1 The Discipline of Agricultural Education

Setting the Stage

As a primer for this chapter, let’s discuss why agricultural educators are essential. The following excerpt, shared by a former student during their agriculture teacher’s retirement celebration, helps illuminate the importance of agricultural educators.

“Before taking Ag classes, high school was uninspiring. I remember my first class, ‘Fundamentals of Agriscience,’ it was so different from every other class at school. The more you let me experience, however, the more I felt at home in the ag room. Sure, the ideas and concepts you taught were interesting and important, but the way you treated me is what I remember the most. Somehow, you created a culture where I could be authentically myself at school. In your classes, I found my passion for animals, plants, and the environment. With every new FFA experience you pushed me toward, I became more prepared to lead. As my SAE expanded, so did my confidence that a career in agriculture was right for me. As I look back on everything you have done for me, every experience you provided, I know you changed my life for the better. You led me to my passion for agriculture and gave me tools to be successful in life. I am forever grateful for everything you have done for me and for all the students you impacted throughout your career.” 

Before reading on, take a moment to reflect on the legacy we hope to achieve as agricultural educators. As we reflect on these goals, write down the impact we want to make throughout our careers.

Being agricultural educators gives us a platform to positively transform the lives of our students, the communities in which we work, and various agricultural systems. We hope this book helps us discover the impact we can have and empowers us with the skills and knowledge to achieve our desired legacy as agricultural educators.

Introduction

This chapter lays the foundation for the textbook by providing an overview of agricultural education and prompts consideration of what agricultural education is, why it exists, who it serves, and how it is delivered. Throughout the remainder of the textbook, we will learn about and reflect on the four keys to a dynamic learning environment. In part 1 of the textbook, we will be encouraged to think about how both the psychology and the principles of teaching and learning influence how agricultural education is delivered. In part 2, “Connecting with Students,” we will consider how the use of problem solving, inclusive strategies, and the classroom environment allows for a connection with our learners. As we progress through part 3, the focus will be on “Designing Instruction” through intentional planning, delivery, and evaluation. We highlight “Applying Learning” in part 4 when describing the inclusion of leadership development opportunities through the FFA, the promotion of experiential and work-based learning through SAE, and the reinforcement of research and inquiry-based learning in the various laboratories found in agricultural education.

Overview of the Discipline of Agricultural Education

What is Agricultural Education?

Instruction

Instruction in each school-based agricultural education (SBAE) program has uniquely adapted to meet the needs of learners, the community, and local agricultural systems. These adaptations yield a rich variety of SBAE programs throughout the country, in each state, and within different regions of each state. Two examples of this diversity can be found in Michigan and North Carolina. SBAE instruction in the northern part of Michigan, including the Upper Peninsula and the northern part of the Lower Peninsula, focuses on natural resource management and forestry. For programs located in the southern half of the state, SBAE instruction focuses more broadly on animal science, plant science, agribusiness, and leadership. In North Carolina, new curricula have been developed and implemented to meet the interests and needs of a changing student demographic as have the opportunities available across different parts of the state, especially with the growth of agricultural programs in suburban and urban areas. Recently, courses in sustainable agricultural production were introduced with a focus on the increasingly complex world of producing enough food and fiber to meet the growing world demand and at the same time maintaining ecological balance and conserving our natural resources (North Carolina Career and Technical Education, 2020).

Diversity in SBAE instruction, however, is not reserved for geographic differences. In fact, when we look at the historical evolution of SBAE, we see differences in SBAE instruction due to changes in the learners, communities, and agricultural systems. A 2017 publication by McKim et al. organized the history of agricultural education in the United States into three categories, starting with the “Early Years of Agricultural Education.” This first phase included agricultural education occurring in the United States before the Smith-Hughes Act, which formalized school-based agricultural education. Agricultural education in this time period was primarily done through father-son apprenticeships with some private schools teaching agriculture. One school emerging during this time was the Tuskegee Normal and Industrial School, opened in 1881 by Booker T. Washington, which provided former slaves or descendants of slaves with a combination of academic, social, and industrial training (Croom, 2007). The Hatch Act, which catalyzed experiment stations, shifted instruction in SBAE to focus on the distribution of scientific agricultural knowledge being gained at experiment stations to rural communities throughout the country. Instruction during the “Early Years of Agricultural Education” was a unique blend of scientific agriculture and vocational (i.e., career) preparation.

