Implementing Forestry and Natural Resource Curricula in Georgia. A Quantitative Analysis of Perceived Barriers Towards Implementation

Brandon L. Ray, C. Clemons, Jason D. McKibben, James R. Lindner, Nicholas E. Fuhrman, Rebecca J. Barlow
{"title":"Implementing Forestry and Natural Resource Curricula in Georgia. A Quantitative Analysis of Perceived Barriers Towards Implementation","authors":"Brandon L. Ray, C. Clemons, Jason D. McKibben, James R. Lindner, Nicholas E. Fuhrman, Rebecca J. Barlow","doi":"10.5032/jae.2022.03149","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There are fewer forestry/natural resources pathway classes being taught in Georgia high schools in relation to other commonly associated agriculture curricula (Georgia Agriculture Education, 2019). The purpose of this study was to investigate school-based agriculture education (SBAE) teachers’ perceptions of forestry/natural resources curriculum to investigate internal barriers towards implementation of the curricula. The participants of this study were Georgia SBAE agriculture teachers (N = 358). This study utilized a quantitative non-experimental survey research design. The findings of the study yielded data that reveals particular weaknesses in the importance and competence of forestry/natural resources curriculum. There were a significant number of teachers that did not teach a forestry/natural resource pathway. Teacher importance and competence of forestry/natural resources concepts was analyzed and ranked. The data further shows the discrepancy of perceived teacher importance and perceived teacher competence through Mean Weighted Discrepancy Scores (MWDS). MWDS were used to rank forestry/natural resources concepts to identify training needs of teachers within Georgia. Teachers that had more years of experience had the greatest discrepancy between perceived importance and perceived competence. Teachers with no personal experiences in forestry, natural resources, and/or wildlife management had a significant need for training within those concepts. The recommendations of this study support university and state staff address different avenues to market the core subjects within agriculture education, cultivate partnerships with forestry and natural resources professionals, and SBAE teachers should seek to bring individuals into their classroom to promote forestry/natural resources careers.","PeriodicalId":73589,"journal":{"name":"Journal of agricultural education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of agricultural education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2022.03149","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

There are fewer forestry/natural resources pathway classes being taught in Georgia high schools in relation to other commonly associated agriculture curricula (Georgia Agriculture Education, 2019). The purpose of this study was to investigate school-based agriculture education (SBAE) teachers’ perceptions of forestry/natural resources curriculum to investigate internal barriers towards implementation of the curricula. The participants of this study were Georgia SBAE agriculture teachers (N = 358). This study utilized a quantitative non-experimental survey research design. The findings of the study yielded data that reveals particular weaknesses in the importance and competence of forestry/natural resources curriculum. There were a significant number of teachers that did not teach a forestry/natural resource pathway. Teacher importance and competence of forestry/natural resources concepts was analyzed and ranked. The data further shows the discrepancy of perceived teacher importance and perceived teacher competence through Mean Weighted Discrepancy Scores (MWDS). MWDS were used to rank forestry/natural resources concepts to identify training needs of teachers within Georgia. Teachers that had more years of experience had the greatest discrepancy between perceived importance and perceived competence. Teachers with no personal experiences in forestry, natural resources, and/or wildlife management had a significant need for training within those concepts. The recommendations of this study support university and state staff address different avenues to market the core subjects within agriculture education, cultivate partnerships with forestry and natural resources professionals, and SBAE teachers should seek to bring individuals into their classroom to promote forestry/natural resources careers.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在格鲁吉亚实施林业和自然资源课程。对实施障碍的定量分析
与其他通常相关的农业课程相比,格鲁吉亚高中的林业/自然资源途径课程较少(格鲁吉亚农业教育,2019年)。本研究旨在调查校本农业教育(SBAE)教师对林业/自然资源课程的看法,以调查课程实施的内部障碍。本研究的参与者为乔治亚州SBAE农业教师(N = 358)。本研究采用定量非实验调查研究设计。研究结果提供的数据显示,林业/自然资源课程的重要性和能力特别薄弱。有相当多的教师没有教授林业/自然资源途径。对教师林业/自然资源概念的重要性和能力进行了分析和排名。数据进一步通过平均加权差异分数(MWDS)显示感知教师重要性与感知教师能力的差异。MWDS用于对林业/自然资源概念进行排序,以确定格鲁吉亚教师的培训需求。经验丰富的教师在感知重要性和感知能力之间的差异最大。没有林业、自然资源和/或野生动物管理经验的教师非常需要这些概念方面的培训。本研究的建议支持大学和州工作人员在农业教育中寻找不同的途径来推销核心科目,培养与林业和自然资源专业人士的合作伙伴关系,SBAE教师应寻求将个人带入课堂,以促进林业/自然资源职业。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The dualism of interdisciplinarity: A model for agriculture, food, and natural resources education Student interest in the national council for agricultural education career pathways AFNR educators’ experiences in an MA program Technical agriculture skills teachers need to teach courses in the animal systems pathway Preparing pre-service agricultural education teachers to teach agricultural mechanics: Are we doing enough?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1