Agricultural Education Administration Research

Document Type : Research Paper

Author

1- Ph.D. Student, Department of Agricultural Extension and Education, Faculty of Agriculture, Bu-Ali Sina University, Hamedan, Iran

10.22092/jaear.2026.371058.2081

Abstract

Since 2020, the Production Support Collaborators “Yavaran – e -Tolid” initiative has been implemented as one of the flagship programs within Iran’s New Agricultural Extension System. The program aims to capitalize on the scientific expertise of university faculty members, researchers from agricultural research centers, and field extension agents to transfer technical knowledge, improve productivity, and advance sustainable development in the agricultural sector. This applied, field-based study evaluated the program’s effectiveness in achieving its intended goals in Hamadan Province and identified the corrective measures needed. The statistical population of the research is a collection of experts, Agricultural Extension, and researchers who are active in implementing the project (N=160), . The statistical sample included 113 people from the general population who were selected using a proportional stratified sampling method. Data were gathered using a structured questionnaire based on the CIPP Evaluation Model, with content validity confirmed by experts and reliability verified using an ordinal theta coefficient of 0/892. Findings from the one-sample t-test indicated that the mean scores for the “Context” and “Process” components were significantly higher than the benchmark value of 3, reflecting relatively greater satisfaction among respondents in these dimensions. In contrast, the “Input” component showed no significant deviation from the benchmark, while the “Product” component scored below it, indicating incomplete achievement of intended economic and environmental outcomes. Major challenges identified included limited financial resources, weak institutional support, insufficient educational equipment, restricted access to modern technologies, and inadequate attention to specific target groups. The Kruskal Wallis test revealed no significant differences in attitudes among occupational groups. Overall, the program demonstrated relative effectiveness in goal-setting and process execution, but achieving sustainable results will require strengthening resources, enhancing institutional backing, targeted planning for disadvantaged groups, and establishing a continuous monitoring and evaluation system.

Keywords

Main Subjects

Anderson, J. R., & Feder, G. (2004). Agricultural extension: Good intentions and hard realities. The World Bank Research Observer, 19(1), 41–60.
Charatsari, C., & Lioutas, E. D. (2020). Evaluating agricultural extension and education projects: The VELVET approach. Development in Practice, 30(4), 548–557. ....
Dalampira, E. S., Tsoukalidis, I., Lazaridou, D., Nikouli, S., Livadiotis, A., & Michailidis, A. (2022, July). Holistic Evaluation of Technology Transfer Extension Programmes. In International Conference on Applied Economics (pp. 205-213). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Davis, K., Nkonya, E., Kato, E., Mekonnen, D. A., Odendo, M., Miiro, R., & Nkuba, J. (2010). Impact of farmer field schools on agricultural productivity and poverty in East Africa. World Development, 40(2), 402–413. FAO. (2017). The future of food and agriculture: Trends and challenges. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization.
Greenhaw, L., & Biderman, R. (2025). Evaluating an agriculture and natural resources leadership development program utilizing the CIPP model. Advancements in Agricultural Development, 6(3), 14-26.
Jafari, N., Karami, E., Keshavarz, M., & Karami, S. (2022). Performance and constraints of the new agricultural extension system: Towards empowering smallholder farmers in Iran. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Research, 41(2), 25–34.
Knook, J., Eory, V., Brander, M., & Moran, D. (2018). Evaluation of farmer participatory extension programmes. The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension, 24(4), 309–325.
Maulu, S., Hasimuna, O. J., Mutale, B., Mphande, J., & Siankwilimba, E. (2021). Enhancing the role of rural agricultural extension programs in poverty alleviation: A review. Cogent Food & Agriculture, 7(1), 1886663.
Mertens, D. M., & Wilson, A. T. (2019). Program evaluation theory and practice (Second edition). Guilford Press. Munyua, H., & Stilwell, C. (2010). A mixed qualitative-quantitative participatory methodology: A study of agricultural knowledge exchange in Kenya. Library Management, 31(1/2), 5–18.
Patton, M. Q. (2017). Principles-focused evaluation: The guide. Guilford Publications. Rai, A. K., Ranjan, A., Bharti, S. D., Saikanth, D. R. K., Rout, S., & Gautam, R. (2023). Agricultural extension's key role in modern farming: a review. Asian Journal of Agricultural Extension, Economics & Sociology, 41(9), 475-485.
Rivera, W. M., & Alex, G. (2008). Human resource d÷evelopment for modernizing the agricultural workforce. Human Resource Development Review, 7(4), 374–386. Salehi, M., Abbasi, E., Bijani, M., & Shahpasand, M. R. (2021). Evaluation of agricultural extension model sites approach in Iran. Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences, 20(8), 506–518.
Stufflebeam, D. L., & Shinkfield, A. J. (2007). Evaluation theory, models, and applications. Jossey-Bass. Venkatesan, P., Sivaramane, N., Sontakki, B. S., Rao, C. S., Chahal, V. P., Singh, A. K., Sivakumar, P. S., Seetharaman, P., & Kalyani, B. (2023). Aligning agricultural research and extension for sustainable development goals in India: A case of farmer FIRST Programme. Sustainability, 15(3), 2463.
Wang, Z., Wang, J., Zhang, G., & Wang, Z. (2021). Evaluation of agricultural extension service for sustainable agricultural development using a hybrid entropy and TOPSIS method. Sustainability, 13(1), 347.
Yusuf, M. S. A., Man, N., Haris, N. B., Ismail, I. A., & Maruf, A. (2022). Program evaluation on urban agriculture Malaysia: A review of evaluation studies using CIPP evaluation model approach. International Journal of Special Education, 37(3), 719-741.
Zhang, G., Zeller, N., Griffith, R., Metcalf, D., & Williams, J. (2011). Using the context, input, process, and product evaluation model (CIPP) as a comprehensive framework to guide the planning, implementation, and assessment of service-learning programs. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 15(4), 57–84.