The second phase of agricultural education in the United States was named the “Smith-Hughes Years of Vocational Agriculture.” This phase started in 1917 with the passage of the Smith-Hughes Act. During this time period, agricultural education instruction was characterized by SBAE teachers preparing learners for careers in farming. As education continued to evolve, tracking learners into either academic or vocational routes became the norm, further distinguishing SBAE as a space for vocational preparation. Further, societal changes encouraged SBAE instruction to prepare learners for a broader range of careers beyond farming, including mechanics, horticulture, and natural resource management. SBAE instruction during the “Smith-Hughes Years of Vocational Agriculture” was, as the name would suggest, vocational in nature.

The third phase of agricultural education has been named the “Current Focus on Agricultural Science.” This phase started in 1988 with the publication of A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform and Understanding Agriculture: New Directions for Education. Noting additional core academic credits being required for graduation from public high schools, the Understanding Agriculture publication suggested a shift from vocational preparation to agricultural science to provide learners taking SBAE coursework with science credit. Since 1988, SBAE instruction has trended toward the illumination of science concepts within agriculture, food, and natural resources. Further, growing emphasis on science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (i.e., STEM education) has expanded the interdisciplinary nature of SBAE. The “Current Focus on Agricultural Science” phase, therefore, is defined by an emphasis on core subject (e.g., science) illumination while maintaining a foothold in vocational preparation through Career and Technical Education.

The diversity of SBAE instruction found geographically and historically illustrates a discipline defined by adaptation and evolution. As we look to the future, the nature of instruction within SBAE is uncertain; however, we can be sure that instruction will continue to evolve to meet the needs of learners, communities, and agricultural systems. As future agricultural educators, we will be in the driver’s seat as the discipline navigates change and continues to move forward toward a better tomorrow.

FFA

What do you think our lives might have been like if we lived in the early 1900s? In 1911, more than 80 percent of children lived in the country, so chances are we too would have lived in a rural area. How might that be similar or different from where we currently live? How might our schooling have been different? The importance of agriculture could have influenced some of our coursework with a primary focus on learning specific skills for farming such as planting and harvesting crops or raising livestock.

Consider some of the extracurricular clubs we participated in during high school. Were we members of the student council or robotics club? Perhaps we were involved in the math club or drama club? However, if we lived at the turn of the century, we may have found ourselves participating in a corn club or a tomato club at our schools. Just like the student clubs we were a part of, these clubs brought youth together with a common interest to participate in activities and competitions.

You might be asking yourself, “What initiated the start of corn clubs?” A lack of adult interest in farmers’ institutes in Macoupin County, Illinois, spurred the president of the county institute, W. B. Otwell, to distribute corn to 500 boys who grew it and competed for prizes at the following institute in 1900. This type of exhibition grew so quickly in popularity, that the following year, 1,500 farmer boys submitted entries and a statewide exhibit in 1904 drew participation from 8,000 boys (True, 1929). Agricultural clubs, such as corn clubs, also grew in popularity amongst rural schools as a way to encourage the study of agriculture (Davis, 1912). In 1902, A. B. Graham, who was school superintendent of rural schools in Springfield, Ohio, started what was known as a “boys’ and girls’ experiment club” (Reck, 1951, p. 12). Graham introduced learners to scientific concepts and agricultural skills such as soil testing, ropework, and using a microscope. Over time, Graham continued to develop and implement programs related to corn production, vegetable gardens, and flower gardens (Reck, 1951). By 1909, there were more than 10,000 boys enrolled in the competitive corn contests, and in 1910, over 46,000 boys were connected with corn clubs (True, 1929).

