































   Advancements in Agricultural Development 
  Volume 6, Issue 1, 2025 
  agdevresearch.org 

 

1. Madison A. Dyment, M.S., University of Florida, 411 Rolfs Hall PO Box 110540, Gainesville, FL 32608, 

madison.dyment@ufl.edu,   https://orcid.org/0009-0001-4702-8284 
2. Annie R. Specht, Ph.D., The Ohio State University, 200L Agricultural Administration Building, 2120 Fyffe Road, Columbus, 

OH 43210, specht.21@osu.edu,  https://orcid.org/0009-0000-8482-1057     
3. Emily B. Buck, Ph.D., The Ohio State University, 200Y Agricultural Administration Building, 2120 Fyffe Road, Columbus, OH 

43210, buck.210@osu.edu  
 

19 

 

International Interests: Student and Industry Perspectives on 
Agricultural Communication Curriculum Development in 

Ontario 
 

M. A. Dyment1, A. R. Specht2, E. B. Buck3 

 
 

Article History 
Received: August 1, 2024 
Accepted: December 12, 2024 
Published: January 13, 2025 
 
 
Keywords 
Agricultural communication; 
curriculum development;  
SDG 4: Quality Education;  
Ontarian agriculture; stakeholder 
perceptions and needs   

Abstract 
This study explores the potential development of an agricultural 
communication program at the University of Guelph. It aims to 
understand the current knowledge of, and interest in, the discipline 
among Ontarian agriculture students and industry professionals, and the 
perceived importance and employability of hypothetical program 
graduates. Using a qualitative descriptive case study approach, focus 
groups with 18 students and six industry professionals were conducted. 
Data were collected through open-ended questions, analyzed using open 
coding and thematic analysis, and triangulated with demographic 
surveys. The findings reveal a general lack of understanding of 
agricultural communication among Ontarian students, who nonetheless 
recognize the field's potential to bridge gaps between producers and 
consumers, particularly through social media and diverse job 
opportunities. Industry professionals emphasized the growing 
importance of storytelling, crisis communication, and the need for poly-
skilled graduates capable of addressing varied communication needs 
within the agricultural sector. Both stakeholder groups expressed interest 
in an agricultural communication academic program. Recommendations 
include engaging broader industry support for the program, integrating 
agricultural communication training across existing agricultural 
disciplines at the University of Guelph, and continuing research to refine 
curriculum development.  

 

mailto:madison.dyment@ufl.edu
https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Forcid.org%2F0009-0001-4702-8284&data=05%7C01%7Cmadison.dyment%40ufl.edu%7C65f0e75276ab4756f6d508dbe2325142%7C0d4da0f84a314d76ace60a62331e1b84%7C0%7C0%7C638352477963213443%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=TO0QtWU6cd2WV%2BfXC%2F9NmsaUrXL8yTBclFlIPB2aCBA%3D&reserved=0
mailto:specht.21@osu.edu
https://orcid.org/0009-0000-8482-1057
mailto:buck.210@osu.edu


Dyment et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i1.531   20 
 

Introduction and Problem Statement 
 
The agricultural communication discipline is present and growing in the United States, with 
over 40 programs nationwide (Cannon et al., 2016; Fernandez et al., 2020; Miller et al., 2015; 
Tedrick, 2009). These academic programs have consistently adapted to encompass modern 
characteristics as dictated by industry (Cartmell & Evans, 2013; Tucker et al., 2003). Today, 
programs focus on communicating agricultural sciences and information to consumers, 
teaching a blend of courses influenced by mass communications, journalism, and agricultural 
industries (Ahrens & Gibson, 2013; Cannon et al., 2016; Corder & Irlbeck, 2018; Irani & 
Doerfert, 2013; Kurtzo et al., 2016; Tucker et al., 2003. These skills are in high demand due to 
increased consumer scrutiny, distancing from agriculture, and a decrease in agricultural literacy 
(Cannon et al., 2016; Kurtzo et al., 2016). Moreover, the discipline is expanding internationally, 
with recent studies proposing agricultural communications academic programs in the United 
Kingdom and Australia, showing value in international expansion (Miller et al., 2020; Thorn et 
al., 2022).  
 
