Ruth, Taylor K. (author), Rumble, Joy N. (author), Galindo-Gonzalez, Sebastian (author), Lundy, Lisa K. (author), Carter, Hannah S. (author), Folta, Kevin M. (author), and University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
The Ohio State University
University of Florida
Association for Communication Excellence
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
2019
Published:
United States: New Prairie Press
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 15 Document Number: D10430
24 pages., Via online journal., Faculty at land-grant universities are expected to engage in some form of Extension, or science communication, as part of the land-grant mission. However, critics have claimed these institutions are out of touch with their stakeholders’ needs and faculty mainly communicate with others in academia. This engagement with a homogenous group reflects the concepts of echo chambers, where people are only exposed to information that aligns with their beliefs and current knowledge and discredit opposing information. An explanatory mixed-methods design was used to understand land-grant faculty’s engagement in echo chambers. A survey was distributed to a census of tenure-track faculty in the University of Florida’s Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences to understand respondents’ engagement in echo chambers. Follow-up interviews were conducted with 13 of the survey respondents to further explore their audiences and channels used in science communication to understand their engagement in echo chambers. Survey results indicated faculty did not necessarily participate in echo chambers, but they also did not contribute to an open communication network. However, the interviews found participants were interested in reaching new audiences yet struggled to communicate with stakeholders. The participants also reported wanting to find alternative channels to peer reviewed journals to help disseminate their work. The findings from this study indicated faculty contributed to a type of echo chamber, but rather than viewing their stakeholders’ opinions as false, they simply did not hear the opinions. Agricultural communicators should work with land-grant faculty administrators to identify appropriate audiences and channels for science communication.
Leal, Arthur (author), Telg, Ricky W. (author), Rumble, Joy N. (author), Stedman, Nicole LaMee Perez (author), Treise, Debbie M. (author), and Universit of Tennessee, Knoxville
University of Florida
Association for Communication Excellence
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
2019
Published:
United States: New Prairie Press
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 15 Document Number: D10428
22 pages., Via online journal., This national study sought to expand on current research to identify the importance of and graduates’ ability to perform selected social skills to aid in curricula evaluation and small program development. Using three evaluation groups – agricultural communication graduates, communication industry professionals, and agricultural communication faculty members – 193 individuals responded to the online survey. The most important social skills were those associated with having work values and transitioning into an organization to be a productive member in the workplace. Graduates placed a higher importance on social skills than the other two evaluation groups. All three evaluation groups showed some agreement on graduates’ highest ability to perform several social skills: The ability to be trustworthy, trained, reliable, professional, dedicated, and behave ethically were assigned the highest mean ability. A significant difference was found with the ability graduates afforded themselves in having common sense, being professional, and encompassing maturity versus the other two evaluation groups. Recommendations included incorporating and identifying social skills into instruction for students. Group work, presentations, internships, and student organizations were proposed as opportunities for social skill attainment. Agricultural leadership principles, oral communication, and professional development courses were recommended for new and developing agricultural communication programs that could serve to incorporate the most important social skills. Faculty members could benefit from research that can identify more effective measures to evaluate social skill attainment. Recommendations for future research included a similar assessment with technical skills and for other elements of the Agricultural Communication Program System Model to be assessed.
23pgs, While the three-part mission of the land-grant university has been a pivotal component of agriculture and natural resources in the U.S., the land-grant mission is not always well understood by all audiences, including faculty members who are the key deliverers of the land-grant mission. As such, it is important to understand how faculty members view the land-grant brand identity. A series of focus groups were conducted with tenure and non-tenure track faculty members at [university]. Faculty members’ perceptions of the university’s brand came out in four themes: overall description of the brand identity, connections to [City], university values, and increased emphasis on research. How faculty members conceptualized the land-grant mission presented two themes: aware but uninformed about the land-grant mission (subthemes: concerns about public awareness and stakeholder priorities, and unawareness of Extension) and having varying definitions of the land-grant mission (subthemes: land-grant is about the land, the land-grant mission is for more than agriculture, the land-grant is successful when serving the state, the land-grant mission is intended to improve society, and the land-grant mission is delivering equal opportunity education). Recommendations for universities included providing faculty members with a full understanding of the land-grant missions and ensuring students are taught about the land-grant mission. Future research was recommended to assess perceptions of faculty members at other land-grant universities and perceptions of non-faculty audiences such as students and external stakeholders. A quantitative survey was also recommended to provide a more generalizable view of faculty perceptions of the brand of land-grant universities.
