16 pages., Via online journal., Expertise is dynamic, domain specific, and characterized according to an individual’s level of knowledge, experience, and problem-solving ability. Having expertise in the phenomenon under investigation can be used as an indicator of an individual’s aptitude to effectively serve as a coder in a content analysis or as panelist in a Delphi study. The purpose of this study was to assess 10 years of scholarship published in the premier journals of agricultural education and describe the ways researchers in agricultural communications, education, extension, and leadership disciplines who use content analysis and Delphi study methods are describing the qualifications of the people serving as expert coders and panelists. The study findings revealed the majority of researchers publishing in the premier agricultural education journals are not describing the qualifications used in selecting coders or the credentials the coders possess that would make them qualified to code the data in a content analysis. Furthermore, researchers were inconsistent citing literature that supported their selection of content analysis coders and citing literature to support a decision to describe or not to describe coders’ qualifications. However, a description of Delphi study panelists’ qualifications and citations to support why panelists were selected in a Delphi study were present in all of the Delphi studies analyzed over the 10-year period. Based on these findings, it was concluded that ACEEL researchers should include a description of coder credentials to enhance the consistency, transparency, replicability, rigor, and integrity of ACEEL research. Editors and research professionals who perform journal article reviews for the premier agricultural education journals are encouraged to note the exclusion of a description of content analysis coders’ credentials as part of the peer review process.
Landini, Fernando (author) and Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Tecnicas (National Council of Scientific and Technological Research), Argentina
University of La Cuenca del Plata, Argentina
University of Moron, Argentina
Format:
Online journal article
Publication Date:
2015-04-15
Published:
Argentina: Elsevier
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Document Number: D10882
9 pages, online journal article, Quality rural extension is of utmost importance for generating food security and sustainable rural development. In this paper, Argentine rural extensionists' point of view on how to be a good practitioner is described, as well as compared to good practices proposed by scholars and international development organizations. Forty rural extensionists from the Northeastern Argentine provinces were interviewed (29men, 11 women). Interviews were recorded and transcribed, texts were categorized and contents analyzed. Scholars and extensionists, despite agreeing to most of the same principles, frame their recommendations for good extension practices in different ways. The former's recommendations tend to be supported by multiple case studies and focused on best practices on the level of extension projects or policies, while the latter's tend to draw upon their own experience and develop proposals more concerned with interpersonal interactions and with overcoming practical problems in real (and not ideal)settings. Best extension practices depend on environmental, institutional, political and cultural contexts, this implying there is no best extension practice in general. Training extensionists in interpersonal skills and in social sciences is key for reaching good extension results. Horizontal communication between farmers and extensionists, negotiation over best technologies, and helping farmers reflect on their production practices are extension strategies with great potential.
