Journal of Agricultural Education

Volume 47, Number 3, pp. 24-32

DOI: 10.5032/jae.2006.03024

MEASURING LEARNING IN THE AFFECTIVE DOMAIN USING REFLECTIVE

WRITING ABOUT A VIRTUAL INTERNATIONAL AGRICULTURE EXPERIENCE

Barry L. Boyd, Associate Professor

Kim E. Dooley, Associate Professor
Summer Felton, Assistant Lecturer
Texas A&M University

Abstract

Agricultural educators are familiar with the three domains of learning: 1) cognitive, 2) affective,
and 3) psychomotor. When teaching agricultural content, the instructional and assessment
strategies are typically focused on the cognitive domain of learning because of the difficulty in
measuring gains in the affective domain. The purpose of this study was to measure affective
learning after viewing an asynchronously delivered simulation, reflecting (metacognition), and
writing about the experience. Research in agricultural education is devoid of writing as an
assessment tool to measure learning in the affective domain. Content analysis of 83 reflective
writing samples was used to analyze affective learning at the levels of receiving, responding,
valuing, organization, and characterization. It was evident in the reflective writing that all
students participated at the receiving and responding levels. It is much more difficult to assess
students at the higher levels of the affective domain (valuing, organizing, and characterizing).
From the analysis of reflective writing, the researchers recognized and determined that some
students expressed affective learning at higher levels of the affective taxonomy and increased
their level of reflective writing in the process.

Introduction (Cano, 1990; Cano & Newcomb, 1990).

However, in today’s atmosphere of large
Piaget noted, “at no level, at no state, classrooms and multiple choice exams, it
even in the adult, can we find a behavior or can be difficult to assess learning in the
a state which is purely cognitive without affective domain.
affect nor a purely affective state without a As agricultural educators, we understand
cognitive element involved” (as cited in the value of writing. We often assign
Clark & Fiske, 1982, p. 130). McKeachie writing as part of our assessment in courses
(1976) emphasized the need to understand and we teach courses in technical and
humans holistically; cognition and affect journalistic writing. Day, Raven, and
should not be separated. Agricultural Newman (1998) measured changes in
educators are familiar with the three student attitudes in technical writing in an
domains of learning: 1) cognitive (Bloom & agri-communications course. Other studies
Krathwohl, 1956), 2) affective (Krathwohl, have measured writing competencies of
Bloom, & Masia, 1964), and 3) graduate students (Murphy, Lindner, &
psychomotor (Harrow, 1972). When Kelsey, 2002; Lindner, Murphy, &
teaching agricultural content, the Wingenbach, 2002). No studies were found
instructional and assessment strategies are in agricultural education that specifically
typically focused on the cognitive domain of examined using writing to assess affective
learning because of the difficulty in changes in undergraduate students.
measuring gains in the affective domain Huba and Freed (2000) determined that
(Leng, 2002). A few studies have examined short writing assignments serve as an
the relationship between instruction and appropriate assessment tool to measure
student performance in the cognitive domain changes in attitude. Writing supports

