National Academies Press: OpenBook

Educating the Next Generation of Agricultural Scientists (1988)

Chapter: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

« Previous: Front Matter
Suggested Citation:"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS." National Research Council. 1988. Educating the Next Generation of Agricultural Scientists. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18633.
×
Page 1
Suggested Citation:"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS." National Research Council. 1988. Educating the Next Generation of Agricultural Scientists. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18633.
×
Page 2
Suggested Citation:"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS." National Research Council. 1988. Educating the Next Generation of Agricultural Scientists. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18633.
×
Page 3
Suggested Citation:"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS." National Research Council. 1988. Educating the Next Generation of Agricultural Scientists. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18633.
×
Page 4
Suggested Citation:"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS." National Research Council. 1988. Educating the Next Generation of Agricultural Scientists. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18633.
×
Page 5
Suggested Citation:"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS." National Research Council. 1988. Educating the Next Generation of Agricultural Scientists. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18633.
×
Page 6
Suggested Citation:"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS." National Research Council. 1988. Educating the Next Generation of Agricultural Scientists. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18633.
×
Page 7
Suggested Citation:"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS." National Research Council. 1988. Educating the Next Generation of Agricultural Scientists. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18633.
×
Page 8
Suggested Citation:"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS." National Research Council. 1988. Educating the Next Generation of Agricultural Scientists. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18633.
×
Page 9
Suggested Citation:"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS." National Research Council. 1988. Educating the Next Generation of Agricultural Scientists. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18633.
×
Page 10
Suggested Citation:"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS." National Research Council. 1988. Educating the Next Generation of Agricultural Scientists. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18633.
×
Page 11
Suggested Citation:"EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS." National Research Council. 1988. Educating the Next Generation of Agricultural Scientists. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/18633.
×
Page 12

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

1 Executive Summary and Recommendations Sustaining our nation's internationally competitive food pro- duction, processing, agricultural input, forestry, and fiber indus- tries is essential. The challenge is to sustain these industries in an increasingly competitive world in which government trade, tech- nology, and subsidy policies affect agricultural competitiveness in many complex ways. This report focuses on only one factor that will help to determine future competitiveness—the number and quality of doctoral scientists working in agricultural science and on technology problems. Measuring and projecting the competence and adequacy of scientists and engineers within a major sector of the economy are difficult analytic tasks. A basic purpose of this study was to make such assessments of doctoral scientists working in the agricultural, food, and related sciences. Nations need individuals skilled in science and technology to acquire and maintain agricultural industry competitiveness. The lack of such skill is a barrier that countries must overcome to be profitably active in international markets for food and fiber products or agricultural industry inputs and services. Countries that possess and use scientific and technical skills in any industrial sector will lower trade and policy-related costs associated with remaining competitive in world markets.

2 EDUCATING AGRICULTURAL SCIENTISTS For this reason, the number and quality of the agricultural and food sciences doctoral scientists is a concern for the United States. The committee makes recommendations that should be implemented to build a firm basis for future agricultural competi- tiveness. THE COMMITTEE'S CHARGE The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) charged the committee to analyze future competency needs of doctoral scien- tists. The task was challenging for several reasons, not the least of which were the difficulties encountered in defining and measuring competency needs. The committee defines competency "as hav- ing the necessary skills and abilities to perform a given task or tasks successfully, according to an established set of standards or records." Qualitative characteristics of the scientific and technologic labor force are hard to measure. They can be difficult to project into the future. In agriculture, projecting competency needs is made more complex by five additional factors: 1. Rapid rates of scientific and technologic advance in agri- cultural science and engineering; 2. Changing domestic and international opportunities in ma- jor agricultural commodity markets; 3. Interactions between unpredictable social, economic, tech- nologic, and demographic trends; 4. A lack of previously compiled data or projections of the characteristics of doctoral scientists in agricultural sciences, either in terms of supply and demand trends or needs; and 5. Limited information on how current educational policy and programs affect the qualitative dimensions of doctoral scientists. For these reasons, the committee relied on its collective expe- rience and judgment in reaching conclusions about future compe- tency needs and trends in the supply and quality of doctoral sci- entists. Moreover, the committee depended mainly on judgment in offering recommendations for education and training initiatives.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 3 PRINCIPAL FINDINGS About 20,600 agricultural, food, engineering, and environ- mental scientists who have earned Ph.D. degrees focus their skills in five broad areas: 1. Basic science essential to plant and animal production, such as genetics, biochemistry, physiology, animal nutrition and health, plant pathology, entomology, agricultural engineering, and food sciences; 2. Applied research on agricultural technologies, resource pro- tection, and the functioning and performance of agricultural sys- tems; 3. Postharvest use and marketing of agricultural and forest products; 4. Agricultural economics and policy in domestic and inter- national contexts; and 5. Monitoring and regulating the performance and effects of agricultural activities and food products on human health, food safety, the environment, and the productivity of the resource base. Characteristics of the Doctoral Labor Force Of the estimated 20,600 scientists and engineers now em- ployed in applied agriculture, 15 percent are involved primarily with teaching, 41 percent in research and development (RfcD), 21 percent as managers, and 21 percent in other work, such as marketing or regulatory activities (see Table 3-4). Academia em- ploys about half of the Ph.D.s working in the agricultural sciences, industry a third, and government—primarily the Agricultural and Economic Research Services within the USDA—the rest (see Table 3-3). In the last decade, the distribution of Ph.D.s who hold agri- cultural science degrees among employment sectors shifted toward industry, from 22 percent in 1975 to 29 percent in 1985 (see Fig- ure 3-2). Academia's share declined from 60 to 55 percent and government's from 19 to 16 percent during the same time. About 16,700 active scientists and engineers have received their Ph.D. degrees within applied agricultural science disciplines (see Figure 3-2). Of these, 12,600 (about 75 percent) are currently employed in applied agricultural science positions (see Table 3- 3). Applied agricultural science disciplines included agronomy;

