Modernizing the Agricultural Education Curriculum: An Analysis of Agricultural Education Teachers’ Attitudes, Knowledge, and Understanding of Biotechnology

Abstract

In 1917, the Smith-Hughes Act encouraged the development of an agricultural education curriculum that spread innovative farming techniques throughout the nation. During the last half of the 20 th century, however, many programs failed to keep pace with rapidly changing technologies. In a major study funded by the National Academy of Sciences (National Research Council, Board on Agriculture, Committee on Agricultural Education in Secondary Schools, 1988), much of the focus and content of many vocational agriculture programs was found to be outdated. The authors challenged the profession to broaden the relevance and scope of the agricultural education curriculum to better prepare students for the study of agriculture. One response to this challenge was to infuse more science and technology into the agricultural education curriculum. The purpose of this descriptive research study was to provide information on the attitudes and knowledge of biotechnology by agricultural education teachers in West Virginia. A major finding of the study was the agricultural education teachers possessed a positive attitude towards biotechnology, but lacked the resources and knowledge to incorporate the subject matter into their curriculum. Teachers perceive themselves with more knowledge on biotechnology topics traditionally associated with agriculture (animal reproduction, hybridization) and less knowledge on topics associated with other fields (environmental biotechnology, human genomics). Introduction/Theoretical Framework The Challenge Following the passage of the Smith-Hughes Act of 1917, the vocational agriculture curriculum evolved into one that "…helped to spread knowledge throughout farming regions about how and when to use agricultural innovations..." (National Research Council, Board on Agriculture, Committee on Agricultural Education in Secondary Schools, 1988, p. 56). This innovative approach, however, failed to keep pace with the rapidly changing technologies during the last half of the 20 th century. As the use of modern biotechnological techniques was accelerating in the 70s and 80s, agricultural education was at a major crossroad. In a major study funded by the National Academy of Sciences, much of the focus and content of many vocational agriculture programs was found to be outdated. The authors challenged the profession to broaden the relevance and scope of the agricultural education curriculum (Figure 1) to better prepare students for the study of agriculture in post secondary schools and colleges and for current and future career opportunities in agricultural sciences (National Research Council, Board on Agriculture, Committee on Agricultural Education in Secondary Schools, 1988). One response to this challenge was to infuse more science and technology into the agricultural education curriculum. Agriscience, bioscience, and

Importance of selected science and technology topics in the instructional programs to Iowa high school agricultural educators

“…These findings appeared consistent with the findings of Wilson, Kirby, and Flowers (2002), Warnick and Thompson (2007) regarding the gender distribution; with the findings of Peasley and Henderson (1992) regarding both the gender distribution and educational level; with the findings of Boone, Gartin, Boone, and Hughes (2006) regarding only the educational level. Different from this study, the national study conducted by Martin et al (1989) indicated that the majority of vocational agriculture instructors held a master's degree.…”

“…However, it can not be ignored that the long time periods could icrease the risk of the deduction when applying the finding of the national study to a specific state. This reason also can be confirmed by Peasley and Henderson (1992), and Boone, Gartin, Boone, and Hughes (2006), since they also reported a lower percentage of a master's degree held. Certainly, the influence of a small population should also be considered, and therefore it could be reasonably assumed that the findings from this study are limited to the description of the high school agricultural teachers in Iowa.…”

“…The probable reasons for these variabilities could be differences in the target populations, sampling procedures and as well as the geographical locations. Samples for the studies conducted by Wilson, Kirby, and Flowers (2002), Warnick and Thompson (2007), Peasley and Henderson (1992), and Boone, Gartin, Boone, and Hughes (2006) were drawn from different states in America. Since each state organization tends to promote agriculture education in a way best suited to its own needs, the diversity of the demographic variables can be accepted reasonable.…”

Biotechnology: An Assessment Of Agricultural Science Teachers' Knowledge And Attitudes

“…All data collection occurred on August 5, 2004, when 274 responses were collected. A modified version of the instrument, Attitudes, Knowledge, and Implementation of Biotechnology (Boone, Gartin, Boone, & Hughes, 2006;Hughes, 2001), was used to create the research instrument; wording changes, question sequencing, and layout constituted the modifications. Content and face validity were established previously by a panel of experts (teacher educators) at West Virginia University.…”

Science Instructors’ Perceptions of the Risks of Biotechnology: Implications for Science Education

“…To date only one study has emerged that examines practicing science teachers' attitudes and perceptions toward biotechnology (Boone et al 2006) and this study focused on undergraduate educators in agricultural science domains. Results from a questionnaire completed by the teachers showed that there were high levels of support and no moral concerns for the research and development of agricultural biotechnology.…”