4-6) to be the most appropriate level make initial offerings. c) Only one fifth or 18.5 per cent of the group considered senior high school to be the most appropriate time for making initial horti culture course offerings. d) Approximately 15 per cent of the group consider ed the primary grades to be the most appro priate time for making horticultural course offerings in the public schools. 18. Horticulture course offerings can be suitable for students of all ability levels. This conclusion is based on these findings: a) One hundred and two of the 156 respondents were of the opinion that vocational horticulture course offerings could serve students of all ability levels. b) Ninety six of the 156 respondents were of the opinion that avocational horticulture course 183 offerings could serve students of all ability levels. 19. School year, semester, and six week unit course offerings can be of some to considerable value in pro viding Ohio youth with educational opportunities in horticulture. a) Respondent opinions revealed that school year courses dealing with such topics as home land scaping and beautification, flower arranging, basic flower, fruit, and vegetable gardening, and the selection and care of plants would be of some to considerable value (mean score values of 4.05, 3.76, and 3.63) in providing Ohio youth with educational opportunities in horticulture. b) Semester course offerings in public schools dealing with such topics as home landscaping and beautification, flower arranging, basic flower, fruit and vegetable gardening, and the selection and care of plants in the home had mean score values of 3.93, 3.76, and 3.75. c) Six-week units of instruction in avocational or vocational horticulture which could serve as modules or units of instruction in courses 184 such as home economics, general science, voca tional agriculture, and biology had mean score values of 3.63, 3.64, and 3.48. 20. Greater educational opportunities in horticulture should be made available to Ohio youth. This conclusion is based on the following findings of the study: a) Two-thirds of the respondents indicated that there were presently inadequate educational opportunities in horticulture for Ohio youth. b) Respondents were generally optimistic concerning the future importance of horticulture. Eighty- seven per cent of the respondents were of the opinion that the importance of horticulture in contributing to the standard of living in our society would increase. c) Only about 1 in 105 Ohio youth received any type of organized program instruction in horticultural subject matter in 1967. d) Gardening is the most popular adult hobby in the United States. The strong interest of citizens in avocational pursuits in horticulture indicates that many Ohio citizens could possibly profit from instruction in horticultural subject matter. 185 Public school offerings in horticulture were considered by the respondents to be an import ant method for providing citizens with horti cultural information needed for avocational horticultural pursuits. e) Commercially, horticulture is an important industry in the State. Horticultural products had a value of 140 million dollars in Ohio in 1964. Replacement of leadership in the industry is required over a period of time. Education in horticulture can be important for providing qualified industry leaders and pro fessional workers needed in the field of horticulture. f) Other than for an average of 20,112 pupils in the Cleveland Public School Horticulture Pro gram and 588 pupils enrolled in vocational horticulture courses in Ohio high schools during 1960-1967, Ohio youth in most communities had no opportunities to study horticultural subjects in the public schools. 21. A desirable educational program for Ohio youth would include horticultural offerings in the public schools. 196 Over 65 per cent of the study respondents considered that a desirable educational program in horticulture for Ohio youth would consist of introductory, exploratory, course offerings in the primary, intermediate, and junior high grades with voluntary vocational and avocational courses in horticulture in the high school, along with supplemental horticultural project work in youth organi zations as desired. RECOMMENDATIONS The following recommendations are suggested for pro viding increased opportunities in horticulture to Ohio youth, based on the investigator's experience and inter pretations of the findings of the study. 1. It is recommended that greater program support and assistance be given by state educational leaders to the out-of-school agencies offering educational opportunities in horticulture to youth in communities where horticulture programs are not offered by the public schools. Assistance could be in the form of: a) In depth subject matter workshops for local and area leaders. b) Preparation of up-to-date, challenging project materials for participants. 187 c) Assistance to local leaders in conducting effective public information programs about the nature and significance of horticulture. 2. The establishment of a council consisting of such members as a staff member from either the Department of Agricultural Education at The Ohio State University or the Agricultural Education Service of the Ohio Department of Education, a staff member from the Horticulture Depart ment at The Ohio State University, an Ohio horticultural industry leader, a member of the Ohio Association of Secondary School Principals, a member of the Ohio Associa tion of School Board Members, a state guidance supervisor, a staff member from the Ohio Cooperative Extension Service, and a member of the Ohio Association of Garden Clubs, to engage in such activities as the following: a) Establishing guidelines and procedures for initiating horticultural education programs in local communities. b) Establishing criteria for horticultural program approval. Courses would conform to standards for accreditation in the North Central Region. c) Insure that adequate personnel would be available to confer with local community leaders,educational administrators, and policy makers to discuss 188 horticultural education program potentials and possibilities. d) Preparation of program descriptive materials suitable for use by agricultural education supervisors, Extension workers, school admin istrators, and board of education members, community leaders, and horticultural industry leaders. e) Publicity regarding the nature of horticulture and opportunities in the area by such means as newsletters, flyers, spot announcements on television and radio, speaker's bureau talks, school assembly programs, extension programs, and educational exhibits. 3. The designation of at least one assistant state super visor of agricultural education to devote full time to the promotion and development of horticultural education programs within the state. 4. Provisions should be made for securing materials suit able for teaching youth horticultural subject matter particularly at the junior and senior high school levels. 5. The appointment of a full time teacher-educator at the state university to implement and expedite teacher training specifically in the area of horticulture. The teacher 189 education program should be accelerated to prepare teachers to assume responsibilities in both vocational and avoca- tional horticulture classrooms and to assist in training horticultural Extension specialists. 6. Efforts must be directed to convince educational leaders that effective programs in avocational horticulture need not involve costly expenditures for facilities such as greenhouses. Several naturally occuring teaching aids are available to the teacher of horticulture which could be utilized to provide interesting, effective courses at expenditures probably no greater than those for a number of courses currently offered in the public schools. By using the multitude of available teaching aids, guest speakers, field trips, films, specimens, and study guides, effective school year courses in horticulture could be offered to Ohio youth if qualified teachers were available. 