Curriculum Innovations in Higher Agricultural Education CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

Editedby Arjen E.J. Wals

2005Elsevie rOverheid ,Th eHagu e This book was developed within the AFANet project, the SocratesThemati c Network for Agriculture, Forestry, Aquaculture and the Environment (www.afanet.info). This project has been carried out with the support of the European Community in the framework of the Socrates programme. The content of this book does not necessarily reflect thepositio n of theEuropea n Community,no rdoe s itinvolv ean yresponsibilit y onth epar t ofth eEuropea n Community.

ISBN9 0590 155 2 5

Wals,A.E.J . ©2005 ReedBusines sInformatio n bv,Th eHagu e Allrights reserved . Nopar t ofthi spublicatio n mayb ereproduced ,store d ina retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior, written per­ missiono fth epublishers . Theauthor san dpublisher shav emad eever yeffor t toensur eth eaccurac yo fth e information in this book at the time of going to press. However, they cannot accept responsibility for any loss or inconvenience resulting from the use of information contained inthi sbook . FOREWORD

Curriculum Innovations inHighe rAgricultura l Education isa compila ­ tion oftw obook stha toriginall y resulted from the200 0an d200 4 disse­ mination phaseso fth eE USocrate sThemati cNetwor k forAgriculture , Forestry, Aquaculture and the Environment (AFANet). The first one focused onth eintegratio n ofsustainabilit y inhighe ragricultura l educa­ tion,whil eth esecon don efocuse d oneducatio nan dtrainin gfo rintegra ­ tedrura l development.A decisio n toreprin t thetw obook si na combin ­ ed volume was made based on the fact that they are both out of print, theyhav ea hig hdemand ,an dthe yaddres ssimila rissues .Th ecombine d volumei sprecede db ya ne wintroductio n linkingbot hthemes .

Manypeopl ehav econtribute d toth econtent so fthi scombine dvolum e inon ewa yo ranother .Henc eI woul dlik et oacknowledg ePete rHolen , Wout van den Bor, Amos Dreyfus, Art Alblas, Marjan Margadant, Robert Macadam, Roger Packham, and Sri Sriskandarajah for their inspirational thinkingan dwor ko neducatio n inth econtex to fsustaina ­ bility, which they so generously shared. I also would like toacknowl ­ edgeth epeopl ewh ohelpe dwit hth ecas estudie so neducatio nan dtrai ­ ning for integrated rural development: Professor Eduardo Ramos and Dr. Maria del Mar Delgado of the University of Cordoba, Spain; Joe Mannion and Jim Phelan of the University College, Dublin, Ireland; Michal Lostâko fth eCzec hUniversit yo fAgricultur e inPrague , Czech Republic; plus the students, faculty members, and administrators who shared someo fthei rvaluabl e timedurin g the site visitso rwhil eparti ­ cipating inth eon-lin e survey. Ials o thank Reena Bakker-Dhaliwal for carefully proof-reading andcopy-editin gth emanuscript .Finally ,I wis h to acknowledge Simon Heath, the AFANet Coordinator, for being the driving force behind theAFANe tan denablin gu st owor ka sa team .

Arjen E.J. Wals Wageningen, September200 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Foreword 5

Introduction- Arjen E.J.Wal s 11

PartI Integrating Sustainability intoAgricultura l Education; dealingwit hcomplexity ,uncertaint y anddivergin g worldviews-Arjen E.J.Walsan dRichar dBawde n

1 Sustain-ability:wha tabilit y andwha tt osustain ? 21

2 Carsonian concerns,sustainabilit y andeducatio n 25 2.1 Farming andGlobalisatio n 25 2.2 Divergent viewso n Sustainability andEducatio n 27 2.3 Sustainability inagriculture :toward sa nanalytica l framework 29 2.4 Worldviewsa sconceptua l windowso nth eworl d 30

3 Sustainability,Curriculu m Developmentan d Learning 37 3.1 Sustainability andeducationa l transition 37 3.2 Processanchor sfo r integrating sustainability 41 3.3 Content anchorsfo r integrating sustainability 46 3.4 Conclusions 56

PartI I Education andtrainin gfo rintegrate drura l development; steppingstone sfo rcurriculu mdevelop ­ ment- FabioCaporali ,Pau lPace ,Bil l Slee,Nadaraja h Sriskandarajah,Arjen E.J.Walsan dMarty nWarre n

4 Exploringcurriculu m responsest ointegrate drura l development 61 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

5 An inventory of institutional practises 65

6 Case studies 73 6.1 MSc-degree in PublicAdministratio n and Regional Development of the Czech University of Agriculture, Prague 78 6.1.1 Background 78 6.1.2 External drivingforces 79 6.1.3 Structure andfunctioning of the MSc in Public Administration and Rural Development 83 6.1.4 Regional Integrationfor Rural Development 85 6.1.5 Outcome assessment 86 6.1.6 Evaluation,feedback andfurther development 87 6.2 The MSc in Rural Development of University College Dublin, Ireland , 88 6.2.1 Description of the institution offering the programme/ course 88 6.2.2 Key characteristics of theprogramme/course 88 6.2.3 Background of the integrated rural development programme/course 89 6.2.4 Key constraints in implementing the integrated rural development programme/course 91 6.2.5 Keystrategies used in implementing the integrated rural development programme/course 92 6.2.6 Evaluation and monitoring of the integrated rural development programme/course 93 6.2.7 Plansfor development of the integrated rural develop­ mentprogramme/course 93 6.3 Titulación Superior en Desarrollo Rural (TSDR) of The University of Cordoba, Spain 94 6.3.1 Introduction 94 6.3.2 Key characteristics of theprogramme/course 97 6.3.3 Background of the integrated rural development programme/course 100 6.3.4 Key constraints in implementing the integrated rural development programme/course 102 6.3.5 Evaluation and monitoring of the integrated rural development programme/course 104 TABLE OF CONTENTS

6.3.6 Plansfor development of the integrated rural development programme/course 106 6.3.7 Conclusions 107 6.4 Degree Course in Ecological Agriculture, University ofTuscia ,Viterbo , Italy 108 6.4.1 Description of the institution offering the programme/ course 108 6.4.2 Key characteristics of theprogramme/course 110 6.4.3 Background of the integrated rural development programme/course 112 6.4.4 Key constraints in implementing the integrated rural development programme/course 113 6.4.5 Keystrategies used in implementing the integrated rural development programme/course 113 6.4.6 Plansfor development of the integrated rural development programme/course 114

7 Stepping Stones for Curriculum Development 117 7.1 Curriculum change between pragmatism and change of ideology 117 7.2 Barriers to integration in curriculum development: a systems perspective 120 7.3 A systems perspective for Integrated Rural Development Curricula 122 7.4 Methodological tools 124 7.5 Conclusions 126

References 129

About the authors 137

Index 139 INTRODUCTION

Arjen E.J. Wals

"Liveyour lifeas ifyou might die tomorrow, butcare for theEarth as if you would liveforever "(modifie d old farming adage)

Education as an institution can be seen as areflectio n ofth e society that supports it. Hence, it is not surprising that some of society's ills can be found in our schools and universities, while the reverse also holds true. Our world is changing with lightening speed. We can either be over­ whelmed and beovercom e bythes e changes,o rw eca ntak eu pth echal ­ lenge to influence their direction, collaboratively and individually, by becoming critically aware of our world and the forces that shape it. Education is notjus t about knowledge transfer and skills enhancement, it isals o about helping people to take charge of their own lives in a sha­ red world.Th e human development side of education, including educa­ tion for agriculture and rural development, needs to be explored if we are to cope with the challenges of today and tomorrow.

Education for a changing world

Weliv e in a rapidly changing society.Advance s in technology continue to alter the ways in which we perform ourjobs , obtain our food, extract raw materials from the earth and communicate with each other. Along with these alterations in lifestyle, our social and natural environments are changing. We often seem unable or unwilling to anticipate how these changes directly affect us and our world.Althoug h technological development has improved the lives of many people, it has also led to the disruption of many others. In the poorer nations of the world, inap­ propriate technology often upsetsth e social and cultural order, degrades the environment, and depletes natural resources. Change can be detri­ mental ifw e dono t take an active role in deciding how itshoul d happen and for what reasons.

11 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

Naisbitt(1982 )describe s a shift currently taking placewithi nWester n society from an industrial culture to an informational one. In this era, information asa resourc ei sno ti nshor tsupply ;i tcome st ou swit heve r increasing speedan d inlarge ran d largerquantitie s from distant places around the globe. As information flows in ever increasing amounts, opportunities forcommunicatio nmultiply .Thes eopportunitie shav e led to the development of numerous ways of exchanging knowledge and insightsbetwee npeopl eal laroun dth eworld .Despit ethis ,th e informa­ tion age has often failed tobrin g people and nations together to solve our common problems. More information does not necessarily lead to betterunderstanding .

Ecological problems, such as pollution of water supplies, disposal of chemical wastes, and global warming, often stem from neglect and inequality. We live in a finite biophysical environment that imposes constraints on human affairs. However, we tend to use raw materials faster than the earth can regenerate them and at the same time return wasteproduct sth eeart hcanno tassimilate .W eofte n presumetha ttech ­ nology can transcend the carrying-capacity of the earth, but it isno w cleartha tecologica l lawscanno tb esuperseded .Althoug hhuman shav e exceptional characteristics that setu sapar t from otherlif e forms (such asculture , faith, and consciousness), wear e only oneo f many species that interdependently exist in the global ecosystem (Carton &Dunla p in:Humphre y& Büttel , 1982,p . 10-11). Ouraction smus tb econsonan t withth eearth' sfunction s ifw ear et osurviv ean dmaintai na reasonabl e qualityo f life.

Theunderlyin gcause so fman ysocia l andecologica lproblem sar ever y similar. The prevalent economic structure favours the exploitation of natural and human resources.Technologica l advances and the subse­ quent industrialisation leadt oth edepletio n ofnatura l resources andt o agros sinequalit ybetwee nthos ewh obenefi t from thisexploitatio nan d thosewh osuffe r from it.Wher epeopl euse dt oliv ei nrelativ eharmon y with their environment, they are now forced to destroy their natural resources to merely survive on an individual level or to keep up with foreign debt payments on a national level. The rapid depletion of the rain forests and the disruption of the cultures of thepeopl e inhabiting themma yserv ea sa nexampl eo fthi sphenomenon .

12 INTRODUCTION

Wehav e built our society on the practice of analysing information to exploitresource si norde rt ogai nmateria lwealth .Progres si sdefine d in terms of material gain and we are encouraged to equate personal suc­ cess and happiness with economic growth and material wealth.W ed o so without scrutiny and without exploring alternative values. Progress thus far hasno tbee n subjected toa form ofethica l control.W e tendt o ignore several important steps in thedecision-makin g process sucha s systematically synthesising pertinent information to gain an overall understanding ofth esituation , carefully weighingth e alternatives,an d cautiously anticipating the results of ourpropose d actions,no tjus t for ourselves,bu t alsofo r otherselsewher e and for future generations.

Byofte n failing toapproac h ourproblem sholistically ,w eten d tocrea ­ tene wproblem swhil ew eattemp tt oresolv eth eol dones .A sou rprob ­ lemsbecom eincreasingl ycomplex ,ou rabilit yt oeffectivel y respondt o themdiminishes .W enee dt odevelo pa napproac ht olearnin gtha tstres ­ sesth edevelopmen to fne wcompetencie stha tinclud ecritica lthinking , problem-solving, and cross-cultural learning and awareness-raising. Onlythe nca nw e gobeyon djus ttryin gt okee pu pwit hth echange san d instead guideth echange stha t takeplace .Ou ragricultura l schoolsan d life sciences universities insufficiently equip students with the skills mostneede d ina rapidl ychangin gworld .A sa result ,man yyoun gpeo ­ ple feel overwhelmed, confused, apathetic, and powerless, and often lacka sens eo fdirection .I ti sno teas yt ofin d life-patterns thatar epur ­ poseful and satisfying when itseem sa sthoug hlif e isou to fcontrol .I n his book, Learningfor Tomorrow: therole of thefuture in education, AlvinToffle r states:

"Tofunctio n well ina fast-shiftin g environment, the learner musthav e theopportunit y tod omor etha nreceiv e and store data; sheo rh emus t have the opportunity to makechange or fail in the attempt" (Toffler, 1974).

Today's students, regardless of the type or level of education they fol­ low,are facin g aworl d full ofcontrovers y and are already involved in making judgements, choices, and decisions that will affect their own lives,thei rfamil y andsociety .Therefor e education shouldengag esoci ­ alissues ,includin genvironmenta l issues,an dgiv estudent s experience in addressing them through engagement in critical reflection, social

13 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION negotiation and theorganisatio n of action(Kemmis ,Col ean d Suggett, 1983). This does not mean that the schools and universities should becometh edumpin gground s for fixing allo f society's illso rtha tthe y should take up sole responsibility where others in society have failed. Neither does this mean that students should onlyb e engaged inprob ­ lem-solving.Wha t itdoe smea n istha tstudent sough t tob erecognise d asvaluabl e actorsi nth epresen t and future society with thecapacit y to affect change.

A socially critical orientation to curriculum and instruction requires some major restructuring of thecurren t school systems,th e content of the curriculum, and the learning process.Additionally , the role of stu­ dents and teachers would need to change. Faculty and students would come to assume a greater responsibility for the development, imple­ mentationan devaluatio no fth ecurriculum .Th econten to fth ecurricu ­ lumwoul dn olonge rb epre-determine db ystandar dtextbooks ,externa l governmental bodies orresearc h institutions.Th e traditional scientific model for curriculum development would need to be replaced by a modeltha thelp steachers ,student san dadministrator screat econdition s under which theyca n takecollaborativ e responsibility for thedevelop ­ ment,refor m andinnovatio n ofeducatio n (Kemmis& Carr ,1986) .

Inth ene wmodel , 'teachers'ar eviewe da speopl ewh ofacilitat e learn­ ingb yprovidin glearnin gexperience stha tinduc echang ethroug hdeba ­ te and dialogue.The y play an active role in resolving student-teacher contradictions,bu tals oi nnavigatin gth e force-fields andconflict s that arisewhe ndifferen t stakeholderssee kchange .I nproblem-solvin g situ­ ations, teachers become co-learners and co-investigators of the world with the student rather thanyôr the student.Thi s isno t to say that tea­ chers have norol e inorganisin g the learning process. Onth econtrary , students willnee dguidanc e indefinin g thepurpos e ofthei r education, conducting their investigations and determining action. In order tob e ablet od othis ,firstl y teachersnee dt ob eawar eo fth ecapacities ,needs , and past experiences of those they work with, and, secondly, teachers needt oinclud esuggestion smad eb yth estudent si ndevelopin ga learn ­ ing plan or project. In Experience & Education, John Dewey's most concise statement about theneeds ,th eproblems ,an dth epossibilit yo f education,i ti sstate dthat :

14 INTRODUCTION

"The [learning] plan... is a co-operative enterprise, not a dictation. The teacher's suggestion is not a mold for a cast-iron result but is a starting point to be developed into a plan through contributions from the expe­ rience of all engaged in the learning process. The development occurs through reciprocal give-and-take, the teacher taking but notbein g afraid also togive .Th e essential point istha t the purposes grow and take shape through the process of social intelligence." (Dewey, 1963,p .72) .

The new role teachers come to assume will lead students to become co- learners and co-actors in a collaborative learning process. No longer will they be able to rely on the teacher to think and act for them. "Students and teachers are responsible for a process of reflection upon the world and action upon their perceptions to attain mutual growth and liberation" (Coover etal. , 1977).A spractic e and experience become the driving force for learning,th e university and the curriculum will havet o change to accommodate the new learning process. No longer is educa­ tion reduced to seemingly unrelated disciplines.

A socially critical approach to education assumes that learning is enhanced when students' ideas, views, "mini-theories," etc., are ac­ knowledged as being valuable (Driver & Oldham, 1986). If not, learn­ ing is likely to be blocked, as will become clear in Part 1o f this com­ bined volume. Thus, for learning to take place, a supportive and safe environment isa basic requirement.Thi s implies a student-teacher rela­ tionship that is based on equality rather than on authority. Students should feel free to express their feelings, ideas, and opinions. Creating such an environment is not easy in an educational system that tends to emphasise competition, hierarchy, and individualism. It is even more difficult inth e cross-cultural learning environment that is characteristic to amajorit y of universities today.Afte r all, students with diverse back­ grounds also have different views on what constitutes 'good' education, teaching and learning.

Working together toward a solution to a problem of mutual concern reinforces the importance of participation, which is necessary for the survival of a truly democratic society. When advocating a problem- solving approach to teach the basic subjects, schools have to create meaningful learning situations for students. Universities can do this by using the interests, creativity, and curiosity of students as well as the

15 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION resources the university and the (rural) community provide. When engaged in problem-solving and action-taking that involve real world issues,teacher s and students are likely toente r aworl d ofcontroversy . A socially critical approach toeducatio n does not shyawa y from con­ troversial issues,bu ttrie st outilis econtrovers y andconflic t asa sourc e for conceptual change and therefore as a source for learning (Wals& Heymann,2004) .B ydealin gwit hcontroversia l issuesdurin gthei redu ­ cation, students can develop the skills necessary to creatively andsuc ­ cessfully discussan dresolv eth efutur e challenges theywil l face.

The transfer of knowledge and skills is an intrinsic part of education, but asi spointe d out soclearl y inthi svolume ,i ti sno t thewhol estory . Social development and so-called higher level learning goals, such as moral reasoning,critica l thinkingan dproblem-solving ,hav elon gbee n neglected inman yeducationa l systems. Tobecom ea huma nbein gwh o isabl ean dwillin gt ocriticall y reflect onhi so rhe rpositio n inth eworl d andth eimpac th eo rsh eha so nth ebein go fother sno wan di nth e futu­ re, here and elsewhere, requires more than knowledge. To become a lifelong-learner, who is ready to deal with uncertainty and ambiguity, requires more than technical skills. To balance the interests of self, family, localcommunit y andcommunitie s elsewhere,t obalanc e short- termgai nwit hlong-ter m survival,require smor etha na prescriptio n for being a successful professional. Education, agricultural education included, has an important role in enhancing the lives of students by addinglearning for beingt oth etraditiona l domainslearning for know­ ing(science ) and learningfor doing(technology) . Good education is concerned with human development and thus will need to include teaching and learning areas that transcend the domain of traditional education i.e. conflict resolution, critical thinking, values clarification and development, moral reasoning, environmental ethics and land-use ethics.

Issueso fsustainabilit yan dintegrate drura ldevelopmen t involveethica l questions, for instance, regarding the injustice and inequity in sharing theus eo fth eworld' snatura lresources .W ed ono thav eclea ranswer st o many ofthes eethica l and moral questions and should not pretend that wedo ,bu tw ed okno wtha t weca nno tbegi nt o find theanswer swith ­ out also looking at issues of development, peace and conflict, and humanrights (no tt omentio nth eright so fothe rspecies) .

16 INTRODUCTION

Perhaps a main assertion of this combined volume is that we should involveou rstudent si nth echallenge so fou rtime ."I fth e [theuniversi ­ ty]doe sno tdevelo p thedebat e [thatresult s from] the doubtsraise db y [thecriticis mo fthe ]technica l rationality inou rwa yo flife ,the nw ewil l fail to involve [students] in thebigges t political challenge ofou rtime " (Bondergaard, 1991). Although nobody exactlyknow sth erigh t ethical lifestyle, wear eal lnevertheles sresponsibl e for seeking aworl dwhic h isbuil t uponhuma nequalit y andsustainabl e sharingo fnatura lresour ­ ces,no tonl ybetwee nmember so fth eWester nworld , butth eworl da sa whole.Educatio n for sustainable agriculture and integrated ruraldeve ­ lopment can not just react to crises as they affect the world's (rural) communities,bu twil lhav et ofac e thetas ko fhelpin g studentsbecom e proactive inpreventin gne wcrise sb yenablin gthe mt obecom ecritical , flexible, environmentally aware, reflective and constructive professio­ nalswh oconside rthemselve s lifelong learners.

Thisboo k describes not only some ofth ephilosophica l underpinnings for curriculum innovation towards a more sustainable agriculture and rural development, but also presents a range of concrete institutional responses. The book, in essence, contains the lessons learnt from a number of initiatives to promote the integration of the concept and praxis of sustainability and integrated rural development carried out between 1997 and 2004 within the framework of the AFANet. These activitiesincluded :workshop sfo rteacher san dcurriculu mcoordinator s from agricultural universities focusing onconceptua l issuesan dpracti ­ cal challenges, an extensive compilation of cases from a number of countries, an on-line discussion of some of the main outcomes ofth e workshops,an d anextensiv e on-line survey. Inth etw opart s following thisintroductio n theselesson slearn t from sixyear so fAFANe tcurricu ­ lumdevelopmen t activityar epresented .

17 Parti

INTEGRATINGSUSTAINABILIT Y INTO AGRICULTURALEDUCATION ;DEALIN GWIT H COMPLEXITY,UNCERTAINT YAN D DIVERGING WORLDVIEWS

Arjen E.J. Wals Richard Bawden SUSTAIN-ABILITY: WHATABILIT YAN DWHA TT O SUSTAIN?

The urgency to address sustainability issues is increasingly being reflected inth emanne ri nwhic hinstitution so fhighe reducatio naroun d the world are giving priority to the teaching, research and practice of sustainability (Corcoran &Wals ,2004 ; Walkere tal. ,2000) .Man yuni ­ versities nowrecognis e that they have acritica l rolet opla y in helping withth ecreatio no fsustainabl efuture s throughth eeducatio no fth ecur ­ rentan dfutur e generationo fprofessionals ,throug hthei rresearc hagen ­ das,an dthroug h theirow ninstitutiona l practices(see ,fo r example,Al i Khan, 1992;Cortese ,1998) .

Sustainabilityapparentl yha sfeature stha tmake si ta nattractiv econcep t toteachers ,student s andadministrator s (Vande n Bore t al.,2000 )and , asa reflectio n ofthis ,man yinstitute s ofhighe r education areadoptin g mission statements thatembrac e aspectso fsustainability . Asa concep t it provides a focus for the building ofbridge sbetwee n different disci­ plines and between divergent interests and values. It also presents opportunities for fundamental reforms of curricula that involve the exploration ofnon-conventiona l epistemologies andontologies ,a swel l asnon-traditiona l pedagogical practices that include more experiential or issue-based strategies, more interdisciplinary studies, and more appliedpractices .

There are those who value the broad-based international political impactso fa sustainabilit y focusi nbringin genvironmenta l issuest oth e forefront ofbot h scholarly andpractica l concerns.Other sse esustaina ­ bility as a way to improve the image of the university within society, and even, among the more cynical, a vehicle to increase enrolments. Othersagai nse eth eopportunit ytha ta focu so nsustainabilit ybring sfo r reflecting on the role that the academy has to play in contemporary society, while behaving as a microcosm of a sustainable community itself inwhic h thequalit y ofth e liveso femployee s and studentsalike , inparalle l withth eenvironmen t inwhic hthe ywor kan d live,ar epara ­ mount concerns.A t the same time however, voices can also be heard

21 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION thatar erathe rcritica lo fth esustainabilit ytrend .Som eeve nsugges ttha t iti sa dangerou s 'hype'tha tmask spowe rstruggle s andideologica ldif ­ ferences (see for examples: Hesselink et al. (2000); Wals & Jickling (2000; 2002).

It is not surprising that institutes engaged in agricultural education - both atth evocationa l andacademi cleve l- areparticularl y sensitivet o the emergence of sustainability. After all,on eo f themos t fundamental threats to sustainable world peace is the Malthusian nightmare of the growth in food supply falling behind ever-increasing global demand. There are already some indications that the world food supply, if not (yet) in actual decline, is not increasing sufficiently rapidly to assure equitable access to, what can be described as, the basic of all human needs.Ironically ,on eo fth emos t seriousthreat st ofurthe r advancesi n thedevelopmen t offoo d production systems,i sth edegradatio n ofbot h thebio-physica l andsocio-cultura lenvironment s inwhic h iti sconduc ­ ted,an d forwhic hpresen tan dpas tagricultura l practicesare ,t oa larg e degree, themselves responsible. There are complex issues here of ethics,aesthetic s and other human values,a s well as issues of science and technology and economics. In the face of this emerging systemic complexity,th eprevailin gparadig m for agricultural development,wit h its narrow focus on production and productivity (productionism), is provingt ob eseriousl yinadequate .

Under such circumstances, it isno t surprising that there arecall s fora newparadig m thatha sa sit scontext ,th esearc h for sustainableapproa ­ ches to the responsible development of the global food production system/rural environment complex.Th e challenge here isprofound , as such a paradigm must indeed allow for the inclusion of practices that area sethicall y defensible asthe y aretechnicall y productive,a secolo ­ gically congruent as they are socially desirable, and as aesthetically appealing asthe y areeconomicall y attractive.Give n thesedimensions , thecentralit yo fth eparticipatio n ofa broa dspectru mo fstakeholder si n debates and discourse about the quest for sustainable food production systems,thei r design and management, isclearl y critical. Such aspec ­ trumno tonl yinclude sagricultura l producers,an dth etechnologist san d the scientists that support them,bu t alsoth e consumers of agricultural products,a swel la sal lother swh oar eaffecte d directly or indirectlyb y the impactso fagricultura l practices onth e 'environment'- inessence ,

22 1 SUSTAIN.ABILITY: WHAT ABILITY AND WHAT TO SUSTAIN? allo fmankind .Argument s arethu smounte d insuppor t ofUlrich' scal l for 'critical systems thinking for citizens'(Ulrich , 1993)an da numbe r ofapproache shav eevolve dove rrecen tyear si na numbe ro finstitution s of higher learning, that respond to this systemic challenge. One such approach, derived from work on 'systemic learning' and participatory environmental education inAustralia , isdescribe d and presented here, asa framewor k forconsiderin gne wstrategie sbot h forsustainabl erura l development inpractice ,an d for pedagogical approaches that facilitate the acquisition of competencies relevant to that. The logic of the ap­ proach and ofth econceptua l model that underpins it reflects thevie w that the 'citizenry' will only effectively embrace systemic ideas once theyhav eachieve d particular 'stateso fmind 'themselve swhic happea r tob etriggere d most effectively through experiential strategies andcri ­ tical reflections. Thus it follows that such strategies andcritica l reflec­ tionsnee dt obecom ea nintegra lpar t ofth eteachin gan dlearnin genvi ­ ronment inagricultura l education.

The bulk of part I consists of the two remaining chapters. Chapter 2 focuses onconceptua l issueswit h regardst o(a )contemporar y agricul­ turalpractices ,(b )matter so fglobalisation , (c)sustainabilit y itself,an d (d) the meaning of education within these contexts. Chapter 3 focuses on the challenge of translating these conceptual issues into curricular strategies and practices within institutes of agricultural education. Specific 'anchor-points' for rethinking both the content and process teachingan dlearnin gfo r agriculturean drura l development arepresen ­ ted.

23 2 CARSONIAN CONCERNS, SUSTAINABILITYAN D EDUCATION

2.1 Farming andGlobalisatio n

Farmers have long appreciated the fact that their practices have had unintended,o ra tleas t unwanted impactso nthei rsurroundin genviron ­ mentsa swel la so nth eresourc ebas eo fthei row nfarm ,an dhav erecog ­ nised the prudence of minimising the negative consequences of their actions. As the industrialisation of agriculture has proceeded apace however,th escal eo fthes eimpact sha sincrease dt ono wachiev egloba l significance, global both inth e senseo fth e spatial distribution ofsuc h impacts, as well as a growing universality of public awareness of the phenomena. The media have been extremely important in this regard, withth epublicatio n ofRache lCarson' sboo k TheSilent Spring i n196 2 (Carson, 1962),whic h detailed the global and accumulative impactso f pesticide usage, being seminal in illustrating the conjunction of these twoaspect so f globalisation.Thi sboo k could be seen to haveplaye da seminal rolei nincreasin gth eappreciatio n ofth econnection sbetween , andconcern s about,th egloba l environmental impactso f localagricul ­ tural activities. It can alsob e argued that it played asignifican t rolei n triggering appreciation ofth enee d to seek systems of food production thatwoul db esustainabl e intoth e future.

Ageneratio nlater ,th eultimat eparado xo fagricultur ewoul dreac h 'for­ mal'level so frecognitio n withth eChairma n ofth eWorl dCommissio n onth e Environment and Development declaring that "Our agricultural practices are both acaus e of global degradation and aprim e victimo f itseffects .Agricultur ewil ltherefor e bea nintegra lpar ti nou reffort s to achievesustainabl edevelopmen tbot hnationall yan dglobally "(Brundt - land, 1987).Th eincreasin grecognitio n ofthes egloba l complexitiesb y thecitizenry ,an dthei rgrowin gcall sfo rthing st ob e'better, 'ar eleadin g tosignifican t critiqueso fth eproductionis tparadig mitself ,an do fthos e whopromulgat e it.Thu sth e institutions responsible for itspersistence , arebein gincreasingl ysubjecte d towha ton ewrite rha sreferre d toa s" a Greek chorus of criticism"fo r seemingly ignoring calls to address is-

25 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HKiHKR AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION sues ranging from "environmental degradation; concerns for animal welfare, impacts on thehealt h and safety of farmers, agricultural wor­ kers andconsumers ;advers e nutritional effects of production andpro ­ cessing technologies;th e extrusion of smaller family farms from agri­ culture;th eerosio no frura lcommunitie san dth econcentratio n ofagri ­ cultural production and economic wealth;inadequat e conservation and commercial exploitation of fragile lands that should not be in cultiva­ tion"(Büttel , 1985).O fparticula r significance isth e further extension of the "Carsonian concerns" of the globalisation of biophysical impacts,t oinclud eunwante dconsequence so fth eglobalisatio n ofagri ­ cultural trade and the large-scale social transmigrations. All of these phenomenaar etogethe rcreatin gsituation swher eman yo fthes e'globa l impacts'ar e"fundamentall y non-linear anddiscontinuou s inbot hthei r spatial structurean dtempora lbehaviour "(Hollings , 1994)an dthu sno t onlyuncertai nbu tinherentl yunpredictable .A sa consequence ,w emus t change our approaches todevelopment , for asHolling s warns "human responses thatrel yo nwaitin gfo r asigna lo fchang ean dthe nadaptin g toi twil lno twork" .

