Last November, we asked our subscribers to evaluate the 1993 Integrated Crop Management newsletter. Twenty-three per cent of you (n=559) returned the reader survey we provided. Here is a brief summary of what you told us.
You were asked to rate newsletter quality as poor, fair, good, very good, or excellent. You rated the following items a composite good, very good, or excellent:
timeliness of information (97%),
readability of text (99%),
usefulness of management recommendations (99%), and
illustrative value of color photos (99%).
The highest single category rating you gave was for use of photos to illustrate content; 69% of you rated our use of photos excellent.
When you compared the benefit of Integrated Crop Management to the annual subscription cost of $30, 68% of you rated benefit as greater than cost, and 30%I of you felt benefit was equal to cost. Readers who subscribed to the previous newsletter rated Integrated Crop Management as better (95%).
Eighty-six percent of you said Integrated Crop Management contained information you could not get elsewhere. Seventyfour percent of you changed a pest management or crop production practice as a result of information in the newsletter. You made changes in:
scouting practices (62%),
crop production (51%),
pesticide selection (44%),
pesticide timing (40%),
fertilizer rates (31%), and
non chemical controls (10%).
Overall, we did most things right. But you also pointed out areas where we needed improvement. Thanks for providing us with your opinions. We hope to produce an even better newsletter to meet your needs in 1994.