7. In view of the fact that the horticulture program in Cleveland Public schools has been so successful throughout the years, it is suggested that other school system officials investigate the potential educational value of horticultural programs for their own systems. Perhaps the benefits of successful programs in horticulture should be made avail able to Ohio youth in areas other than the Cleveland area. 8. The Ohio educational system should prepare more horti- 190 cultural personnel to assume the many jobs existing in horticultural educational programs, industry, and pro fessional work in the State. SUGGESTIONS FOR ADDITIONAL STUDY 1. A study utilizing a purposive sample of those who may have view points differing from the respondents in this study concerning educational programs in horti culture for Ohio youth. The opinions, viewpoints, and concerns of such a group would be useful in gaining additional information relative to the desir ability of implementing additional youth programs in horticulture. A purposive sample for this proposed study could consist of such respondents as (1) admin istrators of previously existing youth horticultural programs which had been dropped for various reasons, (2) teachers who left the horticulture teaching field to take jobs in other areas, and (3) school board members in communities which had previously offered educational programs in horticulture but which no longer offer such programs. By comparing the results of such a proposed study with the results of this study, educational leaders with responsibilities for program offerings would have the benefit of considerable information regarding youth educational programs in horticulture as needed for the decision making process. A study to determine the image of horticulture as perceived by youth, non-agricultural educators, and the general public. A study to identify factors which may discourage or prevent youth from enrolling in horticultural courses or from carrying horticultural project work. A study to determine whether students would take advantage of additional educational opportunities in horticulture if they were available and of high quality. A study to determine the nature of existing teaching materials for instructing pre-teen and teenage youth in horticultural subject matter. A study to determine if there is adequate transfer of concepts of public school science courses for the solution of practical horticultural problems thus negating the need for horticultural courses. A study should be made to determine the effectiveness of mass media techniques for providing horticultural information to those who can use such information. A study to determine the effectiveness and suitability of presently existing vocational horticulture programs for providing trained personnel for the horticultural industry. APPENDIXES APPENDIX A 194 OPINIONNAIRE RETURNS Respondent Group Number Number Percent ______Sent Returned Return Agricultural Education Staff, The Ohio State University 11 11 100 Agricultural Education Super visors, Ohio Department of Education 9 8 89 Horticulture and Forestry Staff, The Ohio State University and The Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center 23 21 91 Ohio Canners and Food Pro cessor's Association 16 12 75 Ohio Cooperative Extension Service Personnel 13 12 92 Ohio Florist's Association 25 13 52 Ohio Nurseryman's Association 20 13 65 Ohio State Horticultural Society 23 13 57 Ohio Vegetable & Potato Growers Association 22 17 77 Public School Principals 23 21a 91 Public School Curriculum Directors 11 8 73 School Administrators of Horticulture Programs 3 3 100 State Guidance Supervisors Ohio Department of Education 9 8 89 Total 208 160 77 aTwo teacher replies eliminated from the study therefore N - 19 rather than N = 21. 195 OHIO •ILUANlIm TON HENRY PORTAGE HURON [n e o in a j u n w t ITARK ■YANOOT HERCCR MOLHEt SHELBY WON COSHOCTON O E l HQNTCONfflJ S»A*M„ /CUNXON ROU ATHENI VINTON, NEICI IFIRE CAILU SCIOTO FIGURE 1 Geographic Distribution of All Respondents X96 OHIO ■IllU V) I FULTON ERIE PORTAGE IKEOINA SUMMIT R IC H l'O NAROIR MARION HOLMES UNION COSHOCTON OEL UIANI BELNONT CLARA FAIRFIELO IPERRT GREENE NQNTCOMf >| HOCKING IUTLER JcuntoT PIKE FIGURE 2 Geographic Distribution of Agricultural Educator Respondents 197 OHIO ■ILHAM [TULTQR ERIC HANCOCK VANlERT RICHL'O CARROLL LOOAIl URIQN JHELBT COSHOCTON OCL LICKING CLARK faNEENE MORGAN BUTLER ROU VINTON MEtCt PINE SCIOTO FIGURE 3 Geographic Distribution of Non-Agricultural Educator Respondents L 198 OHIO wiuilwi iruiioi TRUMBULL PORTAGE HURON M l RERT MERCER HOLMES UNION INSIST COSHOCTON OEL iS BELMONT CLARK iu fL E R MEICt 'PINE GALLtA SCIOTO FIGURE 4 Geographical Distribution of Horticultural Industry Leader Respondents THE OHIO STATE U IN IVEKSi jl x COLUMBUS, OHIO 43210 199 COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE AND HOME ECONOMICS DEPARTMENT OP Rft/Jtni lailrnctiot—R rifircti—Eittaiioa AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION AcUCUtTUIlL ASUIHItnATKM Duiutxo 2120 F rm Roar Tuu ko h i 292-6221 (Addressed to Agricultural Education Staff, The Ohio State University and Agricultural Education Supervisors, Ohio Department of Education) In order to collect some much needed Information regarding educational opportunities in horticulture for Ohio youth, I am writing to request a few minutes of your time for completing the enclosed opinionnaire. Results of the study will he used in making suggestions for future youth educational programs in horticulture. I would appreciate receiving the return by April 20. Your assistance and cooperation in this project is greatly appreciated. 1 will inform you of the results when available. Respectfully yours, James p. Utzinger JDU:ic Graduate Student Enclosure THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY zoo COLUMBUS, OHIO 43210 DEPARTMENT OF COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE AND IIOMF. ECONOMICS AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION RetiJentlnitrittlion—R atm k—Exfiarioa ACllCULTUtAL A bm iniiiiatidn Buiidiho 2120 F trri K oap TiLtpnoNL 293-6321 April 8, 1969 Addressed to State GuidanceSupervisors, selected Ohio school principals, administrators or publxc school hnrf1nultural Droorams, and selected Ohio public school curriculum directors.) As urbanization is progressing at a rapid rate in the state of Ohio, horticulture is assuming increased significance in agricultural education. Ohio is one of the leading states in the nation in the production of horticultural crops. The state ranks first in the production of greenhouse vegetables, second in the pro duction of tomatoes for processing, and third in the production of landscape plants. In 1968 the wholesale value of floral crops in Ohio was approximately $40,000,000. In order to sustain this most important and rapidly expanding field of agriculture our educational system must educate researchers, teachers, and crop producers. Another important aspect of horticultural education is that of assisting our citizens in making productive use cf leisure time through such activities as home landscaping, flower arranging, and flower, fruit and vegetable gardening. To obtain information necessary for planning future youth educational programs in this area, a statewide study directed by Ohio State University staff member, James D. Utzinger, is currently under way. The study is being conducted in cooperation with the Agricultural Education Service of The Ohio Department of Education and The Ohio State University. Your assistance in completing the enclosed opinionnaire will be most helpful in arriving at recommendations for future program development. Please complete the opinionnaire and return it in the enclosed envelope by April 2 0, 1 9 6 9. Your cooperation and assistance in this project is greatly appreciated. Respectfully yours, REB;cr Ralph E. Bender, Chairman Department of Agricultural Education Enclosure A ______State Supervisor of Agricultural Education THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY COLUMBUS, OHIO 43210 201 COLLEKF. OF ACKICUI.TUKE AND HOME ECONOMICS DEPARTMENT OF H n id tn n HOKTICUUUKF. AND EORE5TRV IS27 NtiL Avihui Fhiiuan S. IIowlitt, c h iirm tn CH-29JG027 (Addressed to the Horticulture and Forestry Staff, The Ohio State University, and Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center and selected state, area, and county extension staff.) In order to collect some much needed information regarding educational opportunities in horticulture for Ohio youth, I am writing to request a few minutes of your time for completing the enclosed opinionnaire. Results of the study will he used in making suggestions for future youth educational programs in horticulture. I would appreciate receiving the return hy April 20, Your assistance and cooperation in this project is greatly appreciated. I will inform you of the results when available. Respectfully yours, James D. Utzinger Extension Horticulturist JDU t ss Encl. THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY 202 COLUMBUS, OHIO 43210 COLLEGE UP AGRICULTURE ASI) HOME ECONOMICS DEPARTMENT OF HORTICULTURE AND FORESTRV 1B27 N'r.iL Avlnl-1 FtltMitN S. Howlitt, C /u irm tn 6M-2W 6027 (Addressed to selected members of the Ohio Florist*s Association.) Recognizing the importance to our industry of interesting capable youth in horticulture, a study is presently underway to determine the educational opportunities in horticulture available to Ohio youth. The study is being conducted by extension horticulturist, Jim Utzinger, who plans to use the results of the study to make recommendations for future youth program development. At this time Jim is asking for some assistance from our horti cultural industry leaders in providing opinions relative to youth programs in horticulture. You can be of considerable assistance in the study by taking a few minutes of time to complete the enclosed opinionnaire and returning it in the enclosed addressed envelope by April 20, 1 9 6 9* I have talked with Jim concerning this study and believe it can provide much needed information regarding educational opportunities in horticulture for Ohio youth. Your cooperation and support of this project is greatly appreciated. Respectfully yours, D. C. Kiplinger DCK j s s Encl. THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY 203 COLUMBUS, OHIO 43210 COLLEGE OK AGRICULTURE ANT) HOME ECONOMICS DEPARTMENT OP RriiJenti litim itliun— H cttutch— V.xteniiun HORTICULTURE AND FORESTRY 1127 N iil AvtKUt FlttHAN S. Howlitt. C h iirm in 6H'29J-6027 (Addressed to selected members of the Ohio State Horticultural Society.) Recognizing the importance to our industry of interesting capable youth in horticulture, a study is presently under way to determine the educational opportunities in horti culture available to Ohio youth. The study is being conducted by extension horticulturist, Jim Utzinger, who