Taken together, these issues represent really complex social, political, economic, ecological, aesthetic, and ethical aspects, and together they are clearly dictating the need for a more sustainable approach to the development of food production systems which embrace concern for the integrity of cultures and communities across the globe, and of the global ecology including a respect for the intrinsic value of nature,a s well asth eproductivit y of the systemsthemselves . Dealing withcom ­ plexity, uncertainty, conflicting norms, values and interests in a globalisingworld ,require sa radica ltransformatio n ofagricultura lprac ­ ticesan d thus anequall y fundamental transformation inth ecompeten ­ ciesrequire d tob egaine db ystudent so fagricultur e andrura ldevelop ­ ment. In Chapter 3 we will sketch the kind of transformation that we feel isneeded ,i nterm so fmission ,goals ,conten t andlearnin gprocess . Butbefor e wege tt othi sw enee dt ohav ea close r look atth e mattero f 'sustainability' andho wi trelate st oeducation .

26 2 CARSONIAN CONCERNS. SUSTA1NAB1L1TY AND EDUCATION

2.2 Divergentview so nSustainabilit y andEducatio n

Therear eman ydefinitions , descriptions,meaning san d interpretations ofsustainability .Som eargu etha tthi smake si ta wea kconcep t positing that when a concept can mean so many different things, it cannot be 'surrounded,'measure d anduse d as abas e for comparison, policy-ma­ king, scientific inquiry or as a teachable (scientific) concept. Under­ lyingher ei sth ebelie f that 'When somethingmean ss omuch ,i tmean s nothingi nth eend. 'Ther ear eals othos ewh oar ecritica lo fth eeas ewit h which different groups in society, often with opposing ideological backgrounds, jump on the sustainability bandwagon. They point out that sustainability can mask ideological differences and can promote 'feel-good environmentalism'. Jickling speaks of Orwellian double speak when people use phrases like sustainable economic growth.H e suggeststha t 'sustainability talk'ca nlea du si nth edirectio no fOrwell' s (1989) famously satirical notion of "doublethink" whereby ordinary citizensca nincreasingl yhol di nthei rmind scontradictor ymeaning sfo r thesam eter m andaccep tthe mboth .See nthi swa ysustainabilit ytend s to blur the very distinctions required to thoughtfully evaluate an issue (Jickling, 1999; Wals& Jickling,2002) .

Othershowever ,perceiv ea strengt h inth ever yill-define d andapparen t political impacto fth enotio no fsustainability . Itallow sfo rth econtext - ualisation andth ejoin texploratio no fmeaning .I nothe rwords ,throug h dialogue,discourse ,negotiation ,join t fact-finding, mediation,etc . peo­ pleca narriv e atthei row n interpretation ofsustainabilit y ascontextua l and relevant to their own situation within a broader context of ecological responsibility and ethical defensibility. From thisperspecti ­ ve,i ti sargue dtha tgive ntha tw e dono tkno wwha tcomprise sth e right orbes t 'sustainable lifestyle,' itwoul db ewron g for 'technical experts' or the government to prescribe to citizens how they should behave. Teaching for sustainability, from this position isonl y alegitimat e edu­ cational goal when the learners are given space for autonomous thin­ king and self-determination to decide for themselves what counts as sustainableliving .

The latterpositio n suggest that educating^ something (peace,biodi ­ versity,sustainability) ,unlik eeducatin gabout something ,i sessentiall y politicalan dha st od owit hdemocrac yan dparticipation . Preconditions

27 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

for educationfor sustainability then, should include a focus on:trans ­ parency of power relations, communicative competence ofth epartici ­ pants, diversity ofperspectives ,value san d interestsenterin g thelearn ­ ingprocess ,equa lopportunit yan dacces sfo ral l learners,an droo m for creativity andspac e foralternative ,devian tan dnon-conformin g outco­ mes(Hart , 1997; Wals& Jickling ,2000) .

Thesenotion sabou tdemocrac yan dparticipatio n canals ob eapplie dt o processes for making decisions about the content and direction of the learning totak eplace .The y generate questions that need tob eaddres ­ sed such as: To what extent are learners and facilitators of learning involved insuc hdecisions ?T o whatexten tdoe seducatio n forsustaina ­ bility respond toth e challenges identified byth e community?T o what extent isth elearnin gproces san dconten t sensitive toth eideas , values, interests and concepts embodied by the learners themselves? Figure1 represents anattemp t topositio n different conceptualisations ofeduca ­ tionwithi nth eforce-field s described.

PREDETERMINED PRESCRIBED

I II

AUTHORITATIVE PARTICIPATORY TECHNOCRATIC DEMOCRACY III IV

DISCOVERED SELF-DETERMINED

I = Education as reproduction, no participation II = Education as reproduction, participation as tokenism or within boundaries III = Education as discovery learning and problem-solving focusing on predeter­ mined and predefined issues & options, no participation in democratic deci­ sion making and making key choices IV = Education as human development, genuine participation

Figure 1: Positioning education in two force fields (after Wals and Jickling, 2000)

28 2 CARSONIAN CONCERNS, SUSTAINABILITY AND EDUCATION

Iti sclea rtha ta discussio n ofth eintegratio no fsustainabilit y ineduca ­ tion will need to include a critical reflection on both the meaning of sustainability and the meaning ofeducation . Let usno wretur n toedu ­ cation foragricultur ean drura l development.

2J Sustainability inagriculture :toward sa nanalytica l framework

In spiteo fth eincreasingl y strident calls,ove rth epas tdecad eo rso , for changes in the way food production systems are designed and organi­ sed,th e search for 'more sustainable methods ofdevelopment 'o fagri ­ culture and rural communities, has not gained a very significant momentum to date. As emphasised by various contributors to an AFANet-publication entitled 'Integrating Concepts of Sustainability iritoEducatio nfo rAgricultur ean dRura lDevelopment ' (Vande nBo re t al.,2000) ,on eo fth eessentia l reasons for this isth epowe ro f thepre ­ vailingparadig m ofproductionis m andth eimpac t iti shavin go ninter ­ pretations of sustainable development. The debate about the future of agriculture alsoreveal sdivergen t meaningso f sustainability.

Ina nimportan tboo kexplorin gagricultura l sustainability ina changin g world order, Douglass (1984) introduced the essence and significance ofdifferen t interpretationso fth econcep to fsustainability .T othos ewh o wehav ebee nthu s far labellingproductionists , sustainability relatest o thesufficienc y offood ,wit hagricultur ebein gregarde db ysuc ha para ­ digmatic constituency, as primarily "an instrument for feeding the world".Fro mthi sperspective ,sustainabl eagricultur emean sth esustai ­ nedcapacit y oftechnologica l innovation tocontinuousl y increaseagri ­ cultural productivity; nothing more, nothing less.A second group, in contrast,recognise s sustainability withina necologica lcontext ,extend ­ ing their paradigmatic concerns to embrace the need to reduce "non- harmoniouspractices "t ominimis edisruption st o"biophysica l ecologi­ calbalances" .T oa thir dgroup ,th econcep to fsustainabilit y isextende d even further to include "promoting vital, coherent, rural cultures,an d encouraging the values of stewardship, self-reliance, humility and holism which havebee n most associated with family farming" (Doug­ lass 1984).Th ewor ko fCotgrov e(1982 )an dMille r(1983 )o n 'cogniti-

29 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION vestyle san denvironmenta l problem solving',suggest sa fourth , 'mys­ tic'positio n onsustainabilit y which canb eadde dt othi slist ,an dwher e environmental problems caused by agricultural (mal)practices can be envisaged as being "rooted in individual consciences and morality; a reflection of our twisted mentalities" (Miller, 1983). Given the diffe­ rences in the domain in their focus - their centricities - these four worldviews on sustainable agricultural development can be labelled: egocentric,technocentric, ecocentric,an d holocentric,respectivel y (Bawden, 1997).

Thesedifferin g worldviewso nth enatur eo fsustainability ,presen ta fer ­ tile ground for investigating issues that are at the very heart of the sustainability debate, for they obviously differ very significantly with regard to the focus that each assumes, and the manner by which they address the two key questions of any development: "What constitutes an improvement?" and "Who decides"? There is thus much more to these differences than merely the different levels of complexity that each embraces.A t base,eac h ofth erespectiv e worldviews canb eper ­ ceiveda srepresentin gparticula r setso fassumption sabou t(a )th enatu ­ re of nature (ontology) and (b) how that nature is known (epistemolo- gy). The particular conjunctions of epistemological and ontological assumptions withwhic hw ewil lb einvolve d here,ar eindee d so differ­ ent from each other across the four perspectives, that they represent aspects ofsom eo fth emos tprofoun d matterso fcontemporar y philos­ ophical tension, as well as containing within them, the seeds of enor­ mously important social conflict and social-ecological disharmony.

An exploration of these differences is an apt entry point for exploring what we will refer to as the systemic/epistemic connection: The con­ nection between systemic ways of thinking and acting, and particular epistemological/ontological competencies.

2.4 Worldviews asconceptua l windowso nth eworl d

The four worldviews interpretation of sustainable agriculture asidenti ­ fied above,ca n be 'mapped' on toa conceptua l framework that discri­ minates between profoundly different ontological and epistemological assumptions (Figure2) .

30 2 CARSONIAN CONCERNS. SUSTAINABILITY AND EDUCATION

HOLISM

Holocenlric Ecocentric RELATIVISM OBJECTIVISM

Egocentric Technocentric

REDUCTIONISM

Figure 2: Four conceptual windows on the world (Bawden, 1993)

These distinctions have been incorporated into, what has become known as,th e Hawkesbury Critical Learning Systems model,a s 'win­ dowso nth eworld 'symbolicall y atth e 'interface'betwee nth eobserve r andth eobserve d (Bawden, 1993;2000) .Thei rexplicatio n indiscours e isa fundamenta l aspecto fth eHawkesbur y approach toth eparticipati ­ vedevelopmen t itespouses ,an d thedistinction s that havebee nchose n inthi sparticula rmatrix ,reflec t thispractica l focus.Thu swhil ei tdraw s particularly on notions presented by Miller (1983), on the role of psychological dimensions in cognitive styles, and on Burrell and Morgan (1979) on sociological paradigms of organisational develop­ ment, it has its own idiosyncrasies. Inparticula r it draws seminally on systems principles as frameworks notjus t for understanding the com­ plexityo fth ehuman/environmen tinteraction stha tar einvolve di nagri ­ culture and rural development, but also ofth ecomplexitie s ofth epro ­ cesses involved in learning about them. Particularly those processes which involve ontological and epistemological distinctions, and how thesecom et ob eappreciate d bylearner s(Bawden , 1990).

Ontological distinctions Theontologica l distinctionsar ebase d onassumption sabou t profound­ lydifferin g beliefposition s about the 'natureo fnature. 'Fo rth epurpo ­ seso fth eargument sbein gelaborate d here,a holist ontolog yrepresent s thebelie ftha twhol eentitie shav eemergen tpropertie stha tar euniqu et o themselvesa ssuc hentities ,an dtha tar elos tonc eth ewholenes si scom ­ partmentalised into its component parts (Varela et al., 1991). Holism finds theoretical support andpractica l application inso-calle d systems approaches or systemics. The reductionist position, in contrast, is grounded in arejectio n of such 'neo-vitalism,'arguin g that anywhol e entities arebu t sums ofthei r component parts,an d any 'surprises'tha t

31 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION doemerg e atth e 'level'o fth ewhole ,ar emanifestation s ofincomplet e knowledgerathe rtha no f intrinsicproperties .

Epistemological distinctions The epistemological assumptions draw on distinctions elaborated by Bernstein (1983). Objectivism here relates to the basic conviction that "there iso rmus t besom epermanent , ahistorica l matrixo r framework towhic hw eca nultimatel yappea l indeterminin g thenatur eo frationa ­ lity,knowledge ,truth , reality,goodnes s orTightness" .I n contrast, con­ textual relativism isth e basic conviction that the nature of all of these concepts"mus t beunderstoo d asrelativ et oa specifi c conceptual sche­ me,theoretica l framework, paradigm, form of life, society orculture" . Using thesedistinctions , it isno wpossibl e toexplor e ingreate r detail, the four sustainability stereotypes for agricultural development, identi­ fied earlier.

Anegocentri c worldview of sustainability Froma negocentri c worldview,mor e sustainable practices of food pro­ duction are focussed onth esatisfactio n ofth eneed san dwant so findi ­ viduals, and the constitution of improvements, grounded in personal consciencean dmorality .Th esearc hfo r improvements from sucha per ­ spective is thus most likely to assume the characteristics of almost mysticalintrospections .Th eemphasi so ndevelopmen twil ltherefor e be onth ebettermen t ofself ,relativ e toprio ro rexistin g states,rathe rtha n toth estat eo fothers ,an do nindividua linterpretation so fwha tconstitu ­ tes improvements from theperspective s ofpersona l utility andmorali ­ ty.I t ispossibl e toaggregat e this individualistic worldview tocommu ­ nities, societies, indeed to the entire human race, without loss of the essential reductionism orrelativis mo fthi sperspective .Thu santhropo - centricity can be presented as an egocentric worldview when human concernsar eexclusiv et oth eagend ao fdevelopment ,an dan yemergen t properties resulting from interpersonal collaboration, if recognised at all,ar eregarde d asmer e artifact.

Atechnocentri c worldviewo f sustainability Atechnocentri c worldviewo fsustainabl edevelopment ,emphasise sth e importance of objective knowledge about the characteristics of those plantsan dlivestoc kanimal swhic hca nb emanipulate d toimprov ethei r productionpotential ,a swel lo fbioti can dabioti celement stha tca nals o

32 2 CARSONIAN CONCERNS, SUSTAINABIL1TY AND EDUCATION influence production potential. Sustainability then becomes a function of the capacity of scientists to continue to discover more and more scientific truthabou tth enatur eo fnature ,an dabou tho wsuc htrut hca n be used by technologists, to design interventions which continue to enhance the yieldso f crop,pastur e and livestock enterprises acrossa n extraordinarily diverse planet. The reductionism at the heart of this worldviewlie ssquarel ywit hth epropositio ntha timprovement st oyiel d will come with the discovery and removal of the next limit to growth. This isregarde d asth eunquestione d and unambiguous moral commit­ ment of the techno-scientific enterprise, while any other values that cannotb einclude d intosuc ha nobjectiv e position,ca nb eignore dalto ­ gether.

Anecocentri cworldvie wo fsustainabilit y The ecocentric worldview, the first of the two systemic perspectives, rejects the reductionism of technocentricity,whil e continuing to share itsrespec t for theobjectivit y ofknowledge ,truth , and goodness. There is an acceptance here of the basic inter-connectedness of nature, as expressedthroug hth eobjectiv e findings aboutth enatur eo fbio-physic ­ alecosystem sb yecologists ,an dabou tsocio-technica lsystem sb yman y social scientists, especially economists. Goodness is a measure of the value of the outputs of the system. Of particular interest here, is the emergingcongruenc e between ecologists andeconomist s inth esearc h for objective manifestations ofth e intrinsic valueo fnature ,beyon dth e utilitarian notionso fnatur ea sa resourc e forhuma n use.Th esearc h for sustainable improvements in food production systems from this per­ spective, focuses onth eobjectiv e search for methodso f increasingth e productivity ofsystem s(wit hmone yo renerg ya sth ecurrency )withou t threatening their integrity. Interestingly enough, it is only in recent times that ecologists and economists alike have begun to seriously include the environment inth edeliberation s ofth esystem sunde rthei r review.

Aholocentri cworldvie w ofsustainabilit y The holocentric worldview is pertinent precisely because people hold on to different worldviews! Improvements in the complex situations involvingagricultur ean dit senvironment soutline d insom edetai la tth e start of part I, emerge only through discourse involving all of those affected by the present situation, and accommodating debates about

33 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION desirablean dfeasibl e changet othat .Thi sworldvie wpresent sth echal ­ lenge that the discourse about development be holistic in both intent andprocess ,whil erecognisin gth eimportanc eo fdistorte d communica­ tion, asymmetric relationships of power, and multiple perspectives on what really constitutes 'better.' The commitment is to what we might call a communal rationality, identified through the shared learning of individualsco-operatin gwit ha sens eo fwha tBernstei n(1983 )refer st o as "affinity, solidarity, and those affective ties that bind individuals together into a community". Development from this perspective is represented byth enotio no fresearc hsystem sseekin gt oappl ysystemi c thinking and practices in order to improve the relationships between peoplean dthei renvironment swhic har eregarde d asinextricabl y inter­ related.

Both the ecocentric and holocentric perspectives, with their holistic ontological foundations, aresystemi ci nnature .Conceptually ,th eholo ­ centric system is a network of conversations - a critical discourse in which the criticality includes appreciation of the systemic nature of such discourse. In this manner, holocentric systemicity reflects Checkland's (1988 )ide ao fth eshif t insystemicit y from theworl ditsel f (thefocu s ofecocentri cworldviews )t oth eproces so finquir y intomat ­ ters of that world which are considered somewhat problematical. Holocentric dialogue willembrac ecritica l concerns aboutou rassump ­ tionsi nmakin gsystemi cjudgement s(Ulrich , 1993)a swel la sth enee d to think critically about both the social consequences of systems de­ signs (Jackson, 1995) and, most obviously from all that has been said aboutthem ,thei r impactso n 'nature.'

It is vitally important to stress the notion that each of these four per­ spectiveso nsustainabilit y islegitimat ean dca nrevea lvita linsight sint o theproces so fdevelopmen t whenemploye dcarefully .Th eessentia lele ­ ment of that care, is appreciation of the boundary conditions of each perspective, and an accommodation of the different positions held by others,n o matter how paradigmatically intransigent they may seem to be.Thu sfo r instance,a negocentri c appraisal willallo wa reconstructi ­ ono fpersona l needsan dgoals ,whic heve nthoug h not intended,coul d markedly reduce the pressures on particular production systems. Similarly, it will be those with a technocentric orientation, who will inevitably be needed to continue to research new technologies, within

34 2 CARSONIAN CONCERNS, SUSTAINABILITY AND EDUCATION contexts,however ,establishe db ythos ewh oar eviewin gth eworl deco - centrically.Thes econtext si nturn ,wil lreflec t themor eembracin gper ­ spectives of holocentricity, and be informed by the insights that can arise when whole communities learn together about what sustainable development canreall ymea n from anholistic/relativisti c perspective.

Theai m then isno t toreplac e oneperspectiv e with another,bu t tous e each toinfor m theothers .W e need tomove ,a sBernstei n (1983)ha sit , "beyond objectivism and relativism", and by the same logic, beyond reductionism and holism. We need not to see these dimensions as incommensurablephilosophica l dichotomies,bu ta sheuristi cdevice st o inform practical rationality or praxis. From a holocentric perspective, each ofthes e four perspectives canb econstrue d assub-system swithi n a systemo fperspectives ,an dthu sther ei sa stron gcas efo rarguin gtha t thisparticula rperspectiv e isth emos tliberating .Onc ew elear nt othin k from such acritica l systemic perspective, weca n reconstrue thewhol e concept of perspectives through that memorable insight of von Bertalanffy (1981)a scapture d byhi s"gloriou sunit yo fopposites" .

It isvita l toemphasis e atthi spoint ,tha t theabilit y toassum e systemic worldviews and,eve nmor e significantly, tohol do n todifferen t world- views at one and the same time, are difficult to achieve in practice, involving asthe ydo ,wha t isreferre d toa sepistemi c development - or more dramatically, paradigmatic revolutions. This has very important implications for those philosophies and pedagogical practices being recommended here for 'educational strategies for sustainability' (see also Sterling,2004) .

Wehav e stressed the importance of contextualising sustainability and thevirtu eo fmultipl erealitie so rperspective san dth econflict s towhic h they lead.Emphasi sha sbee nplace do nth ehuma ndevelopmen t aspect ofeducation ,rathe rtha no nth einstrumenta l useo feducatio n intryin g to alter people's behaviour in a pre- and expert determined direction. Furthermore a plea has been made to complement more traditional ways of looking at the world with more systemic frameworks, which can help learners deal with complexity and uncertainty and can open alternative ways of knowing and valuing. In the next chapter we will looka tsom eo fth eramification s offosterin g sucha vie wo neducatio n and sustainability for education for agriculture andrura l development.

35 SUSTAINABILITY, CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENTAN D LEARNING

3.1 Sustainabilityan deducationa l transition

Now that we have reflected on the ill-defined nature of sustainability and the merits of taking a more participatory, democratic, pluralistic, andsystemi capproac ht osustainability ,w ear ebette rabl et odiscus sth e implications of taking such an approach for agricultural education. Some emerging tasks of agricultural education are: to help students learn how to appreciate the differences between particular worldview perspectives on agricultural and rural development, tohel pthe mlear n toachiev esystemi ccompetencie si nthei rapplication ,an di nparticular , tohel pthe m learn howt o facilitate discourse which allows 'clients't o do the same. Each of the perspectives on sustainability and develop­ ment elaborated inpreviou s chapters,ha sparticula r strengths,an dstu ­ dentsar eencourage d toexplor ean dunderstan d whatthes eare .

Two main questionswil lb eaddresse dhere : • What are the didactical and methodological implications for teach­ ing sustainability from a genuinely transformative educational per­ spectivean dfo r theadoptio n ofsystemi cworldviews ? • Whichoperationa lan dinstitutiona lcondition sar enecessar yt oancho r systemicperspective so fsustainabilit y ina revise dcurriculum ?

Herew ewil lretur nt oth emai noutcome so fth eboo k 'IntegratingCon ­ cepts of Sustainability into Education forAgricultur e and RuralDeve ­ lopment(Va nde nBo re tal. ,2000 )an drelate doutcome so fth eAFANe t project focusing on sustainability inhighe r agricultural education. Six lessonslearn tdurin gth eAFANe tactivitie s appearparticularl y relevant toan dhighl ycompatibl ewit hth epositio n described inChapte r2 1:

/ Wewish toacknowledge theinput of Woutvan den Bor and PeterHolen whohave been instrumental in distilling the lessons learntfrom various AFANet activities that took place within the topic 'IntegratingSustainability in Higher Agricultural Education '. These lessons learnt can also befound in Van den Bor, Holen & Wals (2000).

37 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HICHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

Integrating sustainability pre-supposes the re-thinking of institu­ tional missions The integration of sustainability will never lead to anything fundamen­ tally new if the institution is not prepared to re-think its academic mis­ sion.Thi s mission debate should involve all actor groups in the univer­ sity. It should lead to the re-formulation of the aims and objectives of teaching and research programmes and it should result in a commonly accepted strategy at the macro-, meso- and micro-level. Only then mis­ sion statements can become more than a public relations tool.

It is no use crying over vague definitions Based on the AFANet seminar on Holistic Concepts of Trainingfor the Promotion ofSustainable Development (Wagner &Dobrowolski , 2000) held in Krakow, Poland, we are able to distil the following features of sustainability: • Sustainability is areality (aphenomeno n to be taken seriously) • Sustainability is an ideology and therefore political • Sustainability is negotiated, the result of (on-going) negotiations • Sustainability iscontextual, itsmeanin g isdependen t onth e situation inwhic h it is used • Sustainability is a vision to work towards • Sustainability is a dynamic and/or evolving concept • Sustainability iscontroversia l andth e source ofconflict (both intern­ al and with others) • Sustainability isnormative, ethical and moral

It should be admitted that the ambivalent nature of the concept of sustainability can be a major conceptual impediment to those who like to work with crisp and clear, narrowly defined concepts: 'Tell me what iti san d I'll teach it!'I tshoul d alsob erealised ,however ,tha tthi svague ­ ness has an enormous canvassing andheuristi c capacity ifi t is systema­ tically and systemically used as a starting point or operational device to exchange views and ideas. These ongoing discussions may generate fruitful working hypotheses for the concrete formulation of curricula, study-programmes, subject matter content anddidactica l arrangements.

Sustainability is as complex as life itself The concept ofsustainabilit y isrelate d toth e social,economic , cultural, ethical and spiritual domain of our existence. It differs over time and

38 3 SUSTAINABILITY, CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND LEARNING space and it can be discussed at different levels of aggregation and viewed through different windows. Hence, a curricular review in terms of sustainability integration is per definition of an interdisciplinary, systemic and holistic nature. It concerns cognition, attitudes, emotions and skills.I tdoe sno t lend itselft ounilateral ,linea rplannin g ora reduc ­ tionist scientific paradigm and thus involves the systemic integration between theory and practice into systemic praxis.

Teaching about sustainability requires the transformation of men­ tal models Teaching sustainability presupposes that those who teach consider themselves learners aswell .Teachin g about sustainability includes deep debate about normative, ethical and spiritual convictions and directly relates to questions about the destination of humankind and human res­ ponsibility. In this way it differs from a modernist and positivistic way ofthinking . Itincorporate s notions ofth e possibility ofth e finiteness of human existence and trust in human creativity at the same time.

There is no universal remedy for programmatic reconstruction The inclusion of aspects of sustainability in academic programmes is very much culturally defined. Also it is closely tied to the academic history and curricular tradition of the institution concerned. Consequently, there is nopanacea for curricular reform. Some institu­ tions will choose to add on to existing programmes, others will opt for a more revolutionary approach. The decision about the most desirable reform approach istim e and space specific and can only be taken in an open and communicative process in which all actor groups play their own, respected roles.

Programming sustainability demands serious didactical re-orienta­ tion Based on the earlier mentioned Krakow seminar (Wagner & Dobrowolski,2000 ) the following requirements, allpointin g atth e need for a didactical re-orientation, can be synthesised: • Sustainability requires a focus on competencies and higher thinking skills • Sustainability requires a foundational appreciation of holistic prin­ ciples, critical system understandings, andpractical systemic com­ petencies

39 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

• Sustainability requires anearly start, i.e.wel lbefor e studentsenrol l inuniversitie s (from kindergarten through highschool ) • Sustainability requirescritical reflection onone' sow nteachin g • Sustainabilityrequire sself-commitment an dtaking responsibility • Sustainabilityrequire sempowerment o flearner sb yenablin gthe mt o worko nth eresolutio nof real issues thatthe ythemselve shav eiden ­ tified • Sustainability requires appreciation andrespect for differences • Sustainability requirescourage ('Daret ob e different') • Sustainability requirescreativity a sther ear en orecipe s

Integrating aspects of sustainability cannot be realised without thinking very critically about the re-structuring of didactical arrangements.Thi s re-orientation requires ample opportunity for staff members and studentst oembar ko nne wway so fteachin gan dlearning . Forthi st ohap ­ penthe yhav et ob egive nth eopportunit y tore-lear nthei r wayo fteach ­ ing and learning and to re-think and to re-shape their mutual relationships.Thes ene wdidactica l arrangementspre-suppos ea proble m orientation, experiential learning and lifelong learning. The following shifts ineducationa l orientation arepropose d (Vande nBo re t al.,2000 ; Wagneran dDobrowolski , 2000): • from consumptive learningt odiscover y learning • from teacher-centred tolearner-centre d arrangements • from individual learningt ocollaborativ e learning • from theory dominated learningt opraxis-oriente d learning • from sheerknowledg eaccumulatio n toproblemati cissu eorientatio n • from content-oriented learningt oself-regulativ e learning • from institutional staff-based learningt olearnin gwit han dfro m out­ siders • from lowleve lcognitiv e learningt ohighe rleve lcognitiv e learning • from emphasising only cognitive objectives to also emphasising affective andskill-relate d objectives

Focussingo nsustainabilit yprovide sa wonderfu l opportunityfo racces ­ singhighe rlearnin g(epistemi cdevelopment )an dne wway so fknowin g (the paradigmatic challenge) precisely because the concept is (a) so slippery and open to different interpretations, and (b) socomple x (in­ volvingethical ,moral ,aestheti can dspiritua lissue sa swel la sth emor e conventional technical, economic, social and cultural ones). In other

40 3 SUSTAINAB1L1TY, CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND LEARNING

words, serious attempts to integrate sustainability into higher agri­ culturaleducatio nbring sacademic sint owhol ene wpedagogica lworld s - experiential,epistemic ,an dsystemi c- whichi ntur nbring sthe mint o wholene wworld so flearnin g(an dindee dresearching )abou tagricultu ­ rean drura l development. Iti sa nidea lentré eint oepistemology , ontol­ ogy and ethics.Bu t how dow emov efro m an ideal entréet oth emai n course?Teachers ,students ,curriculu m developers and study coordina­ tors alike,afte r rethinking the institution's mission and learning goals, might need something of more substance to work with in redesigning both theproces san dth econten ttha tdrive sthei reducation .

