































   Advancements in Agricultural Development 
  Volume 4, Issue 3, 2023 
  agdevresearch.org 

 
1. Kayla N. Marsh, Graduate Teaching and Research Associate, Oklahoma State University, 458 Agricultural Hall, Stillwater, 

OK 74078, Kayla.marsh@okstate.edu,  https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3574-1936 
2. Christopher J. Eck, Assistant Professor of Agricultural Education, Oklahoma State University, 457 Agricultural Hall, 

Stillwater, OK 74078, Chris.eck@okstate.edu,  https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1645-3632 
3. K. D. Layfield, Associate Professor of Agricultural Education, Clemson University, 246 McAdams Hall, Clemson, SC 29634, 

dlayfie@clemson.edu,  https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1487-6922 
4. Joseph L. Donaldson, Associate Professor and Extension Specialist of Agricultural Education and Extension, North Carolina 

State University, 2601 Stinson Drive, Campus Box 7607, Raleigh, NC 27695, Joseph_donaldson@ncsu.edu,  
  https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9276-3747 

 
117 

 

Identifying School-Based Agricultural Education Teacher 
Needs and Support Gaps 

 
K. N. Marsh 1, C. J. Eck. 2, K. D. Layfield 3, J. L. Donaldson 4 

 
 

Article History 
Received: May 25, 2023 
Accepted: August 9, 2023 
Published: August 22, 2023 
 
 
Keywords 
The Conceptual Model of Support for 
School-Based Agricultural Education 
Teachers; purposeful professional 
development; human lens 

  

Abstract 
The school-based agricultural education (SBAE) teacher attrition crisis 
dates back to the passing of the Smith-Hughes Act in 1917. For the past 
three decades, researchers have studied this phenomenon to better 
understand the needs of SBAE teachers in order to increase retention as 
well as improve work-life balance. While several needs are recurring, 
current efforts are not resulting in actionable change for SBAE teachers. 
To gain perspectives on the problem, an expert panel of SBAE supporters 
were invited to participate in a Delphi in Florida, Georgia, and South 
Carolina, focused on the perceived needs of SBAE teachers. The 
Conceptual Model of Support for SBAE Teachers was introduced as a 
potential lens to meet the human needs of SBAE teachers. The Delphi 
resulted in 42 items being identified as areas of need for 21st century 
SBAE teachers. All align with the historical needs of SBAE teachers and 
demonstrate gaps in support in the areas of wellness, resources, work-
life balance, relationships, and the need for purposeful professional 
development. Further research is recommended to evaluate the 
identified needs.  

 

mailto:Kayla.marsh@okstate.edu
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3574-1936
mailto:Chris.eck@okstate.edu
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1645-3632
mailto:dlayfie@clemson.edu
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1487-6922
mailto:Joseph_donaldson@ncsu.edu
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9276-3747


Marsh et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i3.347   118 
 

Introduction and Problem Statement 
 
School-based agricultural education (SBAE) teachers are tasked with varied responsibilities in 
and out of the classroom while attempting to establish work-life balance (Terry & Briers, 2010). 
Unfortunately, SBAE teachers still have gaps in their abilities, complicating the work-life balance 
and stress that teachers face as they navigate purposeful professional development to further 
their human capital development (Eck et al., 2019; Shoulders et al., 2021). A historical review 
spanning three decades of SBAE teacher needs assessments depicts that several needs are 
recurring, including general administrative tasks, public relations for the program, student 
behavior management, computer technology, FFA program management, and supervised 
agricultural experience (SAE) development (DiBenedetto et al., 2018).  
 
While work-life balance and teacher stress have been heavily researched in recent decades, 
solutions for meeting SBAE teacher needs and improving job satisfaction are not fully realized 
(DiBenedetto et al., 2018; Doss et al., 2022). Therefore, identifying teachers' needs on a human 
level is essential to support SBAE teachers further and potentially offset the ongoing teacher 
attrition concerns (Eck & Edwards, 2019). This task is elusive because a “one size fits all” 
approach to professional learning is ineffective in meeting the needs of all SBAE teachers 
(Klassen & Chiu, 2010). King et al. (2013) recommended that teacher need research results in 
purposeful professional development opportunities for teachers.  Teachers serve as the single 
most important factor in student success (Chetty et al., 2014); without effective SBAE teachers 
the future of an agriculturally literate society and agricultural workforce could be in jeopardy. 
Therefore, the perceptions of SBAE supporters providing professional development are 
instrumental in identifying needs and support gaps—recognizing that each may be limited by 
the phenomenon witnessed within their roles.  
 