plans to use the results of the study to make recommendations for future youth program development. At this time Jim is asking for some assistance from our horticultural industry leaders in providing opinions relative to youth programs in horticulture. You can be of considerable assistance in the study by taking a few minutes of time to complete the enclosed opinionnaire and returning it in the enclosed addressed envelope by April 20, 1 9 6 9. I have talked with Jim concerning this study and believe it can provide much needed information regarding educa tional opportunities in horticulture for Ohio youth. Your cooperation and support of this project is greatly appreciated. Respectfully yours, Eldon S. Banta ESB:ss Encl. THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY COLUMBUS, OHIO 43210 204 COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE AND HOME ECONOMICS DEPARTMENT OP R tuJtnii titiirtittiutt—lieitjreh—Eiieitiio* HORTICULTURE AND FORESTRY 1S27 NiiL Avenui F lltu ta S. Hnvrtirr, Chairman twmwn (Addressed to selected members of the Ohio Vegetable and Potato Grower's Association.) Recognizing the importance to our industry of interesting capable youth in horticulture, a study is presently under way to determine the educational opportunities in horti culture available to Ohio youth. The study is being conducted by extension horticulturist, Jim Utzinger, who plans to use the results of the study to make recommendations for future youth program development. At this time Jim is asking for some assistance from our horticultural industry leaders in providing opinions relative to youth programs in horticulture. You can be of considerable assistance in the study by taking a few minutes of time to complete the enclosed opinionnaire and returning it in the enclosed addressed envelope by April 20, 19&9* I have talked with Jim concerning this study and believe it can provide much needed information regarding educa tional opportunities in horticulture for Ohio youth. Your cooperation and support of this project is greatly appreciated. Respectfully yours, E. C. Wittmeyer ECWs ss Encl. THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY 205 COLUMBUS, OHIO 43210 COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE AND IIOMF. ECONOMICS DEPARTMENT OP fteiiJcnu Iftitrnciiun —KtteJrch—Exttation HORTICULTURE AND FORESTRY 1827 Nut Avxnui Fiiemah S. Howlitt, Chairman GH29J0027 (Addressed to selected members of the Ohio Nurseryman's Association.) Recognizing the importance to our industry of interesting capable youth in horticulture, a study is presently under way to determine the educational opportunities in horti culture available to Ohio youth. The study is being conducted by extension horticulturist, Jim Utzinger, who plans to use the results of the study to make recommendations for future youth program development. At this time Jim is asking for some assistance from our horti cultural industry leaders in providing opinions relative to youth programs in horticulture. You can be of considerable assistance in the study by taking a few minutes of time to complete the enclosed opinionnaire and returning it in the enclosed addressed envelope by April 20, 1969. I have talked with Jim concerning this study and believe it can provide much needed information regarding educational opportunities in horticulture for Ohio youth. Your cooperation and support of this project is greatly appreciated. Respectfully yours, Kenneth V/. Reisch KWR:33 Encl. THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY COLUMBUS, OHIO <43210 206 COLLEOF. OF AOHICUI.TURF. AND HOME ECONOMICS DFI'ARTMFNT OF K n iJ t n li /fli/mr/fuo—ftrttvrrA— HOHTtlX'LTUKK AND FORESTRY IS27 N iil Avinur Fhiiuh S. Howlitt, Chairmen 6H-29JG027 (Addressed to selected members of the Ohio Canners and Food Processor's Association.) Recognizing the importance to our industry of interesting capable youth in horticulture, a study is presently underway to determine the educational opportunities in horticulture available to Ohio youth. The study is being conducted by extension horticulturist, Jim Utzinger, who plans to use the results of the study to make recommendations for future youth program development. At this time Jim is asking for some assistance from our horti cultural industry leaders in providing opinions relative to youth programs in horticulture. You can be of considerable assistance in the study by taking a few minutes of time to complete the enclosed opinionnaire and returning it in the enclosed addressed envelope by April 20, 1$69. I have talked with Jim concerning this study and believe it can provide much needed information regarding educational opportunities in horticulture for Ohio youth. Your cooperation and support of this project is greatly appreciated. Respectfully yours Wilbur A. Gould Y/AG; ss Encl. a ui/uuy ox xjuucuuxoiilix upportumtiea in Horticulture for Ohio Youth 207 OPINIONNAIRE Name (optional) ______Date Definitions of Terms for Purposes of this Study Horticulture - A specialized branch of agriculture concerned with the produc tion, handling, marketing, and use of horticultural plants or plant parts for food and home landscape beautification. The subject matter of horticulture is that of fruit science, vegetable science, floriculture and flower arranging, ornamental plants, landscaping, and food processing. Vocational Horticulture - Programs providing technical horticultural instruc tion to students for the specific purpose of preparing them for occupational entry into the horticultural industry. Avocational or "Enrichment» Horticulture - Programs providing horticultural instruction to students for the purpose of assisting them in becoming more knowledgeable consumers and users of horticultural products and in exploring ways of making productive and satisfying use of leisure time through such hobby type horticultural activities as flower arranging, landscaping, and flower, fruit, and vegetable gardening. Youth - Males and females ages 8 through 21 years. Disadvantaged Youth - Youth handicapped in learning because of economic, social, and cultural deprivation. Educational Programs - A series of learning experiences designed to accomplish the specific goals of an agency or individual in a particular subject matter area. Section I - Background Information Instructions - Complete each of the following questions as indicated. 1. Indicate your experience in working with youth programs of any kind* (Check one) 30 or more years; __ 20-29 years; 10-19 years; 5-9 years; —___ less than 5 years; ___ None 2. Indicate your experience as an administrator or policy maker for educational programs v/ith any educational agency. (Check one) 30 or more years; ___ 20-29 years; __ 10-19 years; 5-9 years; less than 5 years; ___ None 3. Do you now or have you ever worked with youth programs or activities in horticulture in any capacity? (Check one) — . ^es — N° k. Indicate the employment which you have had in any phase of horticultural activity. Industry ___ number of years Educational work ___ number of years Research number of years Hone Instructions - The purpose of thi3 section is to obtain your opinions regar ding various aspects of youth educational opportunities in horticulture. Answer each item as fairly and frankly as you can. Even if your exact reaction is not included as a choice, pick the one which comes closest to your true feeling. In some cases it will he difficult to make up your mind, hut answer as hest you can and answer all items. Theie is no correct or incorrect answer. The objective is to learn how you feel about the various aspects of youth educational opportunities in horticulture. Other people may have different opinions. Please answer each question as indicated. 5. The relative importance of horticulture in contributing to the standard of living in our society in the future will: (Check appropriate square) Greatly Increase Remain about Decrease Increase Some the same Decrease Considerably 5 4 3 2 1 EJ EJ EJ EJ EJ 6. The proportion of persons in our society who can profit from a knowledge in horticulture in the future will: (Check the appropriate square) Increase Increase Remain about Decrease Considerably Some the same Decrease Considerably 5 ^ 3 2 1 EJ EJ EJ EJ EJ 7. Indicate the value of the following items in acquainting and interesting youth in the subject matter of horticulture. (Check in the appropriate column for each item) Great Considerable Some Little No Item Value Value Value Value Value 5 k 3 2 1 a. Public school science courses______b. Public school horticulture courses and activities ______c. Project work in horticulture offered by youth organizations (4—H, Boy Scouts, etc.) ______d. Individual participation in hobby type horticul tural activities ______e. Inspiration from horticul- turally oriented persons ______f. Career Day programs about horticulture______g. Orientation provided by families engaged in horticultural business enterprises ______h. Other - describe 8. Indicate the value of the following items as reasons for offering horticul tural education programs to youth. (Check in appropriate column for each ■^eni) Great Considerable Some Little No Item Value Value Value Value Value 5 ^ 3 2 1 a. Learning specific skills J necessary for producing plants for food and ornamental purposes ______b. Gaining a greater appreciation and understanding of the natural world and learning to become more dependable, reliable, and responsible citizens ______c. Becoming more selective and