3.2 Processanchor sfo rintegratin g sustainability2

The concept of sustainable agriculture implies a change in society's viewo fth erol eo fnatur ei nth esens etha ti tentail sa mutual ,symbioti c relationship between people and nature (instead of seeing nature as beingi nth eservic eo fpeople ,an dseein gscienc ea sa wa yo fachievin g society's domination of nature, Mannion, 1995,p . 329). Agricultural education representsa ne wideolog y(Harwood , 1990;Mannion , 1995), which mayguid eth erevisio n ofth ecurriculum . Educational strategies have been suggested to meet the challenge.Albla s and his colleagues (1995), for instance, suggest strategies based on high relevance to the learner, problem solving,reflectiv e enquiry, dialectical connection be­ tweentheor yan dpractice ,an dcollaboratio n betweenspecialist so fthe ­ ory and practice.The y put a heavy emphasis on: a) intellectual skills thatar erelevan tt oth ediscussio no fcontroversia l issuesi nsituation so f socialconflict , b)a dee pinvolvemen to fth elearne ri nth eissue sa tstak e and c) the inclusion of diverging interests. With an implicitly social- constructivistapproach ,the ystres sth eimportanc e ofstudents 'beliefs , ideas,an dconceptions .

In describing theprocess anchors and content anchorsfor integrating sustainability we make use of and build upon earlier workpublished in theAFANet publication that forms one of thepillars of this chapter fian den Bor et al. 2000). Much of this secti­ on can befound in Wals & Dreyfus (2000), which in its turn builds upon Wals et al, 1999. Wewish to acknowledge the contributions made by Art Alblas and Marjan Margadant of Utrecht University and ofAmos Dreyfus of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

41 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

Meanwhile Bawden and his Hawkesbury colleagues, while holding similarposition st othese ,als oemphasis eth esignificanc e ofth edevel ­ opment of what they refer to as 'systemic competencies' (Bawden, 2000), the importance of multiple worldviews,an d the need for expe­ riential strategies asth emos tappropriat e vehicles for suchoutcomes .

The above strategies emphasise the importance of establishing criteria for enhancing the quality ofth e learning process and selecting themes for learningtha tmak emeetin gsuc hcriteri apossible .W e will listeigh t criteria that havebee n derived from environmental education research inth eNetherland s (Walse tal. , 1999).

/ Totalimmersion Learning bydoing ,discover y learning,hands-o n learning orexperien ­ tial learning all havei ncommo n thatth e learnerbecome simmerse di n amulti-sensor ywa yi na learnin gproces stha ti sfundamenta l enought o have a lasting impact on the state of mind and being of the learner. A learning experience becomes fundamental when the whole person becomespar t ofth e learningexperienc e (i.e.head ,hear t andhands) .

2 Diversityin learning styles People are not all alike. Foragricultura l and rural development educa­ tion to contribute to meaningful learning experiences, educators will havet orecognis ean db esensitiv et oth evariou slearnin gstyle san dpre ­ ferences that canb e found ina singl egroup .I ti sunlikel y thaton epar ­ ticular learning and instruction technique will be appropriate for all involved ina leanin gprocess .

3 Active participation To becomeinvolve d insomethin grequire sactiv eparticipatio n ina dia ­ loguewit h co-learners andteacher-facilitators . It isthroug h thisactiv e participation thatth elearne rdevelop sa sens eo fownershi pi nth elearn ­ ingprocess ,it sconten t and itscourse .Throug h dialogue,th edevelop ­ mento fidea s ina socia l setting,th elearne rca nexpres shi so rhe r feel­ ings or thoughts and become exposed to the feelings and thoughts of others.Thi s confrontation is essential for meaningful learning to take place.

42 3 SUSTAINAB1LITY, CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND LEARNING

4 The value ofvaluing In high quality education for agriculture and rural development the transformation of values and meaning coincide.Th e motivational and affective aspects of learning should be given equal attention.Th epro ­ cesso fvaluin g should atleas thav eth e following components orstep s (Brugman, 1988): • Putting in words what is found to be important with regards to the subject atstak e(explicatin g personalvalues) . • Putting oneself in the positions taken by others with regards toth e subject atstak e(takin g onmultipl eperspectives) . • Comparing one'sow npersona l valueswit h thoseo fother st orecog ­ nisecommonaltie san ddifference s (confronting andrelatin gperson ­ alvalues) . • Investigating and discussing the relationship between personal valuesan dcorrespondin g behaviour(o rth elac kthereof ) (validation ofpersona lvalues) . • Aprim eobjectiv e offollowin g thesestep si st odevelo pi nth elearn ­ era syste mo fvalue san dvaluin gwhic hi scharacterise d by flexibili­ ty,opennes san dpluralisti crespec t(i.e .respec t forwell-argue dalter ­ nativevalues) .

5 Balancingthe far andnear A contemporary curriculum should reflect a society that increasingly demandsth eintegratio no fenvironmenta l andothe rgloba lissues .A tth e sametime ,suc ha curriculu m shouldb eroote d inth elife-experience s of the learner. Inevitably, meeting both criteria will cause some friction. After all,issue s of sustainability anddevelopment , for instance,ar eno t alwaysexistentiall y relevant.Ho wca nw eexpec tsomeon et otak einter ­ esti nproblem stha tsee mphysically ,sociall yan dpsychologicall yremo ­ te?Or ,mor especifically , howd ow e designlearnin gactivitie stha tmov e studentsfro m passivedetachmen tt oactiv einvolvemen t insustainabilit y issueswithou t havingthe m feel overwhelmed orpowerless ?

Abalanc eneed st ob estruc kbetwee nth efa ran dnea ro fthes ephysical , social and psychological dimensions in order for empowerment of learnerst otak eplace .Empowermen ther erefer s toth efeelin g thatone , albeit asa nindividua l ora sa membe ro fa group ,ca n shapeone' sow n life and environment.

43 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

6 A case-study approach Human development can be characterised by a double-edged sword with the 'objective' material conditions on one side and the subjective personal needs on the other. Both aspects are relevant for the process and content of education.Th e challenge is to find exemplary cases that dono t only address subjective personal needs,bu t also addressth e need for a better understanding of more universal principles (Klafki, 1994). A case-study approach allows the learner to dig for meaning, as oppo­ sed to scratching the surface, by focussing on one concrete example for a longerperio d oftime .Takin g sufficient timet o studya particula r issue in-depth is essential and is preferred over studying multiple issues in a superficial way.Th e teacher needs to take an active role in stimulating learners to expand their boundaries of understanding by challenging them to look further and exposing them to alternative ways of looking at the same issue.

7 Thesocial dimension of learning The development of knowledge and understanding has both personal and shared elements to it. Social interaction allows one to relate or mir­ ror hiso rhe r ideas,insights ,experience s and feelings tothos e ofothers . In this process of 'relating to'o r 'mirroring' (Cassel & Giddens, 1993), these personal ideas, insights, experiences and feelings are likely to change as a result. This mirroring may lead the learner to rethink his or her ideas in light of alternative,possibl y contesting, viewpoints or ways of thinking and feeling. At the same time (learning) experiences, which are shared with others, are likely to gain importance. This is not to say that personal experiences, which are kept to oneself, are insignificant. But shared viewpoints or ways of thinking and feeling give the learner a sense of competence and belonging to the community of learners.

8 Learningfor action The argument for including action-taking and the development of acti­ on competence in education for agriculture and rural development pro­ grammes is threefold. First, one could argue that many people are overwhelmed by environmental, including social, problems as a result of their personal exposure to these problems, for instance, through the ever-present media. It is important to help learners explore environ­ mental issues and to provide them with an understanding of the nature and complexity of these problems. However, education for agriculture

44 3 SUSTAINABILITY. CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND LEARNING

Principle Description Examples

1.Tota l Fostering a direct experience Observing and monitoring immersion with a real-world environmental environmental impacts phenomenon Managing a specific site

2. Diversity in Being sensitive to the variety of Offering a variety of didactic learning styles learning styles and preferences approaches that can be found in a single Reflecting on the learning group process with the learner

3. Active Developing discourse and Soliciting the learners'ow n ideas, participation ownership by utilising the conceptions and feelings learners'knowledg e and ideas Consulting learners on the content of the learning process

4.Th e value Exposing the learner to alternative Giving learners opportunities to of valuing ways of knowing and valuing express their own values through self-confrontation Creating a safe and open learning environment

5. Balancing Developing empowerment by Relating issues of biodiversity or the far and near showing that remote issues have sustainability tolas t night's dinner local expressions which one can Showing examples of groups of influence people successfully impacting the local and global environment

6.A case-study Digging for meaning by studying Assigning different people to approach an issue in-depth and looking for explore different angles of a transferability to other areas particular theme and bringing the different angles together

7. Social Mirroring the learner's ideas, Taking time for discussion and dimensions of experiences and feelings with exchange learning those of others through social Addressing controversy interaction Stimulating flexibility and open-mindedness

8. Learning Making the development of Allowing learners to develop their for action action and action competence an own course of action and to integral part of the learning follow through with it process Studying examples of action-taking elsewhere

Table 1: Some ProcessAnchor s for Integrating Sustainability in Higher Education (source:Wal se t al., 1999,p .28 ;Wal s& Dreyfus , 2000,p .81 )

45 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION and rural development should not be limited to this, for it then could easilyfee d feelings ofapath yan dpowerlessness .I twoul db edangerou s if education for agriculture and rural development would become a repetition ofwha tman y ofu salread y know:th e environment isi nba d shape,ou r comfortable lifestyles make it worse and the complexity of sustainability issues makes them hard to solve (Monroe, 1990). By bringing in the action-taking component, students can, under certain conditions,begi n totak e charge of someo f these issues and developa senseo fpowe ran dcontrol .

Asecon dargumen t forincludin gaction-takin g ina neducatio n foragri ­ culturean drura ldevelopmen tprojec t hasit sroot si nexperientia llearn ­ ingthought :on eneve rcome st ofull y understand aproble mwit h allit s nuances and complexities until one fully immerses oneself in thepro ­ blem, identifies all the players and begins to work within the 'force field' orfiel d ofinterferenc e towardsa join t solution (Wals, 1994a). In otherwords ,w ema yneve rreall yunderstan d theproble m untilw estar t toactuall y implement somepotentia l solutions.

Finally,i tcoul db eargue dtha twithou tth eabilit yan dwillingnes st oac t iti simpossibl et oparticipat e inor ,rather ,t ocontribut et oa democrati c society.A s Jensen & Schnack (1994) point out, and as has been sug­ gestedi nChapte r 1, aconcer n forth eenvironmen tshoul db econnecte d toa concer n for democracy.

Table 1 summarisesth eproces sanchor sderive d from Walse tal. ,1999 .

Theabov eproces sanchor sappea rt ob esoun dfro m thepoin to fvie wo f psychology oflearnin gan dmotivation .However ,the yomi ttw oissues , related to the content of what is to be learned according to the new "challenge" of agricultural education: the organisation of the basis of formal knowledge tob elearned ,an dth elac ko fagreemen t aboutsom e partso fthi sknowledge .

3.3 Contentanchor sfo rintegratin g sustainability

What education for sustainable agriculture requires isa radica l change ofth econception ofagricultur e asa practice .Thi smean stha tth econ ­ ception of agriculture as "sustainable" must appear to the learner at

46 3 SUSTAINABILITY, CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND LEARNING least as intelligible, plausible andfruitful (Posner et al., 1982) as the profit focused conception that prevails in the modern western world. The impact of the curriculum must be strong enough to cause a per­ sistent feeling of unease among the students, bringing them to realise theimportanc eo fecologica l considerations,the nt osearc h forreconci ­ liationbetwee nth eexpecte dadvantage so fhigh-tec hproductio n (short- term considerations) and the requirements of social responsibility (long-term considerations). The students must reach a state in which they are willing and able to assess,fo r instance, whether the justifica­ tion for using the production technologies they learn about is "outweighed byattendan t dangers"(Westra , 1998),o rsom edamag et o naturecanno t orshoul dno tb e"trade d off" for someinvaluabl econtri ­ butionso fagricultura lproduction .I nsom ecases ,the yshoul db eabl et o check whether or not the environmentalist claims are exaggerated or unfounded.

The balance ofplausibilit y and potential fruitfulness, betweenproduc ­ tion and financial benefits on the one hand,an d ecological considera­ tions on the other hand,ma yno t be easily reached inth e minds ofth e students.Th e"traditional "content so fagricultura l educationi nwester n countries, e.g., the "know-how" (techniques, practical skills) and its scientific, technological andeconomica l foundations (basicknowledg e tob eapplied) ,presen t few dilemmaso fplausibilit y andpotentia l fruit- fulness toth elearner ,becaus ethe yar edirectl yrelevan tt oth eimprove ­ mento fth eproductivit y andbenefit s ofth eagriculturist . Itma ythere ­ fore be difficult to challenge their prevalence in the mind of the stu­ dents.Th e samema yb eclaime d about otherobjective s of agricultural education, such as intellectual skills related to problem solving and decision making on the basis of scientific, technological, and socio- economical considerations. Incontrast ,th esocio-ecologica largument s of sustainable agriculture may appear to the students to be much less plausible and fruitful. What it actually tells them is:"Yo u can earn so muchb yusin g Xan dY technologies ,bu tyo ushould not ,becaus eyo u mayhar mth eenvironment ,an dultimately ,wil limpai ryour ,o rth enex t generations'capacit yt oproduce... "

Agricultural education hass ofa r very seldomendeavoured ,i fa tall ,t o copewit hsuch personal conflicts. Th eexistin glearnin gactivities , even when they directly and actively involve students, tend to illustrate the

47 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION advantages tocitizen so fjudiciou senvironmenta l behaviour,a scompa ­ redwit h adeplorabl e existing situation (see for exampleWals , 1994b). The required changes in personal behaviour advocated by most pro­ grammes(e.g. ,th ethre eRe's , Recycle,Re-use, Reduce) implymerel ya reasonable effort and very little personal sacrifice, particularly in the caseo fth emuc hemphasise d recycling, which doesno treall ychallen ­ geproductionism .Afte r all,th emor epeopl econsume ,th emor epeopl e can recycle... As far as "empowerment" goes in such programmes, it refers mainly to the development of the ability, and of the feeling of ability,t oinfluenc e "them",i.e. ,othe rpeople ,suc ha sth eauthorities , so that these, in turn, impose required behaviours on still otherpeople , sucha spollutin ginstitutions .

Iti sdoubtfu l whether eventh epurposefu l "infusion" ofenvironmenta l contents into traditional curricular contents, in order to enhance the environmental literacy of the students as suggested by several authors (see for example Ramsey et al., 1992), or as used in many STSpro ­ grammes (seeAikenhead , 1994;Fensham , 1988),i ssufficient . Whati s needed isa systemati c effort toconfron t the studentswit h all thecom ­ ponentso fth eknowledg et ob eacquired ,simultaneously , indirec tcon ­ nection with each other, in relevant contexts, with equal degrees of emphasis and of cognitivedemand s (scientific knowledge, intellectual skills). The objective of agro-ecological vocational education is not indoctrination, butth edevelopmen t ofth eabilit y toweig h alternatives onth ebasi so fequa lunderstandin g ofal lthei rcomponents .Infusio n of sustainability, however defined, into a traditional curriculum is not enough. Inadditio n topayin g attention toth eproces s anchors listedi n Table 1,attentio nt oth esystemati cdevelopmen to fa kin do fknowledg e basei snecessar y aswell . Thisknowledg ebas ei spurposel y verybroa d and includesth e following elements:

Interdisciplinary themes Understanding the production, distribution and consumption side of agriculture from a variety of integrated disciplinary perspectives, i.e. basicnatura lan dsocia lsciences ,technologie so fproduction , financing, processing,marketin gaspect sa swel la shealth ,nutritio nan dconsump ­ tion components, and cultural aspects of agricultural production (National Research Council, 1988; White, 1990; Dreyfus, 1994).

48 3 SUSTAINAB1L1TY, CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND LEARNING

Environmental impactassessmen t Understanding theenvironmental impac to fth eproduction ,distributio n and consumption side of agriculture. This content anchor refers, for instance,t o the direct and indirect (such as influence ongloba l warm­ ing)influenc e ofhigh-inpu t andhigh-energ y agriculture.Th einventor y of such problems is impressive, and varies locally, nationally orregio ­ nallyaccordin gt oth eagro-technica l methodsan dth ecrop stha tprevai l inth eloca l setting.A sa characteristi c example,a voluminou srepor to f the department of agro-ecology in Israel (Capua &Oren , 1998) refers toth e useo fchemical s("...cides") , disposal ofsewag ean d waste,us e of fertilisers, irrigation, and aesthetic damage to the environment asa side effect of the agro-technical activity or negligence, and bad"agri ­ cultural management". Also extremely relevant are biotechnologies, genetic engineering, transgenic methods to increase crop and animal yield,adaptatio n of organisms tovariou s conditions, and the influence of agricultural techniques on the release of gases into the atmosphere (greenhouseeffect) .Th ebasi cknowledg ei nthi scategor yinclude svari ­ ousconcept so fecolog yan dprotectio no fnatura lresource s(e.g. ,biodi ­ versity, attributes of ecosystems, habitats, conservation, preservation, etc.), which have so far not been central to agricultural education but arepertinen t toth edevelopmen t ofan yapproac h tosustainability .

Alternativeway so fthinking ,doin gan dvaluin g Understanding principles of alternative methods of "sustainable agri­ culture" and their advantages over traditional methods. This content anchor focuses on the concept of "agricultural management". It deals with (1) general factors and policies which underpin holistic viewso f sustainable agriculture, such as lessrelianc e onnon-renewabl e resour­ ces,les senvironmenta l degradation,integrate d landus esystems , econ­ omical viability,socia l acceptability,etc. ,(a soutline d inth ediscussio n by Mannion, 1995,pp . 329-335); (2) specific "clean" agro-technical methodswhic hca nb eintroduce d intoth eexistin gsystem so fproducti ­ on (careful use of chemicals, of water and fertilisers, soil protection, treatment of sewage, etc.); and (3) alternative systems of agricultural production,suc ha sorganic ,bio-organi c agriculture,biodynamics ,per - maculture, eco-villages, Good Agricultural Practice, Integrated Pest Management, etc., (Harwood, 1990; Mannion, 1995; Capua & Oren, 1998;Tilman , 1998). Anumbe r of questions could be addressed here: Arether e accepted (post-modern?) alternative agro-technical procedu-

49 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION res which can be unequivocally shown to be more intelligible, more plausible,mor e fruitful to thepractisin g farmer then the procedureso f modernhigh-tec h agriculture?Ar ether eaccepte d solutionst oth eenvi ­ ronmental damage caused by modern agriculture?Ar ether e solutions whose advantages and feasibility can be demonstrated scientifically, without "mixing science with advocacy" (ICEE, 1997)?Thes e all in­ volvedifferen t wayso fviewin gth eworl dan ddifferen t systemsof know­ ingt owhic h studentsnee dt ob eexposed .

Students must also be introduced to ecological/environmental systems of values that will guide their decisions and the development of their attitudes(anthropocentrism ,ecocentrism ,conservationism ,etc.) ,an dt o the civic and political systems in their own and other countries (public and civic decision making at the local, institutional, regional, national levels, etc.).

Enteringsocio-scientifi c disputes Understanding and recognising conflicting norms, values and knowl­ edgeclaims .A nenvironmentall y literate graduate ofhighe r agricultu­ ral education shouldb escientificall y literateenoug ht ounderstan dth e contributions of science and technology to the creation and the solu­ tion of human problems and, vice versa, the influence of human pro­ blems on science and technology. When seeking to produce and con­ sume in amor e sustainable way orwhe n trying toexplor e sustainable lifestyles, oneinevitabl yenter sa socio-scientifi c disputea st owha tth e right way of living entails. According to Bingle & Gaskell (1994, p. 187), a socio-scientific dispute is born when uncertain knowledge associated with science-in-the-making (asoppose d toth emor erobus t widely accepted ready-made scientific knowledge) inhibits consensus ast oth escientifi c facts. Herestatement sabou tknowledg ear esee na s claims: they are contestable and subject to revision" (Bingle & Gaskell, 1994).I nsuc h instances,citizen s find themselvesfacin g divi­ ded expertise - qualified scientific experts who have produced diffe­ rent scientific findings on an issue or whodisagre e overth e interpre­ tation ofth e same findings.

A socio-scientific dispute can even arise in the face of scientific con­ sensus.Suc ha disput earise swhe nth econsensu si schallenge d fromth e outside.Thi s isth ecase ,fo r instance,whe n thepersona l experienceo f

50 3 SUSTAINABILITY, CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND LEARNING citizens isi nconflic t with"scientific " evidence;whe ncitizen sfee l that certain scientific knowledge iss one wtha t anyconsensu so nit s factual naturemus tb econsidere dtentativ ea tbest ;o rwhe ncertai n interestsar e seen as having undue influence on the consensus position (Bingle & Gaskell, 1994,p . 188).Socio-scientifi c disputesar eissue sabou twhic h decision making is most problematic.The y are in fact amai n topico f education for sustainability sincethe yar etrul ya tth einterfac e between science andsociety . Rathertha navoidin gcontrovers y andshyin gawa y from socio-scientific disputes, post-modern educators should look for theman dente rthe m intoth eeducationa lprocess .

Sustainable agriculture studies, a multidisciplinary domain in full development,wil llea dth estudent sint oarea so fdisagreemen t between specialists.The y musttherefor e beequippe d with both types ofknow ­ ledge, and with the awareness of the tentativeness of controversial "claims".The ymus tlear nt ous ebot hready-mad escienc ean dscience - in-themaking .Educatio ntoward sa mor erationa l behaviouri ncase so f socio-scientific disputes may be considered amai n goal of vocational agricultural education.I nfact , sincedurin gth eprofessiona l lifespa no f thestudents ,socio-dispute s aboutsustainabl eagricultur eca nb e expec­ tedt oremai nactive ,som eo fthe mbein greplace db yne wones ,th eabi ­ lityt omak edecision si nsituation so funcertai nknowledg ema yb econ ­ sidered to be the main tool for the professional development of future farmers.

Copingwit hcomplexit y Understanding and coping with complexity without getting trappedb y concerns for the details.Agricultura l education, as we have argued, is bydefinitio n interdisciplinary.Th eadditio no fye tanothe rinterdiscipli ­ nary area such as "environment" may make it overwhelmingly com­ plex.Highe r agricultural education should provide students with skills that make them able to meaningfully, critically and selectively use scientific knowledge. Such use does not necessarily require a full and thorough understanding of all the concepts involved but rather amor e functional and systemic understanding of what the concepts do and whatthe ymea nt ous .Peopl ema yhave ,fo rinstance ,a functiona l under­ standing ofwha tphotosynthesi s doest oou renvironmen t (addingoxy ­ gen,usin gsola renerg yt obuil dorgani cmatter ,carbo ncycle ,etc. )with ­ out understanding the complex biochemical processes involved in it.

51 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

The main idea ist osho w abstract principles and"theories-in-action "i n a concrete situation, instead of trying toprov e their existence scientifi­ cally (Olsher &Dreyfus , 1999).Non e ofth e studentsca nb eexpecte dt o become high-level specialistsi nal lth edomain s ofknowledg e involved. The knowledge taught must befunctional , sotha t thestuden t canus ei t as a tool for thinking, problem solving and decision making (see Solomon, 1994, referring to STSeducation) .

Competencies in systems thinking and systems practice have been found tob eo f very significant usewit h regard todealin g with thecom ­ plexities and dynamics of contemporary agriculture, natural resource management and sustainable rural development. Amidst the chaosan d complexity that characterizes so much of the issues of the day in this regard, systems thinkers look for 'patterns of relationships'. They 'see systems'everywher e they look, even when they look atth eprocesse so f 'seeing'an d'thinking 'themselves . Systems thinkers typically approach situations and issues in organizations, in communities and in 'nature' alike, with a profound sense of the 'wholeness' and the 'inter-connec­ tedness ofi tall' .The y tend tothin k inthre e dimensions- in 'systemso f systems' as it were. In this manner they focus their attention concur­ rently on the system itself, on the sub-systems that interact together to generate that system (and in which they are embedded), and on the supra-system, which represents theenvironmen t inwhic h the system is itself embedded.

A keyassumptio n here istha t anychang e atan yon eo fth e three levels in this 'systemic hierarchy', will invariably have impacts at each of the other levels too:ofte n in a quite unpredictable manner and on a quite unpredictable scale. A small change 'over here' might have a hugely amplified impact 'over there' and even more so,perhaps , further 'over there': and vice versa. The crucial issue is that systems thinkers are always onth e lookout for such emergent changes; always conscious of the need to think about actions and their potential impacts, in three dimensions.

The crux of the 'problem of sustainability' toa system s thinker then, is the resilience andadaptabilit y of this three dimensional 'structure':Fo r any system tob eabl e tosustai n itself, itmus t beabl et oadap t to(an d at times adapt) the environmental supra-system in which it is embedded,

52 3 SUSTA1NAB1L1TY. CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND LEARNING through somehow manipulating thecharacte r of, and/or thenatur eo f therelationship sbetween ,it sow nsub-systems .

Themos tpowerfu l application ofthi slogi ccome swhe nsystem sthink ­ ersplac e themselves inth epositio n ofbein gon eo fth esub-system so f thesystem/supra-syste m inter-relationship theyar eexplorin g- alearn ­ ingsub-syste m asi twere .An dthi sreache sa neve nhighe rorde ro fsig ­ nificance whenth e 'learning sub-system'i ssee na shavin gthre edimen ­ sionso forganizatio n itself.Leve lon eo fa learnin g system isconcerne d with theproces s ofmakin g sense of and taking action to adapt (to) a 'matter tohand' . This level is embedded in ahighe r order of learning whichfocuse so nth eproces so flearnin gitself -so-calle dmeta-learning . Weca nlear nabou tth eworl dabou tus ,an dw e canals olear nabou tho w welearn .A tth ethir dlevel ,w econcer nourselve swit hlearnin gabou tth e keyphilosophica l assumptions that underpin theparadigmati cassump ­ tionstha tw e hold,a sw e goabou tou rlearning .Thi sso-calle depistemi c learning, concerns itself with learning about the assumptions thatw e holdabou tth enatur eo fnatur e(ou rontology) ,abou tth ematur eo fho w wekno w(ou r epistemology),an dabou tth enatur eo fhuma nnatur ean d thevalue stha thel pdefin e us(ou raxiology) .

Someargu etha t iti sonl ythroug h attentiont oal lo fthes ethre edimen ­ sionso flearnin gtha tw eca nlear nt oattai nsystem scompetencie s- and therefore to learn how to deal with matters of sustainability from systemic perspectives.Al lo fthi s clearly hasver y significant implica­ tionswit h respectt obot h intellectual andmora l development- for the designo fcurricul atha tembrac e issuest od o with sustainability andit s paradigmatic multi-perspectives (Bawden, 2000).

Toillustrat e theabov e anchors andthei r interdependency letu sloo k ata neveryda y dilemma that many farmers face:whe nan dho wt o use chemical pesticides,i fa tall .I tca nb eargue d thatchemica l pesticides are usually very effective, from a (short-term) production point of view. Without them, a wide spread world food crisis would have occurred long ago (Katan, 1993). They appear to give the farmer immediate satisfaction concerningcro pprotection .O nth eothe rhand , theyare ,certainl y inth elon g term, veryharmfu l toth eenvironment . This long-term environmental impact is often not directly perceived byth e farmer.

53 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

Alternatives to the exclusive use of chemical pesticides consist of, for instance,type so f"organic "farmin g orcombine d systems,whic hmak e use of both chemical and non-chemical tools (i.e. Integrated Pest Management).Th ebasi s for the development andus eo f suchmethod s isessentiall yscientific and technological: "itencompasse sman ytopic s - from the development of mechanisms and modes of action to the development of technologies of implementation" (Katan, 1993). It requiresa radica lchang ei nth efarmers 'approac ht opes tcontrol : eradi­ cation of thepes t isno t seen as aprerequisit e to effective control.Th e operational goal,namel yt oreac ha nequilibriu ma ta leve la twhic hbot h theenvironmen tan dth efarmer' s livelihood aresustained ,i squit eclear . However,managin gth ecomplexity o funderstandin gan dreachin gsuc h an equilibrium through alternative methods of cropprotectio n isquit e intangible.Fo ron ething ,th eus eo fbiocontro l agents (oneo fth emai n methods ofnon-chemica l controls) ismuc h morecomple x than thato f chemical agents, precisely because they are living organisms and as such much more influenced by the environment. Secondly, "quality control"i softe n difficult torealize .Furthermore ,biocontro l agentsar e subject to intense disputes and controversy: How hazardous are they? Are they less harmful than pesticides? How can their effectiveness be evaluated?Wha t areth erisks involve d in the use ofgeneticall y engin­ eered (highlyimproved )biocontro l agents(se eals oWestra , 1998)?

Table2 summarise sth econten t anchorsgenerate d so far.

Because large industries are involved, and because the research and development efforts require the investment of huge public resources andfinancia l support,th eimplementatio n ofnon-chemica l methodso f pest control have important sociological, political, and economical aspects.Th e education of farmers who are able to keep an eye out for alternativeswhe n directly involved in suchcomple x issueswil l require anintens eeducationa leffort . Also,i nvie wo fth eimportan tsocio-econ ­ omic aspects of the relevant political decisions which must be made concerning the slow and difficult development of non-chemical tools, the "education for action" should clearly not be limited to the agro- technicalpersona ldecision so fth efarmer , butshoul dals oempowe rth e farmers toac to nth epolitica l scene.

54 3 SUSTA1NAB1L1TY, CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND LEARNING

Feature Principle Examples

l.Inter- Looking at issues from a variety Looking at watershed disciplinarity of disciplinary vantage points management from the perspective and seeking a synthesis of nature conservation, agricultural production, recreation and economics

2. Environ­ Considering the environmental Monitoring the run-off of mental impact impact of one's decisions and minerals into the ground and actions surface waters, and considering their impact on the watershed.

