
































Microsoft Word - 157-groberts%2C+157-Manuscript-1883-1-11-20211028[1]ER Edits.docx


Rubenstein & Scott  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
  Volume 2, Issue 3, 2021 
  agdevresearch.org 

1. Eric Rubenstein, Associate Professor, College of Agricultural & Environmental Science, University of Georgia, 0133 Four 
Towers, 405 Station Rd, Athens, GA 30602, erubenstein@uga.edu ,  https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8799-2502   

2. James Scott, Graduate Research Assistant, University of Georgia, 129A Four Towers Building, 405 Station Rd, Athens, GA 

30602, jamesd.scott@uga.edu,   https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4807-4378 

50 
 

Preservice Agriculture Teachers’ Perceived Self-Efficacy of 
Specific SAE Competencies 

 
E. Rubenstein1, J. Scott2 

 
 

  

Abstract 

With the implementation of the supervised agricultural experience (SAE) within school-based 
agricultural education (SBAE), hands-on learning has changed how students learn in the classroom. 
SAE programs, a key component of agricultural education, are an example of experiential learning 
within the SBAE model. The implementation of SAE experiences has been often viewed as difficult 
for many teachers, and many new agricultural educators struggle with implementing SAE into their 
classroom instruction. Therefore, this study sought to determine the self-efficacy of preservice 
agriculture teachers towards the American Association for Agricultural Education-Supervised 
Agricultural Experience (AAAE) SAE competencies. Results indicated that a majority of preservice 
teachers considered SAE an important aspect of the SBAE model. However, results indicated that few 
competencies showed significant differences between pre- and post-completion of the agricultural 
program, and only two competencies showed significance by gender. Data indicates that teacher 
preparation programs have been successful in preparing students to develop, implement, and 
supervise SAE programs during student teaching. The researchers recommend that further research 
should examine additional agricultural teacher preparation programs and determine the self-efficacy 
of cooperating teachers in the classroom. 
 
 
 
Keywords 

Supervised agricultural experience, agricultural education, social cognitive theory, experiential 
learning 



Rubenstein & Scott  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i3.157   51 
 

Introduction and Problem Statement 
 
With the conception of the home project by Rufus Stimson in the early twentieth century, the 
school-based agricultural education (SBAE) model has been forever changed by creating a 
unique programmatic offering in Agricultural Education (Phipps et al., 2008). Since then, the 
project method has changed and adapted to meet the needs of all students (Phipps et al., 
2008). Experiential learning has been best summarized through learning by doing and 
encouraging students to reflect on their experience (Morris, 2020; Phipps & Osborne, 1988; 
Phipps et al., 2008; Roberts, 2006). Teachers should be prepared to make the experiences 
educational for the student and should be prepared to assist in planning and executing each 
student’s SAE.  
 
Preservice agriculture teacher programs may not fully prepare preservice teachers for teaching 
SAE in the classroom, and the self-efficacy of preservice teachers has often been unknown 
(McLean & Camp, 2000; Rubenstein et al., 2014; Stair & Warner, 2012; Talbert et al., 2014). 
Additionally, the self-efficacy of these preservice teachers has often been unknown. 
Furthermore, McLean and Camp (2000) indicated that three of 10 preservice teacher education 
programs, included in the study, actually taught a course focused on SAE to preservice teachers. 
These preservice agricultural programs spend a less significant amount of time teaching SAE as 
opposed to instruction related to the National FFA Organization (McLean & Camp, 2000). 
Rubenstein et al. (2014), concluded that a majority of preservice teachers perceived SAE as 
important or somewhat important, however preservice teachers indicated low self-efficacy 
towards several competencies. Therefore, this research study aimed to further previous 
research and examine preservice teachers’ self-efficacy towards the specific American 
Association for Agricultural Education (AAAE) SAE competencies before and after completing an 
agriculture teacher preparation program.  
 