knowledgeable consumers of horticultural products (fruits, vegetables, house and landscape plants) ______d. Becoming acquainted with career opportunities in horticulture ______e. Developing salable skills for occupational entry into the horticultural industry ______f. Learning to make productive use of leisure time ___ g. Improving economic value of property______h. Other (describe and check) 9. Proposals for the initiation of horticultural programs in the public schools should best be made to school administrators by: (Check one) Interested local citizens Recommendations of State Department of Education Officials _____ Horticultural industry representatives Horticultural society or organization representatives Recommendations of horticultural educators Other (specify) ______ 10. Indicate the value of the following items (a-f) as sources of horticul tural information useful to youth upon reaching adulthood, for home landscaping, gardening, plant care, etc. (Check in the appropriate column for each item) (see next page) No, 10 (continued; Great Considerable Some Littlj No Item Value Value Value Value Value a. Course work obtained in 5 4 3 2 1 horticultural subjects in the public schools ______b. Horticultural information obtained from radio, TV and newspapers ______c* Post high school courses in horticulture ______d. Participation in out of school youth educational programs in horticulture (4-H clubs, Boy Scouts, etc.) ______e. Consultations with horticul- turally trained personnel ______f. Other (describe and check) 11. At what grade level should activities or course offerings in horticulture in the public schools begin? (Check one) Primary grades (grades 1-3) __ Junior high (grac.es 7-9) Intermediate grades (grades 4-6) ___ Senior high (grades 10-12) 12. In terms of contribution to youth education, what role can courses in horticulture best fulfill for each age group? (Check one for each age group) Age Group Best Role of Horticulture Courses______Vocational Enrichment Basic Science Other-Spec.ify Education Education Education ______ 8-12 years ______13-15 years______16-21 years ______13* How important can high school vocational horticulture programs be in meeting youth needs and in providing trained personnel for industry? (Check the appropriate square) Great Considerable Some Very Little No Importance Importance Importance Importance Importance 5 ^ 3 2 1 EJ EJ EJ EJ EJ l4. How important can public school programs in avocational horticulture be in meeting the needs of youth for learning to make productive use of leisure time and consumer education? (Check appropriate square) Great Considerable Some Very Little No Importance Importance Importance Importance Importance 5 4 3 2 1 EJ EJ CJ EJ EJ V/hich of the following test describes the degree to which youth in your area are being provided with educational opportunities in horticulture? (Check one) Sufficient educational programs currently exist to adequately meet the needs of the youth who could profit from or are interested in horticultural instruction. An insufficient number of opportunities currently exist to meet the needs of the youth who could profit from horticultural instruction. At present there are too many agencies and programs providing educational opportunities in horticulture such that there is an undesirable duplication of efforts and competition for participa tion. Do not know. Other (please specify) ______V/hich of the following be3t describes your concept of the type of educa tional program in horticulture v/hich should be provided to Ohio youth? (Check one) Voluntary vocational horticulture offerings to high school youth interested in a vocation in horticulture. Avocational offerings in horticulture to all school youth on a voluntary basis. Both vocational and avocational horticulture course offerings to all school youth on a voluntary basis. Introductory, exploratory type horticulture course offerings in the primary, intermediate, and junior high grades; voluntary vocational and avocational courses in horticulture in the high school; supplemental project work in youth organizations as desired. Interested youth should be provided with educational opportunities in horticulture only through the programs of youth organizations such as *f-H Clubs, Boy Scouts, etc., and not through the public schools. Other (specify) ______Indicate the relative significance of the following factors (a-h) in explaining why instruction in avocational or enrichment horticulture has been practically non-existent in Ohio schools, (Check in appropriate column for each item) Very Considerable Some Little Ho Signi- Signi- Significance Signi- Signi- ficance Item ficant ficance ficance 5 5 2 1 Facilities are too costly in terms of the number which would be served ______Most students are not interested in horti culture on either a vocational or avocational basis ______There is a lack of qualified teachers______ (continued) - 0 - No. 17 (continued) Very Some Little No Signi- Considerable Signi- Signifi- Signi Item ficant Significance ficance cance ficance 5 1 d. Promotion of such programs by educational leaders is limited because of limited potential for meeting student needs. ____ e. There is a lack of suitable educational materials and teaching aids for conducting such courses. _____ f. There is a general lack of understanding of the nature and significance of horticulture. _____ g. There is a lack of administrative and organizational structure to conduct the program. _____ h. Limited educational value of such programs for many students ___ i. Other (specify) 18. What is the potential value of each of the following programs for serving Ohio youth with educational opportunities in horticulture? (Check the appropriate square) a. School year course offerings in public schools dealing with such topics as home landscaping and beautification, flower arranging, basic flower, fruit, and vegetable gardening, the selection and care of plants in the home, etc. Great Considerable Some Very Little No Value Value Value Value Value 5 ^ 5 2 1 EJ EJ EJ EJ EJ b. Semester course offerings in public schools dealing with such topics as home landscaping and beautification, flower arranging, basic flower, fruit, and vegetable gardening, the selection and care of plants in the home, etc. Great Considerable Some Very Little No Value Value Value Value Value 5 ^ 5 2 1 EJ EJ EJ EJ EJ c. Six week units of instruction in avocational or vocational horticul ture which can serve as modules or units of instruction in courses such as home economics, general science, vocational agriculture, and biology. ^ pnM+.inii«d^ No. 10 (continued) c# Great Considerable Some Very Little No Value Value Value Value Value 5 ' 3 2 1 CJ CJ CJ EJ CJ 19. What type of students can best be served with vocational programs in horticulture? (Check as many as appropriate) _ _ The gifted The above average The average The below average The disadvantaged — _ Some students from each of the above groups 20. What type of students would enroll in avocational or enrichment courses in horticulture if such courses were offered? (Check as many as appropriate) The gifted The above average The average The below average The disadvantaged Students from all the above groups APPENDIX B TABLE 43 YOUTH ENROLLMENT IN 4-H CLUB HORTICULTURE PROJECTS, BY PROJECTS, AND BY SEX, OHIO, 1960-1967 1960 1961 1962 Project B G . T B G T B GT Flower Gardening I 181 951 1132 172 969 1141 153 859 1012 Flower Gardening II 50 382 432 69 358 427 50 315 365 Flower Gardening III 18 123 141 18 125 143 9 117 126 Flower Gardening IV 4 28 32 8 60 68 5 38 43 Flower Gardening V 6 28 34 9 18 27 7 25 32 Lawn & Garden Maintenance 171 44 215 128 45 173 155 56 211 Vegetable Gardening for Beginners 1375 328 1703 1431 394 1825 1504 356 1860 Family Vegetable Gardening 693 115 808 784 122 906 713 182 895 Special Crops 222 13 235 154 18 172 160 31 191 Tomatoes for Processing 42 2 44 56 1 57 60 4 64 Potato I 237 12 249 265 8 273 282 9 291 Potato II 54 0 54 75 0 75 82 4 86 Potato III 22 1 23 9 1 10 16 0 16 Strawberry 79 28 107 96 21 117 84 18 102 Grapea TOTAL 3154 2055 5209 3274 2140 5414 3280 2014 5294 i215 i aNew Project in 1967 TABLE 43 (CONTINUED) 1963 1964 1965 Project B G T B G T B G T Flower Gardening I 178 850 1028 227 1016 1243 201 965 1166 Flower Gardening II 73 315 388 44 300 344 63 355 518 Flower Gardening III 21 123 144 17 99 116 16 93 109 Flower Gardening IV 14 49 63 6 29 35 9 34 43 Flower Gardening V 12 22 34 11 26 37 16 25 41 Lawn & Garden Maintenance 170 37 207 235 35 270 171 44 215 Vegetable Gardening for Beginners 1561 500 2061 1624 483 2107 1448 447 1895 Family Vegetable Gardening 710 142 852 729 144 873 719 131 850 Special Crops 162 28 190 133 23 156 124 20 144 Tomatoes for Processing 33 1 34 28 2 30 24 1 25 Potato I 250 18 268 275 21 296 248 28 276 Potato II 14 81 95 74 3 77 69 8 77 Potato III 3 18 21 30 — 30 15 11 16 Strawberry 81. 