Problem Statement 
Considering international impacts, the Canadian agricultural sector remains one of the 
dominant industries in the nation (Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 2017) but lacks dedicated 
agricultural communication undergraduate degree programs to address declining agricultural 
literacy. The University of Guelph, the flagship agricultural institution in Canada, does not offer 
an undergraduate distinction in the discipline (University of Guelph, n.d.). This study explores 
Ontario agricultural stakeholders’ understanding of agricultural communications and illustrates 
stakeholder desire for a future agricultural communication program at the University of Guelph 
to inform curriculum development efforts, while making important international contributions 
to disciplinary literature.  
 

Theoretical and Conceptual Framework 
 
This study employs Wolf’s (2007) curriculum development model and Glatthorn’s (2005) 
process-oriented curriculum theory to guide its exploration of agricultural communication 
program development. Glatthorn’s (2005) perspective, which focuses on the stages of 
curriculum development, provided the foundation for stakeholder engagement and curriculum 
design. It emphasizes understanding preliminary matters such as which groups should be 
represented in developmental sessions, the participation structure, and identifying starting 
points for discussions. This theoretical perspective guided the initial conversations with 
stakeholders to determine interest in program development, ensuring a comprehensive 
approach to curriculum planning. Glatthorn’s (2005) emphasis on using multiple sources to 
develop curriculum further informed the selection of stakeholders for this study. 
 
Wolf’s (2007) model, encompassing three phases of Curriculum Visioning, Curriculum 
Development, and Alignment, Coordination, and Development, structured the study's approach 
to understanding stakeholder perceptions and informed the study methods and participants. 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i1.531


Dyment et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i1.531   21 
 

While each phase is important for holistic curriculum development, this study follows the 
structure of the preliminary Curriculum Visioning phase. In this phase, Wolf (2007) suggests 
initial conversations through focus groups with key stakeholders, such as students and 
employers, to determine their perceptions and needs. This phase is crucial for gathering 
insights and setting a foundation for subsequent curriculum development stages.  
 
These frameworks aid in identifying key stakeholder groups and guiding the initial 
conversations necessary for developing a relevant and effective agricultural communication 
program. This integrated approach aims to ensure that the proposed program will effectively 
prepare graduates to meet the challenges of the agricultural communication field and support 
the growth and development of the agricultural industry in Ontario and broader Canada. 
 

Purpose 
 
This needs assessment explored Ontarian agricultural industry professionals’ and agricultural 
students’ understanding of agricultural communication and illustrated stakeholder requests for 
a future Ontarian agricultural communications program situated in the University of Guelph. 
The following research questions guided this study: 
1. What do Ontarian agriculture students and industry professionals know about agricultural 

communication? 
2. Do Ontarian agriculture students desire an agricultural communication program? 
3. Do Ontarian agricultural industry professionals desire an agricultural communication 

program? 
a. How important are skilled agricultural communication graduates in the eyes of 

industry professionals? 
b. How employable would these graduates be in the Ontarian agricultural industry? 

 
Methods 

 
A qualitative descriptive needs assessment design was chosen to gain a foundational 
understanding of the landscape of Ontarian agricultural stakeholder perceptions for proposed 
agricultural communication curriculum. Needs assessments are customary for beginning stages 
of curriculum development (Gonsalves et al., 2014). As part of a larger study, participants were 
selected using purposive and snowball sampling methods. Purposive sampling was employed to 
select ideal industry representatives (n = 6) based on desired characteristics or knowledge 
(Palinkas et al., 2015). Representatives from the main Ontarian agricultural sectors (beef, dairy, 
poultry, swine, and general food production) were identified through provincial commodity 
group webpages and recruited through an IRB-approved email. Snowball sampling broadened 
the reach of the study for the student population (n = 18) (Sadler et al., 2010). The president of 
the Student Federation of the University of Guelph Ontario Agricultural College (OAC) put out a 
call for recruitment, with an additional call disseminated through the OAC newsletter. Students 
then recommended others for participation. Emphasis was placed on majors and years in 
school. 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i1.531


Dyment et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i1.531   22 
 

Data Collection and Analysis 
Data were collected via focus groups conducted over Zoom to accommodate location 
challenges. Four focus groups with students (n = 6; n = 4; n = 4; n = 4) and two with industry 
professionals (n = 4; n = 2) were conducted between September and November 2022. Each 
session lasted approximately one hour. A demographic survey was distributed via Qualtrics 
after focus groups. Open-ended questions facilitated participant conversation, aligning with 
case study recommendations (Yin, 2016).  
 