In 1909, Marie Cromer, a young rural schoolteacher in South Carolina, learned of the influence of corn clubs on crop yields. She proclaimed the need for a similar opportunity for farm girls and by the next year had initiated a girls’ tomato club (Engelhardt, 2009). As part of the club’s activities, girls were expected to plant one-tenth of an acre of tomatoes and provide all the effort during the growth and the canning of the crop (Evans et al., 1916; Pound & Moore, 2012).

The passage of the Smith-Hughes Act in 1917 led to the development of student organizations for rural youth that had an emphasis on agricultural production but also provided opportunities for personal growth and development (Croom, 2008). Walter S. Newman, who served as the State Supervisor of Agricultural Education in Virginia, grew concerned that farm boys were becoming disinterested in farming and eventually deciding to leave the farm. In an effort to give the boys a “shot in the arm,” he suggested the idea of starting an organization for boys studying agriculture (Yeatts, 1954). During a meeting in September 1925 with Harry Sanders, Edmund Magill, and Henry Groseclose, Newman expressed his concern about the feelings of inferiority often experienced by farm boys. In response, he suggested forming an organization that would allow rural youth the opportunity to “develop confidence in their own ability and pride in the fact that they are farm boys” (Yeatts, 1954, p. 18). Around a wooden table at Virginia Polytechnic Institute, the Future Farmers of Virginia was born. A couple of years later, in May 1927, the New Farmers of Virginia was started at Virginia State College under the guidance of Dr. H. O. Sargent and G. W. Owens. This organization, which was similar to the Future Farmers of Virginia, served African American agricultural learners (Simmons, 1940).

These early agricultural clubs paved the way for the development of the Future Farmers of America. In 1928, the Future Farmers of America was established during the first National FFA Convention in Kansas City, Missouri. The national organization for the New Farmers of America (NFA) was created on August 4, 1935. Throughout the 1960s, the civil rights movement took a prominent position in our nation’s history. As schools desegregated during this time, many FFA and NFA chapters merged at the local level. The passage of the Civil Rights Act in 1964 prompted both organizations to discuss the formation of one unified national organization (IUPUI University Library, 2016). On July 1, 1965, membership in the FFA was opened to all agriculture learners regardless of race, color, or national origin (Wakefield & Talbert, 2000). In 1969, after several failed attempts to amend the constitution, females finally gained the right to be members of the FFA (Moore, 2019).

SAE (Supervised Agricultural Experience)

It is thought that supervised experience was the earliest component of the agricultural education model as youth engaged in apprenticeships or received informal education at home (Croom, 2008). Rufus W. Stimson was credited with developing the project method of teaching in response to concerns about how agriculture was taught. He felt the instruction consisted of too much lecture and manual labor that did not actively engage learners. The project method proposed by Stimson allowed learners to transfer learning from the classroom to projects implemented at their home farms (Moore, 1988). The Smith-Hughes Act of 1917 proposed that learners should engage in directed or supervised practice in agriculture for at least six months during the year. Over time, this emphasis on meaningful and relevant applied learning has evolved into what it now known as Supervised Agricultural Experience (SAE). In 2017, the definition was updated to include that SAE is a “student-led, instructor supervised, work-based learning experience that results in measurable outcomes within a predefined, agreed upon set of Agriculture, Food and Natural Resources (AFNR) Technical Standards and Career Ready Practices aligned to a career plan of study” (The National Council for Agricultural Education, 2017, p. 2).

Types of Agricultural Education

In this textbook, we foreground agricultural education which occurs in a school setting (e.g., a high school agricultural classroom). This type of agricultural education is often termed “school-based agricultural education” or SBAE; however, there are other types of agricultural education. For example, county extension agents teaching community members improved farming practices is agricultural education. A director of an urban garden discussing pest management strategies with gardeners is also agricultural education. Agricultural education which occurs outside the scope of a school-centered program is referred to as “nonformal” or “community-based” agricultural education. Much like school-based agricultural education, agricultural education occurring outside the context of a school is critical to fostering learning and engagement in agriculture. While some of this textbook will focus exclusively on school-based, or “formal,” agricultural education, most of the content will be applicable for those envisioning educating in either space.

