Federal Legislation Impacting Agricultural Education - Era II

1. Federal Legislation Impacting Agricultural Education -Era II Special Thanks to Gary Moore at NC State

2. Vocational Education Act of 1963 • This was a MAJOR piece of federal legislation. It replaced Smith-Hughes • Categorical funding for specific vocational disciplines such as agricultural education was abolished. • Funding went to states on the basis of their population in certain age categories. • States decided how to spend the money.

3. Vocational Education Act of 1963 • Expanded the scope of agricultural education to include all areas of agriculture, not just farming. • No longer required “supervised practice on a farm”. The idea was to expand the scope of SAE, not do away with it, but that is what some states did. • Expanded the scope of home economics education to include all areas of home economics, not just homemaking.

4. Vocational Education Act of 1963 • Established work study programs for vocational students to provide financial support • Eliminated federal supervision/control of vocational programs • Funding for vocational education was substantially increased

5. Sea Grant Program (1966) • The National Sea Grant Collegeand Program Act • Established a program (under the Dept. of Commerce) to provide for applied research, formal education and extension for development of marine and Great Lake resources. About 2/3 of the states involved have incorporated these activities in the extension service.

6. Food and Agriculture Act (1977) • A Major Farm Bill • Authorized $260 million for Extension • Authorized agricultural and forestry extension activities at 1890 institutions • 4% of Smith-Lever Funds must go to 1890 institutions • Extension leaders of 1862 and 1890 institutions are to develop a comprehensive state-wide plan for extension

7. Carl Perkins Act (1984) • This was the most significant rewrite of vocational education legislation since 1963. • Two broad themes • Accessibility to all persons • Improve the quality

8. Carl Perkins Act (1984) • Fifty-seven (57) percent of state funds were allocated to special populations - vocational education was to be accessible to everyone • handicapped (10%) • disadvantaged (10%) • adult retraining (12%) • single parents and homemakers (8 1/2%) • sex bias & stereotyping (3 1/2%) • incarcerated (1%)

9. Carl Perkins Act (1984) • Forty-three (43) percent of state funds were allocated for program improvement • funds were not to be used to maintain existing programs • Consumer and Homemaking received special funding but 1/3 had to be spent in economically depressed areas • There will be a full time sex equity coordinator and $60,000 is allocated to that

10. Perkins II (1990) • The Carl Perkins Act is rewritten • Special populations is still a major focus, • Money can be used to support existing programs • Academic and vocational education was to be integrated • Articulation between secondary and post-secondary institutions

11. National Agricultural Research, Extension and Teaching Act (1994) • Established extension education programs on Native American reservations • Provided technical assistance and training in subsistence agriculture to Native Americans and Alaskan natives

12. National Agricultural Research, Extension and Teaching Act (1994) • Provided grants for on-farm education and assistance directed at accommodating disability in farm operations.

13. School-to-Work Opportunities Act (1994) • A variety of programs were established for students to get them more involved with the world of work and post-secondary education • Grants were given to some states to develop programs • This is for all students • Funding is temporary

14. FAIR Act (1996) • Our current farm bill is titled the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act. • Some people call it the Freedom to Farm Act. • Title VIII contains provisions for Research, Extension, and Education • However, because other sections of the bill were so controversial little attention was really paid to this section of the bill. Most extension related items were merely extended. However, there were a few new twists.

15. FAIR Act (1996) • Authority for secondary and 2-year post secondary education in Agriscience and agribusiness are added to the Secretary's food and agricultural education authorities • This was an attempt to transfer national leadership for secondary agricultural education to USDA from USDE • It partially succeeded, language is present in the bill authorizing it--but there is no money to do it, so nothing has happened

16. FAIR Act (1996) • Even though the national leadership for agricultural education did not move (one representative in the house effectively blocked the move) a $500,000 challenge grant program to improve secondary agricultural education has been established under authority of the USDA. • USDE provides national leadership for agricultural education but USDA is providing funds to improve the program

17. Conclusion • Legislation for extension and agricultural education during the past 50 years has been influenced greatly by changing societal and environmental concerns. • Federal legislation has often mandated what we are to do. • The focus has shifted to helping certain groups of people.