A2B-Lancaster Farming, Saturday, February 22,1992
Ag Teachers Fight Illiteracy
(Continued tram Page A 1)
Lauffer is also president of the
Pennsylvania Vocational Agricul
ture Teachers Association (PVA
TA), a relatively small.' self
explanatory teachers’
organization.
For some time, Lauffer has been
working through the organization
to bring attention to the lack of
agricultural literacy. He said it
seems ridiculous that a high school
graduate does not know from
where their food and fiber come,
and, in general terms, what prac
tices are required to provide those
two basics of survival.
As president of PVATA, Lauf
fer has been putting in extra time to
bring attention to that lack of very
basic education.
The most pressing goal Lauffer
said he hopes can be achieved is to
get the state Deparment of Educa
tion to acknowledge that agricul
ture (or agri-sciences) should be
recognized as a valid course of
study and that agricultural infor
mation should be infused into all
aspects of the curriculum.
However, when the 22-member
State Board of Education, an agen
cy of the Department of Education,
wrote up regulations which man
date a list of “must haves” in each
school’s curriculum, they left out
any mention of agriculture.
Not one word.
In a letter to the board, after
reviewing its draft revisions to
chapters 3, S. and 6 of those regula
tions, Lauffer commented about
the lack of agricultural education.
“In reviewing the draft revisions
to Chapter 5 and 6 a major concern
is the lack of any language that
specifically encourages the deve
lopment and/or improvement of
agricultural education in Pennsyl
vania,” he stated in the position
paper.
In the letter, Lauffer cites a
three-year study by the Research
Board of the National Academy of
Sciences, published in 1986,
called, “Understanding Agricul
ture, New Directions for
Education.”
“The study noted that most
American know very little about
agriculture, its social and econom
ic significance in the United States
and particularly its links to human
health and environmental quality.”
Board Of Education
Reviews School Regs
HARRISBURG (Dauphin Co.) The Pennsylvania State Board
of Education Committee has planned to accept public comment on
Thursday, Feb. 27, on proposed regulations which would affect
school cuniculums, among other things.
The meeting is scheduled for 9:30 a.m., in the Susquehanna Room
of the Education Building at 333 Market St., in Harrisburg, which is
on the 12th floor.
According to a notice published by Robert Feir, executive director
of the board, “The purpose of the meeting will be to review com
ments and testimony regarding proposed revisions of Chapter 3,5,
and 6, which were received during the public comment period; to
develop recommended changes in the proposed regulations for adop
tion by the State Board of Education at its meeting March 11-12,
1992; and to develop proposed student learning outcomes to recom
mend to the board for consideration in lieu of those proposed in Sep
tember 1991.
The efforts of the Pennsylvania Vocational Agriculture Teachers
Association to change the regulations to include agricultural sci
ences and refer to agriculture within the regulations are among the
issues to be considered by the board.
The meeting is open to the public and comments are to be accepted
starting about 9:35 a.m. Depending on the number of those wishing
to comment, the committee may limit individual comment time, in
order to conclude public comments by 11 a.m.
Copies of the documents to be considered are to be available at the
meeting
The board intends to adopt revisions of the codes on March 11 and
March 12.
According to Lauffer, the
academy of sciences report "made
two key recommendations. First,
that agricultue education programs
be upgraded to prepare students
more effectively for the study of
agriculture, and second that,
beginning in kindergarten and con
tinuing through 12th grade, all stu
dents should receive some syste
matic training about agriculture
which may be integrated into exist
ing science, math, history and/or
social studies classes.”
In light of the study, the lack of
the mention of agriculture in the
board’s regulations for curriculum
does not sit well with Lauffer and
others in PVATA.
“We live in a society that obvi
ously depends for its very exis
tence on the most sophisticated,
productive and efficient food and
fiber production, processing and
delivery systems ever known to
man. Our concern is that ‘man’
knows very little about this
system.
“Agriculture is the number one
industry in the state of Pennsylva
nia, yet nowhere in the Chapter 5
and 6 regulations do we even see a
mentio of the word agriculture.
