79 



vajjiie and conflicting, and methods are correspondingly crude. As information ia 

 gatliereil and better methods are discovered a common understanding is readied, and 

 at length a \vell-ionstru<'ted system or organization is effected. 



Until (juite recently the farmers' institute movement has been ])a,ssing through its 

 formative period. The institutes were begun by the several States independently of 

 each other, with very little or no experience to guide those in control, and with no 

 central authority or general bureau of information to aid in coordinating their work. 

 The natural consequence has l)een that wide differences exist iu the laws, forms of 

 organization, and methods of management of the institutes in the several States. 



Some of the States have laws that ari' (juitt,' elaborate. They prescribe in det<iil 

 the methods to be followed in conducting the institutes, the number of meetings 

 that shall be held, and the amount of money that may be expended each year. In 

 others they are extremely simple, merely recognizing the institute as a factor in edu- 

 cation, and leaving the details of its organization and work to the individual or board 

 intrusted with its management. A considerable number of the States and Territo- 

 ries have no institute legislation whatever. In these the work is dependent upon 

 services contributed by public-spirited citizens and by members of t lie faculties of 

 the State agricultural colleges and staffs of the agricultural experiment stations. 



A comparison of the institute statistics as given by the several State directors shows 

 wide differences in the number of .sessions held, in the attendance, in the amount of 

 money appropriated, the character of the programmes, the imndjer of speakers 

 employed, the cost per .session, and in many other important respects. To what 

 extent the differences in the results obtained are due to the varying degrees of etH- 

 ciency of the methods i)ursued can only be surmised, ])ut that tlie methods adopted 

 have affected the work in greater or less degree is undoubted. The fact that 

 one State, with the same or even less exj)enditure of money, is al)le to .secure more 

 satisfactory results than another is evidence that the one that excels po.ssesses special 

 advantages, or has adopted a more efficient system of administration than the other. 



PUKPOSE OF THE IN'STITrXE. 



All earnest farmers' institute workers have the .«ame purpose in view — the improve- 

 ment of country conditions through the dissemination of valuable information relat- 

 ing to agriculture. The differences that exist in their methods of carrying out this 

 purpose are not as a rule the result of a deliberate intention to be j)eculiar, but have 

 arisen, as has been .stated, out of the conditions that existed when the institutes 

 were organized. The methods, however, in any State an; not so fixed in its system 

 as to be incapable of change, or of others being substituted if such change and sub- 

 stitution are found to be best. 



The time seems to have come when those who are responsible for the development 

 of the institute work of the country should in some systematic way consider the 

 important questions that the differences in the various methods in use suggest, with a 

 view to improving existing systems by incorporating in all of them such items of 

 recognized value as are likely to be equally advantageous and applicable in all of the 

 States. This no doubt can best be done by first coming to some agreement respect- 

 ing a few fundamental principles in institute work that ought to be recognized and 

 adopted by every State. 



With this in mind, the Farmers' Institute Specialist of the Office of Experiment 

 Stations, United States Department of Agriculture, has been securing data from the 

 farmers' institute workers in all of the States and in foreign countries respecting the 

 various methods that are in use in conducting this work, and after careful considera- 

 tion and comparison of those that have been most successful with those that seemed 

 to have at least partially failed, has outlined the system that is herewith presented. 



While it is not expected, neither is it desirable, that the institute systems of the 

 several States shall ever become uniform in every particular, any more than that the 

 constitutions and laws of the States should become identical in form, yet there are 

 certain fundamental features that appear to be essential which should be incorpo- 

 rated in every institute system that is to secure highest efficiency in its administra- 

 tion and most complete success in accomplishing its educational purposes. 



ESSENTIALS OP AN EFFICIENT INSTITUTE SYSTEM. 



A brief preliminary discussion of several points held to be essential in any well- 

 constructed farmers' institute system is given in partial explanation of their incorpo- 

 ration into the body of the plan proposed. A full discussion of the items introduced 

 into the plan is for obvious reasons impracticable and is doubtless unnecessary. 

 Most of them are believed to be sufiiciently self-evident to need no explanation. 