Theoretical and Conceptual Framework 
 
This study was guided by Bandura’s (1986) Social Cognitive Theory and Schunk’s (2012) 
research on the role gender plays in self-efficacy. Bandura (1986) stated that learning is 
achieved through interactions between the learner, environment, and behaviors. These 
interactions are bidirectional, built into a triad, where the factors do not have to occur in the 
same moment. Social cognitive theory focuses on the learner with personal factors influencing 
learning. Within personal factors, self-efficacy plays a major role (Bandura, 1986). As 
mentioned, teachers are responsible for many aspects of SAEs. This includes assisting in 
developing, implementing, and executing plans set forth, to aid in the success of the student. 
For a teacher to perform and assist the student, personal factors such as self-efficacy, guide 
them throughout all aspects of SAEs. Therefore, this study focused on preservice teachers’ self-
efficacy and perceptions of SAE regarding their ability to perform a given list of competencies. 
 
Bandura (1986) defines self-efficacy as the judgments of the capabilities people have to 
organize and execute action needed to attain a specific performance. It is a belief about what 
one is capable of doing as opposed to knowing what to do (Schunk, 2012). Schunk also states 



Rubenstein & Scott  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i3.157   52 
 

that to gauge self-efficacy, individuals assess their skills and capabilities and how those skills 
form actions. Actual experiences and performances then offer the most information for 
assessing one’s self-efficacy (Schunk, 2012).  
 
Self-efficacy plays a key role in this study in the performance of preservice agricultural 
educators, but Schunk (2012) also stated that gender differences often relate to differences in 
self-efficacy among vocational career choices. However, a lack of research exists in determining 
the correlations between gender and self-efficacy. Additionally, within the performance of 
preservice teachers, achievement also plays a key role in self-efficacy. Those who view 
themselves as having low-self efficacy will often avoid attempting tasks and may also doubt 
their learning capabilities as opposed to those who are efficacious (Schunk, 2012). Not only 
does teacher self-efficacy have an impact on instructional methods and planning, but it also has 
an impact on student learning (Schunk, 2012). Acknowledging these factors, it is believed one’s 
self-efficacy may in turn influence the progress and achievement of students and teachers 
(Schunk, 2012). 
 
In addition to limited research and little data in determining where SAE instruction should focus 
concerning SAE course work, it is unclear how preservice agriculture teachers view their 
perceived self-efficacy towards SAE. Therefore, the assumption can be made that those with 
limited interaction with SAE and SBAE will be less efficacious towards the specific AAAE-SAE 
competencies as opposed to those with the experience. 
 

Purpose  
 
The purpose of this study was to examine the self-efficacy of preservice teachers’ ability to 
perform the SAE Competencies developed through the American Association for Agricultural 
Education (American Association for Agricultural Education, 2013). The specific objectives that 
guided this study were: 
1. To determine the influence of prior SAE experience and beliefs on preservice agriculture 

teachers’ SAE self-efficacy. 
2. Examine the influence of core agricultural education certification courses on preservice 

agriculture teachers’ SAE self-efficacy.  
3. Examine the differences in SAE self-efficacy among genders of preservice agriculture 

teachers. 
 

Methods 
 
To determine the preservice teachers’ perceived abilities to conduct SAE in their SBAE 
programs, a paper-based pre-survey was administered to senior agricultural education students 
before the completion of the core agricultural education certification courses, where all SAE 
content is taught.  The pre-survey was followed by a post-survey which was administered upon 
completion of their 15-week student teaching experience the following spring semester. The 
span between the administration of the two instruments was nine months. The survey was 
administered to 15 preservice teachers who completed the agricultural education certification 



Rubenstein & Scott  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i3.157   53 
 

program at The University of Georgia using a questionnaire that was developed by Rubenstein 
et al (2014). The survey was developed based on the core competencies approved by AAAE. The 
instrument was found to be reliable by Rubenstein et al. (2014) with a post-hoc reliability found 
to be .95.  The instrument was used unchanged from the previous study.  The questionnaire 
consisted of 20 Likert-type items that measured preservice teachers’ self-efficacy of each AAAE-
SAE Competency.  The instrument utilized a 5-point Likert-type scale that ranged from (5) high, 
(4) moderately high, (3) neutral, (2) moderately low, and (1) low.  Data were analyzed using 
descriptive statistics and the pre-post responses were analyzed using a dependent samples t-
test to determine the change in the preservice teachers’ perceived ability to perform the SAE 
competencies. This study was utilized as a snapshot to understand the influence of the 
program, with a limited population and small sample size.  
 
The sample of this study consisted of graduating preservice agriculture teachers from one 
agricultural education preparation program at a The University of Georgia (n = 15). All 
participants were seniors in their final year of certification courses and student teaching. A 
census was utilized in this study. 
 