Theoretical and Conceptual Framework 
 
To evaluate the perceived needs of SBAE teachers, Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs from the 
Theory of Human Motivation (1943) was operationalized. Specifically, Maslow’s hierarchy for 
teacher needs (Fisher & Royster, 2016) retained the original hierarchy but aligned titles to 
better represent the needs of the K-12 education discipline. The personal growth needed to 
ascend within Maslow’s Hierarchy of Teachers (2016) would require the development of 
essential skills, resources, social networks, and knowledge. This development of personal and 
professional traits is known as human capital, and the developmental needs will differ based on 
the career field, education, and previous experiences of the individual (Heckman, 2000; Schultz, 
1971; Smith, 2010).  Maslow’s hierarchy for teacher needs (Fisher & Royster, 2016) was 
overlayed on the Three-Component Model of Agricultural Education (FFA, n.d.), which 
demonstrates the human capital teachers need to successfully facilitate 21st century SBAE 
programs providing career experiences, leadership development, and student-centered 
learning in agricultural content (Eck et al., 2019; FFA, 2022; Smylie, 1996).  
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i3.347


Marsh et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i3.347   119 
 

To illustrate the development of career-specific human capital skills, training, experience, and 
education for effective SBAE teachers to manage a complete 21st century SBAE program, the 
Effective Teaching Model for SBAE Teachers (Eck et al., 2019) was utilized to represent the 
individuals’ career-specific growth toward effective teaching. As SBAE teachers develop their 
career-specific skills, they ascend to higher levels within Maslow’s Hierarchy for Teachers 
(Fisher & Royster, 2016). A conceptual model was established (see Figure 1) to serve as a frame 
to assess SBAE teachers’ needs. 
 
Figure 1 
 
Conceptual Model of Support for School-Based Agricultural Education Teachers 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
The Conceptual Model of Support for School-Based Agricultural Education Teachers utilizes the 
Three-Component Model for Agricultural Education (FFA, 2022) as the base of the pyramid due 
to the interdependency of the Classroom, FFA, and SAE components and the number of 
overlapping roles of SBAE teachers. Human capital development takes place in each of the 
Classroom, FFA, and SAE components (depicted as dashed line with arrows in Figure 1) based 
on the needs of the individual SBAE teacher, considering their teaching effectiveness as well as 
their personal and professional characteristics (Eck et al., 2019). As SBAE teachers develop their 
human capital in each of the components (i.e., Classroom, FFA, SAE), they ascend to higher 
levels of Maslow’s Hierarchy for Teachers (Fisher & Royster, 2016), which further develops 
career-specific human capital and reduces the challenges contributing to SBAE teacher attrition 
(Doss et al., 2022; Eck et al., 2019; Fisher & Royster, 2016; FFA, n.d.).  
 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i3.347


Marsh et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i3.347   120 
 

 
Purpose  

 
This study aimed to determine the current needs of SBAE teachers and the supports in place. 
Thus, three research questions guided this study to determine the perceived needs of SBAE 
teachers in Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina: (a) What are the needs of in-service SBAE 
teachers as perceived by expert SBAE teacher supporters? (b) What are the current support 
structures available to in-service SBAE teachers according to expert SBAE teacher supporters? 
(c) What categories within the Conceptual Model of Support for School-Based Agricultural 
Education Teachers do the identified needs align? 
 