Journal of Agricultural Education 24 Volume 47, Number 3, 2006

Boyd, Dooley, & Felton Measuring Learning in the…

learning through the whole-brain processing and internal states that drive us in a
of doing, depicting, and symbolizing (Emig, particular direction (McLeod, 1991). Within
1988). When a learner reflects upon their attribution (motivational) theory, Dweck
thoughts and emotions as a result of an (1989) proposes a framework made up of
instructional sequence, then the nature of the beliefs and values. This framework consists
learning process helps the learner to of students’ beliefs about the nature of
construct meaning from information and competence and the level of their own
experiences. In order to fully understand competence, variables that influence
this study, it is important to review the outcomes, and their ability to achieve those
taxonomy of the affective domain, as well as outcomes. Therefore, students’ beliefs
the use of reflective writing as an about their competence and ability will
assessment tool. impact their learning, emphasizing the
relationship between affect and cognition.
Theoretical Framework The Taxonomy of the Affective Domain
was first developed by Krathwohl et al.,
When we think about beliefs and 1964. This original taxonomy contains five
attitudes, we are on a less trodden path levels, from lowest to highest: 1) receiving
called the affective domain of learning. when the learner is aware and attending the
Researchers studying human behavior instructional event; 2) responding when the
recognize the need to consider both learner reacts to the instructional event or
cognitive and affective dimensions of content; 3) valuing when the learner
learning, and their interrelationships demonstrates a voluntary commitment to the
(McKeachie, 1976; McLeod, 1991; instructional event or content; 4)
Vygotsky, 1962). Perhaps the first step on organization when the learner demonstrates
this path is to operationally define these internalization of a value system; and 5)
terms. “Affect” is often described with characterization when the learner
words such as feelings, emotions, consistently acts within the value system.
motivations, attitudes, and beliefs. Studies This taxonomy was applied to the students’
have noted relationships exist between reflective writing to assess the level of
moods and information storage and retrieval changes in affective learning.
(Bower, 1981). There is evidence that affect Topics presented within an affective
can directly influence cognition. Several framework become very real and relevant in
studies describe relationships between a students’ lives (Rompelman, 2002).
student’s mood and learning, as well as Reflection-in-action is a form of
relationships between moods and metacognition in which the student
information storage and retrieval (Bastick, questions both the unexpected event and the
1982; Bower; Bower & Cohen, 1982; knowledge-in-action that brought on the
Kuiken, 1991; Morris, 1989). unexpected event. Surprises cause us to
Attitude can be defined as “a mental or reflect on the cause of that surprise
neural state of readiness, organized through (Bruning, Schraw, & Ronning, 1999).
experience, exerting a directive or dynamic Reflection encourages students to
influence upon the individual’s response to integrate theory with practice. Boud and
all objects and situations with which it is Walker (1985) define reflection as “those
related” (Allport, 1935, p. 810). Attitude intellectual and affective activities in which
theory contends that the expression of individuals engage to explore their
attitude is a social phenomenon and fits experiences in order to lead to new
within the social constructivist paradigm of understandings and appreciations” (p. 19).
learning (McLeod, 1991). Reflection may include the sharing of
Beliefs can be defined as “judgments of feelings, observations, ideas, and reactions
the credibility of conceptualization” regarding a learning activity. While
(McLeod, 1991, p. 7). Values on the other reflection can take many forms,
hand are representations of either positive or reflective writing is often used to get
negative notions (McLeod, 1991; Rokeach, students to delve into subject matter at a
1986). Motivation can denote both external deeper level.
Journal of Agricultural Education 25 Volume 47, Number 3, 2006
Boyd, Dooley, & Felton Measuring Learning in the…