Data were collected using a paper-based questionnaire previously designed by Rubenstein et al. 
(2014). The questionnaire was administered in a face-to-face format (Dillman et al., 2009). Prior 
to utilization, the original survey instrument developed by Rubenstein et al (2014) was 
reviewed by a panel of experts who examined the document for content validity within the 
individual program, and then deemed acceptable in its current form for this study, as the 
population in both studies were preservice teachers.  
 
Responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics to determine the perceived self-efficacy of 
preservice agriculture teachers in completing individual SAE competencies. Independent 
samples t-tests were used to determine the ability of preservice teachers prior/post completion 
of certification courses and student teaching, as well as the differences between students who 
identify as male or female towards their performance of SAE competencies. Researchers 
utilized independent samples t-tests, as this method is often found to be robust to violations of 
the normal population assumption (Agresti & Finlay, 2009). The alpha level of statistical 
significance was set a priori at .05. 

 

Findings 
 
Participants (n = 15) not only responded on their ability to perform AAAE-SAE competencies, 
but demographic information was also collected (see Table 1). Approximately two-thirds of 
respondents (60%, n = 9) identified as female. A majority of respondents (93%, n = 14) self-
reported they were Caucasian, Non-Hispanic. Additionally, the majority of participants were 
involved in high school agriculture education and previous SAE experience (100%, n = 15), (93%, 
n = 14) respectively. A majority responded they received instruction from at least one course 
focused on SAE, yet 13% indicated no previous instruction on SAE. Although 7 of 15 participants 
(47%) believed that SAE was very important in coursework before completing the program, 
post-survey results indicated that 14 participants perceived SAE as very important. 



Rubenstein & Scott  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i3.157   54 
 

Table 1 
 
Demographics of Preservice Teachers (n = 15) 

Characteristic n % 
Gender   
     Female 9 60 
     Male 6 40 
Ethnicity   
     Hispanic 1 7 
     Caucasian, Non-Hispanic 14 93 
High School Agriculture Education   
     Yes 15 100 
     No 0 0 
SAE Experience   
     No Previous Experience 1 7 
     High School Experience 14 93 
Coursework Regarding SAE During Teacher Preparation Program   
     Entire Course on SAE 1 7 
     A Portion of 1 Course 6 40 
     A Portion of More Than 1 Course 6 40 
     No Instruction Provided 2 13 
Importance of SAE in SBAE   
     Not Important 0 0 
     Somewhat Important 1 7 
     Neither Important or Not Important 0 0 
     Somewhat Important 7 47 
     Very Important 7 47 
Certification Status   
     Through a Teacher Preparation Program 14 93 
     Through Alternative Certification Routes 1 7 
     Provisionally Certified Currently 0 0 
Note. SAE = supervised agricultural experience; SBAE = school-based agricultural 
education 

 
Preservice teachers’ self-efficacy towards SAE and SBAE increased between the pre-survey to 
post-survey on 16 items, and Table 2 illustrated that two competencies were statistically 
significant (p < .05). Preservice teachers reported that their ability to provide individualized 
instruction related to a student’s SAE increased from 3.40 to 3.87 (p = .04). However, their 
ability to motivate students to complete an SAE program decreased from 4.40 to 3.67 (p = .00) 
after completion of the program.  
 
 
 



Rubenstein & Scott  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i3.157   55 
 

Table 2 
 
Preservice Teacher Self-Efficacy Towards AAAE-SAE Competencies (n = 15) 

Item: My ability to … Pre-M Post-M p t 
Motivate students to complete an SAE program 4.40 3.67 .00 4.78 
Provide individualized instruction related to a student’s SAE 

program 
3.40 3.87 .04 -.217 

Clearly communicate the purpose of SAE programs with others 3.60 4.00 .11 -1.70 
Instruct students in how to complete SAE programs 3.53 3.80 .16 -1.47 
Assist students in selecting SAE programs that meet their 

individual abilities 
3.47 3.80 .17 -1.44 

Inform administrators about the benefits of SAE programs 4.07 4.27 .33 -1.00 
Evaluate SAE programs 3.73 3.93 .33 -1.00 
Identify SAE programs that connect to agriculture curriculum 3.93 4.13 .38 -.90 
Encourage students to complete a diary record for their SAE 

program 
3.80 4.00 .42 -.82 

Assist students in completing a record of the financial 
transactions related to their SAE program 