Methods 
 
This Delphi study aimed to reach a census population (Privitera, 2020) of expert SBAE teacher 
supporters (N = 71) in three southeastern states (i.e., Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina). The 
three states were selected based on their geographical location and similarities within SBAE 
(i.e., middle and high school SBAE programs, state teacher’s associations, state FFA 
organization/leadership, and SBAE teacher preparation faculty). The panel of experts included 
post-secondary agricultural education faculty, state and regional FFA support staff (i.e., 
recruitment and retention specialists, agricultural education curriculum specialists), state and 
district CTE supervisors, and state Department of Education representatives for agricultural 
education. Since their professional roles revolve around the preparation and support of SBAE 
teachers, they were deemed experts, which is essential to ensure the success of the Delphi 
approach (Dalkey, 1969). Additionally, the teacher supporters were deemed experts due to 
their holistic skill set developed over multiple years within the profession (Benner, 1982). An 
initial personalized email followed by three contact points were used to invite experts to 
participate in all three rounds of the Delphi (Dillman et al., 2014). The Delphi method (Dalkey et 
al., 1972) was implemented to determine the needs of in-service SBAE teachers and identify the 
current support structures available. 
 
A Delphi that has more than 13 respondents per round has a reliability of .80, making it 
essential to reduce attrition to maintain research integrity (Dalkey, 1969). Qualtrics was utilized 
for survey instrument delivery and data collection for all three rounds, and the instruments 
were developed to be accessible for computer or mobile devices per the recommendations of 
Dillman et al. (2014). Round One consisted of two open-ended questions being distributed to 
the expert panel: (a)What do you perceive the current needs of school-based agricultural 
education teachers to be considering their role within a complete program (i.e., 
Classroom/Laboratory Instruction, FFA Advisement, and SAE Supervision)? and (b) What 
support systems are currently in place to help meet those identified needs? The goal of Round 
One was to gain the perspective of the expert SBAE supports on SBAE teacher needs and 
supports. Specifically, question one aligned with research question one and the second 
question aligned with the second research question of the study. The unique responses from 
Round One were analyzed utilizing the constant comparative method (Creswell & Poth, 2018), 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i3.347


Marsh et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i3.347   121 
 

condensing duplicative and redundant statements, which were then redistributed to the 
panelists in Round Two. This method allowed the researcher to use the panelists’ voices from 
the open-ended responses to develop a list of items for Round Two. Items distributed in Round 
Two were ranked on a 4-point Likert-type scale of agreement: strongly disagree (1) to strongly 
agree (4). An a priori consensus rating of 100% agreement by the panel of experts to meet 
consensus in Round Two was established. Items not meeting consensus in Round Two were 
redistributed in Round Three, which sought to achieve consensus for any remaining items, 
utilizing a dichotomous scale of agreement (i.e., Agree or Disagree), with consensus considered 
at an 85% agreement level. Additionally, experts were asked to provide rationale or 
clarifications for any items that they did not agree with (Hsu & Sanford, 2007) in Round Three. 
Any items not reaching the 85% level of agreement were removed from the final list of items 
(Custer et al., 1999). To address the third research question, the identified needs meeting 
consensus were further analyzed using axial coding as a second cycle coding method, aligning 
items with preexisting categories (Saldaña, 2021) of subsistence, security, association, respect, 
and self-actualization from Maslow’s hierarchy for teacher needs (Fisher & Royster, 2016). 
 

Findings 
 
Round One was designed to compile a comprehensive list of concerns currently facing SBAE 
teachers in Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina. The first open-ended response question was 
implemented asking experts, what do you perceive the current needs of school-based 
agricultural education teachers to be, considering their role within a complete program (i.e., 
Classroom/Laboratory Instruction, FFA Advisement, and SAE Supervision)? Round One resulted 
in 80 statements from the 13 experts. Responses varied from single words, such as “Respect” 
and “Support” to detailed statements including “Training on FFA integration within a complete 
program,” “Skills and techniques for working with students with special needs,” and “Relevant 
evaluations that reflect their complete program.” The 80 statements were evaluated by the 
research team using the constant comparative method, condensing statements that were 
deemed to have the same meaning as another, resulting in 44 statements. 
 
Those 44 statements were sent out in Round Two to the expert panel who rated each item on a 
four-point scale of agreement (i.e., 1 = strongly disagree; 2 = disagree; 3 = agree; 4 = strongly 
agree). For a statement to achieve consensus in Round Two, an a priori rating of 100% 
agreement amongst the experts was implemented. Considering this method requires all the 
experts to agree or strongly agree with an item, the researchers were confident in retaining 
items meeting this criterion. Twenty-nine items were strongly agreed upon by the expert panel 
as they achieved 100% agreement (See table 1). Table 1 outlines the results of Round Two, 
identifying the percentage of agreement for each item.  
 
