Search

Purpose: This study investigates student perceptions of different aspects of Agricultural Education and Training (AET) programme processes that have been offered in secondary schools by the formal educational sector in the province of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. The study seeks to identify the existing shortcomings in the implementation of the agricultural education curriculum by gathering important information considering three different types of agricultural science schools. The intention of this study is to inform education policy-makers, programme organizers and teachers at all levels and thereby assist them in the identification of those areas in which improvements can be made. Design/methodology/approach: The sample population of 375 pupils was selected from high schools in the province of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. The research was arranged in nested concurrent mixed sampling designs. The response rate for this sample was 97%. The survey was conducted by using a pre-tested structured interview schedule. Findings: The results show that in the teaching and learning process there is sufficient agricultural lesson coverage, notes for each lesson and time compatibilities in covering agricultural textbooks within the allocated teaching times. However, problems do exist, namely, wasted uncovered class lessons, inadequate teaching aids and materials, and a shortage of trained agricultural science teachers. The majority of agricultural science students indicate the unavailability of sufficient infrastructure and support. Practical implications: It is recommended that the responsible bodies should give serious consideration to the improvement of teaching aids and teacher training within the system. Throughout the system, thoughtful consideration should be given to the teacher-student-teaching-learning infrastructure. Originality/value: The article presents actual data collected from the province. Analysing the educational processes and taking appropriate action could help to solve the existing teaching and learning problems in the system.

Sufficient changes have occurred in both the agricultural and educational sectors of South Africa to warrant a careful scrutiny of the agricultural education offerings in South Africa. Agricultural extension is identified as an important part of the intended transformation of the agricultural sector. Further, agricultural extension is essentially an education programme. As such agricultural extension should be subject to the same scrutiny--both in terms of agricultural policy and educational policy. Drawing on two previously published papers, this paper synthesizes the findings of examining agricultural extension in these two lights. The result is the establishment of a range of 21 markers, grouped in three categories: meta-markers which address cross-cutting factors in the learning agenda; content markers which are underpinning markers that address theory and practice in areas that impact on all other learning outcomes in the curricula; and process markers which are facets of the learning process which need to be included in the agricultural extension curricula. The identified markers comprise essential learning for extension practitioners in addition to the particular technical learning required (as implied in South African agricultural policy). As such they create the framework for facilitated learning. (Contains 2 figures.)

Changes in education and agriculture in South Africa indicate that agricultural extension practitioners should facilitate continuous learning among farmers. This requires that extension practitioners acquire new skills. To provide these skills requires a critical examination of agricultural extension curricula in the light of South Africa's educational, agricultural and rural development policies with a view to rewriting extension curricula. An initial theoretical examination of extension education in the light of South African education policy yields seven learning outcome indicators encapsulating theory and practice in: 1) theory and practice in problem solving; 2) collect, analyse, organize and critically evaluate information relevant to his extension responsibilities; 3) theory and practice in Participatory Technology Development and innovation; 4) theory and practice in systems (systems thinking), including beyond farm systems; 5) theory and practice in learning facilitation; 6) theory and practice in participatory "curriculum" (extension outcomes, content and process) development; and 7) theory and practice in learning and learning styles. Tertiary institutions and other stakeholders can use these indicators to examine and continuously adjust curricula to ensure extension practitioners are equipped to deliver relevant support to farmers as the agricultural landscape changes. (Contains 2 tables, 1 figure, and 2 notes.)

Prosperity--continuous and sustainable wealth creation--is an elusive goal in South African smallholder agriculture. This paper suggests that agricultural extension can facilitate realising this objective if an appropriate approach to extension can be developed. To develop such an approach requires that the definition of extension and the assumptions on which that definition rests are challenged. The objective of such an interrogation would be to reshape principles and assumptions so that extension can be re-cast enabling extension to strengthen the capacity of people engaged in agriculture and thereby tap the agricultural potential of rural communities. Such an approach would need to give practical expression to South Africa's policies to revitalise rural agrarian communities, putting them on a pathway to enduring prosperity. This paper proposes the Agriflection extension model. The model arises out of fundamental changes in thinking about extension. Incorporating elements of livelihoods approaches and learning theory, Agriflection is a learning model that shifts i) the context and locus of learning, ii) what is learned, and iii) the learning process. The model fosters a culture of continuous reflective learning that is submitted as the highest purpose of extension. The model suggests that prosperity can be realised through engaging smallholder farmers in scientific discovery, innovation and technology development based not on what they lack, but on what they have. (Contains 1 table and 2 figures.)

A study was conducted in Lower Gweru Communal area of Zimbabwe to determine factors affecting small-scale resource-constrained farmers' technology adoption and innovation processes. Specific objectives included determining circumstances when farmers consider learning about and adopting new technologies; documenting challenges faced by farmers in technology adoption; and determining the kind of support farmers require in adopting technologies or innovating. Multistage stratified random sampling was used to select a study sample of 256 farmers who participated in focus group discussions (FGDs). Additionally, semi-structured interviews (SSIs) with 200 farmers, selected from within the 256 FGD participants, were conducted to corroborate data collected in FGDs and participant observation. The study found that farmers were ready to learn and adopt new technologies when proposed technologies were (i) cheaper to acquire and use than their current technologies, (ii) easier and simpler to use, (iii) reduced labor requirements, and (iv) increased crop yields and/or animal productivity. Specifically, the study found high adoption rates of new technologies with traits similar to the farmers' traditional practices such as conservation agriculture (with a 90% adoption rate) and thermal composts (with a 78% adoption rate). In terms of challenges, farmers were hampered mainly by lack of capital to acquire new technologies and lack of access to information, credit facilities and markets. In terms of support, in addition to capital and issues of access, farmers preferred to be actively involved in defining problems and developing solutions, technologies and innovations. Rather than being mere beneficiaries of new technologies developed by others, they want to be included in processes such as field-based participatory learning extension and innovation projects. In keeping with their selfperception as businessmen and women, perhaps most significantly, this study has reaffirmed that small-scale farmers, despite their educational limitations, their age, their constrained circumstances, and their risk profiles -- are conscious and deliberate decision-makers. They are rational in their approach to adoption of technology, but are dominated by factors of cost, impact on income, and, of greatest influence, risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]