Focus group sessions were recorded and transcribed, with participants receiving identifying 
numbers to ensure confidentiality. The transcripts manually analyzed using open coding, which 
allowed for thematic discovery among the data. Coding and thematic analysis were conducted 
by the primary researcher. Demographic survey responses were analyzed using SPSS for 
quantitative frequencies. 
 
Limitations, Trustworthiness, and Scope of Study 
The study employed a relatively small sample size (n = 24), which is common in qualitative 
research (Marshall, 1996). Student participants were more represented than industry 
professionals due to convenience and scheduling challenges. Different focus group leaders for 
some sessions could introduce variation in responses, though a script was provided for all 
moderators to follow, and the original moderator's sessions were recorded and reviewed by 
the other moderators for consistency. Measures were taken to enhance trustworthiness, 
including credibility, dependability, and transferability (Cope, 2014). Data triangulation involved 
comparing student and industry responses with researcher notes and relevant literature, 
enhancing the study's validity (Yin, 2016). Crystallization further enriched trustworthiness by 
incorporating the primary researcher's experiences with Ontarian agriculture, providing context 
to the findings (Lindlof & Taylor, 2011). This study is part of a larger investigation into the 
development of agricultural communication programs.  
 
Positionality Statement 
The primary researcher grew up in rural Ontario and has knowledge of Ontarian dynamics and 
institutional affiliations. This offers a unique lens to approach analysis. Both other researchers 
are agricultural communication faculty with no personal or professional connections to the 
subjects. 
 

Findings 
 
RQ1: What do Ontarian agriculture students and industry professionals know about 
agricultural communication? 
Student Participants 
This research question elicited a broad array of student responses. Students noted their level of 
understanding of the field and what came to mind for them when considering agricultural 
communications. These encompassed areas of disciplinary purpose, and job opportunities and 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i1.531


Dyment et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i1.531   23 
 

availability. Identified themes among students were lack of understanding, bridging gaps, social 
media, and broad and diverse job opportunities. 
 
Most participants admitted to having a lack of understanding of agricultural communication. 
They noted having less concrete knowledge of topics covered by agricultural communication 
and professional opportunities in the field. This was consistent across student focus groups and 
may be attributed to a lack of educational opportunities in the discipline. 
 
The theme of bridging gaps emerged early, largely through the context of connecting producers 
with consumers. Students consistently leveraged bridging the gap between consumers and 
producers to characterize the role of agricultural communication in the industry and as a 
valuable skill to be learned through study in this discipline. One student said, “When I think 
about ag communication, I think of the producer-consumer gap and trying to bridge that gap.” 
A gap between researchers and agricultural producers also surfaced among student responses.  
 
From this line of questioning, students characterized agricultural communication and identified 
job opportunities. Social media prominently emerged. This characterization from students was 
well articulated by one student, who noted that, “A lot of communications work is definitely 
over social media, and a lot of farmers are on Twitter largely to catch each other up on what’s 
going on.” Student participants singled out younger generations as frequent users of the 
medium and noted social media as a prominent career opportunity. 
 
Looking more specifically at careers, student participants characterized broad and diverse job 
opportunities in the field of agricultural communication. Education was a common response 
among students for characterizing the field of agricultural communication and as a career 
option for program graduates. This can be seen in another student’s response, who when 
thinking of what agricultural communication means to her said, “My first thought is 100% 
education. Communication is key if you’re trying to educate someone on any topic, not just 
agriculture, so that’s really the first thing that comes to mind and I feel they are really 
connected.” A different student also noted that careers in educational fields would be 
applicable for graduates. She specifically mentioned the lack of a formal agricultural education 
system in Canada but pointed out that “[agricultural companies or commodity groups] have 
programs where some of their employees will go and teach kids about agriculture, so that’s a 
possibility for agricultural communicators.”  
 
