No abstract

A nanometer is one-billionth of a meter. The NNI put this measure in perspective using a sheet of paper as an analogy: The thickness of a sheet of paper is approximately 100,000 nanometers thick. The dimensions between approximately 1 and 100 nanometers are the nanoscale (NNI, 2000a(NNI, , 2000b. At this scale, unusual physical, chemical, and biological properties can emerge in materials. These properties tend to differ in very significant ways from the general properties of bulk materials and single atoms or molecules (NNI, 2000a(NNI, , 2000b.The applications of nanotechnology in agrifood include improved precision farming practices encompassing pathogen and contaminant detection, identity preservation and tracking, smart treatment delivery systems, and intelligent systems integration for agriculture and food processing (Peters et al., 2016 ). Nanodevices for molecular and cellular biology, nanoscale materials science and engineering to address environmental issues and agricultural waste, as well as novel packaging that can extend product shelf life and increase the quality and safety of food are also emerging applications of nanotechnology in food and agriculture (Peters et al., 2016 ). Nanotechnology applications can also be found in agricultural production, animal feed, food processing, food additives, and food products with enhanced flavor, texture, and nutrition (Handford et al., 2014 ).The growing convergence of nanoscience and nanotechnology, information and communication technologies (ICTs), biotechnology, synthetic biology, gene-editing techniques, and a host of related existing and emerging scientific disciplines is creating a challenge for workforce development. Specifically, there is an increasing need to identify skills and qualifications for these emerging fields (Yawson, 2010 ). Unfortunately, issues of nanotechnology workforce development have currently seen little input from HRD professionals and academics. The academic community is not treating the preparation of the workforce for emerging opportunities in nanotechnology

Using the Teacher Career Cycle Model as the theoretical framework, this study extended our understanding of how teachers professionally develop during their first year of teaching. The purpose of this study was to describe the induction activities and socialization process that novice agricultural education teachers experience, and to determine their psychosocial attitude after completion of the first year of teaching. Thirty-one agricultural education teachers in their first year of teaching participated in the study, and both quantitative and qualitative research methodology was utilized to collect and analyze the data. Researchers concluded that factors related to the organizational environment of the school influence the induction stage of teaching. Novice teachers were not prepared for isolation and socialization issues, were challenged by complex program management responsibilities, and expressed frustration by the amount and quality of support that was provided by the school administrator. Novice teachers learned that they serve an important role in students' lives, and reported "love/hate" aspects of their career. It was determined through the use of a semantic differential scale that novice teachers concluded their first year of teaching with an overall positive psychosocial attitude.

Supported by Bandura's social cognitive theory, this study examined the preferred leadership style of agricultural education teachers, and determined if preferred leadership style and leadership factors differed on selected personal characteristics. The accessible sample consisted of agricultural education teachers (N = 234) who taught in Minnesota during the 2005-2006 school year, and a 75.2% response rate was achieved. Data were collected using the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ), and this study concluded that agricultural education teachers are more transformational in their preferred leadership style in contrast to transactional and laissez-faire styles. Teachers exhibited individualized consideration the most often as a transformational leadership factor, and used contingent reward the most often as a transactional leadership factor. A statistically significant difference was not found in preferred leadership style on gender, years of teaching experience, and highest academic degree earned. However, two statistically significant differences were found pertaining to the factors comprising transformational leadership: male and female teachers differed on individualized consideration, and teachers with bachelor's degrees and those with master's degrees differed on intellectual stimulation.

Mentoring has evolved to become a crucial aspect of support for new teachers