3.47 3.73 .43 -.81 

Assist students in developing SAE programs that meet their 
aptitude 

3.33 3.53 .45 -.76 

Assist students in planning an appropriate SAE program that 
meets their needs 

3.47 3.67 .45 -.76 

Build positive relationships with administrators 4.20 4.33 .49 -.70 
Evaluate student’s competency development within their SAE 

program 
3.20 3.33 .49 -.69 

Identify SAE programs within a community 3.67 3.80 .54 -.62 
Clearly communicate the procedures of SAE programs with 

others 
3.53 3.67 .54 -.62 

Enhance student learning using SAE as a motivation tool 3.67 3.53 .58 .56 
Coordinate communications between a student, parent, 

employer, and myself 
4.07 3.93 .61 .52 

Provide students meaningful supervision during their SAE 
program 

4.07 3.93 .63 .49 

Provide sufficient notice to those involved in a supervisory visit 
of the date and time 

4.27 4.13 .65 .46 

Identify SAE programs that are beneficial for individual students 3.73 3.80 .77 -.29 
Assist students in acquiring necessary resources to complete an 

SAE program 
3.60 3.53 .81 .24 

Encourage students to improve their SAE programs 4.20 4.20 1.00 .00 
Use SAE programs as a tool for increasing student learning 4.00 4.00 1.00 .00 
Increase community involvement in agriculture education using 

SAE programs 
3.73 3.73 1.00 .00 

Note. 5 = high; 4 = moderately high; 3 = neutral; 2 = moderately low; 1 = low   

 



Rubenstein & Scott  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i3.157   56 
 

As noted in Table 3, only two competencies showed significance by gender. Table 3 also 
illustrates that if one gender perceived their self-efficacy toward a competency highly, the 
opposite would show lower self-efficacy. Of the two competencies with significance, both 
males and females indicated a large decrease in ability towards providing individualized 
instruction related to a student’s SAE program. However, it can be noted that females showed a 
larger change from the pre-survey to the post-survey (M = -.67), while males indicated a lesser 
decrease (M = -.17). Furthermore, Table 3 indicates that male preservice agriculture teachers 
perceive their ability to evaluate student’s competency development within their program as 
higher upon completion of the preparation program (M = .17) while females perceive their 
ability as weaker upon completion (M = -.33). Thus, statistical significance can be noted of this 
competency (p = .02). 
 
  



Rubenstein & Scott  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i3.157   57 
 

Table 3 
 
Preservice Teacher Self-Efficacy Towards AAAE-SAE Competencies Based on Gender 
 Male (n=6) Female (n=9)  
Item: My ability to … M SD M SD p 
Evaluate student’s competency development within their 

SAE program 
.17 .40 -.33 .86 .02 

Provide individualized instruction related to a student’s SAE 
program 

-.17 .40 -.67 1.00 .03 

Enhance student learning using SAE as a motivation tool .00 .63 .22 1.09 .05 
Assist students in developing SAE programs that meet their 

aptitude 
.00 .63 -.33 1.22 .07 

Assist students in selecting SAE programs that meet their 
individual abilities 

.00 .63 -.56 1.01 .10 

Clearly communicate the purpose of SAE programs with 
others 

-.17 .75 -.56 1.01 .27 

Clearly communicate the procedures of SAE programs with 
others 

.00 .63 -.22 .97 .27 

Assist students in completing a record of financial 
transactions in their SAE program 

.50 1.04 -.78 1.20 .27 

Encourage students to complete a diary record for their SAE 
program 

-.33 .51 -.11 1.16 .28 

Motivate students to complete an SAE program 1.00 .63 .56 .52 .36 
Assist students in acquiring necessary resources to complete 

an SAE program 
.50 1.22 -.22 .97 .39 

Encourage students to improve their SAE programs -.17 .75 .11 1.16 .42 
Identify SAE programs that are beneficial for individual 

students 
.33 1.03 -.33 .70 .44 

Identify SAE programs that connect to agriculture 
curriculum 

.17 .75 -.44 .88 .50 

Use SAE programs as a tool for increasing student learning .00 .89 .00 .86 .53 
Evaluate SAE programs -.17 .75 -.22 .83 .54 
Assist students in planning an appropriate SAE program that 

meets their needs 
.33 .81 -.56 1.01 .56 

Increase community involvement in agriculture education 
using SAE programs 

.33 1.03 -.22 1.39 .57 

Provide students meaningful supervision during their SAE 
program 

.50 .83 -.11 1.16 .67 

Instruct students in how to complete SAE programs .17 .75 -.56 .52 .68 
Coordinate communications between a student, parent, 

employer, and myself 
.00 1.09 .22 .97 .83 

Provide sufficient notice to those involved in a supervisory 
visit of the date and time 