Hatton and Smith (1995) identified four Methods

types of reflective writing done by students.
The first is descriptive writing (not Study Context
reflective) where the student simply The context of this study was an
describes the events. Students may begin undergraduate overview course taught over
their reflective writing in this manner to set a 15-week semester in the Department of
the stage for further discussion. Agricultural Leadership, Education and
Unfortunately, some students never get Communications at Texas A&M University.
beyond this stage (Hatton & Smith). The As a part of a unit on international
next type, descriptive reflection, uses the agricultural development during the fourth
student’s personal judgment in descriptive week of classes, students were asked to view
reflection of an event. A student might cite a simulation called, Five Minutes in a
personal reasons for choosing a particular Developing Country. The simulation was
theory or position at this level. In dialogic developed by international workers with
reflection, students engage in conversation Food for the Hungry International (FHI,
with themselves where they explore possible 2005). In the simulation, students assumed
reasons for the event. The most in-depth the role of a banana farmer in Peru with a
level is critical reflection. At this level, the family of four. The activity involved a
student provides reasons for the event in the decision-making tree where at every turn
broader social, political, or historical there were different outcomes. At each stage
contexts. Writing is a fundamental part of of the simulation, students made a decision
the reflection process (Walkington, between two alternatives with the goal of
Christensen, & Kock, 2001). improving the lives of the farmer’s family.
Several studies have determined that Students were asked to complete the
writing could be used to assess students’ simulation several times, changing their
level of reflection (Kember, 1999; Litke, responses each time to achieve different
2002; Wong, Kember, Chung, & Yan, outcomes. Upon completion of the
1995). For example, Litke found that simulation, learners were asked to
students in a service-learning experience voluntarily write a one-page descriptive
indicated through written reflection that they reflection paper to describe their reaction to
experienced changes that fall into the this experience. Each paper was coded by a
affective domain. Participants in their study number (N = 83) as it was reviewed to
felt a greater sense of belonging to their ensure confidentiality and will appear in the
group and the community as a result of their narrative as a part of the audit trail to
activity, as well as a commitment to active authenticate original data sources. This
citizenship. Would reflection and writing study was approved by the Institutional
about a virtual international agricultural Review Board.
experience provide evidence of an affective
change? Research Approach and Analysis
This study used content analysis within
Purpose the qualitative research paradigm. Content
analysis can be both a quantitative and
The purpose of this study was to qualitative research technique. The
measure student affective learning after difference is dependent upon the procedures
viewing an asynchronously delivered of analysis rather than the character of the
simulation, reflecting (metacognition), and data available (Selltiz, Jahoda, Deutsch, &
writing about the experience. Descriptive Cook, 1959). “Content analysis is a
reflection was the type of writing technique that enables researchers to study
used to assess learning in this study human behavior in an indirect way, through
(Hatton & Smith, 1995). The five major an analysis of their communications”
categories of the affective domain were used (Fraenkel & Wallen, 1999, p. 405).
as the constructs for documenting the level According to Borg and Gall (1989) content
of affective learning (Krathwohl et al., analysis usually aims to achieve one of the
1964). following kinds of objectives: 1) produce
Journal of Agricultural Education 26 Volume 47, Number 3, 2006
Boyd, Dooley, & Felton Measuring Learning in the…

descriptive information; 2) cross-validate a volume of qualitative material and

research findings; and 3) test hypotheses. attempts to identify core consistencies and
For this study the researchers did all three. meanings” (Patton, 2002, p. 453). Content
First the researchers sought to test the analysis requires deciphering skills and
working hypothesis that students were pattern recognition to ensure that variations
gaining an appreciation and change in can be “rigidly and consistently applied so
attitude as a result of participating in the that other researchers or readers, looking at
virtual simulation. Second, descriptive the same messages, would obtain the same
examples of affective domain constructs or comparable results” (Berg, 2001, p. 241).
within the writing samples were identified For this study the research team
and coded. Finally, findings were cross- incorporated independent corroborative
validated using independent corroborative techniques (like inter-rater reliability) and
techniques. detailed excerpts from relevant statements to
Miles and Huberman (1994) suggest document interpretations.
three approaches for qualitative This study used an open coding
data analysis: interpretative, social technique (Strauss, 1987). This process
anthropological, and collaborative social involves carefully reading the document to
research. This research employed a social determine the concepts and categories. The
anthropological approach (Berg, 2001). constant comparative method allows the
Two of the researchers were course researcher to integrate data (descriptive
instructors and spent considerable time in reflection papers) and theory (affective
the “community” (prolonged engagement taxonomy) using joint coding and analysis
over a 3 month period). Both these (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Each reflective
researchers participated directly with the paper was read by two independent
study population, which provided reviewers and action verbs from the
perspective on the materials collected during affective domain were highlighted and
the research and a special understanding of categorized by levels. Sentences and phrases
the participants and how these individuals were included to provide clarity and context
interpret their social world (Berg). Content for interpretation. A peer debriefing with an
analysis allows the researcher(s) to examine independent reader was conducted to check
written documents unobtrusively in order to the initial domain levels. Every assertion
provide “a passport to listening to the words made in the analysis was documented with
of the text, and understanding better the no fewer than three examples.
perspective(s) of the producer of these In the Handbook of Qualitative
words” (Berg, p. 242). Research, Hodder (1994) suggests that
Strauss (1987) suggests that researchers documents, such as reflective papers,
use sociological constructs based upon a require more contextualized interpretation.
combination of the researcher’s scholarly “Somehow it is assumed that words get us
knowledge and knowledge of the field under closer to minds. But…meaning does not
investigation. For this study, the Taxonomy reside in a text but in the writing and reading
of the Affective Domain was used as the of it” (p. 394). He speaks toward a theory of
sociological construct and coding scheme to material culture and the need to use
reach beyond local meanings to broader theoretical or social criteria for analysis.
social scientific ones (Berg, 2001). The unit
of analysis was words, phrases, sentences, The material culture may not be able
and paragraphs within the descriptive directly to ‘speak back,’ but if
reflection writing samples. Abrahamson appropriate procedures are followed
(1983) suggests that researchers begin by there is room for the data and for
immersing themselves in the documents in different levels of theory to confront
order to identify the themes (inductive) and interpretations. The interpreter learns
use some categorical scheme or theoretical/ from the experience of material
social construct for assessment (deductive). remains—the data and the interpreter
Content analysis is a “qualitative data bring each other into existence in
reduction and sense-making effort that takes dialectical fashion. The interpretations
Journal of Agricultural Education 27 Volume 47, Number 3, 2006
Boyd, Dooley, & Felton Measuring Learning in the…