Agricultural boards and commodity groups were identified as prominent employment 
opportunities for graduates. Students named specific organizations, like Dairy Farmers of 
Ontario, with these boards communicating to producers and consumers. Student participants 
also emphasized marketing as a key component of agricultural communication, including 
opportunities outside traditional agriculture. Journalism was another noted job opportunity. 
The range of identified careers also extends to job availability. Students noted a disparity 
between full-time job positions in agricultural communication versus part-time positions or 
internship opportunities. One student accentuated this, saying, “Especially in private industry, 
which is what I want to do, there’s not a ton of jobs for post-grads and it’s hard to find space for 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i1.531


Dyment et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i1.531   24 
 

us outside of internships.” However, other students, disputed this, with one stating, “I think 
there are a lot of communication jobs out there and there will continue to be more, but I think 
they’re not as well-known.”  
 
Industry Participants 
For industry participants, the themes that emerged included transactional field, storytelling, 
and translating. When asked what comes to mind when considering agricultural 
communication, an interesting response was the idea of a transactional field. One professional 
illustrated that, in the past, communications work was transactional, involving professionals 
disseminating the bare facts about the industry as a “necessary evil,” but indicating a shift to 
more engagement and two-way communication.  
 
Industry participants also characterized the field of agricultural communication through the 
lens of storytelling. Another professional best characterized this theme by saying, “[Agricultural 
communicators] are storytellers. We tell the story to a wide variety of different audiences and 
how you tell that story depends on who you’re selling it to.” Aside from storytellers, industry 
professionals noted that agricultural communicators often work translating for the industry. 
One summarized this by saying, “I think the key role we play is translating a variety of 
information to different audiences effectively.”  
 
RQ2: Do Ontarian agriculture students desire an agricultural communication program? 
When directly asked if they would be interested in studying agricultural communication, most 
students responded positively, with responses sorting into preferred format and degree of 
interest. For preferred format, the opportunity to study agricultural communication as a minor 
or certificate was most frequently mentioned. Participants noted that this discipline would be a 
valuable supplement to other existing agricultural programs at the University of Guelph OAC. 
Students said that communication skills apply to a variety of agricultural careers, establishing 
value for students in other program areas to receive this training. A student notably mentioned 
that “The University of Guelph doesn’t currently have a lot of good programs with these types 
of courses, so it would be very beneficial for a lot of different people.”  
 
Other students did indicate a desire to study agricultural communication as an undergraduate 
major. Among the five students who expressed an interest in having this as their primary 
discipline, a commonality of “settling” for another agricultural major to still be involved in 
agriculture emerged. This is summarized by one student by saying, “I absolutely would study in 
this. I didn’t have an interest in ag business, but I wanted to be an ‘aggie,’ so I settled.” 
 
Looking at degree of interest, some students reported that they initially would have considered 
enrolling in an agricultural communication program but now appreciate the program they 
currently study. Only two students expressed a lack of desire to study agricultural 
communication in any capacity. Markedly, these students all indicated that they still saw value 
in agricultural communication. One participant exemplified this, stating, “I’m not personally 
interested but I think it will become very prevalent in the future. Any job will require 
communication skills, especially in agriculture, so everyone should have knowledge in this.” 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i1.531


Dyment et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i1.531   25 
 

 
Students unanimously indicated that they believed an agricultural communications program 
would be a valuable opportunity for a variety of OAC students. From these responses, they 
implied that the discipline would be considered a supplement for any existing agricultural major 
and viewed as increasing job acquisition among agricultural graduates. All students agreed that 
an agricultural communication program would not only coincide with but also uplift the culture 
and experience of the OAC. One student said, 

I think there’s a lot of people that are either taking animal science, or food, agriculture 
and resource economics, or ag business because they want to be in agriculture, but they 
don’t really fit. So, this would benefit the school and a lot of students. 

 
RQ3: Do Ontarian agricultural industry professionals desire an agricultural communication 
program? 
Industry professionals were given different questions. The themes that emerged were growth 
and transition, need for poly-skilled communication graduates, and crisis communications and 
activism. When asked what place agricultural communication has in the Canadian agricultural 
industry, professionals noted that the field is an area of growth and transition. Aside from a 
shifting workforce, changes were also mentioned in consumer interactions and the agricultural 
industry’s perceptions of the field’s importance. Participants gave personal accounts informed 
by their experiences that indicated a surge in career opportunities. One participant summarized 
this, saying, 

Our company is pulling away from advertising and marketing budgets and investing in 
communications elements. These platforms are much more effective at driving our 
message forward…so it’s a growth industry. It’s going to steal some of the budget from 
some of the traditional platforms for how we try to influence our customers’ decisions. 
 