 
 
 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i3.347


Marsh et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i3.347   122 
 

Table 1 
 
Round Two: Level of Agreement for Perceptions of SBAE Teacher Needs (n = 13) 
Identified Need % Agreement 
Purposeful professional development   100 
SAE Support  100 
Support for teacher mental health  100 
Access to essential resources  100 
Community support  100 
Parent support  100 
Support from local school administration  100 
Classroom/Laboratory Support  100 
FFA Support  100 
Emotional health support   100 
Their planning period (i.e., not being required to cover other classes/duties during this time)  100 
Respect   100 
Relevant evaluations that reflect their complete program  100 
Work-life balance   100 
Classroom management skills  100 
Support to identify student mental health issues   100 
Skills and techniques for working with students with special needs  100 
Accessibility training  100 
Resources on FFA integration within a complete program (i.e., Program of Activities, 

National Chapter Award, Proficiency Awards)   
100 

State level support  100 
Curriculum resources  100 
Support for hybrid teaching (i.e., in-person, virtual,  simultaneous)  100 
Agricultural content knowledge  100 
Training of "SAE for ALL" implementation  100 
Pedagogical content knowledge  100 
Laboratory management training   100 
Support in providing equal opportunities to all students  100 
Training to implement a variety of formative evaluation techniques  100 
Resources to integrate experiential learning opportunities for students  100 
Support to aligning lab facilities to program curricula  92.3 
Laboratory safety resources  92.3 
Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) training  92.3 
Resources to recruit traditional and non-traditional ag students  92.3 
Clear and consistent protocols for handling COVID-19 cases  92.3 
Greenhouse management skills  92.3 
Agricultural mechanics skills  92.3 
Training on effective Online delivery techniques   92.3 
Resources to provide chapter level activities  92.3 
Resources to help students overcome various levels of public speaking anxiety  92.3 
Tools to address student mental health issues  84.6 
Lesson planning training   84.6 
Resources for awarding and recognizing SAEs  84.6 
Assistance/resource to develop FFA officer teams   76.9 
Assistance/resources for training FFA teams  76.9 
Note. 1 = strongly disagree; 2 = disagree; 3 = agree; 4 = strongly agree; a = items marked as 
either a 3 or a 4. 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i3.347


Marsh et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i3.347   123 
 

Based on the responses from Round Two, 15 of the 44 statements failed to reach 100% 
consensus, resulting in those statements being resubmitted to the experts for review in Round 
Three. In Round Three, experts were asked to agree or disagree with each statement; if they 
disagreed, they were prompted to provide the rationale as to why they disagreed. For a 
statement to be retained in Round Three, an 85% a priori level of agreement amongst the 
experts was set as the threshold. Table 2 provides the statements for which the experts were 
asked to agree or disagree with.  
 
Table 2 
 
Round Three: Level of Agreement for Perceptions of SBAE Teacher Needs (n = 14) 
Identified Need Agree Disagree % Agreement 
Tools to address student mental health issues  14 0 100 
Resources to recruit traditional and non-

traditional ag students  
14 0 100 

Support to aligning lab facilities to program 
curricula  

13 1 92.8 

Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) training  13 1 92.8 
Laboratory safety resources  12 2 85.7 
Greenhouse management skills  12 2 85.7 
Agricultural mechanics skills  12 2 85.7 
Training on effective Online delivery techniques   12 2 85.7 
Lesson planning training   12 2 85.7 
Resources for awarding and recognizing SAEs  12 2 85.7 
Resources to help students overcome various 

levels of public speaking anxiety  
12 2 85.7 

Assistance/resource to develop FFA officer teams   12 2 85.7 
Assistance/resources for training FFA teams  12 2 85.7 
Clear and consistent protocols for handling 

COVID-19 cases  
11 3 78.6 

Resources to provide chapter level activities  11 3 78.6 
Note. An a priori of 85% was set by the researchers to retain the characteristics.  
 