.17 1.16 .11 1.16 .85 

Build positive relationships with administrators -.17 .75 -.11 .78 .88 
Inform administrators about the benefits of SAE programs -.17 .75 -.22 .83 .96 
Identify SAE programs within a community -.33 .81 .00 .86 1.00 

Note. 5 = high, 4 = moderately high, 3 = neutral, 2 = moderately low, 1 = low 



Rubenstein & Scott  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i3.157   58 
 

Conclusions, Discussion, and Recommendations 
 
Based on the findings of this study, several conclusions can be drawn. However, the authors 
noted limitations, which included a small sample size and its effect on generalization of the 
results. Not only is SAE perceived to be of greater importance upon completion of the program 
but preservice teachers’ self-efficacy increased among 16 competencies. Only two 
competencies were noted with statistical significance among preservice teachers (p < .05), with 
a significant decrease noted for one item; motivating students to complete an SAE program. 
Previous studies have indicated that teachers struggle with SAEs, and many teachers fail to 
implement programs completely (Dyer & Osborne, 1995; Robinson & Haynes, 2011; Rubenstein 
et al., 2014). As noted in Dyer & Osborne (1995), when teachers indicate low self-efficacy 
towards SAEs and struggle with implementation, there is difficulty motivating students leading 
to decreased participation.  
 
While there is limited research that seeks to identify the differences in self-efficacy and gender 
in agricultural educators, researchers determined that there was little indication gender 
impacted self-efficacy of specific SAE competencies. Prior research indicated a large difference 
in male teachers compared to female teachers, yet did not identify key differences in 
perceptions of self-efficacy (Edwards & Briers, 2001; Young & Edwards, 2005). Recent research 
indicates a large gap between female and male agricultural educators, and Rubenstein et al. 
(2014) indicated nearly three-quarters of respondents as female. However, respondents who 
identified as male reported a higher increase in self-efficacy in 17 competencies, but also 
reported a greater decrease than females in five competencies; identify SAE programs within a 
community, encourage students to complete a diary record for their SAE program, evaluate SAE 
programs, encourage students to improve their SAE programs, and build positive relationships 
with administrators. Further examination indicated that both female and male respondents 
reported lower self-efficacy of providing individualized instruction related to a student’s SAE 
program. 
 
While previous research did not indicate significant changes, anecdotal evidence from pre- and 
post-survey means illustrated an increase in each competency except the eight which 
decreased. However, researchers concluded there was little to no difference in self-efficacy of 
participants prior to and after completion of a teacher preparation course. These results 
indicate that agricultural teacher preparation programs are successful to an extent in preparing 
teachers to implement SAE into the classroom. Nonetheless, previous research indicates that 
agriculture teachers struggle with the implementation of these programs in the classroom 
(Talbert et al., 2014). Therefore, researchers express the importance of investigating the 
impacts of agricultural teacher programs, as previous research also indicates that agriculture 
teachers pose the greatest impact on SBAE and SAEs (Dyer & Osborne, 1995; Phipps et al., 
2008; Rubenstein et al., 2014).  
 
Additionally, determining where gaps occur between teacher preparation programs and 
practicing teachers should be examined more thoroughly. Previous research indicates that 
preservice agricultural teacher programs may not fully prepare students for teaching SAE in the 



Rubenstein & Scott  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i3.157   59 
 

classroom (Rubenstein et al., 2014). Rubenstein et al. (2014) concluded that while programs 
would seem to be preparing teachers, teachers struggle with implementation in the classroom, 
leading to the suggestion that a gap exists between what is taught and what is practiced. 
Furthermore, within this study, researchers agreed there were indications student teaching 
impacted the self-efficacy of preservice teachers, and identified several competencies with 
components of classroom interaction that either increased or decreased. As previously 
mentioned, teachers in the classroom struggle with the implementation of SAE (; Dyer & 
Osborne, 1995; Rubenstein et al., 2014; Talbert et al., 2014), which impacts student teachers. 