18 99 96 23 119 106 27 133 Grapea — — — — — — —— — TOTAL 3282 2202 5484 3529 2204 5733 3229 2179 5408 t o ^ e w Project in 1967 t- » c\ TABLE 43 (CONTINUED) 1966 1967 Project B GT B GT Flower Gardening I 241 962 1203 318 1164 1482 Flower Gardening II 79 310 389 71 341 412 Flower Gardening III 36 121 157 22 99 121 Flower Gardening IV 8 47 55 13 42 55 Flower Gardening V 15 24 39 9 13 22 Lawn & Garden Maintenance 225 37 262 298 34 332 Vegetable Gardening for Beginners 1559 384 1943 1470 483 1953 Family Vegetable Gardening 740 183 923 687 146 833 Special Crops 120 21 141 206 17 223 Tomatoes for Processing 21 2 23 26 2 28 Potato I 315 37 352 97 9 106 Potato II Potato III Strawberry 121 19 140 123 23 146 Grape^ — — — 63 14 77 TOTAL 3480 2147 5627 3403 2387 5790 ^ e w Project in 1967 217 Source: Ohio 4-H Statistical Reports, 1960-1967 TABLE 44 RESPONDENT EXPERIENCE IN THE HORTICULTURAL INDUSTRY Respondent Group Experience Agricultural Non-Agricultural Horticultural All (years) Educators Educators Industry Leaders Respondents Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent 40 or more —— — — —— — — 6 9.1 6 3.8 30-39 ------1 2.9 14 21.2 15 9.6 20-29 2 3.6 — — 23 34.9 25 16.0 10-19 3 5.5 —— 15 22.7 18 11.6 5-9 5 9.1 — — 7 10.6 12 7.7 Less than 5 6 10.9 1 2.9 —— 7 4.5 None 39 70.9 33 94.2 1 1.5 73 46.8 TOTAL 55 100 35 100 66 100 156 100 TABLE 45 RESPONDENT EXPERIENCE IN HORTICULTURAL EDUCATONAL WORK Respondent Group Experience Agricultural Non-Agricultural Horticultural All (years) Educators Educators Industry Leaders Respondents Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent 40 or more 4 7.3 —— — — 4 2.7 30-39 3 5.5 2 5.7 1 1.5 6 3.8 20-29 5 9.0 — — 1 1.5 6 3.8 10-19 15 27.3 3 8.6 1 1.5 19 12.2 5-9 7 12.7 2 5.7 4 6.1 13 8.3 Less than 5 9 16.4 4 11.4 2 3.0 15 9.6 None 12 21.8 24 68.6 57 86.4 93 59.6 TOTAL 55 100 35 100 66 100 156 100 219 TABLE 46 RESPONDENT EXPERIENCE IN HORTICULTURAL RESEARCH Respondent Group Experience Agricultural Non-Agricultural Horticultural All (years) Educators Educators Industry Leaders Respondents Number per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent 40 or more 1 1.8 — — — ■ — 1 0.6 30-39 1 1.8 — — — — 1 0.6 20-29 4 7.3 — — 1 1.5 5 3.2 10-19 6 10.9 — — — — 6 3.8 5-9 1 1.8 — — — — 1 0.6 Less than 5 3 5.5 — — 3 4.6 6 3.8 None 39 70.9 35 100 62 93.9 136 87.4 TOTAL 55 100 35 100 66 100 156 100 220 TABLE 47 RESPONDENT OPINIONS REGARDING THE EDUCATIONAL VALUES OF HORTICULTURAL INSTRUCTION Value Item Great Considerable Some Little None Total Learning specific skills necessary 46 63 38 8 0 155 for producing plants for food and ornamental purposes Gaining a greater appreciation and 31 64 53 7 1 156 understanding of the natural world and learning to become more depend able, reliable, and responsible citizens Becoming more selective and know 34 69 48 5 0 156 ledgeable consumers of horticul tural products (fruits, vegetables, house and landscape plants) Becoming acquainted with career 44 78 32 2 0 156 opportunities in horticulture Developing salable skills for 52 62 35 7 0 156 occupational entry into the horticultural industry Learning to make productive use 22 46 67 19 0 154 of leisure time Improving economic value of 12 57 70 12 2 153 property 221 TABLE 48 OPINIONS OF AGRICULTURAL EDUCATORS REGARDING THE EDUCATIONAL VALUES OF HORTICULTURAL INSTRUCTION Value Item Great Considerable Some Little None Total Learning specific skills necessary 16 23 13 3 0 55 for producing plants for food and ornamental purposes Gaining a greater appreciation 15 25 12 2 1 55 and understanding of the natural world and learning to become more dependable, reliable, and responsible citizens Becoming more selective and 16 31 8 0 0 55 knowledgeable consumers of horticultural products (fruits, vegetables, house and land scape plants) Becoming acquainted with career 12 34 8 1 0 55 opportunities in horticulture Developing saleable skills for 18 20 15 2 0 55 occupational entry into the horticultural industry Learning to make productive 12 19 20 3 1 55 use of leisure time Improving economic value of 18 27 3 0 55 6 222 property i i TABLE 49 OPINIONS OF NON-AGRICULTURAL EDUCATORS REGARDING THE EDUCATIONAL VALUES OF HORTICULTURAL INSTRUCTION Value Item Great Considerable Some Little None Total Learning specific skills necessary 12 16 6 1 0 35 for producing plants for food and ornamental purposes Gaining a greater appreciation and 6 14 14 1 0 35 understanding of the natural world and learning to become more depend able, reliable, and responsible citizens Becoming more selective and know- 6 17 11 1 0 35 ledgable consumers of horticultural products (fruits, vegetables, house and landscape plants) Becoming acquainted with career 12 13 10 0 0 35 opportunities in horticulture Developing saleable skills for 14 17 3 1 0 35 occupational entry into the horticultural industry Learning to make productive use 6 15 12 2 0 35 of leisure time Improving economic value of property 5 18 9 2 0 34 223 TABLE 50 OPINIONS OP HORTICULTURAL INDUSTRY LEADERS REGARDING THE EDUCATIONAL VALUES OP HORTICULTURAL INSTRUCTION Value Item Great Considerable Some Little None Total Learning specific skills necessary 18 24 19 4 0 65 for producing plants for food and ornamental purposes Gaining a greater appreciation and 10 25 27 4 0 66 understanding of the natural world and learning to become more depend able, reliable, and responsible citizens Becoming more selective and know 12 21 29 4 0 66 ledgeable consumers of horticultural products (fruits, vegetables, house and landscape plants) Becoming acquainted with career 20 31 14 1 0 66 opportunities in horticulture Developing saleable skills for 20 25 17 4 0 66 occupational entry into the horticultural industry Learning to make productive use 4 12 35 14 1 66 of leisure time 1 21 34 7 2 65 Improving economic value of 224 i property i i TABLE 51 FACTORS EXPLAINING THE LACK OF PUBLIC SCHOOL AVOCATIONAL HORTICULTURE PROGRAMS AS PERCEIVED BY AGRICULTURAL EDUCATORS Significance Factor Very Considerable Some Little None Total Facilities too costly in terms of 5 12 23 10 3 53 the number which would be served Most students are not interested 0 10 19 18 7 54 in horticulture on either a * vocational or avocational basis There is a lack of qualified teach 29 15 8 2 0 54 ers Promotion of such programs by 4 18 21 8 2 53 educational leaders is limited because of limited potential for meeting student needs There is a lack of suitable educa 5 15 20 12 2 54 tional materials and teaching aids for such courses There is a general lack of under 34 17 3 0 0 54 standing of the nature and signifi cance of horticulture There is a lack of administrative 12 22 15 4 2 55 and organizational structure to conduct the program Limited educational value of such 0 5 14 23 11 53 225 programs i TABLE 52 FACTORS EXPLAINING THE LACK OF PUBLIC SCHOOL AVOCATIONAL HORTICULTURE PROGRAMS AS PERCEIVED BY NON-AGRICULTURAL EDUCATORS Significance Factor Very Considerable Some Little None Total Facilities too costly in terms of 11 8 9 5 1 34 the number which would be served Most students are not interested in 2 8 12 11 0 33 horticulture on either a vocational or avocational basis There is a lack of qualified 8 9 13 2 0 32 teachers Promotion of such programs by 2 11 10 8 2 33 educational leaders is limited because of limited potential for meeting student needs There is a lack of suitable educa 0 5 12 14 2 33 tional materials and teaching aids for such courses There is a general lack of under 11 11 10 2 0 34 standing of the nature and signifi cance of horticulture There is a lack of administrative 3 8 12 8 1 32 and organizational structure to conduct the program 226 Limited educational value of such 0 5 8 12 8 33 * programs TABLE 53 FACTORS EXPLAINING THE LACK OF PUBLIC SCHOOL AVOCATIONAL HORTICULTURE PROGRAMS AS PERCEIVED BY HORTICULTURAL INDUSTRY LEADERS Significance Factor i Very . Considerable Some Little None Total Facilities too costly in terms of '• 18 14 11 11 4 58 the number which would be served Most students are not interested in 5 18 19 11 4 57 horticulture on either a vocational or avocational basis There is a lack of qualified teachers; 13 25 13 6 2 59 Promotion of such programs by educa 8 22 19 6 2 57 tional leaders is limited because of limited potential for meeting student needs There is a lack of suitable educa 3 15 19 15 6 58 tional materials and teaching aids for such courses There is a general lack of under 23 30 9 2 0 64 standing of the nature and signifi cance of horticulture There is a lack of administrative 18 14 13 10 4 59 and organizational structure to conduct the program Limited educational value of such 4 13 21 13 6 57 programs 227 TABLE 54 OPINIONS OF AGRICULTURAL EDUCATORS REGARDING THE VALUE OF SELECTED FACTORS IN ACQUAINTING AND INTERESTING YOUTH IN HORTICULTURE Value Factor Great Considerable Some .Little None . Total Public school science courses 7 16 27 5 0 55 Public school horticulture courses 28 24 2 1 0 55 and activities Project work in horticulture offered 23 27 5 0 0 55 by youth organizations (4-H, Boy Scouts, etc.) Individual participation in hobby 20 20 14 1 0 55 type horticulture activities Inspiration from horticulturally 20 20 13 2 0 55 oriented persons Career day programs about horticul 4 23 24 3 0 54 • ture Orientation provided by families 11 25 17 2 0 55 engaged in horticultural business enterprises 228 TABLE 55 OPINIONS OF NON-AGRICULTURAL EDUCATORS REGARDING THE VALUE OF SELECTED FACTORS IN ACQUAINTING AND INTERESTING YOUTH IN HORTICULTURE Value Factor Great .Considerable Some Little None Total Public school science courses 5 11 17 2 0 35 Public school horticulture courses 13 19 2 1 0 35 and activities Project work in horticulture offered 7 16 12 0 0 35 by youth organizations (4-H clubs. Boy Scouts, etc.) Individual participation in hobby 6 16 13 0 0 35 type activities Inspiration from horticulturally 6 14 12 3 0 35 oriented persons Career day programs about horticul 0 14 14 7 0 35 ture Orientation provided by families 5 15 12 3 0 35 engaged in horticultural business enterprises 229 TABLE 56 OPINIONS OF HORTICULTURAL INDUSTRY LEADERS REGARDING THE VALUE OF SELECTED FACTORS IN