The top seven items all had an 85.7 percent agreement, meaning that the expert panel strongly 
agreed with the items. These strongly agreed upon items represented SBAE teachers' needs for 
support from the community and parents as well as support for SAE, mental health, and 
resources. The highest ranked item was the need for purposeful professional development. In 
contrast, the two items that did not meet consensus with a 78.6 percent agreement and 
represent the needs that the expert panel believe to be already available resources or outside 
of their potential scope to assist with. The rationale provided by the expert panel for why items 
that did not meet consensus included “should be taught in teacher preparation” and “these are 
resources already out there.” Additional justification concluded that “schools can provide that 
support for all teachers,” explaining the best protocols for handling COVID-19 as each district’s 
pandemic policies and “not all SBAE teachers need these skills.”  

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i3.347


Marsh et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i3.347   124 
 

 
The second research question aimed to develop a list of current supports in place to meet 
current SBAE teacher needs from the expert panel. In Round One the second open-ended 
response question asked the expert panel: What support systems are currently in place to help 
meet those identified needs? Resulting in 12 responses with statements sharing the sentiment 
of: “very few,” “not many on a state level,” “none, that I am aware of any,” “professional 
development,” and “I can’t think of any” to detailed statements of: “This varies state by state. 
Some of those do exist in our state. Perkins funds are available at our university to help 
teachers with some of these issues…” and “There are PD opportunities in my state for the 
classroom & FFA needs, but probably not at a scale that reaches everyone. Also, there are 
resources online for SAE for All, but that could be expanded significantly.” All of the statements 
demonstrate that gaps in teacher needs and support exist.  
 
Research question three sought to categorize the identified needs of SBAE teachers based on 
the hierarchy of needs adopted in the conceptual model of support, with 26 needs aligning with 
the base of the hierarchy level of subsistence, 10 needs aligned at the level of security, and six 
at the level of association (see table 3). 
 
  

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i3.347


Marsh et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i3.347   125 
 

Table 3 
 
Categorization of identified school-based agricultural education teachers (SBAE) needs 

Categories Identified Need 
Subsistence Access to essential resources 
 Accessibility training 
 Agricultural content knowledge 
 Agricultural mechanics skills 
 Classroom/Laboratory Support 
 Classroom management skills 
 Curriculum resources 
 Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) training  
 Emotional health support   
 Greenhouse management skills 
 Laboratory management training   
 Laboratory safety resources 
 Lesson planning training   
 Pedagogical content knowledge 
 Purposeful professional development   
 SAE Support 
 Skills and techniques for working with students with special needs 
 Support for hybrid teaching (i.e., in-person, virtual, simultaneous) 
 Support for teacher mental health 
 Support to aligning lab facilities to program curricula 
 Support to identify student mental health issues   
 Training of "SAE for ALL" implementation 
 Training on effective Online delivery techniques   
 Training to implement a variety of formative evaluation techniques 
 Tools to address student mental health issues 
 Work-life balance   
Security Assistance/resources for training FFA teams 
 Assistance/resource to develop FFA officer teams   
 Relevant evaluations that reflect their complete program  
 Resources for awarding and recognizing SAEs 
 Resources on FFA integration within a complete program (i.e., Program of Activities, 

National Chapter Award, Proficiency Awards)   
 Resources to help students overcome various levels of public speaking anxiety 
 Resources to integrate experiential learning opportunities for students 
 Resources to recruit traditional and non-traditional ag students 
 Support in providing equal opportunities to all students  
 Their planning period (i.e., not being required to cover other classes/duties during this time) 
Association Community support  
 FFA Support 
 Parent support  
 Respect   
 State level support 
 Support from local school administration  

Note. Identified needs are represented in the table at the lowest potential level of the 
hierarchy.  
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i3.347


Marsh et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i3.347   126 
 

Twenty-six items aligning with subsistence at the base level of the hierarchy (see table 3), 
demonstrate the need for additional technical skills and training opportunities for all career 
phases to improve SBAE teachers' ability to sustain their career tenure across a complete SBAE 
program. SBAE teachers' human needs were represented in 14 of the 42 items identified by the 
expert panel aligning with subsistence and security, including support for teacher mental 
health, work-life balance, and emotional health support, suggesting that an individual’s 
wellness is an essential need. Six of the 42 identified items represent relationships and 
networks of support aligning with association in the hierarchy with identified items of school 
administrative support, parent support, and community support, illustrating the gap that exists 
with program communities and stakeholders.  
 