Industry participants stated a need for poly-skilled communication graduates. Professionals 
connected budgetary issues playing a role in this, with two professionals noting that many 
agricultural companies lack the fiscal range to hire specialists in different areas of 
communications despite needing a variety of skillsets. This requires graduates to have a 
comprehensive understanding of a wide range of communications areas. 
 
Crisis communications and activism were notable themes for job opportunities in the field. 
Multiple participants emphasized the role crisis communications plays in agriculture, 
particularly during a time when the industry is under immense scrutiny and facing 
unprecedented challenges. Anti-agriculture activism was presumed to endure, with participants 
stating the need for trained agricultural communicators to counteract these attacks on the 
industry and defuse situations. One specifically connected crisis communications and activism, 
saying, “I don’t think activism is going anywhere, and a key part of crisis communications is 
[understanding how to] keep your advocates, shift your ‘ambivalents’ and counteract your 
adversaries.” 
When asked what emphasis should be placed on educating and training students in agricultural 
communication, participants unanimously responded that it is a priority. They emphatically 
highlighted the value in all agricultural students having some level of training in agricultural 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i1.531


Dyment et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i1.531   26 
 

communications and that a notable gap exists at the University of Guelph. One participant 
stated, “It’s extremely high priority. We hire a summer intern every year to help the marketing 
team and other than their own social media experience, we haven’t had any that have had 
formal grounding in their education to prepare them.” Another substantiated this, stating, 
“There’s a huge gap. People either go to Guelph for animal science or ag business but they can’t 
get an agriculture background in anything communications related.” A different professional 
even stated, “Every single person that I hired for 15 years out of the University of Guelph said 
the same thing, ‘My education did not prepare me for this job.’” 
 
RQ3a and b: How important are skilled agricultural communication graduates in the eyes of 
industry professionals? How employable would these graduates be in the Ontarian 
agricultural industry? 
Given the direct relation to the broader RQ2, much of the same data is reported for this sub-
question. The emergent themes were priority for all agricultural students, growth industry, and 
new job opportunities. Industry participants all agreed that this should be a made an 
educational priority for all agricultural students. Participants specifically stated that the OAC 
needs a program to train students in this discipline, with one professional claiming “It needs to 
be built as a base for every ag and food student to have because…you need a base in 
communications, and I think we need a specialization for people who want to do it as a career.” 
 
When tracing how hireable these graduates would be, the industry responses around job 
opportunities were the most reflective. Professionals highlighted agricultural communication as 
a growth industry in broader Canadian agriculture, with two professionals specifically stating 
that new job opportunities within the past 20 years have been created that did not exist when 
they were graduates of the University of Guelph OAC.  
 

Conclusions, Discussion, and Recommendations 
 
Perceptions of agricultural communication varied between stakeholders. Students generally 
had limited knowledge, often holding stereotypical views of the field. Industry professionals 
had more informed perspectives, viewing agricultural communication as evolving from 
transactional to more engaging, emphasizing storytelling and translation of complex 
information (Joubert et al., 2019; Park et al., 2021). Social media emerged as a key component 
for both groups, and students recognized various career opportunities, noting the discipline's 
expanding role in Canadian agriculture (Canadian Federation of Agriculture, n.d.). All students 
recognized the discipline’s potential value and agreed that an agricultural communication 
program would enhance the University of Guelph OAC’s offerings. Industry responses 
emphasized the need for collaborative communication skills to address complex issues. They 
identified agricultural communication as a growth area, with communication efforts often 
proving more effective than traditional marketing (Cannon et al., 2016; Fernandez et al., 2020; 
Miller et al., 2015; Weckman et al., 2000). Professionals stressed the need for poly-skilled 
communicators due to budget constraints (Doerfert & Miller, 2006). Crisis communications was 
also crucial (Hamel & Saindon, 2017; Kovar & Ball, 2013; Powell et al., 2008), aligning with 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i1.531


Dyment et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i1.531   27 
 

trends in U.S. programs (Cannon et al., 2016; Edgar et al., 2012). Industry participants 
unanimously prioritized training in agricultural communication, citing a gap at the University of 
Guelph OAC.  
 
