Raises eight questions for ACE members: " 1) Are we glorified clerks or are we scientists? 2) What are desirable forms of publication and information materials? Scientists are demanding longer bulletins. The public is calling for shorter. 3) What should be the professional training of men and women to become agricultural and home editors? One school suggests that all that is needed in our fields is a certain facility -- we are engaged in a science -- home scientists measure success by acceptance in AP and UP. 4) Is there opportunity for research in the field of farm and home editing? 5) What is to be the future of agriculture and what leadership will the college of agriculture, the experiment stations, and the USDA be called upon to give? Together with our institutions, we must begin long-time planning. 6) What place has and will the radio have in carrying to the people the results of research? 7) How shall we measure results in our field? 8) What are we going to do about it?"
King, James W. (author), Rockwell, S. Kay (author), Tate, Thomas G. (author), and Rockwell: Evaluation Specialist, Cooperative Extension Service, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE; King: Extension Specialist, Cooperative Extension Service, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE; Tate: Program Analysis Officer, Extension Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
1990
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 76 Document Number: C04141
18 pages., Interdisciplinary agricultural research centers are becoming more common at land-grant universities. These centers often use an interdisciplinary approach to address complex science issues. As these centers address agricultural issues that impact society, effective science communication is a necessary activity. However, these centers may face unique barriers or opportunities. This study utilized a qualitative approach to identify the barriers and motivations of interdisciplinary agricultural center directors when communicating about science. Participants identified common science communication challenges, such as time and lack of funding. Funding was also identified as a motivation, as well as factors related to the tenure and promotion process. Recommendations from this work include evaluating the public relations and the effectiveness of science communication from these centers. Future research should also examine the financial structure of interdisciplinary centers to better inform best practices.
