| Popis: |
Evaluation provides effective feedback for development plans and programs. In this respect, it is of utmost importance to ensure that the outputs of agricultural extension and education projects are compatible with the ones expected. Therefore, the main purpose of this study was to evaluate agricultural extension model sites approach from actors’ perspectives and to analyze their gaps via the context, input, process, and product (CIPP) evaluation model. The study was quantitative, applied, survey-based, and causal-comparative in terms of nature, purpose, methodology, and type of research, respectively. The samples included 150 main and follower farmers from a total number of 40 model sites and 37 subject-matter experts selected using the random and purposive sampling methods, respectively. The data collection instrument was a researcher-made questionnaire, whose reliability was confirmed through computing Cronbach’s alpha coefficient (0.75 ≤ α ≤ 0.90) and its validity was established by a panel of experts. The data were further analyzed using the SPSS24 and comparative statistical tests. The comparison results demonstrated that the mean values of the experts’ views towards all items at different evaluation stages (i.e., context, input, process, product, output, and re-engineering) were higher compared with those of the farmers. Moreover, the farmers’ perspectives at the context and the input evaluation stages were not the same as those of the experts, and their satisfaction with the project had boosted as they had approached the output evaluation stage. The results of the gap analysis similarly indicated that the largest negative gap between the views of the experts and the farmers was associated with the input evaluation stage and the smallest gap was related to the site re-engineering. Accordingly, much more attention should be paid to building and maintaining the trust of farmers during the early stages of planning for and implementation of agricultural extension model sites. |
