Governance in Agricultural Education

1. Governance in Agricultural Education A Critical Look at Agricultural Education Leadership at Various Levels

2. If a Martian landed…… Greetings Earthlings! Take me to your leader (in agricultural education)! • Where would you take this person?

3. Once the answer was simple! • The Smith-Hughes Act of 1917 (the act that provided federal funds to support the teaching of high school agricultural education) established a Federal Board for Vocational Education. • The Federal Board ruled with an iron hand.

4. The Federal Board • The Federal Board appointed individuals to “Supervise” agricultural education on a national basis • There was a national “Chief” • There were regional supervisors (4 regions of the country) • Later, subject matter experts were added along with people with FFA responsibilities. • In 1962, there were 12 national agricultural education officials

5. The Feds • The agricultural education officials in the federal government had absolute power. • They could threaten states with lose of funding • What they said was interpreted to be the law. • They required all types of reports and records to make sure Smith-Hughes funds were being used properly.

6. At the State Level • A similar pattern of leadership was instituted in each state. • Each state had a “Head State Supervisor” • There were state regional supervisors. • In some states there were even subject matter experts at the state level (Georgia still has them) • The Head State Supervisor had authority over hiring of teacher educators in agriculture at the state universities.

7. At the State Level • The state and regional supervisors within the state were very powerful. • There were numerous forms on every aspect of the agricultural education that had to be completed. These were summarized and forwarded to the Feds. • Depending upon the size of the state it was not uncommon to have 10-15 Ag. Ed. supervisors in the state.

8. # of State Supervisors - 1957 6 1 2 4 2 12 3 3 4 5 2 3 2 1 7 2 3 3 2 7 6 6 2 1 2 9 4 2 5 4 14 12 7 13 8 8 6 8 9 3 2 5 11 11 8 13 17 9 7

9. The Tide Turns • The Vocational Education Act of 1963 did away with categorical funding for agricultural education. • But that is not all it did. It did away with federal supervision of agricultural education. (see the next slide)

10. The 1963 Act • Section 16: • “Nothing contained in this part shall be construed to authorize any department, agency, officer, or employee of the United States to exercise any direction, supervision, or control over the curriculum, program of instruction, administration, or personnel of any educational institution of school system” • This signaled the end of strong federal (and state) control over agricultural education.

11. The Fallout of the 1963 Act • As federal agricultural education officials retired they were not replaced. • By 1980 the number of federal level agricultural education officials had dropped to (2) two.

12. The Feds Today • Today, there are 2 federal agricultural education officials. • The only reason they exist is because of a provision in Public Law 740 (the law passed in 1950 giving FFA a federal charter)

13. The Feds Today • The two federal officials today work primarily with the national FFA where they have some real authority. • They have no real power over state agricultural education programs. • Their leadership status within Agricultural Education is sort of like that possessed by the Queen of England – it is more titular and honorary than real.

14. The Federal Officials in Ag. Ed.

15. Agric. Education Leadership • Because of the decline in Federal leadership, the profession created an independent National Council for Agricultural Education in the mid-1980s. The National Council for Agricultural Education provides leadership, coordination and support for the continuous improvement of agricultural education.

16. The failed coup d'état • In the mid 1990s the profession attempted to move the national leadership of Ag. Ed. to the USDA. • This was written into the 1996 Farm Bill but no money was budgeted to actually accomplish this.

17. The failed coup d'état • Even though the move failed, a challenge grant program to improve secondary Ag. Ed was funded and is now administered through the USDA. • Over $900,000 is given to high schools to improve Ag. Ed. annually

18. At the State Level • The trickle down effect was felt at the state level when the federal role in agricultural education was minimized. • It took a decade or so, but most states dramatically reduced the number of state education officials responsible for agricultural education. • In most states this leadership is located in a state department of education.

19. The State Level Today • In most states today there are 1-4 individuals with state level responsibilities for agricultural education. • Some states have no state level leadership. • The state leadership for agricultural education is weak is most states but there are some exceptions.

20. The State Level Today • In a number of states special “efforts” were initiated to maintain state level leadership in agricultural education. • Today some state level leadership positions are funded or reside in: • State Departments of Agriculture • Farm Bureau • Universities • Special Foundations

21. In North Carolina: • The Department of Public Instruction (DPI) faced severe downsizing in the early 1990s. • The number of DPI Ag. Ed. positions was slated to go from 4 to 1. • When the agriculture teachers learned of this, they took action.

22. In North Carolina: • In the mid 1990s, the state legislature created 5 new state level agricultural education positions at North Carolina State University. • This new leadership scheme was implemented in 1996. • These individuals performed the duties that were formerly done by the Ag. Ed. consultants in the DPI.

23. Leadership in North Carolina __________ is the state coordinatorand is at NCSU. (this position is currently vacant) David Harris isthe Western Coordinatorstationed atFletcher Josh Bledsoe is the FFA coordinator and is at NCSU Benjie Forrest isthe Eastern Coordinatorstationed at Plymouth Horace Johnson is the Central coordinator, stationedat NCSU

24. Leadership in North Carolina The state is divided into six regions Northeast Northwest Central Western Southwest Southeast

25. Leadership in Ag. Ed. • A number of other states have adopted the NC model. • South Carolina • Louisiana • Montana

26. Governance and Financing General Education Governance and Financing

27. State Governance • At the state level there is typically a state board of education. • Some are elected, some are appointed, some are a combination • There is also a State Superintendent of Education • Some are elected, some are appointed • The State Board establishes state level educational policy.

28. Local Governance • At the local level, there is school board that: • Establishes local educational policy • Hires school officials such as the superintendent.

29. Ag Teachers • Who does the agriculture teacher report to? • In many schools it is the principal • In some schools it may be a department head • In some schools, there may be a vocational director (or some administrators with that responsibility) • It all depends upon the size of the school.

30. Finances • How is career and technical education funded? • Federal funds from the Carl Perkins Act comes to the state who then redirects the money to the schools. • However, federal funds make up only about 10% of the money spent in career and technical education; the rest is state and local funds.

31. Finances • In many states local property taxes pay the majority of costs associated with local schools. • In many states, special school bonds are voted on by the general population when more money is needed. • In some states, the majority of the money to fund schools comes from the state budget. This is the situation in North Carolina.