Why Does Agricultural Education Exist?

Now that we have detailed the elements that compose agricultural education, we must situate why agricultural education exists. Agricultural education programs fall within the broader umbrella of Career and Technical Education (CTE). The objective of CTE programs is to prepare learners with the knowledge and skills needed for employment or further education in a corresponding field (e.g., business, health science, information technology). For agricultural education, exploration of and preparation for careers in agriculture, food, and natural resources are the foci. Our focus on vocational preparation has its roots in the Smith-Hughes Act of 1917, which established agricultural education as a vocational education program. Throughout its history, agricultural education has maintained an ethos of vocational preparation; however, other answers to the why of agricultural education have emerged, which we will consider in concert with the vocational aim.

Acknowledging the diversity of careers individuals enrolled in agricultural education courses have an interest in pursuing, agricultural education has evolved to develop agricultural literacy. Agricultural literacy entails knowledge and understanding within the discipline of agriculture (Clemons et al., 2018). Developing agricultural literacy among all learners, including those who do not plan to pursue agricultural careers, is important to create a society of citizens who are informed about issues that exist within agriculture, food, and natural resources. When possessing content literacy, citizens are more likely to make informed choices when voting, shopping, and communicating. Therefore, agricultural education exists to empower members of society with knowledge and understanding so they can improve their lives and the lives of others. Importantly, this literacy does not mean the role of agricultural education is to develop advocates for agriculture. Certainly, literacy often results in advocating; however, literacy can also yield critical thinking about how to continually improve agriculture for the present and future.

Agricultural education also exists to develop systems thinking among learners. Climate change, soil degradation, and water access are just a few of the complex problems which relate directly to agriculture, food, and natural resources. Agricultural education, therefore, must play a role in empowering individuals to understand and address these complex challenges (Pauley et al., 2019). Problem solving has long been a staple of agricultural education curriculum (Parr & Edwards, 2004). Building upon the traditions of problem-solving instruction, educators must seek opportunities to foster systems thinking and interdisciplinary mindsets through their curriculum. Systems thinking refers to identifying the multitude of relationships that exist among social, technological, and ecological factors within a given problem or phenomenon (McKim & McKendree, 2020). Systems thinking is imperative to identifying factors that influence a problem and factors influenced by potential solutions. Related to systems thinking, educators should seek to illuminate the content of multiple disciplines (e.g., science, technology, engineering, and mathematics [STEM]) within their instruction as these interdisciplinary learning experiences mirror the diverse mindsets needed to address complex problems. Building upon the need for interdisciplinary learning within agricultural education, there exists a timely opportunity for agricultural educators to highlight STEM career pathways for all learners. This opportunity is especially salient for populations underrepresented within STEM fields.

Leveraging the interdisciplinary nature of agriculture, many states and programs provide credit in core academic areas for learners engaging in agricultural education coursework. Offering agriculture courses which count for core academic credits positions agricultural education as a valuable option for learners to efficiently complete high school graduation requirements while reaping the myriad additional benefits of agricultural education programs. Further, some agricultural education programs have established articulation agreements with colleges and universities whereby experiences in agricultural education (e.g., individual courses, obtaining a state degree, and program completion) count for postsecondary credits, extending the value of agricultural education.

In addition to vocational preparation, content literacy development, problem solving, and credit obtainment, agricultural education exists to ignite learners’ passion for continuing to learn. For many, the careers we envisioned as middle school and high school learners differs from what we actually end up doing. Therefore, agricultural education exists to “plant the seed”—to promote lifelong learning by illustrating the importance, complexity, and diversity of agriculture, food, and natural resource systems. As one’s future unfolds, the passion sparked for agriculture during coursework could illuminate a new path within the disciplines of agriculture, food, and natural resources. While this answer to why agricultural education exists is the least clear, it can also be the most exciting! Engaging in agricultural education has the potential to impact learners far beyond their days of learning in high school, getting their first job, or picking a college major. The impact of agricultural education persists throughout one’s life. Therefore, as agricultural educators we may not realize the extent of our impact on a life, community, or the world.