can be confirmed or made more or less participate at these lower levels. It is much
plausible than others using a fairly more difficult to assess students at the
standard range of internal and external higher levels of the affective domain
(social criteria). (p. 401) (valuing, organizing, and characterizing).
Valuing is the worth that the learner
Therefore, this study cannot be separated gives to the content. Action verbs
from its context and the descriptive describing this level include differentiate,
examples in the findings allow the reader to propose, appreciation for, and concern for.
draw their own inferences of transferability. One respondent expressed:

Results For most of us, the toughest decisions of

a day are what to wear, where to eat, or
Receiving is the first level in the how much to study for a test; decisions
affective domain. Some verbs that describe for the people like in this activity
this level include ask, choose, or view. The involve whether or not to send their
next level, responding, assumes active children out to beg, whether or not to
participation, attendance or reaction to the steal to provide money and a living, or
content. Action verbs such as answer, write, whether or not to have more children so
discuss, or perform reflect the responding that they can help on the farm. (10)
level. As an example, one student
responded: Another student realized that, “I was
able to go back and do this over and try a
This activity was also interesting different route to see if there was some way
because when you made one small to beat the scenario, but they are not able to
decision it would change this family’s go back” (25). Yet another student asserted,
whole life for the next few years just on
that one decision you made. Before I These people are definitely facing a
sent them to the city, they were doing harsh reality of life and would welcome
OK on their banana farm, but afterwards, any of the luxuries we take for granted.
they were struggling in the city Many of us have grown so comfortable
considering sending their children to beg in our daily lives that even realizing
instead of staying home to study. these situations are out there is hard for
Another example is the man makes a us. I am definitely guilty of thinking that
simple decision to send his daughter to surely they could do better for
work and make more money for the themselves, they just don’t do it. (6)
family, which will help the family. This
leads to less frequent visits from her, and Learners at the organizing level go
the family ends up resenting him for beyond valuing by demonstrating
sending her away. (9) consistency and priority of their values.
Compare, generalize, modify, relate, and
Another student reacts to the decisions synthesize are action verbs that describe this
(s)he has to make in the scenario with this level. This student was able to put himself
statement, “It is hard making these decisions into the character’s situation, “But if you
because one mistake and you lose someone allow your self to be in the banana farmer’s
in your family.” (S)he concludes with, “I shoes for a few minutes, forgetting that
have decided I never want to be in this you’re sitting in a heated house on a
position” (46). Student reflections at these computer, you can really see the reality of
two levels were written at the descriptive the situation” (20). Another compared their
reflection level (Hatton & Smith, 1995). own life to that of the Peruvian farmer:
Simply by choosing to complete this
voluntary assignment, all students were at While growing up as a child, there was
the receiving and responding levels of the very few of us that would go to bed
affective domain. In any classroom setting, hungry. Your parents would clothe,
one should expect most students to bathe, feed and give you shelter. In most
Journal of Agricultural Education 28 Volume 47, Number 3, 2006
Boyd, Dooley, & Felton Measuring Learning in the…