“Agriculture is one of the few
areas of technology in which our
nation is still considered the world
leader. Is it appropriate for us to
take that world leadership for
granted and wail until we arc in a
scientific and economic crisis to
realize the importance of agricul
ture and agricultural education?”
The PVATA position paper
states, “We sometimes hear the
argument that the fanning popula
tion or those who are engaged in
the production of food and fiber is
declining. That is exactly our
point. It is beoming even more crit
ical that we all develop an aware
ness of agriculture.”
The letter also states, “The days
of farmers producing maximum
yields with little regard for related
impacts are a thing of the past. The
technological advances in agricul
ture are unsurpassed by any other
applied science.
“Modem agricultural produc
tion is a complex science of man
agement that defines optimum pro
duction in light of economic feasi
bility. social acceptance and
environmental soudness. We can
not in good conscience allow an
increasingly agriculturally illit
erate society to emerge from our
school systems.”
What PVATA members request
are specific changes to the regula
tions to include agricultural sci
ence as a distinct and recognized
course of study in primary and
elementary education, middle
level education and high school
education.
For the regulations which
address vocational-technical edu
cation, PVATA seeks to add word
ing which would recognize student
“ ... participation in vocational
student organizations to develop
leadership skills and positive atti
tudes be considered as an integral
part of the vocational technical
program.”
Or, in other words, to recognize
the educational value of participa
tion in organizations such as FFA
and 4-H.
That wasn’t the rally letter writ
ten. There were several, the latest
dated Dec. 20, 1991. And three
times Lauffer testified before the
board about the importance of
agricultural study in the
curriculum.
During a Jan. 9 meeting, the
state Secretary of Education
Donald M. Carroll Jr., who is the
chief executive officer of the
board, said that the board did not
want to mandate agricultural edu
cation, and that the word “agricul
ture” had been entered in the reg
ulations, though not the way PVA
TA had requested.
Lauffer. responding to why
“agriculture” should be expressly
addressed as part of a primary
school curriculum, said, “When
was the last time you went into a
restaurant, carefully studied the
menu and then ordered something
that wasn’t on the menu?”
However, for all his efforts, he
said the State Board of Education
has apparently cast a deaf ear. He
wrote as much in a letter to Sheila
Miller, executive director of the
Senate Agriculture and Rural
Affairs Committee. Miller has
promised help.
Lauffer said that PVATA,
though very small, has not been
quiet.
In addition to Miller, they have
contacted and received support
from the Agricultural and Rural
Affairs committees, and the Edu
cation committees in both the
House and Senate.
Responding almost immediate
ly were the chairman and vice
chair of the House Agriculture and
Rural Affairs Committee, Rep.
Kenneth Cole, D-Adams, and Jess
Stairs, R-Westmoreland,
respectively.
In a joint letter to the chairman
of the board. Sister M. Lawreace
Antoun, Cole and Stairs stated that
are seeking, ”... favorable con
sideration of expanding the man
dates of the current State Board of
Education regulations to include
agriculture industry, agriscience
and ag awareness within a school
district’s curriculum or content.
We write this jointly because we
believe the matter deserves a
bipartisan effort.”
Also, during a meeting, PVATA
members literally reached into
their pockets to hire lobbyist Fre
derick C. Brown, of Harrisburg.
According to Brown, the status
of lobbying efforts was “in the ball
park” as of Thursday.
“I charaterize it that we’re in the
ball park,” Brown said. “That is,
with the Independent Regulatory
Review Commission, based on the
legislative support that has been
The State Board Of Education
HARRISBURG (Dauphin Co.) Efforts to infuse agriculture
into mainstream education statewide are placed before the State
Board of Education, but many people are unfamiliar with what the
board is and what their job is.
A general description of the board and its activities, an agency of
the State Department of Education, is provided in the 1991-92 edi
tion of the Pennsylvania Manual, volume 110:
What They Do
The board has the power and duty to review and adopt regulations
that govern educational policies and principles and establish stan
dards governing the educational programs of the commonwealth,
upon recommendation of its councils.