ACQUAINTING AND INTERESTING YOUTH IN HORTICULTURE Value Factor Great Considerable Some Little None Total Public school science courses 7 22 25 9 2 65 Public school horticulture courses 22 24 16 3 0 65 and activities Project work in horticulture offered 16 27 23 0 0 66 by youth organizations (4-H, Boy Scouts, etc.) Individual participation in hobby 13 26 23 3 0 65 type activities Inspiration from horticulturally 25 24 12 4 0 65 oriented persons Career day programs about 6 20 37 3 0 66 horticulture Orientation provided by families 16 31 16 2 1 66 engaged in horticultural business enterprises to u> o TABLE 57 OPINIONS OF AGRICULTURAL EDUCATORS AS TO THE BEST MEANS FOR PROVIDING CITIZENS WITH HORTICULTURAL INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR AVOCATIONAL HORTICULTURE PURSUITS Value Method Great Considerable Some Little None Total Course work obtained in 17 24 13 1 0 55 horticultural subjects in the public schools Horticultural information 5 20 27 3 0 55 obtained from radio, TV, and newspapers Post high school courses 22 27 5 1 0 55 in horticulture Participation in out-of-school 6 33 15 1 0 55 youth educational programs in horticulture (4-H clubs, Boy Scouts, etc.) Consultations with horti- 21 23 10 1 0 55 culturally trained personnel TABLE 58 OPINIONS OF NON -AGRICULTURAL EDUCATORS AS TO THE BEST MEANS FOR PROVIDING CITIZENS WITH HORTICULTURAL INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR AVOCATIONAL HORTICULTURE PURSUITS Value Method Great Considerable Some Little None Total Course work obtained in horti 15 15 4 1 0 35 cultural subjects in the public schools Horticultural information obtained 0 8 24 3 0 35 from radio, TV, and newspapers Post high school courses in 13 8 14 0 0 35 horticulture Participation in out-of-school 5 15 13 2 0 35 youth educational programs in horticulture {4-H clubs, Boy Scouts, etc.) Consultations with horticulturally 3 20 11 0 0 34 trained personnel u>t o to TABLE 59 OPINIONS OP HORTICULTURAL INDUSTRY LEADERS AS TO THE BEST MEANS FOR PROVIDING CITIZENS WITH HORTICULTURAL INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR AVOCATIONAL HORTICULTURE PURSUITS Value Method Great Considerable Some Little None Total Course work obtained in horti 7 31 22 2 1 63 cultural subjects in the public schools s >T Horticultural information obtained , 3 16 32 12 0 63 from radio, TV, and newspapers Post high school courses in 14 33 15 1 0 63 horticulture Participation in out-of-school 9 26 22 6 0 63 youth educational programs in horticulture (4-H clubs, Boy Scouts, etc.) Consultations with horticulturally 17 33 11 2 0 63 trained personnel 233 TABLE 60 RESPONDENT OPINIONS AS TO THOSE WHO SHOULD MAKE PROPOSALS FOR INITIATING HORTICULTURAL PROGRAMS IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS Response Group Proposal Initiating Group Agricultural Non-Agricultural Horticultural Total Educators Educators Industry Leaders Interested local citizens 14 9 4 27 Recommendations of State De partment of Education Officials 8 5 16 29 Horticultural Industry Repres 11 6 16 . 33 entatives Horticultural Society or Organ 4 2 10 16 * < ization Representatives -• V Recommendations of Horticul 7 4 9 20 tural Educators All of the above groups - - 1 1 Other (specify) 2 5 3 10 State Department officials and 2 3 5 Horticultural Industry Leaders Horticultural Industry and • 1 1 Organization Members and Horticultural Educators State Department of Education 1 1 Officials and Horticultural 234 " Educators TABLE 60 (CONTINUED) ______Response Group______Proposal Initiating Group Agricultural Non-Agricultural Horticultural Total Educators Educators Industry Leaders State Department of Educa- - 2 2 tion Officials and Horti cultural Organization Members Interested Citizens and 1 1 2 Horticultural Industry Leaders Horticultural Industry 1 1 Leaders plus others Horticultural Industry 2 2 Leaders and Educators Interested Citizens and 1 - 1 Horticultural Industry and Organization Leaders t o CJ i n TABLE 61 POTENTIAL VALUE OF VARIOUS TYPES OF HORTICULTURAL PROGRAMS FOR SERVING OHIO YOUTH AS PERCEIVED BY AGRICULTURAL EDUCATORS Value Type of Program Great Considerable Some Very Little None Total School year course offerings 17 25 12 1 0 55 in public schools dealing with such topics as home landscap ing and beautification, flower arranging, basic flower, fruit, and vegetable gardening, and the selection and care of house plants Semester course offerings in 12 29 11 1 1 54 public schools dealing with such topics as home landscaping and beautifica tion, flower arranging, basic flower, fruit, and vegetable gardening and the selection and care of house plants Six weeks units of instruc- 10 19 20 5 0 54 tion in avocational or vocational horticulture which can serve as modules or units of instruction in ' courses such as home economics, general science, 236 vocational agriculture, and biology TABLE 62 POTENTIAL VALUE OF VARIOUS TYPES OF HORTICULTURAL PROGRAMS FOR SERVING OHIO YOUTH AS PERCEIVED BY NON-AGRICULTURAL EDUCATORS Value Type of Program Great Considerable Some Very Little None Total School year course offerings 12 34 in public schools dealing with such topics as home landscaping and beautification, flower arranging, basic flower, fruit, and vegetable gardening, and the selection and care of house plants Semester course offerings in 8 14 8 34 public schools dealing with such topics as home land scaping and beautification, flower arranging, basic flower, fruit, and vegetable gardening, and the selection and care of house plants Six week units of instruction 13 10 33 in avocational or vocational horticulture which can serve as modules or units of instruction in courses such as home economics, general science, vocational agriculture, 237 and biology TABLE 63 POTENTIAL VALUE OF VARIOUS TYPES OF HORTICULTURAL PROGRAMS FOR SERVING OHIO YOUTH AS PERCEIVED BY HORTICULTURAL INDUSTRY LEADERS Value Type of Program Great Considerable Some Very Little None Total School year course offerings 28 23 65 in public schools dealing with such topics as home landscaping and beautification, flower arranging, basic flower, fruit, and vegetable gardening, and the selection and care of house plants Semester course offerings in 13 21 26 61 public schools dealing with such topics as home land scaping and beautification, flower arranging, basic flower, fruit, and vegetable gardening, and the selection and care of house plants Six weeks units of instruction 8 25 21 10 64 in avocational or vocational horticulture which can serve as modules or units of instruc tion in courses such as home economics, general science, vocational agriculture, and to u> biology 00 239 YOUTH PROGRAM LITERATURE REVIEWED IN THE STUDY Cleveland School Gardens 1. "How to Institute a Children's Home Garden Project in Your School System" 2. "Third Grade Planting Kit" 3. Locations of School Garden Centers 4. Children's Garden Fair Facts and Figures 5. 1961 School Garden Activities 6. Garden Activities, 1962-1963 School Year 7. "Home Gardens for Boys and Girls" (1963) 8. Horticulture Garden Activities 1964 Calendar Year 9. Horticulture (Garden) Division Report 1965 10. Cleveland Public Schools Horticulture (Garden) Division Report of Summer Activities 1966 11. Cleveland Public Schools Horticulture Division Report to the Board of Education, September 26, 1967 12. 1968 Landscape Planning Contest 13. "Home Gardens for Boys and Girls" (1968) Agricultural Education Service, Ohio Department of Education 1. "Programs for Youth With Special Needs" 2. "A Curriculum Guide for Vocational Horticulture" 4-H Club 1. 4-H Circular 131, "Ohio 4-H Projects" 2. Family Vegetable Gardening 240 3. Flower Garden I 4. Flower Garden II 5. Flower Garden III 6. Flower Garden IV 7. Grape I 8. Grape II 9. Grape III 10. Lawn and Garden Maintenance 11. Potato 12. Special Crops 13. Strawberry 14. Tomatoes for Processing 15. Vegetable Gardening for Beginners Junior Garden Club 1. Ohio Association of Garden Clubs Junior Garden Club Kit 2. "The Garden Path," the official publication of the Ohio Association of Garden Clubs Inc. 3. The Junior Garden Club Handbook National Junior Horticultural Association 1. Constitution and By Laws of the National Junior Horticultural Association (N.J.H.A.) 2. National Junior Horticultural Association Programs of Projects and Activities, 1963-1967 241 3. N.J.H.A. Report Form of the Fresh Market Section 4. N.J.H.A. Report Form of the Canning Crops Division 5. N.J.H.A. Report Form for the Experimental Horti culture Project 6. N.J.H.A. Application Form for the Achievement and Leadership Recognition Project 7. N.J.H.A. Descriptive Brochure Boy Scouts of America 1. Fruit and Nut Growing 2. Gardening 3. Landscaping Youth Gardens 1. 114th Annual Ohio State Fair Junior Division Premium List Flower and Garden Foundation 1. Entry for 10th Annual Young America Gardens Contest 2. 