3. Eye for Being susceptible to alternative Alternative ways of applying alternatives ways of thinking, valuing and minerals to the soil to minimise doing run-off while still maintaining acceptable production levels

4. Socio- Recognising and coping with Critically evaluate the knowledge scicntific conflicting knowledge claims and claims of environmentalists and disputes the normative aspects of such sales representatives of Agro- claims. chemical companies with regards to the use of fertilisers

5. Dealing with The wise, functional and critical Separating facts from myths and complexity use of expertise and scientific details from essentials in using knowledge. information to resolve mineral run-off problems on a farm

Table2 : SomeConten tAnchor s for Integrating Sustainability in Higher Education (source:Dreyfu s & Wals,2000 ,p .86 )

The anchors inTabl e2 areconten t anchors in that they helpa teache r selecttopic stha tar eabl et otrigge rinterdisciplinar y fields ofstud ytha t include environmental impact assessment, alternative ways of looking at an issue, socio-scientific disputes and the need to cope with com­ plexity.The y overlap to a degree with the process anchors inTabl e2 , but the process anchors are intended to help the teacher find suitable learning and instruction activities.O f coursei t should bekep t inmin d thatalthoug hth econtent ,proces san dgoal so feducatio nca nb edistin ­ guished toemphasis e apoin t ort oclarif y things,the y canno tb esepa ­ ratedi neducationa l practice.I nothe rwords : thegoals ,conten tan dpro -

55 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION cesso flearnin gfo rsustainabilit ynee dt ob ecompatibl ean d flownatu ­ rallyou to feac h other,sinc emismatche s arelikel yt obloc klearning .

3.4 Conclusions

When integrating sustainability in higher agricultural education it makes sense to focus on the development of somewhat fashionable - albeit fashionable for good reasons - post-modern ideas of empower­ ment, respect for pluralism, action competence, contextual or local knowledge,authenti c learning,grassroot sdecisio nmaking ,collaborati ­ vean d issue-based learning,systemics ,an d soon ,an d soon .Indeed ,a focus onthes e components isusefu l and mayeventuall y launch ane w generationo fhighe reducatio nprogramme san dcurricula :one stha tar e moresensitiv et oemancipator y learninggoal san dth econtextual ,open - ended and uncertainly-linked nature of the creation of pathways towards sustainability. The current challenge modern agriculture is facing makesclea r traditional approaches tohighe ragricultura l educa­ tion fall short indealin gwit huncertainty , incopin gwit hth enormativ e aspectso fdecisio nmakin gan di nunderstandin gth eimportanc eo flear ­ ning "on the edge", that is, learning at the crossroad of conflicting worldview sroote d invaryin gtraditions ,norm san dvalues .

The topic of sustainability has great potential for post-modern higher agricultural education when considering its ill-defined meaning, its socio-scientific disputecharacte ran d itsabilit yt olin kscience , techno­ logyan dsociety .It sill-define d meaningrequire s specific methodsan d efforts onth epar to fbot hth eeducato ran dth elearne rt omak ei tmean ­ ingful ina specifi c context.It ssocio-scientifi c disputecharacte rrequi ­ res a procedure for dealing with controversy, uncertainty, diverging values and interests,an d moraldilemmas .Whil e itspotentia l toexplo ­ re,critiqu ean dutilis e separateway so rsystem so fknowing ,understan ­ ding andvaluin grequire s learning processes and contents that provide for aric hcontex t for learning.

Students must certainly keep learning how to produce with maximum financial efficiency. Theymus tcontinu et olear nt ous ethei rknowledg e and intuition to solvetechnologica l andeconomica l problems.I nothe r words, they must learn to solve problems by moving into problem

56 3 SUSTAINABILITY, CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND LEARNING spaces until they design solutions which can beexplaine d anddemon ­ strated interm so f"takin gknowledg efo rgranted" .However ,i nvie wo f the crucial environmental crisis threatening the world, their education cann olonge rignor eth eissue so fsustainabl eagricultura l development. Theconten t scopeo fagricultura l education mustb ewidened . Students must come to appreciate the importance of environmental arguments thatma yaffec t theirwa yo flife .The ymus tacquir ene wintellectua labi ­ litiesan dsystemi ccompetencies .The ymus tb eeducate d tomak edeci ­ sions on the basis of uncertain, developing knowledge in various domains,an d onth ebasi so fthei rassessmen t oftentativ e claimsmad e bydisagreein g butequall yqualifie d experts.

Thisi sa nambitiou stas k for agricultural education,bu t iti surgent ,fo r sustainable development depends on education of the future citizens. Coming back to Alblas et al.'s (1995) idea of stimulating voluntary changesi nbehaviour ,i ti squit econsisten t withO'Riorda nan dVoisey' s vision (1997) of "the creation of a society and an economy that can comet oterm swit hth elife-suppor t limitso fth eplanet .Individual swil l havet obehav e associall y responsible citizens,no t self-gratifying con­ sumers, and to care for their neighbours near and far". Agriculture is certainly oneo f thehuma n activities that greatly impactsth ehealt ho f ourplanet .

57 Part II

EDUCATIONAN DTRAININ G FOR INTEGRATED RURAL DEVELOPMENT; STEPPING STONES FOR CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT

FabioCaporali PaulPace Bill Slee Nadarajah Sriskandarajah Arjen E.J. Wals Martvn Warren EXPLORING CURRICULUM RESPONSES TO INTEGRATED RURAL DEVELOPMENT

Thenee dfo r amor eintegrate d approacht oagricultura l productionan d thedevelopmen to frura l areasi sals oclearl yeviden t asland-us eclaim s increase not only in Europe but elsewhere in the world, while, the amount of rural space available is on a continuous decline. Integrated Rural Development (IRD)i sa nemergin gconcep t orthem e inagricul ­ turalrefor m theory,polic yan dpractice .Th eintentio no fIR Di st orais e the level ofeconomi cperformanc e in all sectorso fth erura l economy, topromot eth eshapin go fviabl erura lcommunities ,t omaintai nindige ­ nous cultures, to protect the environment and to conserve the natural features and appearance ofth elandscap e (Wals,et . al.,2004) .Wit ha n eyetoward sIR Dphilosophy ,th eE Uha sdevelope d itspolic y for rural development, which laysstres so n simplification, sustainability anda n integrated approach.Thes e developments throwu pexcitin g challenges and obligations for agricultural and forestry education sectors, which havetraditionall y focussed ona narrowe r scientific model for curricu­ lum development, to provide amore expansive range of skills,compe ­ tencies and knowledge that isconduciv e to amor e integrative form of development. Part I discussed in detail questions of why a more inte­ grativean dsystemi cperspectiv ei neducatio n isnecessar yan dpoint st o whattype so fke yanchor snee dconsideratio n for longter m sustainabi­ lity.Par t IIfocuse s onhow t oachieve/includ e someo fthes econsidera ­ tionsb yaddressin g indetai lth equestion :Ho wdoe sth eincrease dpres ­ surefo r expertise inIR Dtranslat e itself intoth edeman dfo r education­ alservice san dth edesig no fappropriat ecurricul ai npraxis ?Par tI Ifur ­ ther generates a number of stepping-stones for the development of Education andTrainin g for Integrated Rural Development (ETIRD)i n tertiary education, based on a two-year inter-institutional curriculum development project carried outunde rth eumbrell ao fth eAFANet .

Theoveral lai mo fth eETIR Dresearc hprojec t ist oexplore ,outlin ean d develop the communication, education and training strategies that are sensitivet oan dbuil dupo nbot huniversa l (i.e.European )an dcontextu ­ al(i.e .loca lo rregional )conception so fIRD .Th eproject-team , iscom -

61 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION posed of six experts in either rural development or curriculum develop­ ment or both, and represents higher education institutions in four European countries (Denmark, Italy, Malta, The Netherlands, and United Kingdom). The objectives of the project, as identified by these experts, are to: • make an inventory of current curriculum responses to changes in rural land use within European Institutions for Higher Agricultural Education, • investigate Communication, Education and Training (CE&T) pro­ grammes that are suitable for developing notions of IRD among stu­ dents, i.e. problem-based learning, (soft) systems thinking, interdis­ ciplinary learning, social learning, • describe four case studies of CE&T programmes for IRD in Europe (focusing on learning goals, learning and instruction methods, con­ tents and learning outcomes), • share and reflect on participant experiences in the network thus far with regards to alternative learning and instruction methods for teaching and learning for IRD, and • generate general guidelines for the development of CE&T program­ mes for IRD in Europe, complemented with examples of the contex­ tual application of these guidelines.

In order to realise the objectives listed above, a research cycle is desig­ ned that contains five key elements as represented in Figure 3 and des­ cribed briefly below. The first phase of the research consisted of an open exploration of different conceptualisations of IRD and curricular responses to IRD in Europe by the members of the AFANet Team, fol­ lowed by an inventory of existing ETIRD courses and programmes. This inventory is conducted using an on-line survey and the AFANet database of institutions active in higher agricultural education. On the bases of phase I outcomes, specific cases are selected for further in- depth investigation (phase 2)an d mediated confrontation (phase 3)acti ­ vities. Specifically, these two phases consist of the examination and comparison of four case studies from institutions that are selected as being of potential interest to others due to their innovative approach to ETIRD. Phase four consists of tentative extrapolations that work towards a consensus regarding the desired direction for IRD education by generating stepping-stones and appropriate curricular responses. In phase five an evaluation of the original conceptualisations of ETIRD is

62 4 EXPLORING CURRICULUM RESPONSES TO INTEGRATED RURAL DEVELOPMENT conducted inorde rt ounderstan dho wthes econcept snee d modification asa resul t of theresearch .Thus ,th e research itself canb e viewed as a learningcycle .

Phase 1:Ope n Exploration Exploring different conceptualisations of 1RDan d curricular responses toIR D inEurop e

\ Phase 2: In-depth Investigation Phasez 5: Evaluatio n Analysing the different perspectives, Review the learning process to generate and adapt educational philosophies, values and stepping stones for curriculum development interests underlying the various different conceptualisations ofIR D I Phase 3: Mediated Confrontation Phase 4: TentativI e Extrapolation Argumentative discussion about Working towards consensus about desired different curricular responses to IRD directions ineducatio n and training forIR D

Figure 3:Th e ETIRDresearc h cycle

The outcomes ofal l five phases are presented inth e following three chapters. Chapter 5 is an inventory of current practices (phase 1); Chapter 6i sa descriptio n ofselecte d case studies of"good " practice (phases2 an d 3);an dChapte r 7i sa synthesi so fke ychallenge st ocur ­ riculumdevelopmen t forintegrate drura ldevelopmen t(phase s4 an d 5).

63 AN INVENTORY OF INSTITUTIONAL PRACTISES

Inorde rt oimplemen tth efirst phas e(inventory )o fth eresearch ,a lin kt o anon-lin e surveyo nth etopi co frura l development education andtrain ­ ingprogram s issen tt ojus t over20 0peopl eworkin ga tagricultura luni ­ versitieso r colleges.Th emai n purpose ofth esurve y ist ogarne r infor­ mationo nth ecurren t statuso fIR Dprogram san didentif y programstha t indicate a high degree of sensitivity not only to traditional pedagogical practices(i.e .European )bu tals ot onon-traditional ,integrative ,an dcon ­ textual(i.e . localo rregional )aspect so feducatio n forrura ldevelopment . Thecomplet esurve yca nb efoun d on http://www.afanet.info/

Atota lo feighty-tw o individualsrespon d toth esurvey .O fthes eseven ­ ty-eight represent institutions based in Europe, two represent institu­ tions based in Africa and another two represent institutions based in North America.Th e main results of the survey can be summarised as follows: • 100%o fth erespondent sconside rrura ldevelopmen t educationa s an interdisciplinary field; • More than 2/3 (67%) of therepresentativ e institutions have created web-sites providing more information about their institution and theirspecifi c programmes; • Amajority , 3/4 or 75%,o fth eparticipant s arehighl yranke d within theirinstitutions ; • About 1/3(33% )o fth einstitution sinvolve dteac hrura ldevelopmen t asa separat ecours eo rmodule ; and • Many,2/ 3o r67% ,o fth erespondent s expressed theirwillingnes st o participate actively inth e development ofcas e studieso fexemplar y ETIRDi nth enex tphase so fth eresearch .

The sometime elaborate answerst oth eopen-ende d questions form the basis for thediscussio n aboutth egoals ,conten tan dproces so fETIR D and for the selection ofth efou r casestha t aredevelope d inth esecon d phase(in-dept h investigation) ofth eresearch .A n initial poolo fpoten ­ tial case study institutions is identified depending on the respondents'

65 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION input to each question and the completeness of a returned survey. In addition, the following selection criteria are utilised to further narrow downth etota l numbero fpotentia lcas estudies : • Aclea ran ddetaile ddescriptio no fth e learninggoals ; • Aclea ran ddetaile ddescriptio n ofth eteachin gapproach ; • An in-depth description of their perspective on rural development; and • An evidence of the respondent's willingness to become part of the research groupa sa cas e study key-informant.

The narrowing criteria listed above yield a total of twenty-eight short institutional profiles. The profiles help the team decide which institu­ tionst oselec tfo ra mor ein-dept hinvestigation .A sampl edescriptio no f eighto fth eparticipatin g institutionsi smad eavailabl ebelo wt oprovid e anoveral lperspectiv e ofth eprofiles .Th eprofile s arepresente d asori ­ ginallyreceive d andwithou t languageediting .Althoug h not all institu­ tionstha tresponde dca nb epresente dbelow , acomplet e listo fth einsti ­ tutionsca nb e found inWal se tal. ,2004 .

Institution:Czec hUniversit y ofAgricultur e inPragu e Country: CzechRepubli c Course name:Socia lan dregiona l development

Learning goals The education responds to the needs of the Czech society which is entering intoa European Union structure. The graduates and Ph.D. students should be trained in systemicthinking ,t ohav eth eabilitie so fqualifie d decision-making insolvin g differ­ enttype so fproblems ,bein gabl et ob eemphati ci nsolvin gsociall ysensitiv eproblem s in rural areas.Th e students should obtain theoretical fundaments to be able tocop e with designing and implementing various strategies of rural development. They shouldb eabl et ogather ,analys ean dinterpre tvariou sdat arelate dt orura lareas .The y shouldb eabl et omanag eth eproject s andals ob ever yskille d inusin gIT .

Teaching approach Acombinatio n of theoretical fundaments with practical addressing real problemsi n concrete localities.M yexperienc e is that students sometime even can help with the problemsth ecommunitie sthe yliv ein .I kno wi t isbase do nth eknowledg efrom th e theoreticalbackgroun dan dpracticall yelaborate d duringth eseminars .Als ousin gT V programs isusefu l todemonstrat evariou sissues .

66 5 AN INVENTORY OF INSTITUTIONAL PRACTISES

Understanding of Rural Development: Integrated means to focus with the same emphasis on various aspect of the rural life in thecombinatio n with national and global life. It means to address economic social, psychological, environmental, cultural, political, architectonic and other issues to­ gether. Only addressing all aspects, the development can be economically profitable, environmentally friendly and socially acceptable (i.e. sustainable development). Integrated development means sustainable development. Moreover it means not to focus on individual sectors or regions but to see the issues in their complexity.

Institution: Humbold-Universitaet zu Berlin Country: Germany Course name: International Agricultural Sciences

Learning goals Graduates should: be able to contribute to the solution of economic and social problems of rural development be able tocontribut e to food security and safeguarding of natural resources have the necessary social, scientific and methodological competences be able to critically analyze,evaluat e and transfer the knowledge gained be able to work in teams and ina n interdisciplinary way

Teachingapproach Problem oriented learning, small, intercultural groups

Understanding of Rural Development Solving the puzzle of the "critical triangle"(or; the three E's): achieving production goals (efficiency) and at the same time safeguarding the environment and eradicating poverty (equity issue).

Institution: University College Dublin Country: Ireland Course name: Master of Agriculture science

Learning Goals The development of a wide range of professional skills and competencies including:appraisin g and designing projects; planning effective programmes; deliver­ ing and managing development programmes; monitoring and evaluating projects; researching the situation; facilitating community development; leadership develop­ ment; and communication skills.

67 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

TeachingApproach: Exposure to the literature on theory, policy and practice of rural development with a strong emphasis on "hands-on"teachin gan d learning where principlesan d techniques are applied to solve practical problems.A field-base d placement and research project is an essential part of theTeachin g and Learning experience.

Understanding of Rural Development: Tackling the economic, social and environmental problems of rural areas following a multi-sectoral approach that is participatory at all stages of the project cycle; and involves building effective public private and community partnership structures as a vital element of sustainable development.

Institution: The Pennsylvania State University Country: United States Course name: CEDEV 500

Learning goals The ma-1 objectives of the programs are to educate professionals who will assume leadersh.p roles in helping establish and maintain viable communities and communi­ ty organizations. Graduates will become deeply involved in assisting localities with a variety of issues, including: developing new organizations and new industries, growth management, protecting the environment, revitalizing downtown areas, neighborhood improvement, enhancing the local quality-of-life, assisting educational, social, health and human service systems, and developing vital infrastructure - in short, helping communities shape their own futures. Instruction in the CEDEV program emphasizes training entry and mid-career practitioners in public, non-profit, or private organiza­ tions for dealing with thevariet y ofdevelopmen t issues inAmerica' s towns,boroughs , small cities, community organizations, neighborhoods, and rural areas. While many universities focus attention on larger urban and metropolitan areas, this is an applied multidisciplinary program that draws on the significant expertise in development of faculty in our department.

Teachingapproach: A combination of theoretical material and applied tools and techniques are used. Education should include seminars and workshops as well as hands-on experience in the laboratory and the field.

Understanding of Rural Development: Consideration of communities as whole systems which are parts of larger systems. Each ispar t of the whole and the whole is more than the sum of theparts .

68 5 AN INVENTORY OF INSTITUTIONAL PRACTISES

Institution:Agricultur e University of Athens Country: Greece Course name:Agricultura l and Rural Development

Learning Goals Students have to acquire a broad spectrum of issues related to rural development. Therefore after the first three years (6 semesters) of subjects relating to various disci­ plinary aspects of agriculture (including: Political Economy, Microeconomics, Introduction to Agricultural Economics, Rural Sociology, Macroeconomics, Applied Economic Statistics, Agricultural Production Economics, and Mathematics of Finance), a wide range of more interdisciplinary courses is provided, such as: Agricultural Policy, Farm Management, Comparative Agriculture, Quantitative Methods in Economic Analysis, Agricultural Marketing, Analysis of the Pricing of Agricultural Products, Agricultural Credit and Finance, Agricultural Education, Agricultural Extension, Agricultural and Rural Development: Theory and Policy, Methods in Agricultural Economics and Social Research, Cooperative Economics, Agro-environmental Policies, Economics of European Integration, Assessment of Agricultural Investments etc. Furthermore, students have to submit a thesis (10th semester).Therefore , students areprovide d with knowledge relating to the economic, social and environmental dimensions of rural development along with solid knowl­ edge concerning technical aspects of agronomic education and training. The overall aim of the Department concerns the provision of knowledge which, inturn , will allow the students to become capable professionals in the field of sustainable development in rural areas while taking into account the broader framework, i.e. European Integration as well as the world-wide developments concerning the agro-industrial and market conditions.

Teachingapproach In brief, a process-oriented curriculum is needed. The approach has to be systemic/ holistic globally-oriented, and interdisciplinary, involving elements such as learning through action,tea m work insmal l groups,learnin g for an open mindan dcarefu l faci­ litation. Thus, education has to involve elements of creative education like inquiry, discussion, planning, co-operation and appropriate action. Group-work is necessary as it advances communication skills, reinforces the importance of citizen participa­ tion, creates meaningful learning situations for students, utilises the interests, creati­ vity, and curiosity of students as it does with controversy which is thus turned to a source of conceptual change.Thi s way,learnin g is the continuous process of concep­ tual change and central to this ishelpin g students to advance their learning strategies. Within such a context teachers are to be viewed as facilitators and co-learners. They facilitate learning byprovidin g learning experiences that induce change through deba­ te and dialogue.Teacher s have to have the qualities of'transformative intellectuals'.

Understanding of Rural Development It means ane wparadig m for rural development taking intoaccoun t the socio-cultural, economic and environmental aspects.Th e overall aim has to be the close examination of the dynamic balance among many factors such as political,technological , econom-

69 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

ic, ethical, cultural and environmental. Nowadays, rural development represents a 'way out' of the limitations and lack of prospects intrinsic to the modernisation para­ digm and the accelerated scale-enlargement and industrialisation it entails.Thi s new paradigm is of a multi-level, multi-actor and multi-facetted nature. In this context the farming/rural systems approaches have to beutilise d inorde r to understand the multi­ ple dimensions and possible synergies (as well as the negative feedback). Within the framework of rural development new forms and mechanisms for co-ordination and conflict management must be developed; methodologies have to beo f a participatory nature.

Institution: Royal Agriculture College Country: UK Course name: International Rural Development

Learning goals Understanding and competence in rural development from a social, economic and environmental perspective understanding of, and empathy with, other cultures and societies communication skills, project management skills.

Teachingapproach Outline framework, enquiry, case studies, discussion, development of core skills through workshops.

Understanding of Rural Development Developing and guiding critical human capital in order to balance human demands with the critical capital and the currently dominant economic capital.

Institution: Swedish University of Agriculture Country: Sweden Course name: Extension and Rural Development

Learning goals Tovie w the rural sector in broader terms To see rural in systemic terms To provide opportunity to learn through an action learning medium which of a num­ ber of iterations of practice,critica l reflection and abstraction. To provide a conceptual base which will students to critical reflect upon theories, methods and practices pertaining to rural development.

Teachingapproach An action learning approach.

Understanding of Rural Development: Integrated rural development requires a systemic view of looking at rural activity.

70 5 AN INVENTORY OF INSTITUTIONAL PRACTISES

Institution: Lithuanian University of Agriculture Country: Lithuania Course name:Th e administration of rural development

Learning goals Programs of studies are orientated to training broad-minded specialists who are able tothin k creatively and make thebes t decisions inchangin g situations in therura l areas

Teachingapproach Learning by creation of projects, discussions and comparative analysis, distance learning, workshops.

Understanding of Rural Development To me Integrated Rural Development means: sustainable growth of rural areas: soci­ al, economical ecological, psychological.

The results of the inventory show a number of common patterns. In terms of the descriptions of the learning goals, most respondents emphasise the promotion of a systemic orbroa d view or the ability to think out of the disciplinary box in a more holistic or integrated way. Furthermore, many stress the importance ofcommunicatio n skillsan d theabilit y toempathis e withothers .Anothe r learninggoa l thati sregu ­ larly cited istha t ofcritica l thinking andth e ability tocriticall y follow trends in policy-making, society (shifting consumer needs) and farm­ ing.Finally ,a numbe ro fadditiona l competenciesar ementioned ,inclu ­ ding,projec t management,creativ ethinkin gan dworkin gi n(interdisci ­ plinary)teams .

In terms of the teaching approaches that are favoured byth e respond­ ents,agai n more similarities than differences areapparent . Most stress interactive forms of teaching and learning such as: action learning, workshop-based learning,process-base d learning,an dhands-on ,expe ­ riential learning,al lreferrin g tolearnin gtha t supports thecreatio n ofa meaningful synthesisbetwee n theory andpractic e incombinatio n with therelevan tdisciplines .

Interm so fth erespondents 'understandin go fIRD ,a commo npatter no f triple P (Planet, People, Profit) and triple E (Equity, Environment, Efficiency) oriented views of rural development emerges.Al l seem to

71 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION call for amor e systemic view of rural development involving multiple timescales ,multipl e stakeholdersan dsectors ,an dmultipl evalues .

All respondents are involved in very concrete teaching and learning activities - some by means of a special course or module, some by means of a special degree and some by meanso f regular coursestha t seek to include some of the aspects listed above.Th e case studycom ­ ponent of this research is designed to explore good practice in-depth and, in a way, to verify how high-minded social and human developmenttheorie si nth econtex to fsustainabl eagricultura lan dinte ­ grated rural development manifest themselves inpractice , specifically withregar dt ocurriculu m innovationsan ddevelopment .Th enex tchap ­ ter highlights the four cases that are selected for in-depth analysis as part ofphase s2 an d3 o fth e ETIRDresearc hcycle .

72 CASE STUDIES

Themember so fth eETIR Dworkin ggrou pfurthe r examineth eabove - mentioned eight institutions bystudyin gth esubmitte d documentsan d the provided web links. Each of the core group members is given an opportunityt oexpres shis/he rpreferenc e for certain institutestha twar ­ rant further exploration and analysis. Ultimately however, a good geographical distribution isdeeme d tob e important toallo w forpossi ­ ble intra-regional differences and relevance to emerge,whil eminimiz ­ ing inter-regional variations. As a result, one institution each from Southern, Northern, Eastern-central and Western Europe is selected. Using thecriteri a from the on-line survey results, in combination with thepersona lknowledg eo fth evariou sinstitution so fth eindividua lcor e group members, the following cases are selected: University College Dublin (Ireland), University dellaTuscia-Viterb o (Italy),Universit y of Cordoba (Spain), Czech University of Agriculture Prague (Czech Republic). These four institutions are visited by one of the working group members for a two-day period during which time a number of people are interviewed about the respective programs. The site visits result in four cases,whic h arecorroborate d bythos e whoar eintervie ­ wed.Tabl e3 identifie s someke ydetail sconcernin g the four casestud ­ iestha thav ebee n selected.

• Abroa d listo fgenera lguideline san dcharacteristic stha tar eintegra l toth e case studies isgenerate d at aworkin g meeting ofth eETIR D group as follows; A critical and objective evaluation is essential rathertha n aself-reporte d 'feel good'subjectiv e impression ofwha t goeson . • A direct consideration of needs and demands by asking: Whose needsar e thecourses/programme s taking into account?Wha t inter­ estsar ebein gserved ? • Although theprimar y focus ofth eresearc h exploration iso n formal higher education, an awareness and sensitivity to links being made for lifelong learning initiatives and learning taking place within otherinstitution stha tsuppor trura l development mustb epresent .

73 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

• Programmes that promote 'active learning' and 'problem-oriented' learning areo fspecia linteres t forETIRD . • Theintende d audiences for thecas e studiesar ecurriculu mdevelop ­ ers,cours eco-ordinator s anduniversit yteachers . • Eithera cours eo ra degre eo rbot h mayb econsidered .

Institution Contact Address Country Email

Czech Michal Dept. of Humanities, Czech Lostak University of Lostâk Faculty of Economics Republic @pef.czu.cz Agriculture in and Management, Czech Prague University of Agriculture Kamycka 129 Case developer: 165 21Praha6-Suchdol Fabio Corporali Czech Republic

University Joe Dept. of Agribusiness, Ireland Joseph.Mannion College Dublin Mannion Extension and Rural @ucd.ie Development Case developer: University College Dublin Bill Slee Belfield, Dublin 4 Ireland

University of Maria Equippo Desarrollo Rural Spain es2desem Cordoba Mar Etsiam @uco.es Delgado PO BOX 3048 Case developer: Eduardo E-14080 CORDOBA Martyn Warren Ramos Spain

Università Prof. Dipartimento di Italy Caporali dellaTusci a - Fabio Produzione végétale,vi a @unitus.it Viterbo Caporali S.CamillodeLellis,01100 Viterbo Case developer: Italy Sri Sriskandaraja

Table3 : ETIRDcas e study conductors and key informants

Subsequently a more focussed list of questions for guiding case study development with regards to sustainability in higher education is for­ mulatedbase do nth esi xcategorie spropose db yCorcora n etal . (2004).

74 6 CASE STUDIES

The six categories include ideology, programme drivers, responsive­ ness, institutional linkages, access and pedagogy.Th e questions within each category are exemplified below.

A Ideology (values/ethics) Is the programme's ideology explicit or not?3 Is the programme needs based? What isth e balance between cognitive and affective objectives? Are sustainability issues coupled with issues about responsibility?

B Programme drivers What is the programme's ideology? Who/what areth eprogramme' s drivers (market,client, beneficiaries)? From where do funds for the programme originate? What is the policy of the programme? How does the programme address the needs of the individual/people? What RD need is addressed by the programme?

C Responsiveness Does the programme respond to learners' needs? Does the programme respond to employers' needs? Does the programme respond to the needs of those interacting with the learners? Is peer opinion about the programme sought and valued? Does the programme give space for critical reflection? How is quality assurance carried out? Is programme evaluation formative or summative?

D Institutional linkages Is the programme linked to other learning initiatives? Is learning driven by links to networks and/or NGOs? Does curriculum development involve any partners? Is there evidence of any networking activity on an academic level? on a local level? on a global level? How does the programme fit in within the overall institution's ed­ ucational framework?

3 Programme refers to aprogramme of study or a course.

75 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

E Access • Isth eprogramm e flexible torespon d todifferen t learningstyles ? • Doesth eprogramm ehav eflexibl e entry/exit points? • Doesth eprogramm e offer distance-learning opportunities? • Doesth eprogramm eoffe r opportunities for part-time learning? • Doesth eprogramm ecate rt oan dprepar e learnersfo r lifelong learn­ ing?

