Development and Impact of an Extension Web Site

When Carrascal, Pau, and Reiner (1995) reviewed the potential of the Internet for information transfer in agriculture, the authors concluded that the Internet offered great opportunities for information dissemination in agriculture and suggested that Extension Services should take the lead to adopt the Internet. In the spring of 1995, the author started the development of a Web site dedicated to wheat and barley production.

The concept of the Small Grains Web site, hereafter referred to as "Small Grains," was not only to be a library of production information but rather to create a digital platform of news, weather, markets, and production information dedicated to wheat and barley (Figure 1). The goal Small Grains was to create access to timely and accurate production information, thereby empowering wheat and barley producers in Minnesota and North Dakota to find answers to their wheat and barley production related questions.

Figure 1.
The Design of Small Grains in 1997

This article reports the results of an evaluation to determine 1) whether, after nearly a decade, Small Grains has reached the intended users, 2) whether it has met the informational needs of those users, and 3) whether those same users learned from the information provided on Small Grains.

Materials & Methods

To evaluate the impact of Small Grains as an educational program, a voluntary mail and online survey were conducted in the fall of 2003. The mail survey was sent to 500 producers in both Minnesota and North Dakota, respectively. These producers were selected at random from a mailing list of all producers who paid the wheat check-off at least once in the previous 3 years. The online survey was placed prominently on the home page of Small Grains.

The survey questions and wording of answers were developed with assistance the University of Minnesota's Center for Survey Research and piloted on a small group of producers. The mail and online surveys consisted of 13 multiple choice questions. The mail and online survey shared 11 questions. The question about the occupation of the respondent had additional choices in the online survey, while the question about the residence of the respondents in the online survey was substituted with the question whether they had heard of Small Grains (Table 1, in "Results & Discussion"). The online survey form was developed with Quask's Form Artist (Quask, 81 Coast Avenue, Suite 324, New Canaan, CT 06840). The mail survey included a pre-paid envelop with the return address to facilitate the survey.

No special announcements, advertisements, or reminders were posted on Small Grains or mailed to the randomly selected producers to promote participation in either the online or mail survey. If the respondents to the mail survey had not heard of Small Grains, they were asked not to complete the remainder of the survey.

The results of the online and mail survey were tabulated with Form Artist. To allow comparisons between the mail and online surveys, all results were expressed on a percentage basis of the total number of respondents to each individual question. Non-respondents were not included in the results, nor were the mail survey respondents that did not know of Small Grains prior to the survey included in the data analysis of the remaining survey questions.

Results & Discussion

The mail survey was mailed on September 1, 2003, and replies received prior to December 31, 2003 were included in the results. Using cookies, the visitors to Small Grains were able to submit a survey once between September 1, 2003 and December 31, 2003. The mail survey yielded 194 responses, or 19.4% of the number of surveys mailed. The online survey yielded 112 responses, or approximately 1% of unique visitors to the site in the period of September 1, 2003 through December 31, 2003. The response rates are difficult to interpret, because there is little data available to compare the attained online response rate with. In a similar study, Walker and Holden (2000) reported a response rate of 10% to their online survey. However, the authors announced their online survey in topic-related discussion groups and e-mail distribution lists. In the study reported here, similar venues to promote the survey were largely unavailable and posed the risk of introducing bias.

No efforts were made to exclude mail survey recipients from answering the online survey, but we assumed that participants would complete this 20-minute survey only once as no rewards or prices were awarded. Nonetheless, it is conceivable that mail survey recipients answered the online survey and skewed the results of the mail survey; most likely those recipients of the mail survey who answered the online survey rather than the mail survey are early adopters of the Internet and more frequent users of Small Grains.

Likewise, it may have been possible for individuals to answer the online survey multiple times by using different computers and avoiding being recognized by the cookie that was generated a previous time. Again, we assumed that participants would complete the survey only once as no rewards or prices were awarded. Given the marked differences between the two surveys, the results are presented separately in Table 1.

Usage statistics of Small Grains were collected between January 1, 1997 and August 31, 2001 (Figure 2). From the small beginnings in 1995, the average number of user sessions had increased to slightly more than 2,000 unique user sessions per month just 2 years later. By the fall of 2001, this number had increased to more than 16,000 unique user sessions per month. This equals a doubling of the number of unique user sessions each year.