What It Is
The State Board of Education is the regulatory and policy-making
board for basic and higher education in the commonwealth.
There are 22 members of the state Board. Seventeen members are
appointed by the governor and confirmed by the state Senate for six
year terms, and they serve without pay.
Four members of the board are members of the General Assembly,
They serve as long as they hold majority and minority chairs of the
House and Senate Education Committees.
The chairperson of the Professional Standards and Practices Com
mission (PSPC) is a non-voting member.
Ten members comprise the Council of Basic Education, with 10
also on the Council of Higher Education, with the chairperson of the
board and each council designated by the governor.
The 22 members of the board also serve as the State Board for
Vocational Education.
The Pennsylvania Department of Education provides administra
tive services for the board and the Secretary of Education is the chief
executive officer of the board.
, The current Secretary of Education is Donald M. Carroll Jr., of
Mechanicsburg, a carreer education specialist who was appointed by
Gov. Robert Casey in 1989 and reappointed in 1991.
The (board) is supported by a staff consisting of an executive
director, an administrative officer and a secretary.
Related Agencies
Regulations and policies adopted by the board are subject to
review by the Independent Regulatory Review Commission.
The five-member commission was created in 1982 to review all
proposed and existing rules and regulations created by all state agen
cies, commissions, boards, departments and authorities, except for
the legislation, the fish and game commissions, local governments
and the judicial system.
The chairman of the commission is appointed by the governor and
the current chairman is Thomas P. Comerford, of Scranton, also
Gov. Casey’s hometown.
offered and will continue to be
offered by other ag leaden in Jhe
General“ Assembly, i IhW We
stand a 50-50 chance of improving
the status of agriculture with
respect to the school curriculum.”
Brown and Lauffcr have been
working closely to stay on Kg) of
things. They have been attempting
to penetrate what they said they
perceive to be an ingrained ste
reotype of agriculture which
would have only those interested
in running a family farm receive
instruction in agriculture.
Brown said that some people are
beginning to understand that the
steel industry and every other man
ufacturing industry in the state is
second to agriculture now, not the
other way around.
And they are beginning to
understand that the skill and edu
cational levels required to work in
agriculture and agricultural sup
port businesses are not being met
by the majority of those entering or
in the work force.
In fact, according to a Penn
State University instructor, Ken
neth Kephart, certain agricultural
job opportunities abound in
Pennsylvania for those quali
fied to All them.
Brown said that people in Har
risburg are starting to look at the
possibility of agriculture as part of
the regular school curriculum a
little differently.
“Initially (the suggestion of
agriculture be offered as part of a
curriculum) might have been
‘pooed-pooed* somewhat.
“I think Bob (Lauffer), when he
spoke to the state board back in
January and said, ‘How many
times have you gone into a restaur
ant and ordered something not on
the menu?’ I think that got the
attention of many of the state board
members,” Brown said.
Brown also said that, because
some of the regulations considered
by the board arc supposed to allow
and agricultural sciences are not*
included in the curriculum regula|
Uons, a district’s won’t have
flexibility to provide there*
courses.
“I’m pretty optimistic that there
will be some improvement in the
status of agripullßre. I think that if
we move abend one notch, we will
benefit the industry.”
On Thursday, Feir said that the
state board is attempting to move
into different directions with the
state mandates.
“In reality, what the board is
doing with the proposed change in
curricula) regs is reducing a lot of
the kind of specificity that (PVA
TA) would like inserted. In a sense
it’s moving in a different direction
with the regs in general.
“The real answer is I don’t know
what the board is going to do. The
board members will have to make
decisions on a lot of things. We
had a discussion about (agricul
ture) at the last meeting (Jan. 9).
There were a couple of members
who suggested not requiring spe
cific teaching, but requiring some
information about food processing
and related industries.
“The messages that we got from
Bob Lauffer and others has been
expressed clearly, and in the end I
think we will satisfy that to some
extent.”