AGRISCIENCE CURRICULUM REVIEW

1
AGRISCIENCE CURRICULUM REVIEW

• Ginnie Bushong
• A ED 615 Investigations and Studies in Applied
  Research

2
CHAPTER I
3
Introduction

• House Bill 2700 JTED
• CTE Standards Cluster System
• Agriscience Standards Cluster / Science
• AATA Curriculum Committee
• Phase 1 Standards 10.0 through 25.0
• Phase 2 Options B, C, and F

4
Need

• JTEDs require CTE Programs to prepare students
  for careers using the new cluster standards and
  validated assessments by July of 2007. The
  Arizona Agriscience Curriculum has provided
  agricultural teachers with the necessary
  resources to implement the new cluster standards
  into their curriculum. Nonetheless, no reliable
  assessment exists to measure student achievement
  of the standards.

5
Purpose

• The purpose of this study is to determine the
  reliability of the Arizona Agricultural Teachers
  Association Agriscience Curriculum Assessments.
  Reliability is defined as the instruments ability
  to produce similar results when administered to a
  number of different high school students. The
  reliability or internal consistency of the
  assessment will be represented as an alpha
  coefficient. The dependant variable is the alpha
  coefficient while the independent variables
  include type of question, clarity of question,
  and the questions relation to the Agriscience
  Curriculum. The dependant variables
  relationship to the independent variables will be
  examined using statistical software.

6
Objectives

• Divide each assessment in constructs, by related
  measurement criteria.
• Determine the alpha value for each question.
• Recommend necessary assessment changes to the
  AATA Curriculum Committee.

7
Limitations

• Only standards 10.0 through 25.0 are represented.
  Additional research will have to be formulated
  to address assessment of standards 1.0-9.0 and
  26.0 and above.
• As in most studies, standard error of measurement
  is an expected limitation. Standard error of
  measurement is the difference between observed
  and true score.

8
Assumptions

• Agricultural Teachers used the Arizona
  Agriscience Curriculum to teach the standards.
• The assessments are a true measurement of the
  curriculum and standards.
• The students will read each question on the
  assessment entirely.
• The variety of the testing environment and
  assessment administrator has not affect on the
  student answers.

9
Definitions of Terms

• Agricultural Education
• Arizona Agricultural Teachers Association (AATA)
• Arizona Agriscience Standards
• Arizona Agriscience Framework
• Arizona Agriscience Curriculum
• Career and Technical Education (CTE)
• Chronbach Alpha
• House Bill 2700
• Joint Technical Education District

10
CHAPTER II
11
Conceptual Framework
CTE Education
12
Literature Review

• Academic Standards Accountability
• 48 States set higher standards
• 34 Developed high stakes testing
• Over 24 Standardized test for graduation
• (Lynch, 2000)

13
Literature Review

• CTE Response
• Over 50 used basic/advanced academic standards
• Almost 75 Work/skill attainment and placement
• Types of measurement techniques
• State developed
• Local selected/developed
• Nationally recognized
• Other
• (Belcher, McCaslin, Headley, 2006)

14
Significance

• This study will benefit the Agricultural
  Education Profession by providing a reliable
  assessment to measure student achievement of the
  Arizona Agriscience Standards. Future research
  will follow the developed methodology in order to
  determine reliability of standards 26.0 and
  above. In addition, it will benefit Career and
  Technical Education nationwide because they will
  be able to follow the direction of the Arizona
  Agricultural Teachers Association in developing
  curriculum and assessments based on the state
  competencies.

15
CHAPTER III
16
Operational Framework
17
Subject

• Target
• Agriscience Program Review Participants
• Requirements
• Teaching a Standard between 10.0 and 25.0 during
  the 2006-2007 School Year
• Procedure
• Recruitment Letter
• Post Card
• Reminder Email

18
Instrument

• Assessment Documents
• Validity Writing Review Team
• Reliability Chronbach Alpha
• Conditions
• Various High School Agricultural Classrooms
• Instructions
• Assessment Packet Cover Letter

19
Questions / Comments
20
References

• Arizona Department of Education. (2005). Arizona
  Career and Technical Education Framework.
  Phoenix Arizona Department of Education.
• Arizona House Bill 2700. (2006).
• Belcher, G., McCaslin, N. L., Headley, W. S.
  (2006). Implications of performance measures and
  standards for evaluation and assessment in
  agricultural education. Journal of Agricultural
  Education, 37(4), 1-7.
• Bush, G. W. (2001). No child left behind.
• Chronbach, L J. (2004). My current thoughts on
  coefficient alpha and successor procedures.
  Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64(3),
  391-418.

21
References

• Frankel, J. R. Wallen, N. E. (2006). How to
  design and evaluate research in education, sixth
  edition. Boston McGraw Hill.
• George, D. Mallery, P. (2006). SPSS for Windows
  step by step. Boston Pearson Education, Inc.
• Gray, K. (2004). Is high school career and
  technical education obsolete? Phi Delta Kappan,
  86(2), 128-134.
• Lynch, R. L. (2000). High school career and
  technical education for the first decade of the
  21st century. Journal of Vocational Education
  Research 25(2).
• Pekow, C. (2006). Congress approves Perkins Act.
  Community College Week, 18(26), 9.
• Talbert, B. A., Vaughn, R. Croom, D. B. (2005).
  Foundations of Agricultural Education. Catlin,
  Illinois Professional educators Publications,
  Inc.