Figure 2.
Average Number of Unique User Sessions per Month for Small Grains Between January 1, 1997 and December 31, 2001

Small Grains is largely used by the target audience. Of the online respondents, 85% (N=95) live in Minnesota/Northern Plains, and 68% (N=76) of these respondents are producers and crop consultants (Table 1, Items 1 and 2). Nearly 80% (N=29 and N=83) of both mail survey and online respondents had known the site longer than 1 year. Seventy two percent (N=81) of the online respondents visit the sites a couple of times a month or more versus 48% (N=23) of the mail survey respondents (Table 1, Item 8). This indicates that Small Grains is a valued source of information for wheat and barley production.

When asked 'How did you learn about Small Grains' the online survey respondents showed a more diverse response, with 19% (N=21) of the respondents arriving via a link at another web site or with the help of a search engine like Google (Table 1, Item 7). The results of both the mail and online survey show that the audience learned about Small Grains mainly through professional communications (i.e. trade journals and colleagues). The responses clearly indicate that creating awareness and/or promotion of a web site in other media is therefore important.

When asked "What information about wheat and barley do you need most," both the mail and online survey respondents indicated similar needs (Table 1, Item 3). Specific information about growing wheat and barley was the highest need for 44% (N=85) of the mail survey respondents and 46% (N=52) of the online survey respondents. Market news was the second highest need for both mail survey and online survey respondents, with 29% (N=57) and 24% (N=27), respectively. Both mail and online survey respondents indicated that local weather and general information about wheat and barley production were the least important needs.

However, when asked how the respondents used Small Grains, 55% (N=62) of online survey respondents used the site for general information about wheat and barley, 54% (N=60) used the site for the latest agricultural news, and 50% (N=56) used the site for the latest market updates (Table 1, Item 9). Detailed production information was important for 38% (N=43) of the online survey respondents and detailed market analysis accounted for 28% (N=31) of the visits. Of the mail survey respondents, 45% (N=21) used Small Grains for the latest market information, 38% (N=18) used the site for general information about wheat and barley, and 36% (N=17) used the site for the latest agricultural news. While 28% (N=13)of the mail survey respondents used the detailed market analysis information, only 19% (N=9) used Small Grains for detailed production information.

The answers to these two survey questions point to a discrepancy between the information needs and the information use. Both the mail and online survey respondents indicated that detailed production information and market information are most needed (Table 1, Item 3). The same respondents, however, value the general information about wheat and barley and the latest agricultural news higher than either the market information or detailed production information (Table 1, Item 9). This indicates that a further evaluation of the information needs of the target audience as well review of the available production related information might be warranted.

The online survey respondents showed a much higher use of other Web sites (50% versus 2%) (Table 1, Item 10). The online survey respondents also made more use of Extension service resources and satellite information services like DTN in comparison to the mail survey respondents (67% versus 28%). The mail survey respondents relied much more on the general news media, magazines, and advice from colleagues than the online survey respondents (61% versus 51%). This shows that the two groups of respondents satisfy their information needs through different means.

When asked "What sources of information did you stop using when you started using Small Grains," online survey respondents more readily replaced other sources of information with the information presented on Small Grains (Table 1, Item 11). Small Grains clearly is a substitution for other media for this group. The mail survey respondents appeared much more conservative and viewed Small Grains as supplemental rather than a replacement. Sixty four percent (N=30) of the mail survey respondents did not stop using other sources of information. However, the number of repeat visitors and the frequency of use indicate that the chosen format of Small Grains has created a vehicle by which producer's information needs can be met. By providing the latest agricultural news and market updates, Small Grains is able to attract a core of users of who most are producers, representing the initial target audience. Nineteen percent of this target audience visits Small Grains to find detailed information on production issues.

When asked "How has Small Grains changed your information needs," it complemented the information for 40% (N=19) and 42% (N=47) of the mail and online survey respondents, respectively (Table 1, Item 12). However, for 26% (N=12) of the mail survey respondents and 35% (N=39) of the online survey respondents, Small Grains provided information that the respondents otherwise would have difficulty getting access to. Small Grains provided for 12% (N=13) of the online survey respondents access to information that they would have had no access to otherwise. The same was true for only 2% (N=2) of the mail-survey respondents. Small Grains created or, at a minimum, improved access to relevant information for 68% (N=33) of the mail survey respondents and for 89% (N=99) of the online respondents. These findings are in agreement with Burger et al. (1995), who concluded that the Internet increased the ease and speed of accessing information and lowered the hurdles for producers to gain access to the latest production information and to directly contact experts.