families, children won’t start working (world hunger). I now see how important
until the age of sixteen or later. Even it would be to have a job in international
later in life, your parents are still there agricultural development to help people
for you and would do anything for you. around the world that work so hard just
In these third world countries, you start to get by. (14)
working from the moment that you can
walk. It’s not that your parents are being Some students were moved to action by the
cruel, but because they had to do it to activity, “This really encouraged me to get
survive. (13) involved in any way I can even while still in
school to try and alleviate this problem in
Other students noted that “…other our world” (5). As the students reached this
people around the world are struggling affective level, their reflective writing
just to have enough to eat, while we gained more depth. These students
throw away millions of pounds of food used dialogic reflection (Hatton & Smith,
everyday” (29), and 1995).

Everyday is a struggle for them to live Conclusions

and everyday is a struggle for us to get
up. We complain if we have to work a The affective domain consists of levels
ten hour day and it’s a short day if they that address a learner’s interests, attitudes,
work a ten hour day. (25) values, and appreciation of a given topic or
content area. Undergraduate courses that
Characterizing is the highest level of include agricultural content invariably
the affective domain. Questioning, contain both cognitive and affective
demonstrating empathy, solving, and dimensions. The interrelationships between
modifying behavior are actions that cognition and affect cause a learner to
describe this level. The simulation caused further internalize the information and
some respondents to question their promote a change in attitude, belief, and
own lives. One student wrote, “Why am I values that would instill a desire to improve
able to go home and have food in my the condition of international agriculture and
kitchen that I just do not feel like eating other relevant agricultural education content
and have the ability and the means to areas.
go to the store to get something else?” (17). Students’ descriptive and dialogic
Another student questioned, “What would reflections provided evidence that learning
we do if we were in poverty like so occurred at all levels of the affective
many others, and not have the things that we domain, but of particular interest, at the
take for granted?” (42). Other students higher levels where changes make a greater
developed empathy for the characters impact on the student. Changes at the upper
in the simulation. One student stated, three levels of the affective domain might
impact students’ career choices, level of
This exercise made me more perceptive community involvement, empathy toward
and empathetic for those less fortunate. others, or willingness to work or travel
I’ve always been disturbed and abroad. After viewing the simulation,
disappointed by beggars, especially students expressed feeling grateful to live in
children. I have never actually the U.S. and appreciative of the privileges
considered the fact that they may and prosperity that they enjoy. Students
have no choice. This hurts my heart to were motivated to want to help those in
think how quick and harsh I was to judge developing nations. Students realized that
others. (36) people in developing nations are living their
entire lives barely able to afford to eat with
Another student realized: no hope of any improvement any time in
their lives. Their reflections expressed an
Until I did this exercise, I don’t think awareness of developing countries and the
that I realized the total severity of it kinds of decisions people must make and
Journal of Agricultural Education 29 Volume 47, Number 3, 2006
Boyd, Dooley, & Felton Measuring Learning in the…

