Extension Miscellaneous Publications
Persistent link for this collection
Browse
Browsing Extension Miscellaneous Publications by Type "Report"
Now showing 1 - 20 of 209
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item 1947 Looking ahead in Minnesota agriculture(1946) Dankers, W. H.Item 1948 extension work in Minnesota(1948) University of Minnesota. Agricultural Extension ServiceItem 1950 extension work in Minnesota(1950) University of Minnesota. Agricultural Extension ServiceItem 1960 Commercial fruit spray guide(University of Minnesota, Agricultural Extension Service., 1960) University of Minnesota, Agricultural Extension Service.; university of Minnesota, Dept. of Entomology; University of Minnesota, Dept. of Plant Pathology; University of Minnesota, Dept. of Botany; University of Minnesota, Dept. of Horticulture; Minnesota Dept. of Agriculture, Dairy and Food, Division of Plant IndustryItem 1961 feed grain program(1961-03) University of Minnesota. Agricultural Extension ServiceItem The 1964 wheat program, wheat referendum(1963-04) University of Minnesota. Agricultural Extension Service; University of Minnesota. Department of Agricultural EconomicsItem 1974 Minnesota Cattle Feeders' Report, Research Makes Your Choice Easier(University of Minnesota, Agricultural Extension Service, 1974) University of Minnesota, Department of Animal Science; University of Minnesota, Agricultural Extension Service; University of Minnesota, Agricultural Experiment StationItem 1982 Minnesota Retail Dealer and Pesticide Applicator Conference(University of Minnesota Agricultural Extension Service, 1982) University of Minnesota, Agricultural Extension ServiceItem An agent's guide to Survive: a public television series for families and individuals in need(1985-09) Andberg, WendyItem Annual report: Project II, Information and educational aids for the year ending December 31, 1966(1967) University of Minnesota. Agricultural Extension ServiceItem The Apple Maggot(1989) Ascerno, Mark; Hahn, JeffreyItem Apples for Minnesota (1990 Revised)(University of Minnesota, Minnesota Extension Service, 1990) Hoover, Emily; Bedford, David; Munson, Shirley; Foulk, Doug; University of Minnesota, Minnesota Extension ServiceItem Becker County: the study of the people, their resources, problems, and challenges(1962-01) Becker County Extension CommitteeItem Best practices for field days : assessment tool and observation protocol(St. Paul, MN: University of Minnesota Extension Service, 2009) Carlson, Stephan; Heimlick, Joe; Martin, StorksdieckThe Best Practices for Field Days (BPFD) Assessment Tool provides systematic observation methods to evaluate the success of Field Days in meeting intended educational outcomes. It uses evaluator observations to help organizers improve learning conditions and to help presenters develop their skills. Using this assessment tool will improve programs and enhance the student experience.Item Best practices for field days : Assessment tool and observation protocol(St. Paul, MN: University of Minnesota Extension Service, 2009) Carlson, Stephan; Heimlich, Joe; Storksdieck, Martin; Meyer, NathanItem Best Practices for Field Days: 2005 Report of Outcomes and Impacts: Making an Impact with Environmental Field Days: Workshops for Organizers and Presenters(St. Paul, MN: University of Minnesota Extension Service, 2005) Nate, MeyerInitiated in 2002 by members of the Environmental Science Education (ESE) Area of Expertise, Best Practices for Field Days (BPFD) is a University of Minnesota Extension Service professional development program for the people involved in field days. It involves learning how to design and deliver educational events that apply six research-based practices to maximize the educational impact of these events— - centering the event around a single theme, - assessing audience before the event, - planning the setting for effective education, - using appropriate teaching methods, - developing and implementing regular evaluation, and - integrating marketing. A variety of products and services encompass the program: technical articles, a curriculum & planning tools that can be purchased online, customized workshops and in-depth evaluations of events. Through maximizing the impact of field days for the 10 thousand+ students who participate annually, the BPFD program seeks to increase the educational return on thousands of volunteer hours and public dollars invested each year in these events. Program impacts include: a) collaboration, more economical, efficient & effective field day programs, b) creating an “interest pipeline” for youth to explore careers in natural resources, science & technology, c) increasing citizen environmental literacy and abilities to enact natural resource and environmental protection & enhancement through programs that reach young people.Item Best Practices for Field Days: 2008 Children’s Water Festival Evaluation: Presentation Skills for 29 Learning Stations(St. Paul, MN: University of Minnesota Extension Service, 2009) Carlson, Stephan; Wang, Hui-HuiTwenty-nine stations were observed by sixteen observers. Because the research studies could not control how many times that a station was observed, some of the stations were observed only once, while other stations were observed more than once. The station, “Water! Science Museum” was observed the most frequently, a total of sixteen times by sixteen different observers. The stations observed once by the sixteen observers are: “Well,Well,Well”, “DisappearingWaterfall Mystery”, “Streams Creatures”, “Lakes & Rivers & Oceans-Ohmy”, “BackyardWater Recycling”, and “Groundwater on the Move.” The following stations were not observed at all: “Water!Water! From the River to the River”and“Water Arcade.”Item Best Practices for Field Days: A Program Planning Guidebook for Organizers, Presenters, Teachers and Volunteers(St. Paul, MN: University of Minnesota Extension Service, 2012) Environmental Science Education Work Group"Guide includes how to plan field days for large crowds, bad weather, age appropriate activities and more. Guidelines and planning worksheets included. Sections include: Intergrating marketing into your planning process, Stucturing your field day around a single theme, Assessing your audience before the event, Planning your setting for effective education, Use of experiential teaching methods, Developing and implementing program evaluation methods, Organizational resources, and Summary."Item Best Practices for Field Days: Factors That Influence Students’ Learning in an Environmental Field Day(St. Paul, MN: University of Minnesota Extension Service, 2009) Wang, Hui-Hui; Carlson, StephanA field trip is a common strategy used by educators to bring out-of-school learning experiences into schools. Many research studies suggest a field trip will not only bring an individual close to the real-world, but may also increase an individual’s environmental knowledge and responsible behaviors. Therefore, many environmental educators use field trips as a tool to strengthen their in-school curriculum. Thus, program evaluations usually focus on the predetermined outcomes, such as increasing environmental knowledge and responsible behaviors, which were decided by environmental educators and program designers. Students rarely have active voices in program evaluations. How do students evaluate their field trip experience? This study focuses on students’ prespective and the factors that influence students’ field trip experience. In this study, we found that an interesting and fun learning environment is a critical criterion, which students believe can increase their satisfaction level, can help them focus on field day activities, and can contribute to their learning in an out-of-school experience.Item Best Practices for Field Days: Modified Delphi used for Observation Tool Development(St. Paul, MN: University of Minnesota Extension Service, 2009) Heimlich, Joe; Carlson, Stephan; Tanner, Dawn; Storksdieck, MartinA team of 40 people from across the country were invited to the Best Practices for Field Days (BPFD) Delphi panel to develop an effective observation instrument for determining the quality of field day components that represent best practices. Thirty nine people accepted the invitation and 27 people participated.