The public, governmental agencies and the scientific community have recently expressed concerns about the effects of agricultural practices on the environment and the quality of life in general. During the past several years, numerous researchers have attempted to address these and related concerns. However, most of the proposed solutions address the effects of agricultural practices on the environment rather than the solutions to such problems through educational efforts. Perhaps the most important factor often ignored is educating farmers about environmental issues. Against this backdrop, the national task force on extension priorities included water quality as one of eight key issues for extension programming (Extension Service/USDA, 1988). Furthermore, water quality has been listed as the number one priority for fiscal year 1992 by the national committees on extension, agricultural research and northeast regional council (Joint Council on Food and Agriculture, 1990). Extension educators are concerned about how to deliver efficient and effective educational information on environmental issues.

This study identified incentives and barriers to the diffusion and adoption of an agricultural innovation, the pre-sidedress nitrogen test (PSNT), evaluated technology transfer processes (educational programs), identified strategies and tactics for technology transfer, and profiled adopters and non adopters. A random sample of 220 adopters and nonadopters indicated that economic and technical information as well as change agents' attitudes impacted the adoption decision. Farm management information and economic concepts required to facilitate adoption decisions were absent during the original educational program. Adopters indicated that economic variables, saving money and inexpensive to use, influenced their adoption decision. Both adopters and nonadopters either did not possess or adhere to the prerequisite knowledge and skills in soil sampling to correctly perform the PSNT. When promoting agricultural innovations, educational programs should include economic and technical information. Change agents attitudes, as reported by farmers, were significant in discriminating adopters from nonadopters. Educators must consider and motivate change agents to promote and follow up on an innovation's use. Change agents need to recall and discuss prerequisite information to help farmers relate to the innovation and use it correctly. Holistic and multi-disciplinary approaches are necessary to promote an agricultural innovation.

Agriculture students must be prepared to cope with this world in order to function in their future occupations and roles in a less-agriculturally oriented society. To accomplish this feat, students must deal with increasing amounts of complex information and knowledge in purposive and systematic ways.

University faculty, including agricultural educators, must increasingly demonstrate their scholarship through papers presented at research conferences and articles published in refereed journals. In documenting the emphasis being placed upon research and related scholarly activities, Warmbrod (1987, p. 2

The adoption of new ideas and practices is affected by at least five factors: 1) the type of decision involved in adoption; 2) perceived attributes of the innovation; 3) communication channels used; 4) nature of the client system; and 5) the extent of the practitioner's effort (Lamble. 1984). A major function of extension practitioners is to facilitate the adoption of new ideas and practices or to influence the rate of diffusion and adoption of innovations by their clients. To enhance their effectiveness as change agents, extension practitioners must understand the unique characteristics that describe their clientele system. Two decades ago. Rogers and Shoemaker (1971) conducted research on adopter characteristics to enable diffusion agencies (i.e. Cooperative Extension) to appropriately categorize and address adopter audiences. They analyzed publications and summarized hundreds of empirical diffusion studies that either supported or did not support more than four dozen generalizations about technology adoption. Their findings related various independent variables to innovativeness (dependent variable) that were then grouped into three categories of generalizations: 1) socioeconomic status; 2) personality variables; and 3) communication behavior. For example, a socioeconomic generalization states that earlier adopters are no different from later adopters in age; a personality generalization states that earlier adopters have greater empathy than later adopters; and the communication behavior of an earlier adopter includes more contact with change agents than that of a later adopter. Rogers' and Shoemaker's research produced five categories of adopters based upon innovativeness: laggards, late and early majority adopters, early adopters, and innovators. Although Reddy (1987) identified personal factors, such as age and education, that contribute to the adoption of technology, it was Rogers (1962) who earlier recognized that people do not adopt innovations simultaneously: fnnovntors are "venturesome..., eager to try new ideas. . .,desir[ing] the risky. .. . cosmopolites". Eurly adopters are "respected by [their] peers. . ., more integrated [into] the local social system. . ., opinion leader[s]. . ., localities". The curly mujorify "interact frequently with their peers [and]. .. may deliberate for some time before completely adopting a new idea. .. and follow with deliberate willingness in adopting innovations. but seldom lead." 'The late major@ adopt new ideas just after the average member of a social system,. . [are] skeptical, and...the pressure of peers is necessary to motivate adoption." Laggards adopt innovation last,...are traditional and "tend to be frankly suspicious of innovations and change agents.. The laggard's attention is fixed on the rear-view mirror." (pp. 248-250)