The introduction of an agricultural communication program would supplement existing 
agricultural programs. Improved communication skills would enhance students' employability 
and address a critical need in the agricultural sector (Cannon et al., 2016; Kurtzo et al., 2016). 
Industry professionals’ need for poly-skilled communicators indicates that graduates from such 
a program would be highly employable. Moreover, these findings align with industry trends in 
the United States and support the growth of the agricultural communication field (Doerfert & 
Miller, 2006; Miller et al., 2015). Desired skills and competencies identified by Ontarian 
stakeholders largely reflect existing subject matter in U.S. agricultural communications 
programs (Cannon et al., 2016; Miller et al., 2015), substantiating the discipline’s content and 
confirming international connections between the U.S. and Ontarian industries. At present, the 
literature centers on U.S. curriculum, with very few publications on the needs of Canadian 
industry and student stakeholders. With an observed desire to expand the discipline 
internationally (Miller et al., 2020; Thorn et al., 2022), this study provides an additional example 
of such efforts and a framework for international curriculum development work.  
 
In future, the Canadian agricultural industry should be more broadly engaged to support such a 
program. With interest established, the University of Guelph OAC should be involved in future 
efforts to identify how and where such a program would best fit within the institution. Industry 
stakeholders should be engaged in the process. Further research in this subject should continue 
the other stages of Wolf’s (2007) framework to have a comprehensive curriculum development 
plan. Other stakeholders’ opinions from outside Ontario or within the University of Guelph 
should also be taken into consideration. Additionally, studies should be conducted to better 
understand whether there is value in moving away from traditional agricultural 
communication, and if more emphasis should be placed on other related, but distinct areas 
such as science, life science, food, and natural resources communication.  
 

Acknowledgments 
 
Author Contributions: M. Dyment – formal analysis, investigation, writing-all drafts and 
copyediting; A. Specht – formal analysis, writing-review and editing; E. Buck – formal analysis, 
writing-review and editing. 

References 
 
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (2017, November 10). Canada’s agricultural sector continues 

to see economic growth. Government of Canada. 
https://www.canada.ca/en/agriculture-agri-
food/news/2017/11/canada_s_agriculturalsectorcontinuestoseeeconomicgrowth.html  

 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i1.531
https://www.canada.ca/en/agriculture-agri-food/news/2017/11/canada_s_agriculturalsectorcontinuestoseeeconomicgrowth.html
https://www.canada.ca/en/agriculture-agri-food/news/2017/11/canada_s_agriculturalsectorcontinuestoseeeconomicgrowth.html


Dyment et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i1.531   28 
 

Aherns, C. A., & Gibson, C. (2013). The evolution of the agricultural communications degree 
program at Texas Tech University: A historical perspective. Journal of Applied 
Communications, 97(2), 36-49. https://doi.org/10.4148/1051-0834.1119 

 
Canadian Federation of Agriculture. (n.d.). Our members organizations. Canadian Federation of 

Agriculture. https://www.cfa-fca.ca/about-us/our-members-organizations/ 
 
Cannon, K. J., Specht, A. R., & Buck, E. B. (2016) Agricultural communications: A national 

portrait of undergraduate courses. Faculty Publications: Agricultural Leadership, 
Education & Communication Department, 80. 
http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/aglecfacpub/80 

 
Cartmell D. D., & Evans, J. F. (2013). Understanding whence we came: Role of the Association 

for Communication Excellence in the development of agricultural communications 
during the past century—and future implications. Journal of Applied Communications, 
97(2). https://doi.org/10.4148/1051-0834.1120 

 
Cope, D. G. (2014). Methods and meanings: Credibility and trustworthiness of qualitative 

research. Oncology Nursing Forum, 41(1), 89-91. https://doi.org/10.1188/14.ONF.89-91 
 
Corder, J., & Irlbeck, E. G. (2018). Agricultural communications skills, abilities and knowledge 

desired by employers compared to current curriculum: A literary review. Journal of 
Agricultural Education, 59(4), 177-193. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2018.04177 

 
Doerfert D. L., & Miller, R. P. (2006). What are agriculture industry professionals trying to tell 

us? Implications for university-level agricultural communications curricula. Journal of 
Applied Communications, 90(3), 17-31. https://doi.org/10.4148/1051-0834.1273 

  
Edgar, L. D., Edgar, D. W., McGuire, A., Rutherford T. A., Doerfert, D. L., & Murphrey, T. P. 