F Pedagogy • Doesth eprogramm epromot e active learning? • Doesth eprogramm e addressequity/ethica l issues? • Areth e learningexperience spresente dproble m based/experiential? • Is the adopted approach systemic/holistic, hence promoting system thinking andsyste mpractice ? • Isth edistinctio nbetwee ntheor yan dpractic eblurre do rhighlighted ? • Dolearnin gexperience soffere d foster lifelong learning? • Whatar eth elearnin goutcome so fth eprogramme ? • Whatar eth ecompetence s developed throughth eprogramme ? • Doesth eprogramm e developconflic t resolution skills? • Doesth eprogramm ehel plearner st oadequatel yexplor esustainabi - lityissues ? • Does the programme present concepts (e.g. sustainability) as fixed ornegotiabl e concepts? • Doesth eprogramm e encouragemultipl e perspectives? • Doesth e programme give adequate attention to the development of values? • Isespouse dtheor ymatche dwit hth etheor yi nus ei nth eprogramme ? • How isknowledg e acquired during theprogramme ? Is itdiscipline - driven? • IsIR Dlearnin gclearl y sequenced? • Whatar eth eassessmen t approaches adopted byth eprogramme ?

Iti sdecide db yth etea mtha tth ecas estudie snee dno tb estructure diden ­ ticallyan dtha ti ti sunlikel ytha tal lo fth eabov ebroache d questionsca n be undertaken. However, to allow for a relative degree of analysis and comparison,th efollowin g aspectso fa programm emus tb eaddressed . • Personal historyo fth eprogramm e coordinator/developer • History of thedevelopmen t of theprogramm e (how it evolved,bar ­ riers encountered,ho wth ebarrier swer eresolved ,an ypartnerships )

76 6 CASE STUDIES

The ethoso fth e programme (what isspecia l aboutth eprogramme , isther ean ycompetitio n withothe rprogrammes ) Thetarge taudienc e( abrie fbi oo fa typica l learner)an dth enumbe r oflearner sattendin gth eprogramm e Levelo feducatio n andentr y requirements Aimsan dobjective s ofcours e Curriculum plan: main areas addressed,assessmen t methods adopt­ ed,interfac e withoutsid e organisations/institutions Learnerevaluatio n ofth eprogramm e Programme evaluation byth eprogramm e co-ordinator Plansfo r future development ofth eprogramm e

n-depthinvestigatio n offou r programmes nth e following sectionsTh eCzec hUniversit y ofAgricultur e- Czech Republic,Universit yColleg eDubli n- Ireland,Universit yo fCordob a - Spain, and the University of Viterbo - Italy are each detailed as case studiesfo rphase s2 an d3 ofth eresearc hcycle .A sth ein-dept hinvesti ­ gation ofth efou r institutions ispresented ,no t onlyth e internal context withinth euniversit ybu ta nattemp ta tth elarge rexterna l contextoutsi ­ deth euniversit ytha t influence howeac h ofth eETIR Dprogramme si s developed isals oelucidated .

CaseStudies: Introduction Inth e last century the foremost task ofth e agricultural sector inman y countries has been to intensify national food production in order to guarantee food security.Bu tthi smai nobjectiv e isfrequentl y accompa­ nied byothe r national and socio-economical objectives, noles simpor ­ tant,suc has :a )th econsolidatio n ofa socia l groupresponsibl e forpro ­ duction;b )th eintegratio no fth eprimar ysecto ri nth evalu echain ,toge ­ ther with other productive sectors; c) the liberation of labour in rural areas,t ob eoccupie d inothe r sectorsand/o rterritories ;d )th eaccumu ­ lationo fcapita l and itstransfe r toothe r sectors;e )th e improvement in quantity and quality of the level of consumption; and f) the displace­ mento fth eadde ddemand .

Theprotectio npolicie sfo rth eagricultura l sector,primaril yi ncountrie s thatar eabl et oaffor d them,ar eaime da tsupportin gthes evariou snatio ­ nalan dsocio-economica l objectivest oth egreates texten tpossible .Th e substitution of importsstrategy , followed not many decades ago by

77 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION countries such as Brazil, or the European agreement on the desirable model for family agriculture, made clear at the beginning of the CommonAgricultura l Policy ofth eEuropea n Union,ar eonl ytw over y different exampleso fthes e additional objectives ando fpubli cpolicie s established toachiev ethem .

Themodernisatio n processtha tworl dagricultur eha sbee nexperiencin g sinceth egree nrevolutio n ismad epossible ,amon gothe r factors, byth e introduction of higher education system linkages to 1)agricultura l re­ search and development (i.e. agro-technical or scientific in nature) in combinationwit h2 )researc hextensio n(i.e .socio-agricultura li nnature ) activities. Different countries,accordin gt othei rdegre eo frelativ edevel ­ opmentan dthei row nstrateg y forth eagricultura l sector,attac hvaryin g degreeso fimportanc et oone ,both ,o ra combinatio no fth etwo . Thus, the four institutions in the case study work within the broader contextual realities of their national socio-economical and agricultural policies(external )an dth enarrowe rcontextua lrealitie stha texis twithi n their own institutions (internal).Thei r programmes are consequentlya reflection ofbot hhigher-leve l national strategies and lower-level insti­ tutional strategies that involve university management, administration, faculty, andstudents .

6.1 MSc-degreei nPubli cAdministratio n andRegiona l Developmento fth eCzec hUniversit yo fAgriculture ,Prague 4

6.1.1Background Indevelopin g theMS ccours e on"Publi cAdministratio n and Regional Development," the Czech University of Agriculture (CUA) applied a methodology that considers the degree curriculum as an input/output educational process(Figur e4) .

Thedecision-makin g processi sinfluence d bybot hexterna lan dintern ­ al inputs or, respectively, external and internal contexts.Th e external context is influenced by a variety of informational inputs originating from international,nationa l and localleve lsources . Thisexterna l input

4 Thiscase study isdeveloped byProf. Fabio Caporali inco-operation withDr. Micha] Lostâk.

78 6 CASE STUDIES forms a general framework of reference for decision making. The internal context is influenced by informational inputs originating from within the University, the Faculty, the Departments and the personal preferences ofth e people initially involved and who initiated the degree development process.

The outputs of the degree course can be described in terms of achieve­ ments to be pursued at a personal and an institutional level. Key factors and conditionstha t demand continuous attention,monitorin g and evalua­ tion interm so fpersona l and institutional achievements include:persona l educational success; professional skills and job opportunities of grad­ uates; attitude towards interdisciplinary, participatory, problem solving, experiential and systemic learning; academic staff responsibility; and more general societal benefits for public and private institutions derived fromimprove d networking, local sustainable development strategies,an d education atth e local,regional , national and international levels.

All the necessary information to build up knowledge about the Public Administration and Regional Development degree course is based on the AFANet IRD online survey and a three-day visit to Prague by the interviewer, Prof. Fabio Caporali.Th e three-day visit consists of gather­ ing official university documents and other documents from key insti­ tutions, interviews with teachers, students and graduates in the degree course, plus interviews with the head of the Department of Humanities and the vice-dean of the Faculty of Economics and Management. Interviews are based on the standard form designed by the AFAnet- ETIRD group (Wals et al., 2004).

6.1.2 External driving forces At CUA external inputs are a crucial source of motivation in defining new curriculum development strategies. The continuous political and academic processes of harmonisation in Europe are among the most important driving forces in new curricula development. The political harmonisation aspect is built into the SAPARD Programme (the European Union Special Accession Programme for Agricultural and Rural Development) and for academia intoth e Bologna Declaration.Th e SAPARD Programme provides support for pre-accession measures for agriculture and rural development in the applicant countries in the pre- accession period.Th e government of the Czech Republic has prepared a

79 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

SAPARDPla ntha ti sbase do nth eNationa l Programmefo rth eprepara ­ tionfo rmembershi pt oth eEuropea nUnio n inadditio nt oothe rnationa l andregiona l plans.Th e European Commission has accepted theCzec h SAPARDPla nan di ti sno wa neffectiv e politicalan dimplementin gpro ­ gramme,t owhic habou t75 0project s havealread ybee nsubmitted .

The new goal of meeting pre-accession conditions to the EU force the Czech Republicgovernmen t toimplemen t dramatic internal restructur­ ing within institutions and to re-organise the demands for human resources,a tas knecessar y after thenegativ e impacto fcollectivisatio n onrura lcommunitie sdurin gpost-worl d warI Icommunism .A tth een d of the 1960s in Czechoslovakia almost 90%o f land is socialised (col- lectivised), largely inso-calle d Uniform Agricultural Co-operatives.I n 1989, 1656 agricultural co-operativesexis twit ha naverag elan dare ao f 2591h ape runi t (ranging from 200h at o 8000ha )an d 171stat e farms with an average land area of 8432 ha (from 2000 ha to 80,000 ha). Private farming isalmos ttotall yabolishe d andconstitute sonl yabou t3 % of the total arable land (Hudeckova and Lostak, 1992). The pre­ existingsocia lorder ,propert ycondition san drura lculture ,ar eprogres ­ sively destroyedb ycollectivisation .Nonetheless ,a loca lpeasan t cultu­ re persists in rural villages.Th e result is that the present rural society lacks the confidence to manage its fate, to cope with problems and to regardth efutur e witha sens eo fpurpose .Thi sgenera lovervie wo fcur ­ rentsocieta l apathyemerge sdurin gth einterview swit hteachers ,head s of staff and students. In particular, the characteristics that dominate present day rural communities include an overall lack of solidarity;a lack of interest in civic affairs; an unwillingness to assure public res­ ponsibility;a norientatio ntowar dwor konl yfo ronesel fan done' sfami ­ lyi nth ecours eo fexchang eo fservice sbetwee nneighbours ;a nunwil ­ lingness to undertake any private enterprise, especially in agriculture; anda preferenc e forpassiv eentertainmen t offered byth emas smedia .

Oneo fth erepercussion so fcollectivisatio n istha tman yfarmer s areno t preparedt otak eresponsibilit y forfarmin g ineithe rth etraditiona l fami­ lyfarms , the so-called agricultural owners'co-operatives ,o rth enewl y emerging forms ofprivat enon-famil y farming.A sa resul t agricultural entrepreneurship is almost non-existent. To improve the agricultural environment, the Parliament of Czech Republic approved, as early as 1992,a documen t outlining somebasi c strategies for agricultural tran-

80 6 CASE STUDIES

sition and rural development (Ministry of Agriculture of Czech Republic, 1994). Atpresent , 30%o fth e land inCzec h Republic is far­ med by owner co-operatives; 44%b y shareholders or limited liability companies;an d26 %b yfamil y farmers (GreenReport ,2000) .

External Inputs <

International National Local

Personal

Students

Institutional Personal International STUDENTS National ', ' • cultural Local • professional • Networking « * • employment • Sustainable development strategy TEACHERS • Education • interdisciplinarity • participatory attitude • problem solving • experiential learning • systemic approach • responsibility

Figure 4: Development of a degree course as an input/output process CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

To implement the national strategy for agricultural and rural develop­ ment, a cadre of appropriately educated and trained individuals and a readily available pool of human resources are necessary. The task of creating this pool of trained human resources falls on institutions of higher education such as universities. The CUA in Prague (established in 1906) is a leading educational centre in the agrarian sector.Th e four faculties including 1) Economics and Management, 2) Agronomy, 3) Mechanisation, and 4) Forestry plus the Tropical and Subtropical Agriculture Institute offer bachelor, master and doctoral education pro­ grammes to more than 8500 students (both full and part-time). The CUA is an open university, where curricula and research strategy are developed in collaboration with Czech and foreign universities, namely in Vienna, Berlin, Zurich, Wageningen, Uppsala, Cork, Plymouth, Copenhagen, Montpellier, etc.Th e original idea for the development of a degree course in "Public Administration and Regional Development" emerged from previous contacts with the other European institutions. The Faculty of Economics and Management (FEM) within the CUA is responsible for the development of the course structure and content.

FEM educates specialists for the management of technological proces­ ses in agriculture and in the wider economy (i.e. finance, banking, insurance, informatics, business and trade).I n itsresearc h and advisory work FEM focuses on the needs of the agrarian and rural/regional sec­ tors of the Czech Republic in the whole range of business activities, as well as with the wider economy and both the public and private sectors. Four thousand students attend the FEM. A CUA evaluation report sta­ tes, "FEM at CUA in Prague ranks among very well functioning econ­ omic faculties comparable with those abroad. It has attained very good results in the sphere of pedagogical and research activities". In 2001, the FEM's placement inth e top level-groupA - was reconfirmed on the basis of re-accreditation of pedagogical and research activities. Global contacts and international cooperation are at the core of the faculty's programme development, with the underlying expectation that the increased contacts will lead to a) a higher level of education and research; b) an expansion of cultural opportunity for the students and staff; c) an increase in acquisition of financial resources from interna­ tional programmes; d) an improvement in international credit; and, finally, e) an extension of didactic co-operation with foreign partners.

82 6 CASE STUDIES

6.1.3 Structure andfunctioning of the MSc inPublic Administration and Rural Development The MSc in PublicAdministratio n and Rural Development (PA & RD) is established in the academic year 1999-2000, following a faculty board decision in the context of a long-term strategy development as described in section 6.1.2above .Th e study curriculum is accomplished in co-operation with the Czech Ministry of Agriculture, the Agrarian Chambers of the Czech Republic and foreign university partners such as Wageningen University, Netherlands; BOKU, Vienna; SLU, Uppsala; and Humboldt University, Berlin.Th e structure ofth e curricu­ lum isillustrate d inTabl e4 ,wher e 16cor e courses with their associated units of credit are allocated according to their semester position and to their academic disciplines (corridor or orientation).Thi s MSc is atwo - year, four-semester degree course.

The philosophy of the degree programme calls for an integration of each of the four disciplinary area or corridors i.e. Economics, Manage­ ment, Public Administration, and Regional and Social Development into each of the four semesters. As the programme progresses, the teaching and learning develops from more general and theoretical con­ cepts in the first two semesters to more specialised and applied knowl­ edge, problems and solutions by the last two semesters. Within the lar­ ger disciplinary corridors, amor e internal coherence among each disci­ pline is pursued by the coordination of their contents.

The integration between theory and practice at the curriculum level is realised by the implementation of a project (Master thesis or Diploma thesis) which consists of a four-step process with one step to be com­ pleted ineac h semester.A projec t (Master's thesis) isusuall y completed by the execution of sequential steps as follows: • Problem identification - the establishment of the theoretical part of the project including literature review and the theoretical back­ ground set up for the work. • Project methodology - a detailed definition of the project objectives andth eelaboratio n ofth emethodolog y tob euse d inth e project work. • Project implementation - the empirical and practical work such as the acquisition of data for project research goals in accordance with themethodolog y and theoretical conditions elaborated earlier.Thi s is with the supervision and co-operation of a local influential group.

83 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

_, oo o H

.2 o 5 'C <~ üs Sogoog-- « § 5 & 2 U El" o a O. U

C «4-1 y~- •ÄR » s. -s ° .a •- „ oo o •£ 'fS aso ° S. — tó f , g o S. 5 o U w ! •§' 1 8- Ë C UI w c/l ** 'gal" oo "9 J3 00 3"

UJ!«! 1 o .S ËÔ.Ï« •3 o g o -S e« rt . .'S u .2 •s-s. § 1.1 ë Ä | B I-S"-I I frlM — 4» u i» c '§3"is § 'T 1 u O OS o- X£ =5 B = '" 8* OH EO S Q 00

IS l'A o -a « 3 1 S-l w a ö i« o fj-in

Ou

M 1» — C II ° ëf2 IJ'S s« E g •g ° ËS oo °S -U 3 2 "> rî u CJ

r* C R 5 4« 5 Jag* lâl

T3 1 .a s fr c 'S w ^ _ a oo og M-c og ^ 4> 2 < E u o < c .S- S S o -g f» O u . O 2 - § LU •a o UJ p S 3 fi w m s. s o 5 S 3 J» -J 22 4*

Table 4: MS e in Public Administration and Regional Development

84 6 CASE STUDIES

• Project analysis and report writing - the assessment of the project outcomes, data analyses and interpretation with suggested problem solutions and aconclusion .Assimilatio n of the four project stepsi n a final write-up orthesis .

Problem solving and experiential learning are crucial components in theproces so fprojec t development and implementation.

6.1.4 RegionalIntegration for RuralDevelopment TheMS cfocuse s onstrategie so fregiona l integration ofrura ldevelop ­ ment.T oachiev e this goal,teachin g facilities areuse d which combine full-time campus and distance studies. The Faculty of Economics provides teaching in four centres for distance learning in the Czech Republic(Prague ,Cheb ,Mos tan dHrade cKralove) .Th ethre eregiona l centres (Cheb, Most and Hradec Kralove) have been chosen because theyar elocate d inregiona l areaswit hdifferen t characteristics interm s ofsocio-economi c andbio-physica l conditions.Th ecor ecurriculu m is modified according to specialisations, which are tailor-made for the special need of the regions. The connections with the three regional centres have mostly been established in collaboration with the local Agrarian Chambers, whose mission is to establish farmers marketing organisations,t osuppor t thebusines s activities of itsmembers ,t opro ­ mote and protect their interests and to cater for their needs. The Agrarian Chambers areentruste d with apar t ofth e administration and organisation of the distance learning centres. Other non-governmental organisations which can helpa t national and local levels in organising visits, seminars and meetings and in providing materials and support useful for student' experiential learning and problem solving are also involved asnecessary .

Academic links are established with other institutions in the Czech Republic in order to strengthen both teaching activities and student enrolment.Man ystudent swh oappl yfo rth eMS ci nP A& R Dar egrad ­ uates from these institutions and make uppar t ofth e flow of about4 0 full-time studentswh oente rth eMS cprogra m eachyear .

85 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

6.1.5 Outcome assessment

New curricula According to the opinions expressed by both teachers and students in their interviews, a broader base of knowledge and practical approaches should be provided in order to comply with the aim to master the whole field of integrated and sustainable rural development. At the present time, the MSc degree course in PA& RD offers an appropriate specia­ lisation on sectors like economics, law and sociology, but lacks an appropriate base for integrating the biophysical aspects of sustainable development. One solution to this problem envisaged at the Faculty of Economics and Management is to offer a new curriculum at the BSc level. This new curriculum branches out to other faculties and depart­ ments at CAU, which help the students obtain a more pluralistic per­ spective on rural development. Taking this initiative will lead to amor e integrated approach to rural development within the larger educational system (BSc + MSc), that is to say a broader base of knowledge devel­ oped at the BSc level while maintaining the more specialised approach in economics, sociology and law at the MSc level.

Postgraduate options After completing the master studies,CA U offers postgraduates doctoral (PhD) study courses that take three years in the following accredited fields: 1) Business Economics, 2) Management and Marketing, 3) System Engineering; 4) Business Administration; 5) Information Management, and 6) Regional and Social Development (following the MSc in PA & RD). The PhD degree is bestowed upon graduates after the completion of rigorous examinations and the submission of a doc­ toral dissertation.

Social outcomes The integrated approach torura l development inth e PA& R DMS cpro ­ gram is regarded as a key factor in the production of an educated and skilled labour force. These professionals are seen to be able to contri­ bute toth e removal of major weak points inCzec h agriculture,tha t con­ cern the lack of:

86 6 CASE STUDIES

• Administrativestaf f ablet otackl eth echallenge so frura ldevelopmen t withinth eCzec h Republici nvie wo fEuropea nre-integratio n andth e cultural reconstruction ofa post-communis t ruralcommunity ; • Investment inagricultura l plantst oachiev eprogres si nremovin gth e insufficient levelso fwelfar e andhygien estandards ; • Improved competitiveness inth eprimar yproductio n andth eproces ­ sing industry toallo wjob st ob emaintaine d inrura lareas ; • Investment in land consolidation to contribute to the settlement of ownershipright san dth ecreatio n ofa functiona l landmarkets ; • Support for the preparation and implementation of micro-regional development strategieswit hth eparticipatio n ofloca linhabitant san d businesses, including support for investment in infrastructures in ruralareas ; • Support for the diversification of activities in rural areas to help reduceth ehig h levelo funemploymen t inrura l areasan dt osto pth e migration tourba nareas ; • Support of agri-environmental farming in protected areas, as pilot projects toexten d experiences inmaintainin g and increasing natural valueso fth eenvironment .

6.1.6 Evaluation,feedback and further development Toevaluat e student and teacher performances in the educational sys­ tems,questionnaire s are astandar d part of annual evaluations.Alumn i also provide feedback on the structure and effectiveness of the MSc degreecourse . The alumni areconcentrate d inth eAGRI Aclub ,whic h isals oa ninformatio n sourcefo r agriculture.Eac hyea rther ei sa meet­ ingo falumn ian drepresentative so fth efaculty . Inadditio nth eaccredi ­ tation processo fth e studyprogramm eb yth egovernmenta l committee (Accreditation Committeeo fth eCzec hGovernment )offer s morefeed ­ back.Afte r the first approval in 1999,th e programme is re-accredited from 2001u pt o 2007.

Finally,a nintricat evirtua lteachin gan dlearnin genvironmen twil lhav e future implications for theMS ci n PublicAdministratio n and Regional Management intha t a)th e staff will need special training tob e ablet o use new ICTtechnologie s andb ) the technical and technological sup­ portwil lb estrengthene db yth ecreatio no fa virtua llaboratory ,wit hth e useo fWe b CTan dspecia l supporting toolsan dhypertexts .

87 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

6.2 The MSc in Rural Development of University College Dublin, Ireland5

6.2.1 Description of the institution offering the programme/course The institution ison e ofth e major players inhighe r education in Ireland and has a strong involvement in agricultural education. The Masters in Rural Development is the first-degree programme in the department to deal explicitly with rural development. Since its inception a number of other undergraduate degree programmes have been developed with rural development components. Further, there are moves to establish cross-institutional degree programmes embracing arang e of Irish insti­ tutions.

6.2.2 Key characteristics of the programme/course The identified goals of the programme/course are to provide a) a cadre of change agents who can work with communities in rural Ireland and in developing countries and who can animate and facilitate bottom-up development, while recognising b) a need for both rural development from a multi-social sciences perspective (economics, sociology, busi­ ness, marketing) and the need for 'professional skills' amongst the change agents.

The original goal has stood the test of time well and has certainly been invigorated and given a boost by the practices and experiences of EU Structural Funds and especially the one created for assisting rural development: the LEADER+ programme.

Thecours etarget smi d and early career professionals and end-on under­ graduates with an interest inrura l development work in Ireland, Europe in general or in developing countries.

There is no clear distinction between aims and objectives of the pro­ gramme at an aggregate level (i.e. an overarching aim followed by quantifiable objectives), though the curriculum clearly indicates the purpose and content of the various modules. It is difficult, ifno t impos­ sible, to articulate objectives at the programme level. For the Masters

Thiscase study has been developed byETIRD Team member Bill Slee in co-operation withJoe Mannion of the University College Dublin. 6 CASE STUDIES programme an honours degree in a relevant subject is required. However, senior staff is interested in values and motives and there is a possibility that a student with good motivation from a non-cognate dis­ cipline might be submitted to the programme. Individual course outli­ nes are available,bu t the basic curriculum map is shown inTabl e 5.

COURSE ALLOCATED CREDITS 1. Rural development Total » 12 a. Economics of development 2 b Sociology of development 3 c. Approaches and strategies to rural development 7 2. Enterprise Development Total - 14 a. Project appraisal ; b. Management and organisation 2 c. Financial analysis and planning 3 d. Basic marketing 3 e. Programme planning 5 3. Research Methods Total= 10 4. Communications Total" 12 S. RuralTourism Total » 10 6. Thesis Total'32

Table S: Outline ofth e MS ci n Rural Development ofUniversit y College Dublin (Source:Programm e handbook 2000-2001)

Insofar as there is a discernible theory, it is put into practice through a strongly case study based approach to learning. It is suspected that the theory is often implicit rather than explicit, especially with regard to rural development theory (that may well be because there is not a high­ ly developed theory orbundl e of theories regarding rural development).

Outcomes are usually measured by normal examinations and continu­ ous assessments, though there is extensive use of group work.

6.2.3 Background of the integrated ruraldevelopment programme/ course The post-graduate programme in rural development has evolved out of an existing masters programme in agricultural extension for educating and training extension officers and administrators involved in agricul­ ture. UCD is the principal organisation involved in in-service training

89 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION with extension workers and administrators being seconded to UCD for skill enhancement. Because of the centrality of UCD in training exten­ sion workers in agriculture, the switch to training rural development workers (manyo fwho m initially came from thatbackgroun d in Ireland) is a natural evolution. The Kellogg Foundation has made a substantial financial commitment to kick-start the programme, which began in 1987.

If there is a predominant ideology it is that there is a perceived distinc­ tiveness of rural problems that demands special attention. The current ideology is that rural problems demand endogenous, 'bottom-up' solu­ tions. The LEADER model (of partnership, local stakeholder involve­ ment and participatory development) matches very closely the ideology ofth e programme. However,th e ideology is implicit rather than explicit and isroote d in agenera l perception of what works and what is needed. In other words, it is not ideologically based; it is rooted in practice and experience.

The programme is largely needs driven. It is built around the perceived needs of extension workers and administrators, but in the 1980s there are cutbacks in extension services and there is at least an element of 'what else can we do?'tha t leads toa n international/developing country strand being added to the course. Nonetheless it can still be argued that this is needs based.

The programme serves the needs of rural Ireland and the needs of developing countries, especially East Africa which has been the major recruitment ground and where many members of staff are engaged in projects.Th e external factors leading to change are the shift from a nar­ rowly based conception of agricultural development to a more broadly based view of rural development, which occurred in Ireland very early compared to other parts of Europe.Th e farm population was haemorrh- aging (over the last 15 years it has declined by 50%) and there was a perceived need to develop a much more entrepreneurial culture in rural Ireland which would provide for some kind of future to its rural areas.

The principal internal driver is the rationalisation that occurred in the extension service that led to a decline in numbers on the programme, which in turn triggered a more 'entrepreneurial' attitude amongst those

90 6 CASE STUDIES developing the course, and which eventually led to a broadening of the focus.

Two academics, Joe Mannion and Jim Phelan, within the extension department at UCD, are the prime movers of the initiative. The mem­ bers of staff of the department have a long tradition of involvement in research/consultancy activity in practical rural development. Some of this work constitutes action learning; recent graduates are often involv­ ed and there is a consultancy unit within the department.

6.2.4 Key constraints in implementing the integrated rural development programme/course Staffing: the development of the staff team has often been difficult due to lack of/insufficient funding from theUniversity . Often staff aretake n on by the consultancy unit for particular projects and then eventually kept on by the department, but this is not seen as a wholly satisfactory arrangement.

Research versus consultancy: in the developing ethos of the course, high-level academic research, as is increasingly sought by the institu­ tion, is not figured prominently. Instead,a hands-on consultancy appro­ ach prevails which may not deliver the requirements in terms of high- level research output in refereed journals. There is recognition of these new centrally driven demands and action is being taken to enhance re­ search capability. However,ther e mayb e aresidua l tension between the consultancy/practical research role and the more conventional 'acade­ mic research' output that is increasingly demanded by university mana­ gement, and which drives intra- and inter-university funding by govern­ ment.

Research versus teaching: the emphasis of the department isver y much on creating an environment in which group learning> about rural deve­ lopment can take place. Until recently, there was little scope for acade­ mic promotion based on excellence in teaching and consultancy activi­ ty, which were the prevailing activities of the department. New promo­ tion procedures nowtak e intoaccoun t research, teaching and 'contribu­ tion to the wider community,' the last being a field in which the depart­ ment excels, but for which it had not been recognised within the uni­ versity system.

91 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHKR AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

Renewal and reinvigoration: there is something of an age-gap between thejunio r staff and the senior professors. The senior professors argue a strong case for an open and inclusive approach that reaches out and listens to the widercommunit y through seminars,professiona l and per­ sonal contacts etc. The more junior staff seem to think that there is a slightly complacent attitude which had led the department as awhol e to 'take their eye off the ball' and as a result they have failed to recruit an ideal number of applicants to the Masters programme in the last couple of years.Als o it iseviden t that the department is largely recruiting from itsow n research students leading to aself-reinforcin g departmental cul­ ture. However, there is awareness of this, which recently resulted in an appointment from outside the department.

6.2.5 Keystrategies used in implementing the integrated rural development programme/course Bonding through group-work and seminars isutilise d tocreat e an inclu­ sivelearnin genvironment .Th ecas estudie suse d inthes ebonding/learn ­ ing exercises may be live or based on case studies, including videos. However, there may be a difference between the community develop­ ment elements of thecours e which aretaugh t more innovatively through group-work based case studies and the financial management and mar­ keting areas which are taught more conventionally. Students comment on the rather tedious conventionally taught parts, which significantly contrast to the more invigorating group-work approaches of other parts ofth e programme.

The MSc in Rural Development is a flagship course but there are many developments 'in the pipeline' within the department that indicate a diversification strategy towards inter-institutional partnerships using a 'blackboard system' (a Penn State University system) and through diversification downwards into undergraduate programmes.

The strategy ison e of carefully thought adaptation, including for exam­ ple the decision to include options in the course to reflect changing demands from students and the employment market.

92 6 CASE STUDIES

6.2.6 Evaluation and monitoring of the integrated rural development programme/course Normal scrutiny is through the university system + external examina­ tion,althoug h ata n informal level there isa form ofdemand-drive n eva­ luation whereby those involved in the course have very close involve­ ment with ex-students in employment, which leads to much informal feedback and a constant reappraisal of what is being taught.

Theexten tt owhic hth ecours emanager sar ei ntouc hwit hth erura l devel­ opment 'constituency' both in East Africa and in Ireland isa key feature of the programme.Thi s provides a key test of relevance.Ther e seems to be a good match between the anticipated and actual outcomes.Withou t a careful appraisal of training/educational needs of ex-students in post, it would be difficult topic k up any weaknesses incurriculu m content.