To measure the educational impact of Small Grains, the mail and online survey respondents were asked whether Small Grains had changed their production practices and their overall small grains enterprise (Table 1, Items 13 and 14). More than a quarter of the online survey respondents replied that these two questions did not apply to them. In line with the responses to question about the occupation of the respondents, these respondents are likely not producers nor directly involved with wheat and barley production as agronomist or crop consultants (Table 1, Item 1).

Of the online survey respondents, 36% replied that Small Grains had altered their production practices (Table 1, Item 14). Twenty-five percent of the mail survey respondents replied that Small Grains had not changed their production practices, against 12.5% of the online survey respondents. Thirty percent of the mail survey respondents replied that Small Grains had altered their production practices either by using fewer inputs to maintain or improve their yields or even increase inputs to improve grain yields (Table 1, Item 14) . The remainder of both the mail and online survey respondents did not know or did not answer the question.

In the second question, respondents were not asked about production inputs, but rather whether the information on Small Grains had allowed them to increase grain yield, lower production cost or both (Table 1, Item 13). The responses to this question were very similar to the question about the amount of production inputs used (Table 1, Item 14). The responses to both questions indicate that the information on the Small Grains web site has indeed had an impact on the production practices and outcomes.

The effectiveness of online education in agriculture has been debated. Lewis, Alexander, Farris, and Greene (1999) reported that less than 1% of the distance education enrollment in the U.S. was in agriculture or natural resource management. Pardue (2001) stated that:

Even the most ardent critics of the Internet admit that it is an excellent medium for transfer of data and information. However, every teacher recognizes that true learning extends beyond mere factual information. The true test of the use of the Internet in education comes in determining if it can also assist students in achieving a measure of knowledge and understanding.

Small Grains is a clearinghouse of information and does not provide any formal training. Nonetheless, the information provided on Small Grains was not merely transferred, but higher forms of learning occurred that allowed correct implementation.

Conclusion

As intended, Small Grains attained a sizeable audience in Minnesota and the Northern Plains, with a doubling of the number of unique user sessions each year to more than 16,000 unique user sessions per month by 2001. However, a little less than a quarter of the producers in Minnesota and North Dakota are aware of Small Grains. The responses to the mail survey clearly indicate that creating awareness and/or promotion of Small Grains in other media is advisable. This lack of awareness may have affected the reliability of the mail survey.

Likewise, the response rate to the online survey as a percentage of the number of unique users was low with 1%, but little comparative data is available. Small Grains allowed either creating or, at a minimum, improving access to relevant information for 68% of the mail survey respondents and 89% of the online respondents. The access to the information provided on Small Grains has had an impact on more than 30% of the producers' production practices and outcomes. This means that the producers in Minnesota and North Dakota have learned something from the information they gleaned from Small Grains. As such, Small Grains has succeeded in its goals.

References

Burger, D. W., Katcher, J. B., Lange, N. E., Saenz, J. L., Sherman, S. P., & Stoutemyer, M. R. (1995). Horticulture information on the Internet: Cyberhorticulture on the Information Super Highway. HortTechnology 5, 329-331.

Carrascal, M. J., Pau, L. F., & Reiner, L. (1995). Knowledge and information transfer in agriculture using the hypermedia: a system review. Computer and Electronics in Agriculture 12, 83-119.

Lewis, L., Alexander, D., Farris, E., & Greene, B. (1999). Distance education at postsecondary education institutions: 1997-98. Statistical Analysis Report (Dec), 2000-13. National Center for Educational Statistics, Jessup, MD.

Pardue, S. L. (2001). The Virtual Revolution: Implications for Academe. Poultry Science 80, 553-561.

Walker, R. C., & Holden, L. A. (2000). Survey results from users of a dairy management Web site. Journal of Extension [On-line] 38 (1). Available at http://www.joe.org/joe/2000february/tt1.html