discernment of whether others share their positioned for inclusion to join in this line of
level of awareness. inquiry.
This research demonstrated that
descriptive reflection was an appropriate References
assessment tool for affective learning. In
addition, it was noted that as students Abrahamson, M. (1983). Social research
increased their level of the affective domain, methods. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice
they also reflected at a deeper level. Some Hall.
students’ writings at the characterization
level moved from descriptive to dialogic Allport, G. W. (1935). Attitudes. In C.
reflection, and perhaps a bit to critical Murchison (Ed.), Handbook of
reflection. While not a specific purpose of social psychology, (pp. 798-844).
this study, the findings imply that a Worcester, MA: Clark University
relationship may exist between student’s Press.
level of reflective writing and the higher
levels of the affective domain. At the Bastick, T. (1982). Intuition: How we
higher levels of affect, some students’ think and act. New York: John Wiley and
reflections were more conversations with Sons.
themselves (dialogic) while others
were moved to question why society is Berg, B. L. (2001). Qualitative research
not doing more to improve the condition methods for the social sciences. Needham
of those in need (critical reflection). Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Further study is needed to examine the
relationship between levels of reflection and Bloom, B., & Krathwohl, D. (1956).
affect. Taxonomy of educational objectives: The
Instructional implications may exist for classification of educational goals, by a
prompting higher levels of reflective writing committee of college and university
in agricultural educations courses. examiners. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain.
Instructors should consider the use of New York: Longman, Green.
reflective writing, both as an instructional
tool to improve learners’ cognitive models, Bohlin, R. M. (1998). The affective
as well as an assessment tool to measure domain: A model of learner-instruction
changes in attitudes, beliefs, values, and interaction. Proceedings of Selected
motivations. Research and Development Presentations.
Affective learning and assessment is an The National Convention of the Association
under represented area of research in for Educational Communications and
agricultural education. There is a need for Technology (AECT).
additional research examining the
relationship between all three domains Borg, W. R., & Gall, M. D. (1989).
of learning: cognition, affect, and Educational research: An introduction (5th
psychomotor. Implications for our Ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman.
profession exist in terms of instructional
strategies and content delivery. Retention Boud, D., & Walker, D. (1985). Barriers
and transfer of agricultural content to reflection on experience. In D. Boud, R.
could be enhanced with the inclusion of Keough, and D. Walker (Eds.), Reflection:
affective and psychomotor dimensions. Turning experience into learning (pp. 18-
Furthermore, Krathwohl et al., (1964) 40). London: Kogan Page.
admitted difficulty in placing learning
into specific levels within the affective Bower, G. (1981). Mood and memory.
domain. As a result, other theorists American Psychologist, 36, 129-148.
have proposed the need for a new taxonomy
(McLeod, 1991; Bohlin, 1998). Bower, G., & Cohen, P. R. (1982).
Further research is needed in these Emotional influences in memory and
areas and agricultural educators are thinking: Data and theory. In M. S. Clark &
Journal of Agricultural Education 30 Volume 47, Number 3, 2006
Boyd, Dooley, & Felton Measuring Learning in the…

S. T. Fiske (Eds.), Affect and Cognition (pp. developing behavioral objectives. New
291-331). Hillsdale N.J.: Erlbaum. York: McKay.

Bruning, R. H., Schraw, G. J., & Hatton, N., & Smith, D. (1995).
Ronning, R. R. (1999). Cognitive Reflection in teacher education: Towards
psychology and instruction. Upper Saddle definition and implementation. The
River, NJ: Merrill Publishing. University of Sydney: School of Teaching
and Curriculum Studies. Retrieved January
Cano, J. (1990). The relationship 23, 2005 from http://alex.edfac.usyd.
between instruction and student performance edu.au/LocalResource/study1/hattonart.html
at the various levels of cognition among
selected Ohio production agriculture Hodder, I. (1994). The interpretation of
programs. Journal of Agricultural documents and material culture (pp. 393-
Education, 31(2), 74-80. 402). In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln,
(Eds.) Handbook of qualitative research.
Cano, J., & Newcomb, L. H. (1990). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Cognitive level of instruction and student
performance among selected Ohio Huba, M. E., & Freed, J. E. (2000).
production agriculture programs. Journal of Learner-centered assessment on college
Agricultural Education, 31(1), 46-51. campuses: Shifting the focus from teaching
to learning. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Clark, M. S., & Fiske, S. T. (1982).
Affect and cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Kember, D. (1999). Determining the
Erlbaum. level of reflective thinking from students'
written journals using a coding scheme
Day, T. M., Raven, M. R., & Newman, based on the work of Mezirow.
M. E. (1998). The effects of world wide International Journal of Lifelong Education,
web instruction and traditional instruction 18(1), 18-30.
and learning styles on achievement and
changes in student attitudes in a technical Krathwohl, D., Bloom, B., & Masia, B.
writing in an agricommunications course. (1964). Taxonomy of educational objectives:
Journal of Agricultural Education, 39(4), The classification of educational goals.
65-75. Handbook II: Affective domain. New York:
David McKay Co.
Dweck, C. S. (1989). Motivation, In A.
Lesgold & R. Glaser, (Eds.) Foundations for Kuiken, D. Ed. (1991). Mood and
a psychology of education, (pp. 87-136). memory: Theory, research, and application.
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Emig, J. (1988). Writing as a mode of Leng, Y. L. (2002). Learner analysis in

