Implications of Integrating Science in Secondary Agricultural Education Programs.

KJre purpose of this study was to determine how the National FFA AgriScience Teacher of the Year Award Program winners perceived the impact that integrating science has had on their agricultural education program. The target population consisted of all state, regional, and national winners of the National FFA AgriScience Teacher of the Year Award Program from the years I988 1995. Responses were collectedfrom 131 teachers (71.98% response rate). A Jive point Likert-type scale (I = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree) was used to measure the teachers ‘perceptions toward integrating science into their agricultural education programs. The respondents perceived that integration of science was an effective delivery method for agricultural education, as over one-third of the instrument items received mean scores greater than 4.0 and 90% of the items received mean scores of 3.0 or greater. The findings of this study support the need to integrate science into agricultural education programs. Introduction/Theoretical Framework Educational initiatives (A Nation at Risk, 1983; The Unfinished Agenda, 1984; An Imperiled Generation: Saving Urban Schools, 1988) have called for educators to find ways for students to learn more effectively and more efficiently. The A Nation at Risk report alarmed many Americans with students’ low levels of basic skill performance in science (National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983). In response, educational policymakers increased basic skills graduation requirements in an attempt to improve students’ academic knowledge and stimulate higher order thinking (Case, 1986; Wirt, 1991). Jennings (199 1) contended that raising academic standards had not been effective for most students who performed poorly in academic settings. In an interview by the New York Times (1990) George Tressel of the National Science Foundation pointed out that the general idea in present science education has been: “Don’t educate them better; raise the standards, filter harder. We’ve gotten so good at weeding Journal of Agricultural Education out that no one’s left” (p. B-18). Ten years after the A Nation at Risk report, USA Today (“Riskline,” 1993) printed results of the International Assessment of Educational Progress; U.S. students ranked 13 out of 15 participating countries in science scores. These low science scores resulted in a demand for improved science education for American students. Wirth (1992) portrayed the delivery of science as a depressing picture, citing evidence that large numbers of American students avoided science in both secondary and higher education. Cole (1990) agreed, “Science education in the United States right now is largely a misnomer. It has little to do with science as scientists practice it, nor does it seem to educate anyone particularly well” (New York Times, p. B-18). The National Science Board Commission on Precollege Education in Mathematics, Science, and Technology (1983) joined in stating an urgent need for curricula that utilized science and math applications in practical situations to improve student learning. The American Association for the Advancement of Science began a major effort to improve the delivery 76 VoL 39, No. 4 1998 method of science education through Pro_iect 2061, science for all Americans (1989). Teachers and administrators devised the science curriculum to encourage students to make their own discoveries instead of reading about them in a book. Policymakers, educators, employers, scholars, and social critics have advocated vocational education reform that dealt with “integration” (Stasz, Kaganoff, & Eden, 1994). According to researchers (Stasz and Grubb, 1991; O’Neil, 1992) vocational educators as well as critics of vocational education viewed integration of academics as a curricular reform that improved the academic content of vocational education and helped prepare students for employment in an ever-changing world of work. The pursuit to integrate science into agriculture programs could improve the image and quality of programs while meeting the needs of a rampant changing industry. Little objection to integrating academic and vocational education has been found in the literature. While supporters of integration have had a strong rationale for supporting integration in the American education system, it has remained a complex issue with different implementation strategies and models. Integration will academically strengthen vocational courses and make academic courses more relevant. Hence, instruction in vocational classes reinforced academic classes and instruction in academic classes reinforced vocational classes (Grubb, 1995) The National Research Council (1988) reported that much of the curriculum in agricultural education programs was outdated and additional science-based curriculum should be incorporated. According to Budke (1991), agricultural education provided an excellent means to teach biological sciences such as genetics, photosynthesis, nutrition, pollution control, water quality, reproduction, and food Journal of Agricultural Education processing. The use of live examples as a part of the classroom for experimentation and observation provided an effective method to teach science concepts (Budke, 1991). Whent (1992) indicated that many agriculture teachers were reluctant to change traditional agriculture programs because they believed integrating too much science into the curriculum might threaten the program. To assist in developing programs that integrate science into agricultural education, knowledge must be gathered about the perceptions and beliefs of teachers with exemplary agriscience programs. Johnson (1995) reported that Arkansas teachers perceived that offering science credit for agriculture courses would increase enrollment, benefit students, and enhance the program image. Researchers (Roegge and Russell, 1990; Whent and Leising, 1988; Enderlin and Osborne, 1992; Connors and Elliot, 1995) found that students who have been taught science using agriculture and natural resources perform equally well or better than students who have been taught science using traditional instructional methods. The educational reform movement has led to rapid changes in education and agricultural education. One result of the changes in agricultural education has been the establishment of new FFA Award Programs to recognize teachers in agriscience and technolo,T. Duval (1988) stated that the AgriScience Teacher of the Yea r Award P rogram recogn ized outstanding agricultural educators who emphasized agriscience technology in their curriculum. “The program has surfaced some of the finest agriscience programs in the country. They have recognized the need for retaining the assets of today’s vocational agriculture program, leadership training and SOE programs, while placing renewed emphasis upon the scientific and technological aspects of agriculture” (p. 20). 77 Vol. 39, No. 4 1998 Few studies have been conducted to evaluate agriscience programs and ascertain the perceptions of award winning agriscience teachers. Moore (1994) suggested that we can best integrate agricultural and academic education by studying the schools and teachers who are experiencing success in these areas. “At times we need to identify the best programs, best teachers, and best FFA Chapters and study them in detail” (Moore, 1994, p. 11). 6. What were the agriscience teachers’ perceptions concerning support of the agricultural education program since integrating science?