9th Young America Gardens Contest Winners, Flower and Garden Magazine, December, 1968. pp. 26-29 3. Personal letter from the Flower and Garden Foundation director APPENDIX C 243 The Sample Used in the Study "To Buy or Not to Buy" as Conducted by Dr. Ernest Dichter, of the Institute for Motivational Research Inc. for the Geo. J. Ball Company, the Pan-American Seed Company and the Jiffy-Pot Company of America. Age_____ Per Cent Education______Per Cent Sex Per Cent 20-29 25 Some High School 5 Male 40 30-39 20 Completed High 30 Female 60 School 40-49 25 Some College 30 50-59 25 Completed College 15 60-69 5 Graduate Education 20 Marital Status Per Family Income Per 5 Years ago Cent Now Cent Per Cent Single 5 $ 0-3000 10 Married 90 3001-5000 5 10 Divorced t 5001-7000 15 10 Separated 5 70001-9000 20 20 9001-11,000 20 10 11,001-13,000 10 15 13,001-15,000 10 5 15,001-18,000 10 - 18001 and over 10 5 No answer 5 , pmssr ; ■ !./< •*-■ '« ’.. Aril J& ft “*< viV- ** #*. FLOWER AMD GARDE IlOX 3357 • HOSEDALE STATION • KANSAS CITY, KANSAS 60103FOUNDATIO January 31, 19&9 James D. Utzinger Extension Horticulturist Cooperative Extension Service Ohio State University 1827 Neil Avenue Columbus, Ohio *43210 Dear Mr. Utzinger: We are pleased that you are interested in our annual Young American Gardens Contest. Enclosed are tear sheets from the December, 1968, and the February, 1969 Flower and Garden which will tell you everything you wish to know about this program. Also enclosed are some entry blanks and a press release. As you will note, this is the tenth year we have offered this program. The response from the state of Ohio has been very good in the past. X am unable to give you any figures on this, as we did not break it down by states. One year we had 6,500 entries. Since then we have set a limit of 5,000 as that is about all our staff and our available seed supply can accomodate. If you have any further questions or if you would like me to send you a supply of entry blanks, please feel free to write again. Sincerely, FLOWER AND GARDEN FOUNDATION William C. Davidson Director WCD:Js Enclosure FLOWER AND GARDEN ROSEDALE STATION • KANSAS CITY, KANS. 66103 Contact: Bill Davidson Phone: (8l6) JE 1-5730 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE KANSAS CITY — The tenth annual Young America Gardens Contest is under way for youngsters from 6 to 19* This is sponsored by the Flower and Garden Foundation, a non-profit organization interested in helping young Americans to learn gardening. Youngsters compete for cash prizes, bicycles and trips, and besides have the fun of having their cwri garden planted with seeds given by some of America's 245 leading seed companies. Those enrolling will receive a variety kit of seven seed packets (four vegetables and three flowers) with which they are to plant their own KANSAS CITY — The tenth annual Young America Gardens Contest is under way for youngsters from 6 to 19. This is sponsored by the Flower and Garden Foundation, a non-profit organization interested in helping young Americans to learn gardening. Youngsters compete for cash prizes, bicycles and trips, and besides have the fun of having their ovil garden planted with seeds given by some of America*s 245 leading seed companies. Those enrolling will receive a variety kit of seven seed packets (four vegetables and three flowers) with which they are to plant their own 200 square foot garden. Each contestant receives an entry blank to be completed during the summer, and submitted by September 1 to make a valid entry. Each an swers questions, writes a short story and sends photographs of himself in his gar den. An adult sponsor is needed to oversee the garden project and cosign the entry. The contest is planned on a regional basis to give equal opportunity to all, and divided by age — teen and pre-teen. Junior garden clubs and groups are welcome to enter on an individual basis. Entry applications must be sent to the Foundation by May 15, 1969. Prospective entrants should send 251 for each entry (to help defray postage and handling costs) to Flower and harden Foundation, Box 3357, Rosedale Station, Kansas City, Kansas 66103. Each entrant must include his name, address with zip code, and the name and address of his adult sponsor. Any adult may sponsor any number of contestants. Contestants must be age 6 to 19 (as.of September 1, 1969) and not have von a first prize in any previous YAG contest. The contest will be limited to the first 5,000 entries received. Winners will be announced in the De- KIRCHER, HELTON & COLLETT, INC. 246 2600 FAR HILLS • DAYTON, OHIO 45419 • 513 293-3191 ADVERTISING • MARKETING . TVDLIC RELATIONS October 16, 1969 Mr. James D. Utzinger Extension Horticulturist College of Agriculture and Home Economics OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY Extension Service Cooperative 2001 Fyffe Fourt Columbus, Ohio 43210 Dear Mr. Utzinger: The study on the growth of the garden tool market in the United States was conducted for The Union Fork and Hoe Company by another organization. Therefore, I am only able to pass onto you the results of that survey as it was given to us. Copies are enclosed. Unfortunately, the material that I have does not include the information you are looking for. That is, a break down on the results edited by states. The organization that did this study for Union Fork and Hoe is disbanded be cause its principal and owner passed away. Therefore, I am not at all sure that I can resurrect the kind of information you are looking for. But I will try. However, I hope the information enclosed will be of some benefit to yo u . Unless the date is on the copy of the study that you enclosed, I have no knowledge of the year in which the studies were done. But, as I said before, we will try to identify the facts a little more closely. S in c e r e ly , Charles J. Carey \ Director of Public Relations PR Counsel for The Union Fork and Hoe Compan; C JC :rb E n c lo su r e cc: Robert T. Davis Memttr of Amtritmn Aisotiatkm «/ A dvtrtitint A ttncitt O- For further information contact 247 Erwin M. Frey FOR RELEASE DENSON FREY tt AFFILIATES 220 V/. 59th St., N .Y ., N.Y. 10019 J U 6-0110 WOMEN CHANGE NATIONS GARDENING HABITS YOUNG MARRIEDS GET GREEN THUMB EARLY 81, 000, 000 Gardeners New U. S. A. High National Study Reveals A major revolution is going on among American gardeners! For the first time in 50 years they have switched from growing flowers to vegetables and fruits. And its the women who started it all. A national study made among 712 garden clubs and 5160 heads of fam ilies with incomes of $6, 000 to $12, 000 by the research bureau of the Union Fork and Hoc Company of Columbus, Ohio uncovered this fact and other green thumb phenomenon now taking place in the 50 states. This eight month survey also brought to light that the U .S.A . has about 81, 000,000 home gardeners who work in the nations 45, 000, 000 gardens; city gardeners have jumped from 3, 200, 000 to 4, 400, 000; 64% of our garden ing population are women; 36% are men. Gardening is the most popular adult h ob b y. The number of new gardens are up substantially despite the decline in home building which usually adds 1 million gardens per year. Roses are the nations #1" favorite flower. The young marrieds plant earlier and bigger gardens initially than their counterpart of 10 years ago. 74% of the existing home gardens were expanded substantially. 248 Vegetables and Fruits Take Over Have you made any changes in your garden during the last 12 months? 81%...... Y e s 19%...... No Those who answered "Yes" were asked: Have you made it larger, smaller or same size? 74%, ...... L a r g e r 7% ...... S m a lle r 19%...... S a m e S iz e Have you changed your plantings, if so what? 59% cut down on flowers and added vegetables 54% reduced flowers and added fruit Why did you make this change? 1. Vegetables and fruit prices constantly in creasing* Also makes budget go further* 2. Home grown vegetables and fruits taste better, more nourishing*. 3* Cuts down on shopping time. 4. Insures family of getting vegetables and fruits they like. Too many shortages and damaged produce in stores. 5. Vegetables and fruits are just as relaxing as flowers and more rewarding. Many vegetables and fruits have bedutiful blossom s and foliage. The answers given to these questions clearly showed it was the high cost of living that motivated this change in gardens. This is the first time since World War I's Victory gardens have vegetables and fruits dominated the nation's gardens. The survey shows that about 56% of the land homeov/ners utilize for gar dens is now being used for growing string beans, tomatoes, beets, spinach, cucumbers, carrots, apples, pears, berries, etc. Flowers Fruits and Vegetables 1965 ratio 68% 32% 1966 ratio 44% 56% 45 Million Gardens New U. S. A. High The biggest increase in the number of home gardens took place during the past 12 months when over three million more gardens were added to the nation's garden inventory. It is now 45,000,000. This is m ost unusual because new home building which usually contributes about 1, 000, 000 new gardens a year has been down, while new gardens have been going up. One of the reasons that made this growth possible was the great number of homeowners who didn't have gardens only lawns on their property have converted part of their land to gardens. Young Marrieds Garden Enthusiasts Another factor is the young married segment of our population are i starting gardens the first year of marriage instead of waiting until the third year which was the traditional time young homeowners started their green thumb activities. The gardens they designed are 60% larger than their coun terparts planted a decade ago. This survey also showed that thousands of homeowners cancelled their plans to move into new houses due to high mortgage rates. They decided to keep their homes and make them more livable with greater emphasis on g a r d e n in g . Women Decision Makers The survey also established that the women make the majority of de cisions on what to grow. They buy the seeds, cuttings, plant food and help buy the tools. Men do their share in maintaining the gardens