Who Does Agricultural Education Serve?

When looking around our classrooms on the first day of school, we are going to be surrounded by learners who all have different motivations for signing up for agricultural education. Some learners may have family members who are involved or employed in the agricultural industry. Their parents or grandparents might be farmers or ranchers, an aunt or uncle might work in an agriculture business, a cousin might be a food scientist, or a sibling might work in construction or metal fabrication. Another learner may have cultivated an interest in agriculture through personal interests or future career aspirations. It is common for learners who dream of one day becoming a veterinarian to enroll in an agriculture class. Likely, a couple of your learners will have no idea why they are in your classroom. The class may have just appeared on their schedule, or a guidance counselor may have encouraged them to take the course for a variety of reasons.

The content and delivery methods common to agricultural education might also attract learners to your classroom. Learners might find that the integration and reinforcement of numerous scientific concepts, as well as contextual teaching and learning, serves their needs and interests. The Hatch Act of 1887 provided the impetus for the first agriscience programs in the United States. As experiment stations were developed, district agricultural schools were also established to provide secondary instruction in agriculture and home economics. The schools delivered practical instruction in agriculture, while the experiment stations emphasized scientific application and research. Over time, agricultural education became more vocational in nature and focused more on training and less on academic instruction (Hillison, 1996).

However, in 1988, the need for the integration of scientific concepts in agriculture instruction was raised again by the National Research Council. Legislation, such as the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Act of 1990, the School-to-Work Opportunities Act of 1994, and the Carl D. Perkins CTE Improvement Act, has repeatedly called for the integration of core content academics into Career and Technical Education (Threeton, 2007). Educators have embraced this opportunity to reinforce scientific concepts in their classroom and curricula has changed leading to course offerings such as agriculture biotechnology, food science, agriculture biology, agriculture chemistry, earth science in agriculture, and animal and plant sciences. In some states, several of these courses can be used to fulfill science requirements needed for admission to four-year institutions. Calculating feed rations, determining genetic probabilities, profit and loss margins, accurate measurements, and timber cruising are few topics in which learners can apply mathematical concepts Additionally, educators commonly use pedagogical strategies such as inquiry-based learning, experiential learning, and problem-based learning which support learners’ scientific reasoning and contribute to student achievement in mathematics. Beyond the traditional academic content, learners can gain a lasting appreciation or even academic course credit in the visual arts when completing a unit or course in floral design.

Other learners may have had family members or friends who were in the FFA, so they may be counting down the days until they can have an FFA jacket of their own. Several factors have been identified as contributing to FFA participation such as encouragement from others, the positive impact of teachers on their learners, and opportunities to develop professional and personal skills that look favorable on college applications or résumés. Learners also seek participation in the social aspects of the FFA organization and engage in activities beyond the classroom, such as field trips and community engagement (Phelps et al., 2012).

Even with numerous opportunities and benefits associated with the FFA, some learners may be reluctant to become members. As agriculture teachers look to support and offer options for all learners, they must also be cognizant of the student population they may not be serving. Learners might have negative perceptions or misconceptions about learners involved in the organization or may just be apathetic toward involvement in extracurriculars. There could also be challenges with schedules, both during school and after school. Learners may not have time to include an agriculture class in their class schedule or might feel like they do not have any extra time outside of school to participate in FFA events (Phelps et al., 2012).

How is Agricultural Education Delivered?

School-based agricultural education comprises three interrelated components: classroom and laboratory instruction; experiences in Career and Technical Student Organizations such as the National FFA Organization (FFA), the National Post-Secondary Agricultural Student Organization (PAS), or the National Young Farmer Educational Association; and experiential-, service-, and/or work-based learning through the initiation and continuation of a Supervised Agricultural Experience (SAE) program. The classroom and laboratory component consists of the planning and delivery of instruction and assessment of student learning. While content knowledge remains consistent across the country, there is variation in the curriculum guides/blueprints/frameworks, instructional materials and resources, and tests and performance assessments that are used in agricultural education.

