The importance of comprehensive agricultural education in land-grant institutions: a historical perspective.

Abstract

Any thorough examination of the present and future of agricultural education must certainly begin with a look into its past. Since the creation of the United States, many leading American philosophers have viewed a strong agrarian culture as the bedrock of American vigor. These same philosophers repeatedly noted the significance of comprehensive agricultural education to a nation rich in agricultural wealth. The signing of the Agricultural Colleges Act legitimized the concept of formal education in the agricultural sciences and provided funding for such education. The Act, which came to be known as the Morrill Act, after one of its primary authors, stressed the importance of comprehensive education. In fact, the inclusion of liberal studies was specifically mentioned in the Morrill Act and was defended repeatedly by Morrill himself. Comprehensive education prevented graduating technically trained students who were lacking in the basic outcomes of education--critical, comprehensive problem solving, cohesive thought, and effective communication. However, throughout history, the demands of a growing population coupled with rapid advancements in scientific knowledge led to a gradual move away from comprehensive education in agricultural sciences toward increasing specialization, resulting in more narrowly trained students. Today's agricultural students are technically well versed but often lack the skill and knowledge required for cohesive thought and critical problem solving. Addressing the multitude of challenges facing leaders in the future of agriculture requires much more than technical skill. These challenges require quick, yet careful thinkers and communicators who can respond to changing market structure and consumer demand in a dynamic way. Students who are a product of a conscious move toward amalgamation of burgeoning scientific knowledge and technical prowess with an integrative education emphasizing relationships between disciplines would better serve tomorrow's agriculture.

Growing Opportunities for Equitable, Interdisciplinary Undergraduate Food Systems Education: A Review of Food Systems Education at Land-Grant Institutions and Development of Open-Access Materials

“…LGIs have been criticized in recent decades for veering away from their mission of applied research, teaching, and extension and more toward differentiation of knowledge and skills within narrowly defined disciplines (Schuh, 1986;Grant et al, 2000). This paper helps to document a shift toward interdisciplinary education within the land-grant system.…”

“…In the U.S., there has been a long tradition of agricultural education that dates back to the Morrill Act of 1862 and the establishment of the land-grant system. By its mandate, the land-grant system was uniquely designed to provide educational opportunities to future farmers, tradespeople, and food system leaders (Schuh, 1986;Barrick, 1989;Grant et al, 2000;Parr et al, 2007). Initially intended to integrate technical education and the liberal arts and to translate research into practical applications, over the twentieth century agricultural education became increasingly specialized and technical in response to population growth and rapid scientific advancements (Schuh, 1986;Grant et al, 2000).…”

What Does Undergraduate Enrollment in Soil and Crop Sciences Mean for the Future of Agronomy?

“…As previously noted by other authors (e.g., National Research Council, 1997; Matthews, 1992) concerns over environmental impacts of U.S. farming practices are leading to increasing emphasis in undergraduate curricula on the interaction of agricultural production systems with natural resources, and the inclusion of areas such as agroecology and resource management, soil conservation, and water quality. Current socioeconomic factors and demographics are also playing a part in shaping new curricula at land‐grant institutions nationwide (Grant et al, 2000). Agronomy students from rural farming backgrounds represent a diminishing minority in undergraduate enrollment.…”