(2012). Crisis communication needs assessment: A Delphi study to enhance instruction 
for agricultural communicators and other stakeholders. NACTA Journal, 56(4), 52-62. 
https://www.nactateachers.org/index.php/vol-56-num-4-dec-2012/2013--crisis-
communication-needs-assessment-a-delphi-study-to-enhance-instruction-for-
agricultural-communicators-and-other-stakeholders 

 
Fernandez, J. M., Goecker, A. D., Smith, E., Moran, E. R., & Wilson, C. A. (2020). Employment 

opportunities for college graduates in food, agriculture, renewable resources and the 
environment. United States Department of Agriculture. 
https://www.purdue.edu/usda/employment/ 

 
Glatthorn, A. (2005). Curriculum leadership: Development and implementation. Sage 

Publications Inc. 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i1.531
https://doi.org/10.4148/1051-0834.1119
https://www.cfa-fca.ca/about-us/our-members-organizations/
http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/aglecfacpub/80
https://doi.org/10.4148/1051-0834.1120
https://doi.org/10.1188/14.ONF.89-91
https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2018.04177
https://doi.org/10.4148/1051-0834.1273
https://www.nactateachers.org/index.php/vol-56-num-4-dec-2012/2013--crisis-communication-needs-assessment-a-delphi-study-to-enhance-instruction-for-agricultural-communicators-and-other-stakeholders
https://www.nactateachers.org/index.php/vol-56-num-4-dec-2012/2013--crisis-communication-needs-assessment-a-delphi-study-to-enhance-instruction-for-agricultural-communicators-and-other-stakeholders
https://www.nactateachers.org/index.php/vol-56-num-4-dec-2012/2013--crisis-communication-needs-assessment-a-delphi-study-to-enhance-instruction-for-agricultural-communicators-and-other-stakeholders
https://www.purdue.edu/usda/employment/


Dyment et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i1.531   29 
 

Gonsalves, C. L., Ajjawi, R., Rodger, M., & Varpio, L. (2014). A novel approach to needs 
assessment in curriculum development: Going beyond consensus methods. Medical 
Teacher, 36(5), 422-429. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2013.877126 

 
Hamel M. A., & Saindon, G. (2017). Shaping Canadian agriculture—A reflection on the future 

role of agronomists in Canadian agriculture. Canadian Journal of Plant Science, 97(6), 
957-963. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjps-2016-0385 

 
Irani T., & Doerfert, D. (2013). Preparing for the next 150 years of agricultural communications. 

Journal of Applied Communications, 97(2), 6-13. https://doi.org/10.4148/1051-
0834.1109 

 
Jones S. R., Torres, V., & Arminio, J. (2014). Negotiating the complexities of qualitative research 

in higher education (2nd ed.). Routledge Press. 
 
Joubert, M., Davis, L., & Metcalfe, J. (2019). Storytelling: The soul of science communication. 

Journal of Science Communication, 18(5), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.22323/2.18050501 
 
Kovar, K. A., & Ball, A. L. (2013). Two decades of agricultural literacy research: A synthesis of the 

literature. Journal of Agricultural Education, 54(1), 167-178. 
https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2013.01167 

 
Kurtzo, F., Hansen, M. J., Rucker, K. J., & Edgar, L. D. (2016). Agricultural communications: 

perspectives from the experts. Journal of Applied Communications, 100(1), 17-28. 
https://doi.org/10.4148/1051-0834.1019 

 
Lindlof, T. R., & Taylor, B. C. (2011). Qualitative communication research methods (3rd ed.). 

Sage Publications, Inc. 
 
Marshall, M. N. (1996). Sampling for qualitative research. Family Practice, 13(6), 522-525. 

https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/13.6.522 
 
Miller, J. D., Large, M., Rucker, J., Shoulders, K., & Buck, E. (2015).  Characteristics of U.S. 

agricultural communications undergraduate programs. Journal of Applied 
Communications, 99(4), 76-90. https://doi.org/10.4148/1051-0834.1063 

 
Miller, J. D., Maples Bell, S., Rucker, J., Buck, E., & Parks, A. (2020). Introducing the academic 

discipline of agricultural communications to the United Kingdom. Journal of Applied 
Communications, 104(4), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.4148/1051-0834.2364 

 
Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., & Hoagwood, K. (2015). 

Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method 
implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental 
Health Services Research, 42(5), 533-544. https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs10488-013-0528-
y  

 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i1.531
https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2013.877126
https://doi.org/10.1139/cjps-2016-0385
https://doi.org/10.4148/1051-0834.1109
https://doi.org/10.4148/1051-0834.1109
https://doi.org/10.22323/2.18050501
https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2013.01167
https://doi.org/10.4148/1051-0834.1019
https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/13.6.522
https://doi.org/10.4148/1051-0834.1063
https://doi.org/10.4148/1051-0834.2364
https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs10488-013-0528-y
https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs10488-013-0528-y


Dyment et al.  Advancements in Agricultural Development 
 

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v6i1.531   30 
 

Park, E., Forhan, M., & Jones, C. A. (2021). The use of digital storytelling of patients’ stories as 
an approach to translating knowledge: A scoping review. Research Involvement and 
Engagement, 7(58), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40900-021-00305-x  

 
Powell, D., Agnew, D., & Trexler, C. (2008). Agricultural literacy: Clarifying a vision for practical 

application. Journal of Agricultural Education, 49(1), 85-98. 
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ839874 

 
Sadler, G. R., Lee, H., Lim, R. S., & Fullerton, J. (2010). Recruitment of hard-to-reach population 

subgroups via adaptations of the snowball sampling strategy. Nursing & Health Science, 
12(3), 369-374. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-2018.2010.00541.x  

 
Tedrick, B. (2009, April 4). An abbreviated timeline in the development of agricultural 

communications. Association for Communication Excellence. 
https://aceweb.org/agricultural-communications-timeline/ 

 
The Ohio State University Undergraduate Admissions (n.d.) Agricultural Communications. 

https://undergrad.osu.edu/majors-and-
academics/majors/detail/7#:~:text=The%20agricultural%20communication%20major%20provide
s,enjoy%20persuading%2C%20writing%20and%20designing.  

Thorn, L., Meyers, C., Fraze, S., & Akers, C. (2022). Identifying stakeholders’ needs for 
agricultural communications in higher education curriculum in Australia. Journal of 
Applied Communications, 106(4), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.4148/1051-0834.2462 

 
Tucker, M., Whaley, S. R., & Cano, J. (2003). Agricultural education and agricultural 

communications: Striking a proper balance in the academy. Journal of Agricultural 
Education, 44(1), 22-30. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2003.01022 

 
University of Guelph (n.d.). MSc in Capacity Development and Extension (thesis/research). 

https://www.uoguelph.ca/programs/msc-in-capacity-development-and-extension/ 
 
Weckman, R., Witham, D., & Telg, R. (2000). Southern agricultural communications 

undergraduate programs: A survey. Journal of Applied Communications, 84(4), 41-50. 
https://doi.org/10.4148/1051-0834.2157 

 
Wolf, P. (2007). A model for facilitating curriculum development in higher education: A faculty-

driven, data-informed, and educational developer–supported approach. New Directions 
for Teaching and Learning, 2007, 15–20. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.294 

 
Yin, R. K. (2016). Qualitative research from start to finish (2nd ed.). Guilford Press. 
 
 
© 2025 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.v6i1.531
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40900-021-00305-x
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ839874
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-2018.2010.00541.x
https://aceweb.org/agricultural-communications-timeline/
https://undergrad.osu.edu/majors-and-academics/majors/detail/7#:~:text=The%20agricultural%20communication%20major%20provides,enjoy%20persuading%2C%20writing%20and%20designing
https://undergrad.osu.edu/majors-and-academics/majors/detail/7#:~:text=The%20agricultural%20communication%20major%20provides,enjoy%20persuading%2C%20writing%20and%20designing
https://undergrad.osu.edu/majors-and-academics/majors/detail/7#:~:text=The%20agricultural%20communication%20major%20provides,enjoy%20persuading%2C%20writing%20and%20designing
https://doi.org/10.4148/1051-0834.2462
https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2003.01022
https://www.uoguelph.ca/programs/msc-in-capacity-development-and-extension/
https://doi.org/10.4148/1051-0834.2157
https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.294