Given the one-year nature ofth eprogramme , itwoul d berathe r difficult for the studentst ob e ablet o shape and negotiate the contents. However, students are able to select options from other departments and students with particular interests are able to design at least part of their curricu­ lum. Likewise the methods are largely established and range from some modules, which are group work based to others, which are more con­ ventional. There is a significant difference in teaching styles between different elements of the programme.

6.2.7 Plansfor development of the integrated rural development programme/course Clearly there is a desire for the staff to maintain leadership in the field at the national level. However, there is now a clear strategy to pursue this through academic partnerships and new styles of distance-based learning, rather than 'doing it alone.'

Based on the observations made: There is a need for a more shared learning culture across the different subject areas of the course as a whole. However, an argument against this might be an implicit recognition of the diversity of the nature of rural development, with both individualistic and collectivist compo­ nents. However, the achievement of any one view is inevitably partly compromised by the desire to pull in modules from other departments, which may not share the same learning ethos and culture. It is thus

93 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HlüHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION necessary to balance the desire to allow students to customise course content to meet their aspirations and the desireo f thedepartmen t tocre ­ ate an all-embracing learning culture with a distinctive house style.

The institution management as a whole has been very tolerant of a teaching/consultancy oriented department (including special financial arrangements for a department-based consultancy), but there may be growing pressure to engage in research, which drives the department in different directions. A practical needs-based learning programme for post-graduates, undergraduates andjunio r practitioners may point staff towards different types of activity compared to a refereed publication- based appraisal approach, built on more formal research, which is becoming the norm.

There may be a tension between the desire to develop a 'community' focus to the programme and the desire to foster an individualistic entre­ preneurial culture through the emphasis of part of the course on finan­ cial planning, marketing, etc. Although it can be argued legitimately that communities as a whole can engage in marketing themselves and there is scope for community entrepreneurship, the ethical basis of the programme learning isno t alwaysclea r (i.e. isi t individualist, mutualist or collectivist?). It is not clear whether community approaches to rural development necessarily foster and nurture individualistic entrepreneu- rialism or challenge it.

6.3 Titulación Superior en Desarrollo Rural (TSDR) of The University of Cordoba, Spain6

6.3.1 Introduction This report is based on a visit to the University of Cordoba, Spain, on 6/7 March 2003. During that period several discussions are held with the leaders ofth e rural development courses, Professor Eduardo Ramos

Case study developed by ET1RD member Martyn Warren,Head of Land Use and Rural Management, University of Plymouth, UK in co-operation with Maria Mar Delgado and Eduardo Ramos of the University of Cordoba, Spain. Wewish to ac­ knowledge Eduardo Ramos and, particularly, Mar Delgado for contributing their (free) timefor this study,for their open andfrank responses, andfor allowing access to their comprehensive reportfor UNESCO/FAO.

94 6 CASE STUDIES and Dr.Mari ade l Mar Delgado.Meeting s areals ohel d with Professor Andres Garcia-Roman, Vice-Rector for Academic Organisation ofth e University, and with studentso f thecourse .Th e study isals o informed by acomprehensiv e report produced by thecours e team for UNESCO andFA O (Ramosan dDelgad o2003) .

Duringth ecas estud yvisi t allth e studentso nth ecurren tTSD Rcours e are met without lecturers being present. They are from a mixture of backgrounds,wit h first (5 year) degrees includingVeterinar y Science, Business,Socia lWork ,an dAgriculture .The yar ei nth elas tfe wmonth s ofthei rtwo-yea rprogramme .

The course under study is the Rural Development Higher Academic Degree, or Titulación Superior en Desarrollo Rural(TSDR) . This is equivalent toth e fourth and fifth yearso fa five-yea r degreeo fth etra ­ ditional European model,bu toffere d asa stand-alon eprogramme . The TSDR started in 1995 and then ran for three two-year cycles, end to end.I tha sbee nsubstantiall yrevise ddurin g200 1fo r implementationi n 2001 to 2003. The course is part-time, designed for practising rural development professionals, and itscurren t mode ofoperatio n involves attendance onFrida y afternoons plusevening san d Saturdaymornings , with students required tocomplet e coursework inth e interveningperi ­ ods. Funding is from acombinatio n of student fees and other regional and national funding (the course lies outside the government higher education funding system):eac hcohor tcomprise s 15 to2 0students .

TwoMasters 'programme s developed from TSDR:th e Master in Rural Development (MDRM)an dth e International Masteri n RuralDevelop ­ ment (MIDR). The MRDM is designed specifically for managers of rural development in LocalActio n Groups inAndalusia :th e first cycle started in200 0an dwa ssuppose d tofinis h atth etur no f2001/2002 , but administrative issues (onth e students'side )hav edelaye d final comple­ tion.Th eMID Ri sa nextensio n ofth eTDSR ,requirin ga 6-mont h study period ina foreig n university.A networ ko fmor etha n2 0Europea nan d South American universities, and which is situated in the European SOCRATESan dALF Aprogramme ssuppor tthi sprogramme .

The University of Cordoba issituate d in aregio n where agriculture has traditionallyha da hig heconomi can dsocia limportance .Forme di n197 2

95 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHIiR AÜRICULTURAL EDUCATION from theprestigiou sHighe rEducatio nCentr efo rVeterinar yScienc ean d theHighe r School ofAgronomy , itsorigina l mission isstate d as 'auni ­ versitywit ha stron gagro-foo d andscientifi c vocation,committe d to the developmento fit ssocia lenvironment '(Ramo s& Delgad o2003 :16) .

Spanish Higher Education in agriculture is currently based on the French GrandEcole system .Th e officially recognised qualification is the five-year Agricultural Engineer degree, with a prescribed curricu­ lum comprising a combination of agronomy and subjects typical of engineering. An individual centre has little flexibility in content and delivery method of the programme of study. Only such officially approvedprogramme sreceiv efundin g from theMinistr y ofEducation , though anumbe ro falternativ e programmes,suc ha sthos eunde rstud y here,operat ewithou t such funding.

Incommo nwit hal lrura l regionso fEurope ,Andalusi aenjoye d relative prosperity of the agricultural industry after the Second World War, which is further enhanced by the eventual accession to the European Union.Th e transformation of the government from an autocracy to a democracy during the 1980s resulted in a strong movement towards decentralisation, with substantial powers (and responsibilities) being delegated to regional governments. One result of the latter was an in­ crease inth eprovisio n ofhighe r education placesa sne wregiona luni ­ versities werecreated .A tth esam etim ea numbe ro ffactors , including a movement away from price support of agricultural products in European policy, were reducing the demand for agricultural graduates of the traditional kind. This in turn created a need for well-qualified professionals to manage the process of rural development, the new focuso fpolic yo fbot hth eEuropea nUnio nan dth eregio no fAndalusia .

The combination ofoversuppl y of graduatesi nproductio n agriculture, and demand for graduates with expertise in integrated rural develop­ ment,i sa majo r influence onth ecreatio no fth erura l developmentpro ­ grammes inth e University of Cordoba. Also important isth econvicti ­ ono f someUniversit y staff memberso fth erelevanc e ofrura lchanges , and their obligation to support that process. In this they are reflecting the University's commitment to serving the needs of society in Andalusia, and their proposals for change have been well received by somesenio rstaf f andgovernors .

96 6 CASE STUDIES

6.3.2 Key characteristics of the programme/course Thebroad aim ist oenhanc e thecapabilit y ofthos e already employed in leading positions in rural development, and to enable others to build on their specialist first degrees in order to obtain appropriate employment in the rural development field. In achieving this aim, the students would be able to: • Plan rural development at different levels, from the rural develop­ ment groups to higher administration levels; • Shift from a sectoral approach to a territorial approach in the differ­ ent initiatives undertaken in the area; • Integrate co-ordination of the different activities, in order to obtain complementarities and synergies; • Promote sustainability at economical, social and environmental level; • Encourage local people involvement in their future as a means of fostering the social and economic revitalisation of rural areas through the creation of activities, the reinforcing of competitiveness and the access to markets; • Search for new opportunities based ina n endogenous and bottom-up development; and • Animate and train rural people as a means of improving local capa­ city building, empowerment, community leadership or governance. (Ramos & Delgado 2003: 22).

Theguiding principles of curriculum design were: • Multidisciplinary approach to both curriculum content and delivery (staff groups and student work teams); • Internationalisation in both curriculum content and delivery (e.g. involvement of international experts); and • Commitment to quality in curriculum content and delivery, in staff profile and in evaluation.

High emphasis isplace d on flexibility, with the detail of subject content responding to changes in the rural environment: students are moreover allowed someopportunit y fortailorin g thecurriculu m tomee t theirow n individual requirements.

The course structure for the first three student cohorts (1995-2001) comprises 180credits ,taugh t overtw oyears .I n thismodel ,th e learning

97 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

process is full-time, requiring daily attendance. Table 6 outlines the maincomponent so fth eRura l Development HigherAcademi cDegree .

Teachingmethods ar eparticipativ ewhereve rpossible ,usin ga combina ­ tiono fconventiona l lecture,'conferences '(wher eexper tspecialist spre ­ sent ideas and engage in debate with students), and problem-oriented learning in workshops (where students work inmultidisciplinar yteam s totackl eissue srelevan tt orura ldevelopment) .A swel la sspecifi c skills, this process is intended to develop generic skills such as working ina multidisciplinary environment, acquiring groupwor ktechniques ,usin g negotiation techniques,an dreachin gagreemen to rconsensus . Studentsals ostud y livecases ,an dmak e field visits,whic hallo wthe m topractis e theirskill san dobtai npractica l experience.

Economy of Rural Development 12credit s OS Sociology of Rural Development 6 credits u Ecological Basis 9 credits Productive Basis (Livestock and Crops) 6 credits OS Geographic Analysis 4 credits Ü. Countryside Management 11 credits Optional Subjects 26 credits FIELD WORK (12 credits) Methods and Tools for Strategic Planning 12 credits Biological Production Systems X 9 credits < Technologies 6 credits > Management of Strategies 9 credits a Public Policies 9 credits 6 Diversification of Activities 8 credits Innovation and Transfer Techniques 6 credits SA Rural Extension 3 credits Optional Subjects 20 credits FINAL DISSERTATION (12 credits)

Table6 : Outline ofth e Rural Development HigherAcademi c Degree ofth e University ofCordoba ,Spai n

Teachingstaff: Twopeopl e who are crucial to the success of thepro ­ grammear eProfesso r EduardoRamo san dDr . Mariade lMa rDelgado . Professor Ramosi sHea do fth eRura l Development Research Groupi n the Department of Agricultural Economics; Dr. Delgado is a lecturer who has been for the last nine or ten years on a one-year renewable

98 6 CASE STUDIES contract asa junio r lecturer.The y aresupporte d bya smal l numbero f colleaguest ofor m acor e team.Thi si sbooste d by lecturers from else­ wherei nth e university and from outsideth e university,an dth ereputa ­ tiono fth ecours ei sno wsuc htha tther ear eman yactivel yrequestin gt o bepar t ofth eprocess .Th einternationa l reputation ofth ecours e is now so well positioned that guest lecturers from European and Latin Americancountrie sca nfrequentl y beincorporate d intoth eprogramme .

Targetaudience: Themaximu mnumbe ro fstudent si nan yon ecohor ti s seta t25 . Selection isb yreferenc e tobot h academic record andprofes ­ sional/research experience,an dinvolve sa persona l interview.Th etypi ­ cal ageo fstudent si saroun d 30year ,an d most alreadyhav ea five-year undergraduate degreeplu s several yearso fexperience . Asmal l propor­ tion (around 10%)ha sdon ejus t thefirs t three yearso fthei r undergra­ duatequalification , andar ethu sstil lacquirin gthei r first degree.

All students aredoin g the course while in full-time employment.Al l haveth eai m ofgettin g intoa caree ri nRura l asa resul t ofth ecourse , widening theirjo b opportunities considerably.Th e political andecon ­ omic situation ofth e region (which hasE UObjectiv e 1 andLEADE R inputs)mean s that rural development iswell-recognise d asa noccupa ­ tion,an dtha t therear eman yopportunitie s available for well-qualified plus experienced people: public administration, consultancy, project management wereal lmentioned .

At least oneha s already found newemploymen t through thecourse . Theysee mt ohav en odoub ttha tth ecours ewil lhel pthe machiev ethei r goals,an dar ever ysatisfie d withit .Th eapproac ht olearnin gi sfavoura ­ bly compared with the more traditional methods ("200peopl e in one room, whereas there areonl y 18o fus" ) andi t ispointe d outtha tth e flexible deliveryi sth eonl ywa ythe ycoul dcombin ei twit hemployment .

Students are very enthusiastic about the input of Dr. Delgado, Prof. Ramosan dth e rest ofth eteam .The y areconfiden t thatthe y have suf­ ficient opportunity toinfluenc e both content anddelivery ,vi a monthly meetings with the course leaders, as well as through more frequent informal meetings. In the process they feel able to comment onan y matters relating toquality .Th estudent s arechallenge d toasses swhe ­ ther thecours e accomplished what it setou tt odo . Thecollectiv ere -

99 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

sponse istha t "Itdepends on the individual effortof thestudent - wheth­ er he or she engages or not." It is felt to be particularly important that they have the discipline to do the 'homework,' and maintain contact through email and Internet.

Staff development: There is no specific plan for staff development. The core team develop their skills by maintaining close contact with rural development activities in the region, by attending international confe­ rences, by international networking with academics and rural develop­ ment practitioners. For the teaching of the programme, they select spe­ cialists who they regard as already having the attitudes and skills requi­ red for success within the course (which includes flexibility of ap­ proach, ability to relate their teaching to practical issues in rural deve­ lopment, professional credibility, and an absence of the traditional aca­ demic approach of 'professor teaches students'). They monitor this by attending class sessions and by frequent engagement with students in informal discussion about the course.

6.3.3 Background of the integrated ruraldevelopment programme/ course The idea for the programmes arose in the early 1990s from the involve­ ment of agrou p ofacademic s indevelopin g arura l development plan at the request of the regional government. The plan was not implemented, but discussions within the group continued around the need for specific education and training in rural development, in order to help solve the rural problems ofth e region.A survey ofpotentia l employers of highly- skilled rural development specialists was conducted at European, natio­ nal,regiona l and local levels:th e resultsthe n formed the basis for inter­ view and debates involving awid e range ofacademic , social, institutio­ nal and business agents.Th e outcome was confirmation of the need for rural development education: in addition the process was valuable in arousing interest of the various agents in the project. The results high­ lighted a need for a study programme based on comprehensive acade­ mic knowledge: although various vocational training programmes and short courses were available, there were no university-level studies available in Spain in this area.

The approach chosen is the establishment of a Second-Cycle Higher Education programme:Titulació n Superior en Desarrollo Rural (TSDR)

100 6 CASE STUDIES

- inothe r words equivalent toth e fourth and fifth years of a five-year degree,bu ttake n bythos ewh ohav ealread y graduated from their first degree.On e reason for taking thisroute ,rathe r than that of a Master's degree, is to enable the programme to recruit graduates from a wide rangeo fpreviou sdegrees . Thisavoid splace sbein g limited to,say ,jus t holders ofAgricultur e Engineer degrees,whil ereflectin g themultidis - ciplinary approach, which is felt to be appropriate to studies of, inte­ grated rural development.

Thus the initiation of the course is demand-led, responding to very strongsignal sfro m regionalagencie san dgovernment ,rathe rtha ntrans ­ latinga particula rphilosoph yo fintegrate drura ldevelopmen tint oa pro ­ gramme of study. This also applies to the aims and objectives of the course,an dit scontent ,whic har einfluence d byth eresult so fth esurvey .

TheTSD Ri sth euniversity' sow ndegree ,an dno ta nofficia l degree, in thati ti sno tacknowledge d orfunde d byth eMinistr yo fEducation .Th e Spanish Higher Education Ministry is not well funded, and only has enough toservic e 'official' degrees.Th erura l development course isa 'private' initiative, of one department rather than the whole university, andi sthu sregarde da sbein g 'on thefringe.' Thi smean stha tth epeopl e running the course have had to find all the resources for it, including classrooms, staff etc. All the funding comes via the students, partly from the students themselves (€ 1.500 peryear ) and partly from regio­ nal and national government funding (€ 1.500 per year). Given the small numbers (15 - 20) in each cohort, the financial survival of the course is inevitably dependent on cross-subsidisation from other uni­ versity activities,an dals oo na for m ofcross-subsidisatio n byth eindi ­ viduals inth ecor eteam ,wh oar etotall y committed toth eproject , and puta significan t amounto fthei row ntim eint oth eproject . Recognition ofth ecours eb yofficial s atvariou slevel so fgovernmen t inth elas ttw o yearsmean stha ti ti spossibl etha tstat efundin g willb eavailabl eshort ­ lyand ,bette r still inth e eyeso fth e organisers,tha t thequalificatio n is granted special recognition by the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries andFood ,thu sincreasin gth eattractivenes so fth ecours estil lfurthe r for potential rural development specialists.

Course leaders identify various supporting factors, which havehelpe d them in developing the rural development programme (Ramos &

101 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HKillKR AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

Delgado 2003:27,49).Th e initiative comes from asmal l groupo fdedi ­ cated teachers who identify rural development education as crucial to the well-being of their region, and are prepared to commit their time and energy to it. In this they are supported by the university's Rural Development Research Group,whic h continues to play an active part in ongoing improvement. Teachers and researchers from various depart­ ments in the University of Cordoba, who bring a wide range of know­ ledge and experience to the programme, have supported the program­ me.Th eVice-Chancello r of the University has been personally suppor­ tive since the inception of the programme, and the Deputy Vice- Chancellor of Academic Planning has given explicit institutional sup­ port.Th e latteroversees introduction ofne w degree systems,an d thus is particularly important in this process: he was offered the position of academic leader of the programme at an early stage, and still holds that position.

Externally, the support of individuals and agencies engaged in rural development has been crucial to the development of the course. The proliferation of rural development strategies, and the introduction of Objective 1 Structural Funding and theLEADE R programme,ha shelp ­ ed to emphasise the importance of relevant education and training, and have created a source of employment for graduates of the programme.

6.3.4 Key constraints in implementing the integrated rural development programme/course In common with most new academic initiatives, the introduction of the TSDR has met with resistance from various groups and individuals.

One source of resistance has been the farming sector, by which the change in emphasis from sectoral support of agricultural production to a territorial policy of rural development issee n asa threa t to livelihoods of those in the industry. Rural development is often seen (usually erro­ neously) as competing for the same funds as production agriculture. Deep-rooted cultural attitudes also play a part, in that many see rural development programmes as denying them their identity as farmers, and trying to turn them into 'landscape gardeners' or 'hotel owners.'

102 6 CASE STUDIES

Theseperception sar estrongl yroote dno tonl yamon gfarmer s andagri ­ businesses,bu t also amongcivi l servants,institution s andothe r agents concerned with administering agricultural policy. Itals o has itsechoe s amongthos eengage d inprovisio no fconventiona lagricultura l engineer degreeswithi nth euniversit y sector.B yassociation ,a highe reducatio n coursetha tcater sspecificall y forrura l development (inth epas ta sour ­ ce ofemploymen t for agricultural engineers,despit e the inadequacyo f theirtrainin g for sucha role )i sitsel fregarde d asa threa t toestablishe d interests on a wide front. Even institutions, which acknowledge the need for a properly trained force of rural development professionals, haveofte n failed toprovid eappropriat e support.

Within the university, themulti-disciplinarity ,whic h issuc h ake y fea­ tureo fth eprogramme ,cause s itsow nproblems . Researcherstypicall y identify themselveswit h singledisciplines ,an dth elac ko fa singl espe ­ cific paradigmo frura ldevelopmen t makesi tmor edifficul t forthe mt o achieve peer recognition for their work (the crucial test).Thi s makes many academics reluctant to engage with research or teaching in this area.Ne wacademi ccourse sten dt obuil do nexistin gsubjects ,an dt ob e heavily influenced byth eresearc h interests ofth estaf f involved,rathe r thanrespon d toa marke t demand for anissue-le dapproach .

Also affected isth eproces so fteachin g andlearning ,an ddevelopin ga truly integrated approach has been a challenge for an academic com­ munity with little previous experience of team-teaching. Encouraging applications from students ofa wid erang eo fconventiona l coursesha s posed further problems,a si ti sno tpossibl e torel y ona share dbod yo f prior learning.Thi sha sha d implications for the design and implemen­ tation ofth ecurriculum .

At institutional level,despit e the support ofke y senior individuals,th e 'unofficial' status of the course has created various difficulties: for instancei ttoo kfiv eyear sfo rth eregistratio nproces st ob eincorporate d inth ecentra l systemso fth euniversity , andunti ltha ttim estudent sha d restricted accesst o libraries and university services,an d wereno tabl e topa yfee s bybanker sorder .

103 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN H1ÜHLR AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

6.3.5 Evaluation andmonitoring of the integratedrural development programme/course Ata loca l level,th e performance ofth ecours e ismeasure d by various means: - monitoringstuden tresult s(compare dwit hpreviou scohort san dstu ­ dentso nothe rcourses) ; - frequent direct contact with students, and seeking their opinions; andmonitorin g employment obtained bygraduates .

The course leaders observe andevaluat e sessions givenb yothe r lectu­ rers, particularly if they are newt o the programme. During the case study visit Dr. Delgado spent several hours briefing, observing and debriefing anexterna l lecturer. At university level, there is a process for evaluating official degrees, based mainly onpee r evaluation of the teaching process - professors give reports, identifying strengths and weaknesses, and looking for wayso fimprovin gth eweaknesses .A sye tther ei sn osyste m forunof ­ ficial degrees,bu ti t ispropose d that, in future, theproces s shouldb e appliedt oboth .Th eratificatio n ofth eBologn aDeclaratio nwil lmea na morerigorous approac h to quality assurance in the future, involving monitoringo fqualit yindicator sfo ral lpart so fth elearnin gprocess .Al l degrees will be accredited, with additional Quality Certification fora few high-quality courses.Accreditatio n ofdegree swil l becompulsor y (it will be the bottom level of Quality Assurance), with additional Certification givingextr arecognitio n tohigher-qualit ycourses .

During200 1Prof .Ramo san dDr .Delgad ocom et oth econclusio nthat , given critical feedback from students,a radica l reviewo fth ecours ei s necessary.A perio d of reflection leads toa nanalysi s ofstrength san d weakness, anda n objective assessment of the course, trying to bea s self-critical aspossible .Thei r conclusion istha t they needed eithert o kill the course, or make significant changes. Deciding for the latter, they organise a debate, involving many people inside andoutsid eth e university,i na searc h fora ne wcurriculu m moresuite d toth eneed so f theirtarge t groupo frura l development practitioners.Thi si sa departu ­ re from theusua l professor-led approach tocurriculu m design: many professors back offbecaus eo fthis ,bu t otherswh oar emor ei nsympa ­ thy with the process join in. At that time the 'managers' course (MRDM) isrunnin g concurrently withTSDR ,an dth echang e process

104 6 CASE STUDIES is used asa focus for a problem-based learning assignment for students on this course, over a period of two months. The findings are used to inform the redesign process, helping to make the result more demand­ ed and tailored to the needs of professionals.

The changes must be approved and implemented very rapidly, in order toappl y toth e2001- 3cohorts .Th e support ofsenio r management inth e university, and particularly Professor Andres Garcia-Roman, Vice- Rector for Academic Planning has been crucial. The resulting course structure can be found inTabl e 7.

The difference of emphasis between this and the earlier design is very marked, moving from a theory-led structure towards a process-led structure (though still underpinned by theoretical considerations).

Rural Development Theories: Economical and Sociological 6 credits Territory Planning 6 credits Natural Resources Planning and Management 6 credits et The Cycle of the Project I 12credit s >< Quantitative and Qualitative Method of Analysis 6 credits H Participation and Network Analysis 12 credits C/l Geographic Information Systems 6 credits SS S Basic Legislation on Rural Development 3 credits Public Financing on Rural Development 6 credits The European Union Model of Rural Development 6 credits Rural Development in a Global Perspective 6 credits FIELD WORK (12 credits) Current Challenges of Agriculture 6 credits Countryside Management 6 credits a TheTerritoria l Approach 12 credits < Innovation, Quality and Competitiveness 9 credits w >• Valorisation of Endogenous Resources 6 credits a Sustainable Development 6 credits o Human Resources Management 6 credits Case Method 6 credits 1/5 Business Development 6 credits Rural Tourism 6 credits The Cycle of the Project II 12 credits FINAL DISSERTATION (12 credits)

Table7 : Revised outline of the Rural Development HigherAcademi c Degree of the University of Cordoba,Spai n

105 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

Some basic subjects have been trimmed, others deleted on the grounds that they can be studied in other degree courses, while more applied subjects have taken their place.A s well as reflecting informed opinion from students and practitioners, the new course design accommodates advances in applied research and the increased availability of relevant learning materials since the inception of the course 6 years previously. It also benefits from the increasingly international outlook of the Rural Development Research Group, and its affiliation to a network of European and SouthAmerica n universities,enablin g frequent participa­ tion of visiting lecturers.

It is at this point that the daily attendance is changed to its present pat­ tern of 15-hour blocks on alternate weekends, from Friday afternoon to Saturday lunchtime, plus occasional field visits. Each block takes the form of aworksho p focussed on a specific issue,wit h a mixture of lec­ ture/seminar presentation and problem-based learning with students working in multi-disciplinary groups. A semi-distance approach is taken, using electronic communications and multi-media materials, to allow the students to learn from home during the week. This enables students to combine work and/or family roles with their studies, although this requires considerable determination. Each student has a personal tutor who is readily accessible by email or telephone.

6.3.6 Plansfor development of the integrated rural development programme/course It appears that, eight years on, considerable progress has been made in overcoming the difficulties mentioned above. Although resistance to change is still deep-rooted in agricultural society, the growth in impor­ tance of rural development funding, boosted by Agenda 2000,an d cou­ pled with institutional reorientation, have helped to change attitudes externally.

Internally, a major influence on attitudes has been the success of the programme itself.Th e course team has been able to demonstrate that it ispossibl e to combine ademand-led ,multidisciplinar ycourse , incorpo­ rating a mixture of learning methods, with academic rigour.Th e contri­ bution of teachers from various parts of the university has undoubtedly helped to spread this message through the institution. Furthermore, the three cohorts of students who have so far graduated from the course

106 6 CASE STUDIES have secured good employment and have achieved 'outstanding perfor­ mance in their respective work' (Ramos & Delgado, 2003: 32). The international recognition which the programme & the Rural Development Research Group has achieved reflects well on the University, and hasgon e some way inchangin g attitudes within theuni ­ versity staff and its governing body.

The team recognises the importance of continued development and innovation. They are working to adapt the degree to a Master's qualifi­ cation according with the Bologna agreement, and it is likely that this will be a pilot at national level. This will carry with it the important benefit of being officially recognised byth e Ministry of Education.

Other plans include the development of a European Master with a net­ work of five or six European universities, and the presentation of apro ­ posal to the Erasmus World programme with European and Latin American universities. Inth e medium term,th etea m hopes tob e ablet o organise a fully on-line system for delivery of the course.

6.3.7 Conclusions Given the time constraints in conducting this case study, assessment of theTDS R course relies more on experienced subjectivejudgemen t than on objective performance measures. With that caveat, there is little doubt that the programme is fulfilling a valuable role in the process of rural development in Andalusia and beyond, and is highly regarded by the current students. The dedication and enthusiasm of the core team members is admirable, and they have acted as the catalyst for creation of a wider group of academics within the University of Cordoba, com­ mitted both to a multidisciplinary approach to rural development, and to the use of a wide range of learning methods appropriate to both the area of study and to the students' circumstances. The course has undoubtedly been influential in changing attitudes in professional cir­ cles and within the university itself.

While it is impossible to reduce this success story to a simple formula, certain key points arise: • The need for specialist education is recognised at an early stage. • Ake y tothi s recognition isth e cultivation of networks of individuals and organisations engaged in the process of rural development.

107 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

• These networks have been expanded over time, and now extend internationally. As such, they supply valuable ongoing support for the course, and provide the course team with frequent 'reality checks'o nth evalidit y ofth eprogramme . • Theprogramm e isdesigne d forpurpose ,aime da tservin gth eneed s ofrura l development professionals rathertha n the interests andpre ­ judiceso facademi c staff. • Thecours etea mi ssensitiv et ostuden topinio nabou tth eprogramm e and the way in which it isdelivered ,an d isprepare d totak e radical actiona sa resul t ofwha t itlearns . • Despitebein gcommitte dt oa demand-le d approach,th ecours etea m has been able to show that this need not mean a loss of academic rigour inteachin go rresearc h- although itmigh tb eharde rwor kfo r academicst oachiev ethi stha na narro wdiscipline-base d method. • Thetim eneede dt ochang eentrenche d attitudesshoul dno tb eunder ­ estimated: the problems faced by this course team at all levels are replicated acrossEurope ,i fno tth eworld , andnee dconsiderabl esta ­ mina,patienc ean ddiplomac yt oovercome .

The clearest conclusion from this case study istha t the success of the programme- from recognition ofneed ,throug hcurriculu m designan d delivery, to achieving national and international recognition - arises primarily from the initiative andshee rhar dwor ko fa smal lcor eteach ­ ing team, a key member of which is still on an annually-renewed contractafte r nineyears .I ti st ob ehope dtha tthe yan dthei rcours egai n the official recognition they deserve from their university before the coursereache sit stent hbirthday .