and selecting the right tools. Women say that garden tools should be more colorful, more contrasting to green and earth colors so that they can be seen easier when left on the ground. . . Women Lead Men Women now represent 64% of the nations gardeners have taken a com manding lead over men who slipped to 36%, Men attribute their decline to working overtime, crowded highways, more business travelling which cuts down the time they spend at home. City Gardens Up City gardens which started to boom in 1963 with 1, 500, 000 indoor and outdoor terrace green thumbers have increased to 4,000,000. In 1965 there were 3, 200, 000. This growth of urban gardening shows that you can take people out of the suburbs and rural areas but you can't take them away from gardening. Most of the city gardeners had been living in the suburbs and rural areas. Rose Top Flower The stately rose was crowned the //I favorite flower by gardeners through out the nation. However, the beautiful zinnia was very close behind in second place. In order of preference after the zinnia are lilacs, day lillies, snap dragons, azaleas, gladioulus, petunias, marigolds and daffodils. Strikers Do-lt-Yourselfcrs A phenomenon was uncovered when Union researchers reached homes where the breadwinners were on strike. Of the 485 questioned 72% were engaged in do-it-yourself projects in improving their homes. Gardening was high on the list for expansion. More Interesting Facts The Union Garden Study clearly demonstrates that women are here to stay in the solid position of the leaders in gardening. Never before have they had such a large margin over men green thumbers. More women are presidents of garden clubs and horticulture societies than men and they dominate in the educational field too. Public Gardens report the biggest attendance in the past ten years. As a nation we have 18% more garden clubs than in 1965 and the number is growing every week. The early entry of the young m arrieds into gardening forecasts an even greater annual growth for gardening. Marriages of young persons are at an all time high with most of the women between 18 and 19 years of age. They represent the majority of marriages in the U.S.A. Their interest in gar dening has been stimulated by school garden courses and community clubs. Union researchers found that city and town building codes arc being changed to include gardens as prime requisite for a construction permit. . • This has been brought about by the Federal, State and City Environmental Programs. Minimum landscaping is no longer acceptable in the majority 252 of s ta te s . 81 professional real estate appraisers questioned estimated that an at tractive garden depending on its size increased the value of a house up to 30%. Gardening is not limited to the young and the middleaged. Senior citizens find it a mild, healthful exei'cise that need never be too much of a strain. Homeowners freely admitted that in addition to gardening for its beauty and satisfaction, they also realized its economic value. Landscaped prop erty with an attractive garden has a higher market value. (By using computors this year the study was able to get a truer picture of our nation's gardening population and habits.) Copies of the study will be sent free to public, private, parochial schools, colleges, garden clubs, community centers and business firms. Request must be on organization letterhead. Supply is limited. Send your request to Union Fork and Hoe Company, attentioh Mr. Robert E. Schuler, 500 Dublin Avenue, Columbus, Ohio 43215. BIBLIOGRAPHY 254 Public Documents U. S. Census of Agriculture, Volume 1, Part 10, State of Ohio, 1964. U. S. Department of Commerce. Bureau of Census. United States Census of Population 1960, Ohio, DetaXled Characteristics, Table 94, 37-4X3. Books Alberty, Harold et. al. Reorganizing the High School Cur riculum. New York! McGraw-Hill Book Comapny, 1962. Alexander, William M. and Saylor, J. Galen. Secondary Education; Basic Principles and Practices. New York; Rinehart & Company Inc., 1950. Good, Carter V. Introduction to Educational Research. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1959. Janick, Jules. Horticultural Science. San Francisco; W. H. Freeman and Company, 1963. Kerlinger, Fred N. Foundations of Behavioral Research. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston' I n c . ", 1965. Phipps, Lloyd J. and J. R. Warmbrod. Review and Synthesis of Research in Agricultural Education. Columbus! Center for Vocational and Technical Education, The Ohio State University, 1966. Rummel, J. Francis. An Introduction to Research Procedure in Education. New York; Harper and Row, 1964. Steel, Robert G. D. and James H. Torrie. Principles and Procedures of Statistics. New York: McGraw Hill Book Company, 1960. Articles and Periodicals McClay, David R. "Our Future in the Urban School," Agricultural Education Magazine, September, 1964, p. 59. Woodin, Ralph J. "No Bed of Roses," Agricultural Education Magazine, September, 1964, p. 59. 255 Workman, Mrs. Robert. "Junior Garden Clubs," "The Garden Path," Official Publication of Ohio Association of Garden Clubs Inc., Stammer, 1968, p. 11. "9th Young American Gardens Contest Winners," Flower and Garden Magazine, December, 1968, p. 26. Proceedings Adriance, Guy W. 1955. "What Is Wrong With Horticulture." Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 62: 434-439. Childers, Norman F. 1962. "Horticultural Students- Recruitment, Training, and Future." Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 80: 673-685. Munger, H. M. 1967. "Interactions and Horticultural Science." Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 91: 899-904. Dissertations and Thesis Gerber, George A. "A Proposed Garden Club Program for the Columbus Public Schools." Unpublished Masters Thesis, The Ohio State University, 1959. Heimlich, Richard E. "The Non Vocational Programs in Agriculture in the Public Schools in Ohio." Unpublished Masters Thesis, The Ohio State University, 1964. Leimbach, Gale J. "Vocational Agriculture for Students from Urban Homes." Unpublished Masters Thesis, The Ohio State University, 1964. Wotoweic, Peter J. "Adult Education for Horticulture Employees in Cuyahoga County, Ohio" Unpublished Masters Thesis, The Ohio State University, 1965. Reports Cleveland Public Schools Horticulture Division Report to the Board of Education. Cleveland: 1961, 1963, 1964, and' 1967. 256 Dichter, Ernest, Institute for Motivational Research Inc. "To Buy or Not to Buy," A report of a study sponsored by the Geo. J. Ball Co. Inc., Pan American Seed Co., and Jiffy Pot Company of America, West Chicago: 1968. Ohio Cooperative Extension Service "4-H Statistical Results" Columbus: The Ohio State University, 1960- 1967. Nirode, Bernard R. "Experience Programs Conducted in Vocational Horticulture Programs in Ohio High Schools in 1966." A Field Study Presented to the Faculty of the College of Agriculture, The Ohio State University, March, 1967. Research Bureau, Union Fork and Hoe Company, Columbus, Ohio. A Report of a National Gardening Habits Study, Columbus: n.d. Unpublished Materials Agricultural Education Service, Ohio Department of Education and Department of Agricultural Education, The Ohio State University, "A Curriculum Guide for Vocational Horticulture," Columbus. 1967 (Mimeographed) Agricultural Education Service, Ohio Department of Educa tion, "Criteria for Determination of Approval of Units in Vocational Agriculture Under the Ohio School Foundation Program." 1966. (Mimeographed) Cleveland Public Schools Horticulture Division "How to Institute a Children's Home Garden Project in Your School or System," Cleveland. 1966. (Mimeo graphed) Cleveland City Schools 1968 Landscape Planning Contest for Vo-Hort Students. (Mimeographed) Division of Vocational Education, Ohio Department of Education, "Programs for Youth With Special Needs," Columbus. 1967. (Mimeographed) Ohio Association of Garden Clubs Junior Garden Club Hand book, Revised, October, 1964. (Mimeographed) 257 Ohio Association of Garden Clubs Junior Garden Club Kit. (Mimeographed) Ohio State University Department of Agricultural Education "Townshend Educator," Volume XIV, No. 2, Columbus. June, 1967. (Mimeographed) Booklets, Pamphlets, and Circulars Boy Scouts of America Merit Badge Series, "Fruit and Nut Growing," New Brunswick. 1964. Boy Scouts of America Merit Badge Series, "Landscaping," New Brunswick. 1967. Cleveland Public Schools, "Home Gardens for Junior and Senior High Pupils," Cleveland. 1963. Cleveland Public Schools, "Home Gardens for Boys and Girls." Cleveland. 1963. Cleveland Public Schools, "Home Gardens for Boys and Girls," Cleveland. 1968. Cleveland Public Schools, "Third Grade Planting Kit," Cleveland. 1963. Federal Extension Service, United States Department of Agriculture, The National 4-H Service Committee and the National 4-H Club Foundation, "The Many Faces of 4-H," Washington, D. C. National 4-H Center. National Junior Horticultural Association Program of Projects and Activities, Amherst: National Junior Horticultural Association. 1965-1967. National Junior Vegetable Growers Association Program of Projects and Activities, Amherst: National Junior Horticultural Association. 1963-1964. Ohio Expositions Commission. 114th Annual Fair Junior Division Premium List. Columbus. 1967. Ohio Cooperative Extension Service Circular 131, "Ohio 4-H Projects," Columbus. The Ohio State University. 1969. Work, Paul W. "Gardening" Boy Scouts of America Merit Badge Series, New Brunswick. February, 1968.