learning. New York: Oxford Press. instructional design: The affective domain.
CDTLink, 6(3). Retrieved July 20, 2005
Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (1999). from http://www.cdtl.nus.edu.sg/link/nov
How to design and evaluate research in 2002/ tech2.htm
education. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985).
Food for the Hungry International. Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA:
(2005). Five minutes in a developing Sage.
country. Retrieved July 29, 2005 from
http://www.fhi.net/fhiperu/FHISite/interacti Lindner, J. R., Murphy, T. H., &
veintro.htm Wingenbach, G. J. (2002). Written
communication competencies: Strengths
Harrow, A. (1972). A taxonomy of the and weaknesses of agricultural education
psychomotor domain. A guide for graduate students. Proceedings of the
Journal of Agricultural Education 31 Volume 47, Number 3, 2006
Boyd, Dooley, & Felton Measuring Learning in the…

National Agricultural Education Research Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative

Conference, Las Vegas, NV. research and evaluation methods (3rd Ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Litke, R. A. (2002). Do all students “get
it?” Comparing students’ reflections to Rokeach, M. (1986). Beliefs, attitudes,
course performance. Michigan Journal and values: A theory of organization and
of Community Service Learning, 8(2), 27- change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
34.
Rompelman, L. (2002). Affective
McKeachie, W. (1976). Psychology in teaching. New York: University Press of
America’s bicentennial year. American America.
Psychologist, 31, 819-833.
Selltiz, B., Jahoda, M., Deutsch, M., &
McLeod, S. H. (1991). The affective Cook, S. W. (1959). Research methods in
domain and the writing process: Working social relations. New York: Holt, Rinehart
definitions. JAC, 11(1). Retrieved & Winston.
November 11, 2004, from http://jac.gsu.edu
/jac/ 11.1/Articles/6.htm Strauss, A. L. (1987). Qualitative
analysis for social scientists. New York:
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, M. A. Cambridge University Press.
(1994). Qualitative analysis: An expanded
sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Vygotsky, L. (1962). Thought and
Sage. language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Morris, W. N. (1989). Mood: The Walkington, J., Christensen, H. P., &

frame of mind. New York: Springer. Kock, H. (2001). Developing critical
reflection as a part of teaching training and
Murphy, T. H, Lindner, J. R., & Kelsey, teaching practice. European Journal of
K. D. (2002). Authenticated writing Engineering Education, 26(4), 343-350.
competencies of agricultural education
graduate students: A comparison of Wong, F. K. Y., Kember, D., Chung, L.
distance and on-campus students. Y. F., & Yan, L. (1995). Assessing the level
Proceedings of the National Agricultural of reflection from reflective journals.
Education Research Conference, Las Vegas, Journal of Advanced Nursing, 22(1),
NV. 48-57.

BARRY L. BOYD is an Associate Professor in the Department of Agricultural Leadership,

Education, and Communications at Texas A&M University, 130 Scoates Hall, College Station,
TX 77843-2116. E-mail: [email protected].
KIM E. DOOLEY is an Associate Professor in the Department of Agricultural Leadership,
Education, and Communications at Texas A&M University, 107E Scoates Hall, College Station,
TX 77843-2116. E-mail: [email protected].

SUMMER FELTON is an Assistant Lecturer in the Department of Agricultural Leadership,

Education, and Communications at Texas A&M University, 119A Scoates Hall, College Station,
TX 77843-2116. E-mail: [email protected].

Journal of Agricultural Education 32 Volume 47, Number 3, 2006