The goal of Supervised Agricultural Experience (SAE) is to provide learners individualized opportunities to apply principles in the classroom and laboratory to a real-world context. SAE can also promote career exploration, support the acquisition of technical skills, and develop dispositions contributing to the college and career readiness of learners (The National Council for Agricultural Education, 2017). When starting SAE programs, learners are encouraged to complete a Foundational SAE. This allows learners to discover the broad scope of the agricultural industry, develop personalized interests in agriculture, and identify possible career opportunities. From the completion of a Foundational SAE, learners can expand their SAE with an Immersion SAE. There are five types of Immersion SAEs: Placement/Internship, Ownership/Entrepreneurship, Research, School-Based Enterprise, and Service Learning. Financial literacy, workplace safety, and key employability skills are also reinforced throughout the completion of SAE (The National Council for Agricultural Education, 2017). Agricultural educators play an important role by helping their learners develop plans and set goals, providing ongoing supervision, encouraging continual reflection and growth, and incorporating and reinforcing record keeping skills.

The FFA is an intracurricular student organization that complements both classroom instruction and SAE (Croom, 2008) and offers a variety of career and leadership development events, leadership conferences, award programs, and scholarships. The numerous opportunities allow for the development of key leadership skills and encourage personal growth among members. The National FFA Organization also promotes the importance of service engagement in local communities through community service and service-learning projects. Additionally, the opportunity to travel, both domestically and internationally, can provide FFA members a chance to experience new places, differing perspectives, and other cultures. For example, FFA members in North Carolina were able to host Future Farmers of Japan members from Tokyo Metropolitan Engei High School. A FFA chapter in Ohio traveled to Brazil and the Dominican Republic. The North Huron FFA in Michigan sends a few members to Uganda each year as an outreach opportunity and personal growth experience. While travel may not always be feasible, FFA chapters can also connect and engage through various social media outlets and video conferencing.

Numerous groups and entities contribute to the effective delivery of agricultural education. In 1983, the National Council for Agricultural Education was established to provide leadership and identified important opportunities and needed initiatives to support the ongoing development and direction for agricultural education (The National Council for Agricultural Education, 2012). Additionally, at the national level and throughout many states, Team Ag Ed provides a collaborative effort among secondary and postsecondary educators to improve student achievement. At the national level, organizations contributing to Team Ag Ed include the National Council for Agricultural Education, US Department of Education, National Association of Agricultural Educators (NAAE), National Association of Supervisors of Agricultural Education (NASAE), American Association for Agricultural Education (AAAE), Association for Career and Technical Education, National Farm and Ranch Business Management Education Association, Inc., National Young Farmer Education Association, and National Professional Agricultural Student Organization (PAS). Individual states may create their own Team Ag with state-specific representatives along with participation from additional groups such as Farm Bureau, the Department of Agriculture, FFA Alumni Association, FFA Foundation, and the agricultural industry.

References

Clemons, C., Lindner, J. R., Murray, B., Cook, M., Sams, B., & Williams, G. (2018). Spanning the gap: The confluence of agricultural literacy and being agriculturally literate. Journal of Agricultural Education, 59(4), 238-252. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2018.04238

Croom, D. B. (2007). Agricultural education at the Tuskegee Normal and Industrial School. Journal of Agricultural Education, 48(2), 13–22. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2007.02013

Croom, D. B. (2008). The development of the integrated three-component model of agricultural education. Journal of Agricultural Education, 49(1), 110–120. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2008.01110

Davis, B. M. (1912). Agricultural education in the public schools. University of Chicago.

DeLay, A. M., & Swan, B. G. (2014). Student apathy as defined by secondary agricultural education students. Journal of Agricultural Education, 55(1), 106–119. https://doi.org/ 10.5032/jae.2014.01106

Engelhardt, E. (2009). Canning tomatoes, growing “better and more perfect women”: The girls’ tomato club movement. Southern Cultures, 15(4), 78–92. https://doi.org/10.1353/scu.0.0087

Evans, L. B., Duncan, L. N. & Duncan, G. W. (1916). Farm life readers, book 5. Silver, Burdett & Company.

