The purpose of this study was to determine college students '

Theoretical frameworks bring order to phenomena and provide a context for both research and practice. However, it has only been in the last four decades that theoretical frameworks have guided writing research. Before the 1980s, writing research focused more on mechanics and grammar than on cognitive thought processes related to writing. During the mid-1990s, theories shifted to a more sociocultural view of writing. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to apply theory evaluation criteria to theories of writing to review and evaluate their use and applicability in modern-day writing research. A literature review yielded three theories consistent across publications: cognitive process theory of writing, social cognitive theory of writing, and sociocultural theory of writing. The theories were reviewed and evaluated using accuracy, consistency, fruitfulness, simplicity/complexity, scope, acceptability, and sociocultural utility. Since the 1980s, writing researchers have modif ied theories to define writing ideas, concepts, and relationships. Cognitive processes should also be included in writing theories because of their importance in knowledge construction. Of the three theories that were reviewed and evaluated, the social cognitive theory of writing was the most complete. Its structure included society's influence on writing and the cognitive processes involved in writing development. Each writing theory brought a unique perspective to writing research, but Flower's theory was a complete theory that incorporated an in-depth look at writing as a product of cognitive processes situated within society. However, more research needs to be done on its applicability in agricultural communications research and practice.

The purpose of this study was to determine college students' awareness of and attitudes toward biotechnology issues reported in the mass media. Future agricultural communicators (N = 330) representing 11 land-grant universities in 10 states recorded their knowledge and perceptions of biotechnology issues as reported in the mass media. Respondents were mostly seniors (46%), female (55%), and considered themselves "8" average students (60%). Students achieved only 30% correct responses (M = 3.05) in a knowledge assessment of biotechnology practices, illustrating a lack of knowledge. However, nearly 84% of the respondents perceived their level of knowledge as average to high (24% perceived they possessed above-average scientific knowledge). Future agricultural communicators were somewhat accepting of biotechnology practices for genetically modified organisms involving plant life (M = 3.28), but viewed these same practices as somewhat unacceptable for use on humans (M = 1.84). Significant, low positive relationships existed between respondents' perceived and assessed levels ofbiotechnology knowledge (r = .17) and between their assessed knowledge and acceptance of biotechnology practices (r = .16). Selected college students in the agricultural sciences have much less knowledge about biotechnology practices than what they believed to possess. Although correctable through increased study of biotechnology, this finding may pose serious problems for students choosing to "communicate" the science of biotechnology issues in the mass media. Agricultural communications faculty nationwide should analyze their curricula to determine if students are being given the opportunity to study biotechnology issues while learning how to communicate it to a larger audience.