As part of a larger study, four agriscience teachers were interviewed about their perceptions, attitudes, and challenges with implementing content area reading strategies (CARS) in secondary agriscience. In the larger study, two of the teachers implemented a treatment of systematic, planned, and thoughtful CARS in two agriscience courses, while the other two teachers provided the comparison of teaching their “normal” routine of instruction. Prior to the study, agriscience teachers implemented few or no CARS. They possessed limited knowledge and confidence in using CARS. However, due to pressures from administrators, the state department of education, and others, teachers in the comparison group implemented twice as many strategies as the treatment group, yet their students arrived at nearly the same level of agricultural comprehension and motivation as students in the treatment group.

Secondary agriscience, along with all education, is facing pressure to document and contribute to student achievement in math, science, and reading. Agriscience teachers often expect their students to enter the classroom with adequate skills for reading and comprehension, yet the vocabulary, concepts, and structure of secondary agriscience is foreign to many students. Agriscience teachers may be able to enhance students' reading performance through implementation of reading strategies in secondary agriscience. While similarities exist between reading in other content areas and secondary agriscience, differences exist in the products of reading in agriculture. This study reviews research related to content area reading to develop research questions and a model for studying reading in secondary agriscience. Building on Dunkin and Biddle's (1974) model of the study of teaching, this research proposes areas of inquiry regarding process and product variables associated with reading. Research in process variables includes setting purpose, strategy instruction, use of strategies, monitoring reading, discussion, and question generation. Research in product variables includes comprehension, agricultural literacy, motivation to read, creating lifelong readers, critical thinking, and communication of ideas.

Increasingly, agriscience teachers are called upon to demonstrate their contributions to student achievement in math, science, and reading. This national survey of 216 agriscience teachers investigated the current attitudes and practices related to reading in agriscience. Agriscience teachers generally appreciated reading for personal development and learning, but were in less agreement about allocation of time for reading. Further, teachers agreed that reading was important in agriscience, but were in less agreement about their role in teaching content area reading strategies (CARS). Reading is a fundamental part of instruction in agriscience, with nearly 20% of class time being devoted to reading. Teachers exhibited limited knowledge of, confidence in, and frequency of CARS use. Teachers understood how to select textbooks and how to assess student comprehension. Indications suggested that teachers helped students summarize, determine important ideas, generate questions, and define unfamiliar words. However, they did not regularly help students think aloud, make predictions, use multiple strategies, activate background knowledge, preview texts, or create graphic organizers. In essence, teachers need assistance in helping students with the first two micro-periods of reading and professional development to boost knowledge, confidence, and frequency of use of content area reading strategies (CARS).

Agriscience is facing pressure to document and contribute to student achievement in math, science, and reading. Agriscience teachers may be able to foster student reading and comprehension through utilization of research-based reading strategies to further develop literacy in and about agriculture. Building on Dunkin and Biddle's (1974) model of the study of teaching, this synthesis of research proposes areas of inquiry regarding the teacher and context variables associated with reading. Teachers influence reading in agriscience through personal reading habits, expectations for reading, attitudes toward reading, and knowledge of and preparation in reading strategy use. Contextual variables include the student, environment, and text. Students enter agriscience classes with differing reading ability, interest, prior knowledge, prior reading, motivation, age, and experience. They encounter texts in the home, classroom, and school environments. Texts are comprised of varying readability, vocabulary, structure, content, and selection, all of which impact comprehension.

A national survey of 216 agriscience teachers investigated the attitudes and practices related to reading. Knowledge of strategies, total time of text use, confidence in strategy use, and the general approach to reading explained 67% of the variance in frequency of content area reading strategy use. Teachers held positive attitudes about reading from personal and instructional standpoints. However, they lacked knowledge and confidence in content area reading strategies, which translated into low frequency of strategy use. Teachers appeared to use reading and text with justifiable frequency in their agricultural science courses. Because knowledge of reading strategies explained such a large amount of variance (nearly 64%) in frequency of reading strategy use, career and technical education program administrators and teacher educators should encourage professional development about reading strategies.