Glatthorn, A. A., Carr, J. F., & Harris, D. E. (2001). Curriculum handbook: Planning and organizing for curriculum renewal. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Hillison, J. (1993). The Role of Virginia in the development of the FFA. Journal of Agricultural Education 34(2), 37–45. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.1993.02037

Hillison, J. (1996). The origins of agriscience: Or where did all that scientific agriculture come from? Journal of Agricultural Education, 37(4), 8–13. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.1996.04008

IUPUI University Library (2016). New Farmers of America Records, 1929–1965 [Online Archives]. Ruth Lilly Special Collections and Archives, Indiana University Purdue University. https://archives.iu.edu/catalog/mss059

McKim, A. J., Velez, J. J., Lambert, M. D., & Balschweid, M. A. (2017). A philosophical review of science and society within agricultural education. Journal of Agricultural Education, 58(2), 98–110. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2017.02098

McKim, A. J., & McKendree, R. B. (2020). Metacognition, systems thinking, and problem-solving ability in school-based agriculture, food, and natural resources education. Advancements in Agricultural Development, 1(1), 38–47. https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v1i1.21

Moore, G. E. (1988). The forgotten leader in agricultural education: Rufus W. Stimson. Journal of the American Association of Teacher Educators in Agriculture, 29(3), 50–58. https://doi.org/10.5032/jaatea.1988.03050

Moore, G. E. (2019, January 25). The age of aquarius: The 1960s and girls in the FFA. The Friday Footnote. https://footnote.wordpress.ncsu.edu/2019/01/24/the-age-of-aquarius-the-1960s-and-girls-in-the-ffa-1-25-2019/

The National Council for Agricultural Education. (2012). About us. https://thecouncil.ffa.org/about-us/

The National Council for Agricultural Education. (2017). SAE for all teachers guide. https://ffa.app.box.com/s/exollg1x7q2lntun3su2mdufw07wiklf

National Research Council. (1988). Understanding agriculture: New directions for education. Washington, DC.

North Carolina Career and Technical Education. (2020). Updated CTE course blueprint: Sustainable agriculture production I. https://ncffa.org/agricultural-education/curriculum/

Parr, B., & Edwards, M. C. (2004). Inquiry-based instruction in secondary agricultural education: Problem-solving – an old friend revisited. Journal of Agricultural Education, 45(4), 106–117. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2004.04106

Pauley, C. M., McKim, A. J., & Hodbod, J. (2019). A social-ecological resilience perspective for the social sciences of agriculture, food, and natural resources. Journal of Agricultural Education, 60(4), 132–148. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2019.04132

Phelps, K., Henry, A. L., & Bird, W. A. (2012). Factors influencing or discouraging secondary school students’ FFA participation. Journal of Agricultural Education, 53(2), 70–86. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2012.02070

Pound, K., & Moore, G. (2012, February 4-7). Achieving equity for females in agricultural education: The development of tomato clubs [Paper presentation]. Southern Region AAAE 62nd Annual Meeting, Birmingham, AL, United States.

Reck, F. M. (1951). The 4-H story. The Iowa State College Press.

Simmons, S. B. (1940). Negro youth and the U. S. junior employment service – 4-H clubs and the New Farmers of America. The Journal of Negro Education, 9(3), 408–415.

Threeton, M. D. (2007). The Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education (CTE) Act of 2006 and the roles and responsibilities of CTE teachers and faculty members. At Issue, 44(1), 66–82.

True, A. C. (1929). A history of agricultural education in the United States 1785 – 1925. United States Department of Agriculture Miscellaneous Publication No. 36. Government Printing Office.

Wakefield, D. B., & Talbert, B. A. (2000, December 6). Exploring the past of the new farmers of America (NFA): The merger with the FFA [Paper presentation]. National Agricultural Education 27th Annual Research Conference, San Diego, CA, United States.

Yeatts, A. L., Jr. (1954). A history of the Future Farmers of America in Virginia [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. http://hdl.handle.net/10919/41197