6.4 DegreeCours ei nEcologica lAgriculture ,Universit yo f Tuscia,Viterbo ,Italy 7

6.4.1 Description ofthe institution offeringthe programme/course TusciaUniversit yi sa relativel yyoun guniversit y inItal yan dit sFacult y ofAgricultur e ison eo f 15 inItal ybu tth efirs t onei nth eLazi oregion .

Case study developed by ETIRD-member Nadarajah Sriskandarajah of the Royal Danish University of Agriculture in co-operation with Prof. Fabio Caporali of the University ofViterbo.

108 6 CASE STUDIES

The mainstay ofthi s Faculty has been a five-year degree programme in Agricultural Science and Technology with two options for specialisa­ tion: Management ofAgricultura l Resources and Plant Production and Protection.Th e emphasis given toplan tproductio n is areflectio n of the significance of the cropping sector in the region, particularly cereals, vegetables and fruit crops. The new degree programme in Ecological Agriculture (EA), introduced two years ago, emerged due to the con­ vergence of several factors, some internal and others external.

Of the 10 new course offerings approved and implemented by the Faculty of Agriculture, the Department of Crop Science is responsible for two: the degree in Ecological Agriculture and a degree in Agricultural Crop Production and Protection. There are currently three cohorts of students following the programme, with a class of 19 stu­ dents in the first year cohort of 2001-02.Thi s also means that when the case study iscompile d none has graduated from the programme.

Organic farming, which emerges as an alternative to conventional agri­ culture in the 1980s in Europe, has as its ideology and practice an emphasis on sustainability, human health, biological conservation and quality of life for farmers.Th e way in which academic institutions have incorporated this change in farming practice, and in society in general, isthroug h the adoption of new words.Th e term 'agro-ecology' came to be used in some instances and the phrase 'ecological agriculture' in other instances to symbolise 'organic farming.'

The university is a member of the European Working Group on joint curriculum development within the field of agro-ecology.Th e degree is one of only three independent degree programmes offered in this field in Europe. The other two are at the University of Wales, Aberystwyth (in English) and the University of Kassel, Witzenhausen (in German). While the number of institutions offering courses and programs in this field is growing, the partnership among the original Socrates group of institutions is strong with a flow of staff and students among them and on-going joint development of curriculum. In addition to Viterbo and the two institutions named above, KVL, the Danish Veterinary and Agricultural University and Wageningen University are also members ofthi spartnership . InJul y2000 ,th e summercomponen t ofth e Socrates joint programme was hosted atViterbo .

109 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

6.4.2 Keycharacteristics ofthe programme/course Thespecifi c objectives ofth eprogramm e areto : • develop an appreciation of farming as an occupation oriented towardseco-compatibility ; • acquireth eabilit yt oorganis efarmin g asa harmoniou sexpressio no f humanneeds ; • learn how to organise farming system components in a coherent agro-food system which embraces solidarity and employment at local andgloba llevel ; • develop skills required to plan agro-ecosystems on different scales withth echie fobjectiv e ofsustainability ;an d • beawar e ofth e economic and management aspects ofagro-ecosys ­ temscompatibl e withth eenvironmen t throughcontac t withagricul ­ tural enterprises farming organicproducts .

In addition tothese ,th eprogramm e also aimst o serve regional needs, bothi nterm so fmeetin gfarmers 'need san di nreachin gou tt oloca lstu ­ dents foruniversit y study.Promotin g international mobility ofstudent s acrossth eE Ui sanothe ro fth egoal so fth eprogramme .

The three-year Bachelor programme is offered through 3 teaching terms each year, made upo f 60credit s (ECTS)pe r year or 180credi t pointsfo rth ewhol edegree .Th efirs t halfo fth eprogramm econsist so f basicdiscipline san dprinciple so fagricultur ewhil eth esecon dhal fha s unitsmos to f whichar e specially designed with anemphasi s onE Ao r organic farming. These latter units are open to students in otherpro ­ grammesa swell .A lis to fcourse sca nb efoun d inTabl e8 .

Aspecia l feature ofth ene wprogramm e isth eWor kTraineeshi pexpe ­ rience, distributed overth ethre eyears .Student sbecom e engagedwit h practicing farmers,wit h 10ou to f 180credit sbein gallotte dt othi sacti ­ vity spreadove rfou r terms.Th efina l thesis,whic hma yinvolv ea pro ­ ject connectedwit hthi straineeship ,ha sbee nallotte d another5 credits. Theai mo fthi suni ti st obrin gstudent sclose rt ofarmin g practice,hel p them experience and deal with real problems faced by farmers and to think about allpossibilitie s assolution s ina ninterdisciplinar y manner. Students work with organic farmers approved by the University, visit the enterprise several times, continue to work on problems associated with the same fields over different seasons in close consultation with theirtutor san d finally present theirfinding s toth eclas san dteachers .

110 6 CASE STUDIES

Term Subject Credits Term Subject Credits P'Year 2nd Year Is' Mathematics 6 41h Is' General & Organic 8 4'h Soil Management as Biological 5 Chemistry Resource Is' Foreign Language 6 4lh Fundaments of Engineering 9 4lh Eco-compatibleTechnique s and 5 Mechanisation 2nd Agricultural Genetics 6 Placement 1 2nd Physics 6 5lh Fundaments ofAgronom y and 9 Crop Production 2nd Formative activity 5 5th Fundaments ofAnima l 8 (student's choice) Husbandry 2nd Placement 2 5,h Placement 3 Energy Flow and Food in 5 Eco-compatible Agricultural Systems 3rd Agricultural Botany 6 6th The Principles of Organic 9 Cropping System Design and Management 3rd Agricultural Ecology 6 Human Health, Nutrition and Food Quality 3rd Fundaments of Agricultural 9 Economical and Social Impacts Economics Summer of Ecological Agriculture Historical Evolution and 6 course Philosophy of Ecological Agriculture 3rdYear 7th Planning and Management of Organic Animal Husbandry 10 7th Decision-making in Ecological Agriculture 6 7th Environmental Impact and Enhancement in Ecological Agriculture 4

8th Ecological Agriculture as Business 6 8th Statistics and Informatics Laboratory 4 8th Formative Activity (Student's Choice) 6 8,h Placement 4

9th Fundaments of Plant protection 9 9,h Pest-control in Ecological Agriculture 5 9,h Formative Activity (Student's Choice) 1 Table 8: Course contents of the three- ,h 9 Final Exam 5 year bachelor in Ecological Agriculture Total Credits 180 at The University of Tuscia

HI CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

Assessment of courses is predominantly through written examinations, practicals and quizzes. Discussion of projects and reports and oral exa­ minations are also included where appropriate, such as in the assess­ ment of the work traineeship programme. Other assessment options are also now being considered.

English isbein g taught asa n important element ofth eprogramm e espe­ cially in view of the emphasis on international mobility.

6.4.3 Background of the integrated ruraldevelopment programme/ course In the context of this course, Ecological Agriculture (EA) is taken to constitute agriculture as a human activity system oriented towards eco- compatibility. Farming is viewed as a harmonious expression of the many human needs.I n thissense ,rura l development issee n asa proces s with a series of aims that need to bebalance d within the context of eco­ logical agriculture,thes eaim shavin gt ob eunderstoo dprimaril y asbio ­ physical processes which are influenced by economic, technological, socialan dpolitica l factors. EAoffer s thepotentia l todesig n an efficient web of human activities which are able to re-vitalise local and regional economies through a quality-oriented development.

The original five-year degree programme built to support the region's agriculture had to be adjusted to comply with several external and internal events and changes. Inth e external scene,ther e has been a per­ ceptible shift in farming practice from long established and dominant systems of monocultural cropping to a more diverse and rotational system of crop farming. The demand from the public for chemical free food and the push coming from Agenda 21 for development of environ­ mentally compatible agricultural systems has seen the growth of the organic farming sector in Italy. It is felt that the University ofTuscia , as a young university with a young faculty, is uniquely placed to meet society's new demands on it.

Other external factors that contribute to this change are: • Participation in the EU's Socrates/Erasmus programme towards a common European degree in Ecological Agriculture, and the push coming from thisprogramm e forjoin t curriculum development inEA ;

112 6 CASE STUDIES

• Internationalisation Program of the Italian Ministry of Education, which allowed access to funds; and • Financial support from the Regional Agency for the Learning Right of students.

Prominent among the internal factors is the requirement of the Univer­ sity to restructure its curriculum according to the 1999 Bologna decla­ ration and to harmonise it with EU directives into a 3+ 2 structure.Th e University ofTusci a alsohas ,a spar t of itsmissio n statement, the requi­ rement to adhere to the Magna Carta principles. The personal involve­ ment and push from some of the professors in the field of EA has been an important driver for the start ofth eprogramme , particularly the part played by Professor Fabio Caporali as the main promoter of the pro­ gramme and its co-ordinator.

6.4.4 Key constraints in implementing the integrated rural development programme/course Students with a rural upbringing have an advantage over metropolitan students,suc h asthos e coming from Rome,i ntha t theyposses s some of the necessary skills and the capacity to relate to farmers. This aspect of the programme is still in its infancy and like most innovative approach­ es to education, it is evidently a challenge for both students and tutors. It demands more resources than traditional classroom teaching and transport of students from the university to farmers' fields poses speci­ fic difficulties.

6.4.5 Key strategies used in implementing the integrated rural development programme/course The range and mix of competencies expected of agronomists are such that, higher education in agriculture in Latin countries has generally moved towards specialisation and multiplication intoman y independent courses within each programme.Th e case of EA seems tob e an excep­ tion to this trend in that there has been integration leading to reduction in the total number of courses in agronomy. The theme of EA with its ideology of holism and integration is reflect­ ed in the course content and design. Furthermore, the programme is being co-ordinated on a more thematic basis than has been usual.

113 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

There seems to be a good mix of students from the local area and those from the wider region. Students on the whole seem to be motivated and some of them are explicit in their commitment towards ecological con­ cerns and the ideology of organic farming. There are even a few that abandoned other fields of study inothe r institutions in ordert otak e this programme. Students often comment on the success ofth e international links, for example, the Erasmus programme. Students who experienced the older programme at Viterbo comment on the choices available to them now in terms of courses. They also feel that courses are better organised now than before due to the opportunities teachers have for rethinking their offerings.

There is evidence of an adequate research and publication base to sup­ port education in EA. However, not all members of faculty are engaged in research pertaining to the needs and ideals of EA. Students note that some of the teachers are interdisciplinary in their practice, both in re­ search and teaching, and work within the field of EA.Ther e are others, it is noted by students, whose research practice does not necessarily overlap with the ideals of EA. Likewise, there are also observations about the tension between the level of depth characteristic of teachers who are specialists and the breadth of coverage offered by those who tend to be generalists.

Evaluation of courses is being undertaken by the use of standardised university wide questionnaire.

6.4.6 Plansfor development of the integrated rural development programme/course The programme hasbee n going for three years and when the case study was being compiled, no graduates had been produced. Students are in their 1st,2 nd and 3rdyear s at present. Graduates in the old programmes have in the past been employed traditionally as technical specialists. It isto o early toevaluat e the employment potential of graduates of the EA programme. It isexpecte d that mostwil l continue ont oth enex t level of the 3 + 2 model.

The organic farming sector is expected to grow in Italy.Th e nature of the problems experienced and the large regional differences in Italian agriculture are considered to be unique. This implies that the demand

114 6 CASE STUDIES

for graduates toserv e EAan d rural development will continue to rise. In terms of being integrated with local needs, the programmes in Viterbosee mt ob elinke d wellt oth ecommunity .Th ewor ktraineeshi p programme,fo rexample ,i srate da ssuccessfu l withcommitte d farmers inth ecommunit y workingwit hth eUniversity .

The active involvement of and the push provided by Professor Fabio Caporali, the international network in EA and the need of a young, innovative university with ayounge r teaching faculty haveenable dth e creation of the new programme in Viterbo. The programme could be bettermarkete dtha n whati sbein gdon ea tpresent .Ther ei ssom eloca l recruitment beingundertake n inth eregio nbu tthi scoul db e improved. In the words of one teacher 'the future of the course depends on the teachersan dthei rcommitment. '

115 STEPPING STONES FOR CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT

7.1 Curriculum changebetwee npragmatis m andchang eo f ideology

One of the key observations that the four cases featured in this book seem to share is that highly motivated and dedicated people are the main driving force in curriculum change. They are engaged in such change for anumbe r of reasons, amongst which the desire toproduc e graduates whoca nwor k in thene wrura l economy,wit h its post-prod- uctionist demands and its stronger environmental concerns, is a very important one. There are important differences of a personal nature (epistemological vantage point, personal values, personal experiences andsocia lnetworks) ,an do fmor econtextua lnatur e(rura lhistor yo fth e region, rural policy, local economic outlook and trends, links or lack thereofbetwee ntertiar yeducatio nan dth erura lcommunities) ,tha tlea d todifferen t institutional responsest oth echalleng eo fdesignin geduca ­ tionfo rIRD .

There areals odifference s inth ewa y 'change'i sconceptualise d byth e various actors involved in curriculum response to a changing world. Somelea ntoward sa radica ltransformatio n ofideolog yo fteachin gan d learning and equate 'integration' with the inclusion of systemic think­ ing,holis man dtransformativ e learning.Others ,perhap smor epragma ­ tically,op t for amor eadaptiv e andconservativ eapproac h andprefe r to renewexistin gcourses ,improv elink swit hth ecommunit y andintegra ­ teemergin gconcepts ,whil ediscardin gol done stha thav ebecom e fruit­ less. Inth e cases covered in thisbook , but also inth e responses toth e on-line survey, a whole range of approaches to teaching and learning can be found, often closely related toa particula r view ofwha tconsti ­ tutes 'knowledge,' 'research' and 'curriculum.' Some stress the im­ portanceo fpreparin gstudent st ob ecompeten tan dskilfu l workerswit h ahealth ywor kethi c(tendenc y towardsa vocational/neo-classic orien­ tation). Again,other s stressth e importance ofequippin g studentswit h thecompetence san dskill stha thel pthe msuccee di na competitive ,glo -

117 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

balising market-oriented world (tendencytoward sa liberal/progressive orientationo f curriculum development). There are also those who stress the importance of engaging students in critical thinking, action taking and helping them cope with uncertain futures and every chan­ gingrealitie s (atendenc y towardsa socially criticalorientation ofcur ­ riculum development). Table 9 shows three different perspectives on teaching,learnin g and research that inrealit y mightno tb ea sclear-cu t aspresente dhere .

The epistemological paradigm shift towards a systems perspective, whichwil lb ehighlighte d inthi sclosin gchapter ,i sa stron ginfluenc ei n somecases ,bu tcertainl y noti nal lcases .Man yinvolve d incurriculu m development have simply sought vocational sensitivity, which has requiredne wcourses ,withou tadvocatin ga paradig m shift.Th ecourse s and degree programmes that we examined are a manifestation of this practical response aswel la so fne wthinking .I npractic ew ese ea mix­ ture of giant leaps and small steps. Such changes, big and small, are often a function of changing values, interests, perceptions and expe­ rienceso fpeopl eactiv ei nfurthe r andhighe reducation .

Scientia Techne Praxis Focus Learning for knowing Learning for doing Learning for being Knowledge produced Propositional Practical Experiential Stucture Subject disciplines Crafts/Skills Issues/ Competences Teacher's role Expert Master Facilitator Teaching strategies Lectures on theory Practical instruction Real-world Demonstrations Projects Research style Basic (Experimental) Applied Action (Developmental) (Participative) Research goals Abstract-universal Workplace Contextual knowledge Solutions knowledge / Action for change Basic philosophy Positivism Utilitarianism Constructivism Focus of reflection What do I What can I Who am I now know? now do? becoming?

Table9 Some distinctions between different traditions of knowledge and knowing (Adapted from:Bawde n &Macadam , 1991, p.4 )

118 7 STEPPING STONES FOR CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT

Here webrin gtogethe r someo fth e lessons learnt from our engagement with the literature, the practical case studies, and with each other and others duringworkshop s and seminars.A significant part ofthi s closing section comes from a presentation one of us, Fabio Caporali, made at the ETIRD workshop at the 16th European Seminar on Extension Education which was held in Hungary in September of 2003. In this part some of the barriers of adopting an integrated approach to curricu­ lum development are discussed. These barriers include the deeply entrenched patterns of reductionist and disciplinary thinking that cha­ racterise so many institutions of 'higher' education. A systems frame­ work is offered as a way out of these unproductive and,ultimately , irre­ versible and destructive processes.

A systems perspective on curriculum change as a means for accommo­ dating more integrative approaches to teaching and learning (process) and rural development (content),perhap s does not fully reflect the grad­ ual, messy, stuttering process that more accurately reflects how, in most cases, progress in curriculum design in IRD moves forward. In some cases there are significant key events that may trigger curriculum chan­ ge, for instance, when new powerful or inspiring (or both) personalities engage in curriculum development, or when a new European Policy on Higher Education becomes effective (for instance the introduction of a European Bachelor-Master structure and the European wide introducti­ on of the ECTS-system), or when adeclin e in student numbers require a major overhaul of existing programmes. Hence, the turn to a systems approach and the need for an alternative ontology/epistemology that emerges out of the four case studies should not be seen as a prescription but rather asa critica l consideration that might beconsidere d along with others.On e of those,presen t in all four cases covered, is aver y pragma­ tic one driven by the current socio-cultural and economic reality that many rural area's in Europe are currently facing. Itca n be argued that in economic, social andcultura l termsth e 'old rural,'mad e up byth e occu­ pational community ofthos e working the land,ha sbee n supplanted bya 'new rural'wit hbusinesse s notnecessaril y connected directly toth e land (i.e.touris m and other services,whic h arepar t ofrura l development and need tob e integrated intoa ne wconsumption-oriente d approach toRD) . In some areas,thi s trend isenhance d by a growing new rural population alongside a declining farm population. It should be no surprise that many higher agricultural education institutions respond to these trends

119 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION by creating new courses and programmes that address these changes without necessarily re-thinking their educational philosophy. It iswit h this inmin d thatw eintroduc e a systemsperspectiv e ason eo fth estep ­ ping-stones forcurriculu m development.

7.2 Barrierst ointegratio n incurriculu m development: a systemsperspectiv e

Curricula are"learnin g systems"representin g therea lsystems , physic­ alo rabstract ,t owhic hthe yrefe r (Figure5) .Th efirs t aspecto fsystem s integration concerns the correspondence between the representation system (curriculum) and what is represented (real system), which is essentially anontologica l andepistemologica l matter.A lo to fcriticis m ofth estructur ean dfunctionin g ofcurricul a inWester nuniversitie sha s ariseni nth elas tdecade .On eparticularl ystron gcritiqu efocuse d onth e lacko fconnection st ocontemporar y reality.Eve nwhe nsuc hconnecti ­ ons are made, it is in such afragmente d form that little useful under­ standing ispossibl e (Daly &Cobb , 1994).Th e current status ofcurri ­ culum development has been well summarised by Malon (1990) with these words:"Wha t weteac h is fragmented. Weteac h what weunder ­ stand,an duniversitie sreflec t anoutmode dunderstanding. "However ,i t iscrucia ltha t a curriculum isa goo drepresentatio n ormode lo frealit y sincei tinevitabl ybegin st ofunctio n asa nor mt owhic hrealit y ismad e toconfor m byth ever ypolicie sderive d from themodel .

Theory Praxis Economic paradigm • Global free marke t ' Disciplinolatry' • Consumerism • Individualism • Externalities Money fetishism

Figure5 :Curriculu m development inWester n Universities under the dominant paradigms

120 7 STEPPING STONES FOR CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT

Strangely enough,realit y can, eventually, converge towardsth emode l that tried to represent it in the first place.Th e model then becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Daly& Cob b(1994 )hav emad e a meaningful contribution in order to highlight what kind of theory and praxis is behind curriculum development inWester n- but alsoi n manyEaster n European- universities(Figur e6) .The ycreate dth eter m"disciplinola - try" to refer to the process of the disciplinary organisation of knowl­ edge.Thi sdisciplinar y organisation ofknowledg epenetrate s forcefully themoder nuniversit y andthroug h itcontemporar y societya sa whole .

Theory Praxis Systems Paradigm Systems Paradigm (epistemological and (methodological tools) ontological tools) External

Figure 6: Curriculum development in Western Universities under the emergent systems paradigm

The disciplinary "successes" have involved high levels of abstraction resulting in deductive conclusions, which are generalised to the real worldwit hlittl eawarenes so fth edangerou sconsequence so fdoin gso . This kind oforganisatio n ofknowledg e and its implications wereanti ­ cipated early inth epas tcentur yb yAlfre d NorthWhitehea d wholabel ­ ledth eoutcom eo fth ewhol eprocess : "thefallac y ofmisplace dconcre - teness".Sign so fthi sfallac y are shown inth eeconomi c paradigmtha t dominatesou rcurren tunsustainabl edevelopmen t (seeals oPar tI o fthi s volume).Fo rinstance ,th estrongl ycultivate dappea lo f"materia lexter ­ nalities"occur sa tth eexpens eo fothe rmor einternall ydrive nexperien ­ ces.Thi spoint sa tth eproble m ofmisplace d concreteness ineconomi c theory. The fallacy of misplaced concreteness culminates in "money fetishism," which consists in taking the characteristics of the abstract symbolo rmeasur eo fexchang evalue ,money ,an dapplyin gthe mt oth e concrete use value,th e commodity itself. With the advent of amone y economy,th emos ttragi chuma nparado xha sbee naccomplished :virtu ­ alwealt hca nb eindefinitel y accumulated inth efor m ofmoney ,where ­ as real wealth in the form of bio-physical, non-material,richness an d earth habitability can be increasingly destroyed.Th e characteristics of

121 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION theabstrac t symbol (non-spoilage) come todominat e the characteristics (spoilage) of the concrete reality being symbolised (Daly & Cobb, 1994).

Another barrier to integration in curriculum development is provided byth e university research structures,whic h contribute tore-enforc e dis­ ciplinary-oriented learning. Departments are designed to foster knowl­ edge within their discipline, and their reputation and resources flow from recognition within their field. Most research is conducted within the established boundaries of a given discipline. Traditional doctoral programmes, which open access to academic careers,hav e evolved ina way that strongly encourages specialisation (Golde &Gallagher , 1999). As a consequence, the classical organisation of university research into discrete and specialised departments provides neither the perspectives nor the tools to deal with reality, let alone to (re)design and improve it (Francis et al., 2001).

7.3 A systems perspective for Integrated Rural Development Curricula

Rethinking the curriculum means discussing the changes in teaching, learning and instruction that areneede d tobette r linkth eacademic world to today's global realities.Accordin g to a survey of the agriculture tea­ ching programmes of related universities in Europe (Phillips, 1999), most graduates felt that their exposure to relevant practical experience was lacking, as was their training experiences in the environmental aspects of agriculture.T o overcome the growing mismatch between the requirements of the curriculum and the realities of life, it isnecessar y to develop new epistemological, ontological and methodological tools in ordert ogiv ea mor e coherent viewo fknowledg e and moreauthenti c and meaningful view of life. These new intellectual and organisational tools will help in the challenge to better understand reality.

One of the most powerful examples of an integrative approach is the systems paradigm, which calls for a change from a discipline to a systems focus. To explain the structure of reality, the processes invol­ ved, and the role of humankind in these structures and processes, the use of a holistic type of instrument called "systems thinking" has been

122 7 STEPPING STONES FOR CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT suggested (Boulding, 1956; Checkland, 1981). The systems field is predicated upon the belief that reality is a unified whole.Historically , the term and the philosophy of holism was originally developed by Smut (1927) and scientifically elaborated byTansle y (1935)wh ouse d the concept of ecosystem ofwhic h people andthei r activities are fully part. Dating back to the first formulations of this concept (Tansley, 1935),huma nactivit y finds itsspac ei necolog ya sa nextremel ypower ­ ful biotic factor that tends to increasingly disturb the balance of pre­ existingecosystem san di nth een ddestro ythem .Th esystem sparadig m spotlights thedeepe r pattern whichconnec t allphenomen a andpropo ­ sestha tdivers easpect so frealit y- physical,biological ,socia lan dtech ­ nological - can be better understood and handled when treated as systemso finterdependen t partstha t interact withthei renvironments .

Curricula based on a systems paradigm offer an educational process moreappropriat efo ra ner ao flimits .Th einterpretatio n ofou rplane ta s the ultimate global ecosystem requires an acceptance of natural limits tohuma n activitiesan d servest oinsti l acontex t culture,wher ea sens e of belonging and responsibility for sustainable development are promoted.Curricul a designed to foster social andenvironmenta l inter­ dependencehav emor echance st ooffe r studentsmultipl e opportunities to experience learning within the context of their neighbourhoods so thatth eacquisitio n ofimportan t skillsan dknowledg e isno tde-contex - tualised but embedded in aproces s of shared existence.Knowledg e of localcultura l traditionsan dsens eo faffinit y withth eregiona lenviron ­ menthel pprepar e studentst otak ea nactiv erol e inth ecar ean dgover ­ nanceo fthei rcommunitie sonc ethe yhav egraduate d (Smith, 1993).

Global problems are systemic (Malone, 1990). Education for global problems demands an understanding of the underlying ethical attitude of our activities. One of the most critical challenges in restructuring natural sciencedominate dcurricul a isincorporatin gethica lan daesthe - ticaldimension so flearning . Thecentralit yo fvalue s(lik esustainabili - ty) emerges in a curriculum based on a systems approach. Values are not a separate category of the mind,bu t arise out of a comprehensive understandingo freality ,ou rworldvie w(Clar k& Wawrytko ,1990) .Th e senseo fgoo dan dth esens eo fbeaut yar epar to fou rhuma ndimension . The ontological assumptions derived from the ecosystem concept that all life forms are inextricably connected (religion ofconnectedness )i n

123 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION a finite andbeautifu l planetcall sfo r theurgen tnee dt oprotec tth eeco ­ system of which wear e part, by assuring sustainability of our human activity systems. Universities and schools have a responsibility in re­ examining current perceptions of nature, of the world and of human society in the light of the reality of resource depletion (see also Corcoran& Wals ,2004) .The yhav ea responsibilit y to(re)develo pcur ­ ricula and structures tohel p students deal with aworl d of limitsrathe r than aworl do fexpansio n andgrowt h (Smith, 1993).

7.4 Methodological tools

Traditional methodologies inspired bya mono-disciplinar y curriculum structureten dt ofoste r inlearner sa fragmente d viewo frealit ybecaus e theirmai nfocu s issucces s(e.g .passin ga nexa mo rgettin ga proficien ­ cycertificate ) inseparat e fields oflearning .Learner sfin d itver y diffi­ cult to integrate de-contextualised and unrelated knowledge and skills toresolv ereal-lif e issues.Methodologica l toolsinspire db yth esystem s paradigm can be helpful in improving connections between a curricu­ luma sa whole ,it sexterna l context,an dwithi n thecurriculu mcompo ­ nentsthemselve s(interna ltools) .Externa lmethodologica ltool shel pt o introduce a broad concept of teaching and action-based learning. Integrating theexpertis e offarmers , business owners,governmen tspe ­ cialists, and non-profit groups can enrich the educational process by offering different perspectives and ways of knowing (Francis et al., 2001). Moving students into the discovery made through case studies engagesthei rmultipl e senseswhe nthe ybecom e immersed inth ereal - worldcontex t inwhic hlearnin gtake splace .Cas estudies ,intervie wan d survey techniques, time-series measurements, and activity calendars canb etaugh t andapplie d toanswe rquestion s about integration within the whole agro-ecosystem hierarchy (cropping systems - farming systems- regional systems- global systems).Thes eapproache srequi ­ resevera lchange si nattitud ean dorganisation .Ne wsource so f funding andrevise d systemso fadministerin g research funds willb erequire dt o promotethi sapproac h successfully (Stark, 1995).

Toolsar eals oneede d inorde rt ogiv emor einterna lcoherenc et oa cur ­ riculum. This requires more integration of the disciplines. Thus, all levels of approaches to integration (multi-disciplinarity,inter-discipli -

124 7 STEPPING STONES FOR CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT narity andtrans-disciplinarity )ar eprobabl yneeded .Multi-disciplinari - ty generally means bringing separate theories, skills, data and idea to bearo na commo nproblem ,whil einter-disciplinarit yinvolve sbringin g togetherpeopl ean d ideas from different disciplines, tojointl y frame a problem, agree on a methodological approach, and analyse the data (Golde& Gallagher, 1999;Hamme r& Soderqvist,2001 )Finally ,trans - disciplinarity impliesful l interactionbetwee ndiscipline sfro m anissue - basedperspective .Accordin gt oHamme r& Soderqvis t(2001) ,integra ­ tive approaches could be addressed in course programmes in several ways,including : 1 invitingexterna l lecturers from otherdisciplines ; 2 having seminar exercisesan ddiscussion s with invited lectures from otherdisciplines ; 3 mixing students from ongoing disciplinary courses forjoin t exerci­ ses;an d 4 offering full trans-disciplinary coursesan dprogrammes .

The efforts in this list range from the most basic (1) toth e most com­ pletely integrative (4). Although the latter type of effort isdesirabl e in manyrespects ,i t islikel yt orequir e relatively well-developed andinte ­ gration-oriented organisational structures, such as interfaculty degree courseso rcourses/modules .