 

Recommendations 
 
Based on the results of the study, several recommendations have been developed for future 
research. These include examining the level and depth of SAE instruction in agricultural teacher 
preparation programs across the United States, how agriculture teacher preparation programs 
are preparing preservice teachers to develop individual student SAE programs, cooperating 
teachers’ self-efficacy towards the AAAE-SAE competencies, and agricultural educators who are 
new to teaching and those who have been teaching for many years to determine the differences 
in self-efficacy towards specific competencies among teacher experience and performance. 
 
Furthermore, the researchers propose recommendations for agricultural teacher educators 
which include developing SAE implementation guides to support new teachers in motivating 
students to complete SAEs, and provide additional training opportunities for preservice and in-
service agriculture teachers to learn about SAE development, implementation, and supervision.   
 

References  
 
Agresti, A., & Finlay, B. (2009). Statistical methods for the social sciences (4th ed.). Prentice-Hall. 
 
American Association for Agricultural Education. (2013). Teacher education SAE competencies. 

http://aaaeonline.org/Resources/Documents/SIG%20Files/SAE%20Competencies.pdf 
 
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. 

Prentice-Hall. 
 
Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D., & Christian, L. M. (2009). Internet, mail, and mixed–mode surveys; 

The tailored design method (3rd ed.). Wiley. 
 
Dyer, J. E., & Osborne, E. W. (1995). Participation in supervised agricultural experience 

programs: A synthesis of research. Journal of Agricultural Education, 36(1), 6–14. 
https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.1995.01006  

 
McLean, R. C., & Camp, W. G. (2000). An examination of selected preservice agricultural teacher 

education programs in the United States. Journal of Agricultural Education, 41(2), 25–
35. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2000.02025 



Rubenstein & Scott  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i3.157   60 
 

 
Morris, T. H. (2020). Experiential learning – a systematic review and revision of Kolb’s 

model. Interactive Learning Environments, 28(8), 1064–1077. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1570279 

 
Phipps, L. J., & Osborne, E. W. (1988). Handbook on agricultural education in public schools (5th 

ed.). Interstate. 
 
Phipps, L. J., Osborne, E. W., Dyer, J. E., & Ball, A. (2008). Handbook on agricultural education in 

public schools (6th ed.). Thomson Delmar. 
 
Roberts, T. G. (2006). A philosophical examination of experiential learning theory for 

agricultural educators. Journal of Agricultural Education, 47(1), 17–29. 
https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2006.01017 

 
Robinson, J. S., & Haynes, J. C. (2011). Value and expectations of supervised agriculture experiences 

as expressed by agriculture instructors in Oklahoma who were alternatively certified. 
Journal of Agricultural Education, 52(2), 47–57. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2011.02047 

 
Rubenstein, E. D., Thoron, A. C., & Estepp, C. M. (2014). Perceived self-efficacy of preservice 

agriculture teachers toward specific SAE competencies. Journal of Agricultural 
Education, 55(4), 72–84. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2014.04072 

 
Schunk, D. H. (2012). Learning theories: An educational perspective (6th ed.). Pearson. 
 
Schunk, D. H. (2020). Learning theories: An educational perspective (8th ed.). Pearson. 
 
Stair, K. S., & Warner, W. J. (2012). Identifying concerns of preservice and in–service teachers in 

agricultural education. Journal of Agricultural Education, 53(2), 153–164. 
https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2012.02153 

 
Stimson, R. W. (1919). Vocational agricultural education by home projects. Macmillan.  
 
Talbert, B. A., Vaughn, R., Croom, B., & Lee, J. S. (2014). Foundations of agricultural education 

(3rd ed.). Pearson. 
 
Young, R. B., & Edwards, M. C. (2005). A profile of cooperating teachers and centers in 

Oklahoma: Implications for the student teaching experience in agricultural education. 
Journal of Southern Agricultural Education Research, 55(1), 60–73. 
http://www.jsaer.org/pdf/Vol55/55-01-060.pdf  

 
 
© 2021 by authors. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of 
the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). 