Conclusions, Discussion, and Recommendations 
 
The 42 items identified as needs demonstrate the current support gaps that exist for SBAE 
teachers. The items align with the Conceptual Model of SBAE Teacher Support, developed to 
identify gaps in SBAE teacher needs and supported previous research focusing on career-
specific human capital development, human needs, relationships, and communities 
(DiBenedetto et al., 2018; Doss et al., 2022; Eck et al., 2019). All 42 identified needs are found in 
the literature but call to question: why are these needs recurring if they are essential human 
capital needs of SBAE teachers? Could it be that previous work has not considered the human 
lens in which teacher support should be grounded? Moreover, perhaps more critically, how do 
we change the way we approach these humanistic needs to create impactful change to reduce 
attrition and support SBAE teachers across the profession? Considering the 42 items identified 
within this study as critical human needs of SBAE teachers and providing the development and 
support needed could help improve the most pivotal component of student success, the 
teacher (Chetty et al., 2014). 
 
SBAE teachers’ career-specific human capital needs are reflected in the 26 subsistence items 
identified as needs for sustaining and supporting SBAE teachers in their daily practice, helping 
to provide the ability to survive within the profession (DiBenedetto et al., 2018; Doss et 
al., 2022; Eck et al., 2019; 2021; Fisher & Royster, 2016; Traini et al., 2021; Yopp et al., 2020). 
Until we can address the subsistence needs that are limiting teachers' ability to survive within 
the profession, teachers cannot ascend to higher levels within the hierarchy of support (see 
Figure 1), i.e., security and association (Fisher & Royster, 2016). SBAE teacher survival within 
the profession is further demonstrated by the number of identified items related to mental, 
physical, and emotional wellness for teachers. Suggesting that resources for improving 
teachers’ well-being is a critical need that must be addressed before other human capital skills 
can be developed to effectively support teachers in their practice.  SBAE teacher's human needs 
were represented in 14 items identified aligning with subsistence and security from Table 3, 
suggesting that an individual’s wellness is an essential need to maintain 21st century programs 
(Fisher & Royster, 2016; Shoulders et al., 2021; Sorensen et al., 2016). Six identified items 
represent relationships aligning with association in the hierarchy, illustrating the importance of 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i3.347


Marsh et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i3.347   127 
 

connecting with stakeholders to meet students' needs (Doss et al., 2022; Fisher & Royster, 
2016; Sorensen et al., 2016).  
 
While resources are available, none were mentioned by the SBAE teacher supporter as effective 
in providing the support currently needed (Doss et al., 2021; King et al., 2013), as current 
support structures either lacked the necessary depth or did not exist. Purposeful professional 
development and SAE for all supports were specifically mentioned by the panel of experts, but 
there is no mention of support for the 23 other items that are currently found at the level of 
subsistence, as the experts did not identify themselves as a support structure to bridge the gap 
for SBAE teachers. This lack of support causes a serve disconnect between the supporters and 
the teachers themselves. Could this disconnect influence teacher attrition as SBAE teachers 
long for a professional community (Fisher & Royster, 2016; Shoulders et al., 2021)? If these 
expert supporters are not supporting SBAE teachers, then who is? 
 
Gaps currently exist and add to the stress, struggle, and overwhelming nature of the SBAE 
profession, the depths of which are unknown. Perhaps by addressing these gaps, we could 
create proactive change in SBAE teacher work-life balance and reduce the current attrition rate 
within the profession (Doss et al., 2021; Shoulders et al., 2021; Sorensen et al., 2016). Based on 
the items found through the Delphi process, SBAE teachers have support gaps that need to be 
addressed from a more human lens to truly create proactive support instead of being reactive 
to teachers' human needs and attrition from the profession. 
 
