Agricultural Curriculum Philosophy at Cornell University

Abstract

business training. He needs, however, more productionrelated courses than does the student preparing for an off-farm agricultural business. The latter needs more emphasis on economics and business, and the student preparing for agricultural research and education must emphasize the fundamental sciences. The faculty of the School of Agriculture at V.P.I. concluded, after months of study, that its curricula needed revision and adjustment. It approved measures that accomplished the following things: (i) strengthened the basic sciences, including mathematics; (ii) increased the emphasis on fundamentals and reduced the courses concerned with application to the minimum consistent with career plans; (iii) broadened the scope of the curricula by including more social sciences and humanities; (iv) established minimum requirements for all students; and (v) provided more freedom to students in selection of courses. These adjustments were accomplished by increasing the requirements in chemistry, biology, physics, mathematics, and geology; by adding requirements in languages, history, government, economics and business, philosophy, and sociology; and by providing more electives. Further adjustments were made by reorganizing the courses into three curricula: Agricultural Science, which emphasizes science and its application to agriculture; Agricultural Technology, which stresses applied science and technology related to production; and Agricultural Business, which emphasizes business and agriculture. V.P.I. has one additional curriculum, Forest Management, in its School of Agriculture. This curriculum has the same minimum requirements, emphasis on fundamentals, and breadth as the other three. The new curricula and the revised courses at V.P.I. and other colleges are more than a reshuffling of the old academic cards. They are designed to serve the industry of agriculture specifically and the public in general. They provide educational opportunities for students interested in careers in any of the sectors of the industry. They also provide the intellectual background on which students can build satisfying lives as citizens of a free country. Many references were of special value in the preparation of this paper. I wish to mention several of these: (i) Report of the Dean's Committee on Agricultural Curricula, V.P.I. School of Agriculture, December 1959; (ii) Curriculum Development, a report from a work conference for Schools of Agriculture, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, July 18-21, 1960; (iii) Planning for the Future in the School of Agriculture, a report from a Symposium, North Carolina State College, December 10-11, 1957; (iv) The Challenge of the Land-Grant Centennial, a talk presented to the American Society of Agronomy, November 1961, by Dean H. E. Myers of University of Arizona; (v) The Spirit of the Land-Grant Institution, a New Printing of Four Essays by Distinguished Educators, 1931, by the University of Arizona in 1961; and (vi) National Study on Agribusiness Education, Symposium Proceedings, Michigan State University, March 15-17, 1961. A. W. Gibson