More internal coherenceals orequire smor e integration betweenteach ­ ers and students,wh oar e the basic components of a curriculum-based learning system.Creatin g atrul y integrated curriculum entailstha tth e two groups become reciprocal members of a shared, self-critical lear­ ningcommunity .Thi sca nb eachieve d through: • creating a community (amongst learners and/or teacher - learners) thatgenerate sconversatio n (i.e.includin gsuc htechnique sa shavin g memberstal k intur nt ocreat eknowledg e through aproces s ofcon ­ tinual negotiation and transformation); • creatinga team-teachin g context.Team-teachin g isa nexcellen twa y to move away from the individualistic and disciplinary mode of scholarship and research. Members of teams composed of faculty from different disciplines, often find their intellectual life moreen ­ riched (Manley &Ware , 1990). Ateam-taugh t courseca nb ea vast ­ lyrewardin gexperienc e forbot hstudent s andinstructors ;an d • implementing intensive programmes or courses that are not longer

125 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

than two weeks (6 ECTS) in order to create moreflexible didacti c arrangements for approaching different contextualexperiences .

7.5 Conclusions

Among the human activity systems, agriculture and forestry are per­ haps the most integrated, since they combine in organised systems or farms bio-physical and socio-economic components from bothnatura l and anthropogenic sources.A sustainable integration is demanded in today's rural land using activities at any hierarchical level, from the localt oth eregiona lan dgloba l levels. Theconcep t ofIntegrate d Rural Development has been created torevitalis e the rural environment and economy without compromising the Earth's life support systems. University has an important role to play in society by educating pro­ fessionals in agriculture to help them meet the current expectations and demands. New epistemological, ontological and methodological toolsbase d ona systemsparadig m could helpuniversitie s addressth e challenge of establishing new curricula for sustainable rural develop­ ment.A tth e sametime , society as awhol e must find therigh t wayo f supporting universities inthi stas k sotha t itca n play itsrol e ina lear ­ ningsociety .

In our cases we found diversity in innovation. In addition to the epi­ stemological "Gestalt switch"toward s a systems orientation, weals o found a kind of Darwinian adaptation process as institutions, and more importantly individuals, sought to survive and adapt what they haddon e inorde rt oattun e itmor eclosel yt ocontemporar y demands. Theresistanc e ofth eol dguar d iswidespread . Iti seviden t inman yo f the cases, as is the tendency for mono-disciplinary scientists to look downthei r noses atth e efforts tobuil d inter-disciplinarity.

Therear esom eprofoun d andunresolve d paradoxes,no tleas tth egrow ­ ing tension between institutional research excellence and relevance to the wider needs of rural society. This pushes inter-disciplinarity and new courses to the margins and makes their establishment and finan­ cing difficult in many cases. New universities seem to have the edge becausethe yten dt ob emor eclosel yconnecte d tothei r clientbas ean d lessivory-towere d thanth eol dIv yLeagu etyp eestablishments .

126 7 STEPPING STONES FOR CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT

It might help to have a systems perspective - as has been outlined here - but it is still possible to develop an IRD-oriented curriculum without it.Nonetheles s the cases and the on-line survey results dosho wa strong drift towards a systems-type approach as programmes are evolving. Sometimes this systems perspective is explicit and sometimes it is not.

Across theboar d introducing IRD inth ecurriculu m hasbee n a struggle and will remain so as long asuniversitie s arejudge d on their traditional outputs in terms of narrow disciplinary research excellence. It is also paradoxical that agricultural institutions designed to be vocationally sensitive have been so critical and resistant to what is clearly led by the demands for change on the ground and the actual changes that have swept through rural Europe, albeit in different ways and at different paces in different places.Thi s can be explained by the attempts of those with power and resources, in both industry and education, not wishing to give these up to new activities and to deny the legitimacy of softer process-oriented approaches to education and change management. A general attitude of 'better a subsidy in the bank than a learning process to help manage change and complexity' seems to have prevailed!

Despite all this, progress has been made and will continue to be made by the actions of a few individuals motivated by their subject and capa­ ble of sparking that interest not only in their students, but also in their teaching colleagues and administrators. Their efforts greatly benefit from the vocational relevance-demands of practitioners who face the need and urgency of a more integrated approach to rural development on a daily basis in everyday practice.

Finally, reflection on the relationship and level of congruency between one's outlook on Integrated Rural Development and one's view on teaching, learning and curriculum development is crucial.Wha t we see emerging from the cases is a need to understand better the connection between biophysical and human systems. This is becoming a central task for higher education propelled, in part, by the multiple market fail­ ures and externalities that are found in the rural arena. Even though education for IRD can go down a number of routes, from soft-systems based learning to amodifie d or amor e pragmatic positivism to a socio- critical transformative learning, it appears crucial to reflect on the rela­ tionships between one's conceptualisation of Integrated Rural Devel-

127 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION opment and one's conceptualisation of teaching and learning. When such reflection and reflexivity becomes an integral part of curriculum development, Education and Training for Integrated Rural Develop­ ment will make for a stronger, more meaningful and transformative learning experience that is likely to sustain itself beyond the time stu­ dents spend incollege .

Thisboo kha sbee n alearnin gproces s for thoseengage d in itsproduc ­ tion, who have had the opportunity to view courses and programmes and to reflect on their own experiences relating to sustainability and integrated rural development. It is an unfinished journey of discovery onwhic hw ewelcom efello w travellers.

128 REFERENCES

Aikenhead, G. (1994). What is STS science teaching. In: J. Solomon and G.Aikenhead (Eds): STS Education. International Perspectives on Reform. NewYor k and London, Teachers College,Columbi a University,Teacher s College Press,pp .45-59 . Alblas, H.A., Van den Bor, W. & Wals, A.E.J. (1995). Developing the environmental dimension ofvocationa l education.International Research in Geographicaland Envi­ ronmental Education, 4 (2), 3-19. Ali Khan, S. (1992). Colleges Going Green. London: Further and Higher Education Council for Higher Education. Bawden, R.& R. Macadam (1991).Action Researching Systems: Extension Reconstruct­ ed. Paperprepare d for the workshop 'Agricultural Knowledge Systemsan d the Role of Extension'hel d atth eUniversit yo f Hohenheim, Stuttgart,Germany .2 1-2 5May , 1991. Bawden, R. (1992). SystemsApproache s toAgricultura l Development: The Hawkesbury Experience.Agricultural Systems, 40, 153-176. Bawden, R. and R. Macadam (1991). Action Researching Systems: Extension Recon­ structed. Paper prepared for the workshop 'Agricultural Knowledge Systems and the Role of Extension' held at the University of Hohenheim, Stuttgart, Germany. 21-25 May, 1991. Bawden, R.J. (1993). Critical Systemic/Epistemic Connections And Sustainable Rural Development. Paper prepared for theAnnua l Conference of the International Society for the Systems Sciences.Systems for Peace, Phoenix Arizona.Augus t 1993). Bawden, R.J.(2000) .Th eCautionar yTal eo fth eHawkesbur y Experience:a casestud y of reform in agricultural education. In:Va n den Bor, Holen, P.Wals ,A.E.J . & Filho,W . (Eds.), Integrating Concepts of Sustainability into Education for Agriculture and Rural Development. Frankfurt/M: Peter Lang Publishers. Bawden, R.J. & Packham, R.G. (1993). Systemic Praxis in the Education of the Agri­ cultural Systems Practitioner. Systems Practice 6, 7-19. Bawden, R.J. (1990). OfAgricultura l Systems and SytemsAgriculture : systems method­ ologies in agricultural education. In: J.G.W. Jones and P.R. Street (Eds.), Systems TheoryApplied toAgriculture andthe Food Chain. London: ElsevierApplie d Science. Bawden, R.J. (1997). Learning to Persist: a systemic view of development. In: F.A. Stowell, R.L. Ison, R. Armson, J. Holloway, S. Jackson, and S. McRobb (Eds.), Systems for Sustainability: people, organizations and environments. New York Plenum Press.

129 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

Bernstein, R.J.(1983) .Beyond Objectivism and Relativism. Oxford: Basil Blackwel l Ltd. Bingle, W.H. & Gaskell, P.J.(1994) . Scientific literacy for decision making and the soci­ al construction of scientific knowledge. Science Education, 78 (2), 185-201. Bondergaard,J .(1991) .Environmenta l Education as a Political Educated Criticism of the Technical Rationality. Global Forumfor Environmental Education. 1 (3), 5-7. Boulding, K.E. (1956). General systems theory: The skeleton of science. Management Science,3(2), 197-208. Brugman, D. (1988). Personaliseren van de leerstof: een interventieonderzoek naar het ontwikkelen van waardegebieden door leerlingen tijdens lessen sociale wereldoriën­ tatie. Leiden: DSWO Press. Brundtland, G. (1987). Our Common Future: Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Burrell, W.G. & Morgan, G. (1979). Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analy­ sis. Heinemann: London. Büttel, F.H. (1985). The Land Grant System; A Sociological Perspective on Value Conflicts and Ethical Issues.Agriculture and Human Values 2, 78-95. Caporali, F.(2001) . Ecosystems controlled by man. In: Frontiers of Life. Vol IV,pp . 519- 533. NewYork :Academi c Press. Caporali, F.,Mancinelli , R. andCampigli a E.(2003) .Indicator s ofcroppin g system diver­ sity in organic and conventional farms in Central Italy. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 1(1), 67-72. Capua, S.& Oren ,A .(1998) . TheAgricultural Environment: Conservationand Sustainable Development. Ministry of Environmental Quality, Department ofAgroecology , Israel. Carson, R. (1962).Silent Spring. Houghton Mifflin: Boston. Cassel, P.& Giddens,A . (1993). The Giddens reader. Basingstoke: Macmillan. Checkland, P.B. (1981). Systems thinking, systems practice. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons. Checkland, P.B. (1988). Systems Thinking: Systems Practice. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. Clark, M.E. and Wawrytko, S.A. (Eds.) (1990). Rethinking the curriculum: Towardan integrated, interdisciplinary college education, NewYork :Greenwoo d Press. Corcoran, P.B. & Wals, A.E.J (Eds.) (2004). Higher Education and the Challenge of Sustainability: Problematics, Promise, and Practice. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press. Cortese,A . (1998). 'Afterword'. Academic Planning in College and University Environ­ mental Programs: Proceedings of the 1998 Sanibel Symposium. Troy, Ohio: North American Association for Environmental Education. Cotgrove, S. (1982). Catastrophe or Cornucopia. NewYork :Joh n Wiley & Sons. Daly, H.E. and Cobb, B.Jr . (1994).For the common good.Boston : Beacon Press.

130 REFERENCES

Dewey, J.(1933) . How We Think.Boston : DC. Heath. Dewey, J. (1963). Experience & Education. Collier Books, New York: Macmillan Publishing Company. Douglass, G.K. (1984).Th e Meanings of Agricultural Sustainablility. In: G.K. Douglass (Ed.),Agricultural Sustainability in a Changing World Order Boulder, Co: Westview Press. Dreyfus, A. &Wals ,A.E.J . (2000).Ancho r Points for Integrating Sustainability in Higher Agricultural Education. In: Van den Bor, Holen, P.Wals , A.E.J. & Filho, W. (Eds.), Integrating Concepts of Sustainability into Education for Agriculture and Rural Development. Frankfurt/M: Peter Lang Publishers. Dreyfus, A. (1994). Agricultural and rural education. In T. Husen and T.N. Postlewhaite (Eds.) TheInternational Encyclopedia of Education. UK , PergamonPress ,pp .240-244 . Driver, R. &V Oldham (1986).A constructivist approach to curriculum development in science education. Studies in Science Education, 3, 105-122. Fensham, P.J. (1988). Approaches to the teaching of STS in science education. International Journal of Science Education, 10(4) , 34-356. Francis, C.A. (2000). Designing a durable and positive future for agriculture. American Journal ofAlternative Agriculture, 15(1) ,44-47 . Francis, CA., Lieblein, G., Helenius, J, Salomonsson, L. Oise, H. and Porte, J. (2001). Challenges in designing ecological agriculture education: a Nordic perspective on change.American Journal ofAlternative Agriculture, 16(2), 89-95. Golde, CM. and Gallagher, H.A. (1999).Th e challenges of conducting interdisciplinary research in traditional doctoral programs.Ecosystems, 2,281-285. Hammer, M. and Soderqvist,T .(2001) . Enhancing transdisciplinary dialogue in curricu­ la development. Ecological Economics, 38, 1-5. Hart, R. (1997). Children's Participation : The Theory and Practice of Involving Young Citizens in Community Development and Environmental Care. New York: Earthscan Publishers. Harwood, R.R. (1990). A history of sustainable agriculture. In: CA. Edwards, R. Lai,P . Madden, R.H. Miller and G. House (Eds.) Sustainable Agricultural Systems. Ankeny, Iowa: US Soil and Water Conservation Society. Hesselink, F.,va n Kempen, P.P.& A.E.J. Wals (2000). ESDebate: International On-line Debate on Educationfor Sustainable Development. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN. Hollings, CS. (1994). An Ecologist View of the Malthusian Conflict. In: K. Lindam- Kiessling and H. Landberg (Eds.),Population, Economic Development, and the Envi­ ronment NewYork :Oxfor d University Press. Hudeckova, H.an dLostak ,M .(1992) .Th e influence ofCollectivizatio n and Decollectivi- zation on the Development of Rural Communities in the Czech Republic.Journal of Rural Cooperation, 20 (2), 110-126.

131 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

Humphrey, CR. & F.R. Butte] (1982).Environment, Energy and Society. Belmont, CA.: Wadsworth. ICEE, Independent Commission on Environmental Education (1997). Are WeBuilding Environmental Literacy? Washington DC: Marshall Institute. Jackson, M.C. (1995). Beyond the Fads: Systems Thinking for Managers. Systems Re­ search 12,25-42. Jickling, B. (1999). Beyond sustainability: Should we expect more from education? SouthernAfrican Journal ofEnvironmental Education, 19,60-67 . Katan, J. (1993). Replacing pesticides with nonchemical tools for the control of soilbor- ne pathogens,Phytoparasitica, 21(2), 95-99. Kemmis, S., Cole, P. & D. Suggett (1983). Orientations to Curriculum and Transition: Towards the Socially Critical School. Melbourne: Victorian Institute of Secondary Education. Klafki, W. (1994). Neue Studien zur Bildungstheorie und Didaktik: Zeitgemäße Allge­ meinbildung und kritisch-konstruktiven Didaktik. Durchgesehene Auflage. Beltz Verlag,Weinhei m und Basel. Macadam, R.D.& R.G. Packham (1989).A cas e study in theus e of soft systems method­ ology: restructuring an academic organisation to facilitate the education of systems agriculturalists.Agricultural Systems, 30, 351-67. Malone, R.W.(1990) .Th e need for global education. In: Clark, M.E.an dWawrytko , S.A. (Eds.), Rethinking the curriculum: Toward an integrated, interdisciplinary college education. NewYork :Greenwoo d Press. Manley, J.C.an d Ware,N .( 1990) .Ho w do we know what we have done?Assessmen t and faculty development within a learning community. In: Clark, M.E. and Wawrytko, S.A. (Eds.) (1990>,Rethinking the curriculum: Towardan integrated, interdisciplina­ ry college education, NewYork :Greenwoo d Press. Mannion, A.M. (1995). Agricultural and Environmental Change. Chichester, UK: John Wiley and Sons. McFarland,D .andTaggie , B.J.(1990) .Cuttin g theGordia n knot: secret of successful cur- ricular integration. In: Clark, M.E. and Wawrytko, S.A. (Eds.),Rethinking the curri­ culum: Towardan integrated,interdisciplinary college education, NewYork : Green­ wood Press. Miller, A. (1983).Th e Influences of Personal Biases on Environmental Problem Solving. Journal of Environmental Management 17, 133-142. Ministry of Agriculture of the Czech Republic (2000). Green Report of the Ministry of Agriculture of the Czech Republic. Prague: Ministry of Agriculture. Monroe, M.C. (1990). Converting "It's no use"int o "Hey, there's a lot I can do:"A matrix for Environmental Action Taking. In: Simmons, D.A.; Knapp, C. andYoung , C. (Eds.), Setting theEE Agenda for the '90s 1990Conference Proceedings. Troy ,Ohio :NAAEE .

132 REFERENCES

Naisbitt, J.(1982) . Megatrends. NewYork :Warne r Books. National Council forAgricultura l Education (199 1 ). TheCouncil. 1991 Status report. Olsher, G. & Dreyfus, A. (1999). Biotechnology as a context for enhancing junior high school students' ability to ask meaningful questions about abstract biological proces­ ses. International Journal of Science Education, 21(2), 137-153. O'Riordan, T.& Voisey, H.(1997) .Th e political economy of sustainable . Environmental Politics, 6(1), 1-23. Orwell, G. (1989). Nineteen eighty-four. London: Penguin Books. (First published in 1949). Phillips, C. (1999) .Th e role of the universities in agriculture teaching and research in the twenty-first century. Outlook onAgriculture, 28 (4),253-256 . Posner, G.H. Strike, K..A., Hewson, P.W., and Gertzog, W.A. (1982).Accommodatio n of a scientific conception:Towar d atheor y of conceptual change.Science Education, 66 (2), 211-227. Ramos, E. and Delgado, M d M. (2003). 77ie experience of the University of Cordoba (Spain) in higher education on ruraldevelopment. Rome':UNESCO/FAO . 60pp . Ramsey,J.M. ,Hungerford , H.R., andVolk ,T.I .(1992) .Environmenta l education in the k- 12curriculum : Finding a niche.Journal of Environmental Education, 23 (20), 35-45. Reckmeyer, W.J. (1990). Paradigms and progress: integrating knowledge and education for thetwenty-first century. In:Clark , M.E.an d Wawrytko, S.A. (Eds.),Rethinking the curriculum: Toward an integrated, interdisciplinary college education, New York: Greenwood Press. Smith,G.A . (1993). Schooling ina ner ao f limits.Holistic Education Review, 6(2) ,45-59 . Smut, J.C. (1927).Holism and Evolution. London: Macmillan. Solomon, J (1994) Conflict between mainstream science and STS in science education. In:J .Solomo n andG .Aikenhea d (Eds.),STS Education. International Perspectives on Reform. NewYor k and London:Teacher s College Press. Stark, CR. (1995). Adopting multidisciplinary approaches to sustainable agriculture research: potentials and pitfalls. American Journal ofAlternative Agriculture, 10(4) , 180-183. Sterling, S. (2004). Higher Education, Sustainability, and the Role of Systemic Learning. In: Corcoran, P.B. & Wals, A.E.J (Eds.), Higher Education and the Challenge of Sustainability: Problematics, Promise, and Practice. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press. Tansley,A .G .(1935) .Th e use and abuseo fvegetationa l concepts and terms,Ecology, 16, 284-307. The Ministry of Agriculture of the Czech Republic (1994). Basic Principles of the Agricultural Policyof the Government on the CzechRepublic upto 1995and for a fur­ therperiod, Prague: Ministry of Agriculture.

133 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

Tilman, D.(1998) .Th e greening of the green revolution. Nature, 396,211-212. Tofrier , A. (1974). Learning for Tomorrow:The Role of the Future in Education. New York:Vintage . Ulrich,W .(1993) . Some Difficulties of Ecological Thinking, Considered from a Critical Systems Perspective:A Plea for critical Holism. Systems Practice 6, 583-611. Van den Bor, Holen, P & Wals, A.E.J. (2000). Sustainability in Higher (Agricultural) Education. In: Van den Bor, Holen, P. Wals, A.E.J. & Filho, W. (Eds.), Integrating Concepts of Sustainability into Education for Agriculture and Rural Development. Frankfurt/M: Peter Lang Publishers. Varela, F.J.,Thompson , E. & Rosch, E. (1991). The Embodied Mind: Cognitive Science and Human Experience. Cambridge, Ma: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Von Bertalanffy, L. (1981).A Systems View of Man. In: Paul Violette (Ed.), Boulder, Co: Westview Press. Wagner, A. & Dobrowolski, J.W. (Eds) (2000). International Conference on Holistic Concepts of Training for the Promotion of Sustainable focused on European Integrationfor Better Quality of Environment and Human Life. Book of Summaries. Krakow: University of Mining and Metallurgy. Walker,K. , Corcoran, P.B.& Wals ,A.E.J .(2004) .Cas e Studies,Make-Your-Cas e Studies, and Case Stories:A Critique of Case Study Methodology in Sustainability in Higher Education. Environmental Education Research, 10(1). Walker, K., Thomas, I. & Wals, A.E.J. (2000). Sustainability as Innovation: Changing Higher Education in two Australian Universities. Paper presented at the 2000 American Educational Research Association meeting held in New Orleans in April 24-28,2000. Wals, A.E.J. & B. Jickling (2000). Process-based Environmental Education: Setting Standards without Standardising. In:Jensen , B.B.,Schnack , K.. &V Simovska (Eds.). Critical Environmental and Health Education. Copenhagen: Royal School of Educational Studies. Wals, A.E.J. & B. Jickling (2000). Process-based Environmental Education: Setting Standards without Standardizing. In:Jensen , B.B.,Schnack , K.& V Simovska (Eds./ Critical Environmental and Health Education. Copenhagen: Royal School of Educational Studies. Wals,A.E.J . & Bawden, R. (2000).Integrating sustainability into agricultural education: dealing with complexity, uncertainty and diverging worldviews. Gent: ICA, 48p . Wals, A.E.J. & Jickling, B. (2002). "Sustainability" in Higher Education from double­ think and newspeak to critical thinking and meaningful learning. Higher Education Policy,\ol 15,121-131. Wals,A.E.J . (1994a).Actio n Research and Community Problem Solving: environmental education in an inner-city. Educational Action Research, 2 (2), 163-183.

134 REFERENCES

Wals, A.E.J. (1994b). Pollution Slinks! YoungAdolescents Perceptions of Nature and Environmental Issues withImplications for Education in UrbanSettings. De Lier,Th e Netherlands,Academi c Book Center. Wals, A.E.J., Alblas, A.H. & M. Margadant-van Arcken (1999). Towards process-based evaluation of environmental education. In: New and Improved? Snapshots of two years of ExtraImpulse Environmental Education. Amsterdam: NCDO. Wals, A.E.J., Caporali, F., Pace, P., Slee, Sriskandarajah, N. & Warren, M. (2004). Education andTrainin g for Integrated Rural Development: Stepping stones for curri­ culum development.Th e Hague: Reed Business Information, 88p . WCED (1987). Our Common Future - The Brundtland Report. Oxford: Oxford Univer­ sity Press. Westra, L.(1998) . Biotechnology and transgenics inagricultur e and aquaculture: the per­ spective from ecosystem integrity. Environmental Values, 7, 79-86. White,J .( 1990) ."For "agricultur e or "about"agriculture" ?Th e role of agricultural educa­ tion in secondary schools. Bulletin ofAERDD. Reading,UK : University of Reading.

135 ABOUTTH EAUTHOR S

Richard J. Bawden is a Visiting Distinguished University Professor at Michigan State University and Dean Emeritus ofth e Faculty ofAgricultur e and Rural Development at the University of Western Sydney Hawkesbury in Australia, where he was one of the key architects of the so-called "Hawkesbury SystemicApproach " to education for agriculture and rural development. Heha sbee n a consultant toman y international development agen­ cies including FAO/UNDP,UNESCO ,USAID ,AusAlD ,th eWorl d Bank,an d theFor d and Kellogg Foundations. Email: [email protected]

FabioCaporali i sa Professor ofAgricultura l Ecology at the University ofTuscia ,Viterbo , Italy, within the Department of Crop Production. He has more than twenty years of expe­ rience in teaching both Ecology and Agroecology and has published extensively in this area. Hiscurren t main scientific interest is indesigning ,performin g and evaluating sustai­ nable cropping systems using aparticipator y research strategy.Email : [email protected]

PaulPace work s for theDepartmen t of Mathematics, Science &Technica l Education ofth e University of Malta. Dr. Paul Pace lectures and conducts research in Environmental Education and ScienceEducation . Hework sactivel y withteacher si nth eimplementatio n of environmental education school policies. Email: [email protected]

Bill Slee is Professor of Rural Economy at the Countryside and Community Research Unit of theUniversit y of Gloucestershire. His principal research interest isth e restructur­ ing of the rural economy,bot h inrelatio n toth eprimar y sector and itsdiversificatio n and theaggregat e shift towardsmor econsumption-base d demands onrura l space.Throughou t his career he has been engaged in curriculum development in relation to countryside management and rural development. Email: [email protected]

Nadarajah (Sri) Sriskandarajah is Associate Professor at the Unit for Learning and Interdisciplinary Methods, Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Copenhagen, Denmark. Formerly, he was with the University of Western Sydney, Hawkesbury in Australia, as an active member of the group which led many innovations in agricultural education. Hismai n interestshav e been in systemic and learning approaches to education and research within agriculture and rural development. Email: [email protected]

137 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

Arjen Wals is an Associate Professor within the Education & Competence Studies Group of the Department of Social Sciences of the Wageningen University in the Netherlands (http://www.wur.nl). He specialises in thearea s of environmental education and participa­ tion,an d social learning in the context of sustainable living. Email: [email protected]

Martyn Warren is currently Head of the Rural Economy Group in the School of Geography, University of Plymouth, UK, having been Head of the Land Use and Rural Management Department for 10year spreviously . Hisprim e area of research is the use of information and communication technologies in rural areas,bu t he has had a long-stand­ ing interest in pedagogic processes. He was the driving force behind the development of an innovative part-time Master's course in Rural Development. Email: M.Warren@ply- mouth.ac.uk

138 INDEX

AFANet 4-5, 17,29, 37-38, 61-62, 79 Africa 65,90,93 Agenda 2000 106 Agenda 21 112 Australia 23, 137 Bologna agreement 107 Carsonian concerns see globalisation 25-26 Czech Ministry ofAgricultur e 83 Czechoslovakia 80 Czech University ofAgricultur e 5, 8, 77-78 Decision-making 13,66,78 Development 11-16, 22-23,25-26 , 29-32, 34-35, 37-38,40,42-44, 46,48-54, 56-57,59 ,62-63 ,66-74 , 76-79, 81-83, 85-90,94-98 , 100-104, 106-107, 109, 112, 114, 117-120, 132 Agriculture 11,17, 22-23,29-30 , 32,42-44,46,49 , 51-52, 56-57, 69,78-79,82,90,112,129,137 curriculum 14, 17, 37,48, 53,6 1-63 , 75,79 , 83, 104, 109, 117-118,120-121,127,131,137 food production systems 22 Ecological 12,22,26-27 , 29-30,47-48, 50,71 , 98, 108-109, 112, 131,134 agriculture 47, 108-109, 112, 131 considerations 47,114 Ecology 26,49, 109, 123, 133, 137 Education 1,5 , 11, 13-16, 19, 21, 23,25-29 , 35,37,40-44,46-52, 54-57, 61-62,65-66 , 69, 74-75,77-79 , 82, 88,95-96 , 100-102, 107, 113, 117-119, 123, 127, 129-134, 137-138 agriculture and 3,5 Environmental impact 25,49, 53,5 5 Erasmus World programme 107 ETIRD 61-62 , 65,72-74 , 77, 79, 119 Europe 62,65 ,73 ,79 , 88,90 ,96 , 108-109, 119, 122, 127 European Union (EU) 61,66 , 78-80, 88,96 ,99 , 110, 112-113

139 CURRICULUM INNOVATIONS IN HIGHER AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION

Farmer 25-26,51,53-54,80,85, 102-103, 109-110, 113,115 , 124 Globalisation 23,25-26 Integrated rural development (IRD) 5, 16-17, 59,63, 70-71,89 , 92-93,96, 100, 102, 104, 106, 112-114, 122,12 7 Integrated RuralDevelopment : Stepping stones for curriculum development 135 Ireland 5,67 ,73-74 ,77 ,88 , 90,9 3 Israel 49,13 0 Italy 62,73-74 ,77 , 108,112 , 130,13 7 Krakowsemina r 39 Learning 13-16,23,26,28,31, 34,37,40,42-44,46-47 , 53,55-56 , 62-63,66-76 ,79 ,83 , 85,87 ,89 ,91 , 93,97-99 , 103,105-107 , 113, 117-120, 122-127, 129,132-134 , 137-138 Netherlands 42,62 ,83 ,135 ,13 8 Paradigms 31,120 , 130,13 3 Problem-solving 13-16 . Ruraldevelopmen t 23,26,29 ,31 ,35,41-42,44,46 , 61,65-66 , 68-72,79 ,83 ,85-86 ,88-95 , 97-99, 101-103, 106-107, 112, 115, 119,126,129,131,134,137-138 Society 11-15,21 , 27,32,41,43,46 , 51, 56-57,66 ,71 , 80,109 , 112,121,124,126,129,131-132 Socio-scientific disputes 50-51,5 5 Socratesgrou p 109 Spain 5,73-74,77,94,98,100 Sustainability 5, 16-17, 19,21-23 ,25-27 ,29-30 ,32-35 , 37-40,43, 46,48,51-53,55,61,74-76,97, 109-110, 124, 128-134 Agricultural 29 Agriculture 5,17,29, 35,41,129-130, 134 Divergent views 27 Education 21,23,29, 55-56, 129,13 3 UniversityColleg eDubli n 67,73-74, 77,88-8 9 University ofCordob a 94 University ofViterb o 77 Wageningen University 83,109,138 Worldview 30,33-35 , 37,42 ecocentric 30,33-34 holocentric 30,33-35 technocentric 30,32 , 34

140 i^V

Curriculum Innovations in Higher Agricultural Education isa compilatio n of two bookstha t originally resulted from the 2000 and 2004 dissemination phases of the EUSocrate sThemati c Network for Agriculture, Forestry,Aquacultur e and the Environment (AFANet). Thefirs t onefocuse d on the integration of sustainability in higher agricultural education,whil e the second one focused oneducatio n and training for integrated rural development. The combined volume is preceded bya ne w introduction linking both themes,whil e all texts have been revised and updated.