Expert SBAE teacher supporters at a state level should review the identified needs in relation to 
teachers' human capital and human needs within their state. State CTE faculty and staff should 
provide support for content rigor and relevance, increasing administrative support and 
justifying the respect and value of SBAE programs. State FFA staff are recommended to aid and 
structure the development of FFA and SAE activities on state-by-state bases that are inclusive 
and meet the needs of all students in SBAE. State agricultural education teacher preparation 
faculty should consider the depth of current needs of SBAE teachers practicing within the state 
by focusing on identified items representing the subsistent level, ultimately impacting teachers' 
survival. Professional development alone cannot meet SBAE teachers' mental, physical, and 
emotional wellness needs. Facilitating and developing curriculum, pedagogical, and technical 
resources are essential for the future success of SBAE teachers. In addition to providing 
purposeful professional development opportunities that increase SBAE teachers' needed 
human capital, human wellness, relationships, and networks between expert supporters and 
SBAE teachers should be considered.  
 
Future research should aim to validate the conceptual model presented in this study to address 
support gaps and develop resources and purposeful professional development opportunities 
that will increase teachers’ human capital within the profession. Qualitative research should 
investigate the areas and depth of SBAE teacher needs. Since this study was limited to three 
southeastern states (i.e., Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina), the 42 items established in this 
study should be considered nationally to determine gaps and differences that potentially are 
regionally limiting. Additionally, professional development should be investigated to help 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i3.347


Marsh et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i3.347   128 
 

identify potential causes of ongoing SBAE teachers' needs. Furthermore, this study should be 
replicated as the potential exists that the political and educational climate, along with the post-
pandemic mindset, played a role in the needs identified and connections to support made by 
SBAE teacher supporters because of the timing of this study.  
 

Acknowledgements 
 
K. N. Marsh – conceptualization, formal analysis, investigation, writing – original draft, writing – 
review and editing; C.J. Eck – conceptualization, methodology, formal analysis, writing – review 
and editing; D.K. Layfield – validation, writing – review and editing, visualization; J. L. 
Donaldson – validation, writing – review and editing. 
 

References 

Benner, P. (1982). From novice to expert. American Journal of Nursing, 82(3), 402–407. 
https://doi.org/10.2307/3462928  

Chetty, R., Friedman, J. N., & Rockoff, J. E. (2014). Measuring the impacts of teachers II: Teacher 
value-added and student outcomes in adulthood. American Economic Review, 104(9), 
2633-2679. http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/aer.104.9.2633 

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among 
five approaches. Sage.  

Custer, R. L., Scarcella, J. A., & Stewart, B. R. (1999). The modified Delphi technique: A rotational 
modification. Journal of Vocational and Technical Education, 15(2), 1–10. 
http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JVTE/v15n2/custer.html 

Dalkey, N. C. (1969). The Delphi method: An experimental study of group opinion. The Rand 
Corporation. 

Dalkey, N. C., Rourke, D. L., Lewis, R., & Snyder, D. (1972). Studies in the quality of life: Delphi 
and decision-making. Lexington Books. 

DiBenedetto, C. A., Willis, V. C., & Barrick, R. K. (2018). Needs assessments for school-based 
agricultural education teachers: A review of literature. Journal of Agricultural Education, 
59(4), 52–71. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2018.04052 

Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D., & Christian, L. M. (2014). Internet, phone, mail, and mixed-mode 
surveys: the tailored design method. John Wiley & Sons.  

Doss, W., Rayfield, J., & Lawver, D. (2022, February 13–15). Identifying challenges faced by 
school-based agricultural education teachers [Paper presentation]. Southern Region 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i3.347
https://doi.org/10.2307/3462928
http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/aer.104.9.2633
http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JVTE/v15n2/custer.html
https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2018.04052


Marsh et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i3.347   129 
 

AAAE Conference, New Orleans, LA, United States. 
http://aaaeonline.org/resources/Documents/Southern%20Region/2022SouthernConfer
ence/2022SouthernAAAE_ResearchProceedings.pdf 

Eck, C. J., & Edwards, M. C. (2019). Teacher shortage in school-based, agricultural education 
(SBAE): A historical review. Journal of Agricultural Education, 60(4), 223–239. 
https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2019.04223 

Eck, C. J., Layfield, K. D., DiBenedetto, C. A., & Gore, J. (2021). School-based agricultural 
education teachers competence of synchronous online instruction tools during the 
COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Agricultural Education, 62(4), 137–147. 
https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2021.02137 

Eck, C. J., Robinson, J. S., Cole, K. L., Terry, Jr., R., & Ramsey, J. W. (2020). The validation of the 
effective teaching instrument for school-based agricultural education teachers. Journal 
of Agricultural Education, 61(4), 229–248. http://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2020.04229 

Eck, C. J., Robinson, J. S., Ramsey, J. W., & Cole, K. L. (2019). Identifying the characteristics of an 
effective agricultural education teacher: A national study. Journal of Agricultural 
Education, 60(4), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2019.04001 

Fisher, M. H., & Royster, D. (2016). Mathematics teachers’ support and retention: Using 
Maslow’s Hierarchy to understand teachers’ needs. International Journal of 
Mathematics Education in Science and Technology, 47(7), 993–1008. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2016.1162333 

Heckman, J. J. (2000). Policies to foster human capital. Research in Economics, 54(1), 3–56. 
https://doi.org/10.1006/reec.1999.0225 

Hsu, C. C., & Sanford, B. A. (2007). The Delphi technique: Making sense of consensus. Practical 
Assessment, Research, & Evaluation, 12(10), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.7275/pdz9-th90 

King, D., Rucker, K. J., & Duncan, D. W. (2013). Classroom instruction and FFA/SAE 
responsibilities creating the most stress for female teachers in the southeast. Journal of 
Agricultural Education, 54(4), 195–205. http://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2013.04195 

Klassen, R. M., & Chiu, M. M. (2010). Effects on teachers’ self-efficacy and job satisfaction: 
 Teacher gender, years of experience, and job stress. Journal of Educational Psychology, 
 102(3), 741–756. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0019237 

Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370–396. 
http://doi.org/10.1037/h0054346 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i3.347
https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2019.04223
https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2021.02137
http://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2020.04229
https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2019.04001
https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2016.1162333
https://doi.org/10.1006/reec.1999.0225
https://doi.org/10.7275/pdz9-th90
http://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2013.04195
http://doi.org/10.1037/a0019237
http://doi.org/10.1037/h0054346


Marsh et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i3.347   130 
 

Privitera, G. J. (2020). Research methods for the behavioral sciences. Sage. 

Saldaña, J. (2021). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage.  

Schultz, T. W. (1971). Investment in human capital: The role of education and of research. New 
The Free Press.  

Shoulders, C. W., Estepp, C. M., & Johnson, D. M. (2021). Teachers’ stress, coping strategies, 
and job satisfaction in COVID-induced teaching environments. Journal of Agricultural 
Education, 62(4), 67–80. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2021.04064 

Smith, E. (2010). Sector–specific human capital and the distribution of earnings. Journal of 
Human Capital, 4(1), 35–61. http://doi.org/10.1086/655467 

Smylie, M. A. (1996). From bureaucratic control to building human capital: The importance of 
teacher learning in education reform. Educational Researcher, 25(9), 9–11. 
http://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X025009009 

Sorensen, T. J., McKim, A. J., & Velez, J. J. (2016). A national study of work-family balance and 
job satisfaction among agriculture teachers. Journal of Agricultural Education, 57(4), 
146–159. http://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2016.04146 

Terry, R., Jr., & Briers, G. E. (2010). Roles of the secondary agriculture teacher. In R. Torres, T. 
Kitchel, & A. L. Ball (Eds.), Preparing and advancing teachers in agricultural education 
(pp. 86–98). Curriculum Materials Service, The Ohio State University. 

The National FFA Organization [FFA]. (n.d.). The National FFA Handbook. 
https://www.ffa.org/agricultural-education/   

Traini, H. Q., Yopp, A. M., & Roberts, R. (2020). The success trap: A case study of early career 
agricultural education teachers’ conceptualizations of work-life balance. Journal of 
Agricultural Education, 61(4), 175–188. http://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2020.04175 

Yopp, A. M., Edgar, D., & Croom, D. B. (2020). Technical In-Service Needs of Agriculture 
Teachers in Georgia by Career Pathway. Journal of Agricultural Education, 61(2), 1–19. 
https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2020.02001 

 
© 2023 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/). 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v4i3.347
https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2021.04064
http://doi.org/10.1086/655467
http://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X025009009
http://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2016.04146
https://www.ffa.org/agricultural-education/
http://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2020.04175
https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2020.02001