4 EDUCATING AGRICULTURAL SCIENTISTS soil science; horticulture; plant breeding; animal husbandry, sci- ence, nutrition, and breeding; food science; hydrology; environ- mental sciences; agricultural engineering; general agriculture; and forestry. The balance of active agricultural scientists and engi- neers, which is 8,200, or 40 percent of the total of 20,600, earned Ph.D. degrees outside applied agricultural disciplines. These fields included biochemistry, bacteriology, genetics, molecular biology, plant and animal physiology, zoology, botany, economics, ecology, sociology, plant pathology, entomology, and other sciences. In recent years, the distinction between applied and basic scientific research has become less distinct. For example, scien- tists trained and working within fields traditionally classified as applied are contributing to the development of biotechnology re- search methods. Applied scientists often pioneer new research methods and contribute to basic scientific knowledge. Collabo- ration between basic and applied scientists in multidisciplinary research terms decreases the distinction between basic and ap- plied science. (See Chapter 3 for a more detailed discussion of the field and subfield definitions used in this report.) Most of the tables and trends discussed in this report refer to doctoral scientists employed in agriculture by field of employment (20,600); a few tables report data for those agricultural scien- tists and engineers trained in an applied agricultural discipline or program, or by field of degree (16,700). The large number of currently employed agricultural scien- tists and engineers trained outside traditional applied agricultural science disciplines has important implications. Many doctoral sci- entists who have earned degrees in nonagricultural sciences are being hired in agriculture-related positions; and educational ini- tiatives and reforms within traditional applied agricultural science fields only are unlikely to adequately meet future needs. Quality Many educators think the quality of undergraduate and grad- uate students intending to enroll in agricultural science programs is low (Christensen and Heinrichs, 1985). According to the Na- tional Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges: "A major issue confronting our society is the declining quality of students who are preparing for scientific and professional careers

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5 in food, agricultural, and natural resource disciplines. The avail- ability of food, agricultural, and natural resources expertise is in serious jeopardy" (NASULGC, 1986b). The committee reviewed evidence supporting this statement (see Table 3-6). The verbal and quantitative scores of students intending to study agriculture as undergraduates were among the lowest on the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT). Among all students taking this test, only those intending to major in home economics had lower average scores. Results from a comparison of Graduate Record Examination (GRE) scores are similar. These tests were designed to predict performance in educational programs, not intelligence. Nonetheless, the low average scores of students intending to pursue agricultural studies lend evidence to the concerns regarding qual- ity and the ability to attract students that agricultural research and technology development administrators, recruiters, and prac- titioners voiced to the committee. In the committee's judgment, agricultural institutions and industries should be able to offer challenging careers that will increasingly attract talented scientists. But in meeting this need, the emphasis should not be on numbers alone; it should also be on excellence. Agriculture is not attracting enough of the brightest undergraduate and graduate students. Moreover, agriculture's ability to attract such students will probably not improve without incentives and initiatives backed by sufficient funds. Foreign Students A significant number of U.S. doctoral candidates are foreign students. In 1985, foreign students with temporary visas ac- counted for 392 of the 1,192 new Ph.D.s in applied agriculture and 391 of 3,093 new Ph.D.s in agriculture-related basic sciences (see Table 3-6). This is clear evidence of the attraction of U.S. ed- ucational programs in these fields. The task of training scientists from other countries, especially developing countries, will continue to require special commitments by U.S. colleges and universities. The presence of foreign students can benefit domestic teach- ing programs, students, and institutions. Foreign students can be an important source of knowledge about their respective coun- tries. They can help U.S. scientists gain a better understanding of conditions and scientific challenges outside the United States. Agriculture is a global endeavor; the marketplace is the world.

6 EDUCATING AGRICULTURAL SCIENTISTS Educating foreign students can be a way to help them—and all students—develop an international view of agriculture and a sense of the global challenges that must be overcome to feed all people. But we should not become too dependent on foreign students to fill classrooms. Institutions and individuals in the United States have been as- sisting developing countries in three principal agricultural science areas: (l) education and training, (2) agricultural development, and (3) establishment of scientific and agricultural institutions. To improve these efforts, U.S. agricultural science programs should be developed to better fit the needs of students from developing coun- tries. These students usually need help with language, computer, and cultural skills to complete a program. They also often need to learn basic science skills and gain knowledge about technologic options. Those who intend to re- turn to their countries would benefit most during their academic programs from some focus on those technologies that might be practical outside the United States. Foreign students must also acquire an understanding of so- cioeconomic influences on agriculture, particularly the effects of domestic and international food and agricultural policies on the development, transfer, and profitable use of agricultural technolo- gies. Projections of Supply and Demand The committee assessed existing projections of future labor market conditions and demand. In the committee's judgment: • Currently available Ph.D. labor market projections are in- adequate in assessing possible future imbalances in the supply of and demand for agricultural doctoral scientists and engineers. None of these projections address qualitative factors. Available analyses and projections are outdated, too aggre- gated, or do not extend sufficiently into the future. Projections are even less relevant in assessing necessary skills and abilities, be- cause they deal exclusively with the number of scientists entering the labor pool relative to employment opportunities. There is a need for improved projections of supply of and demand for Ph.D. agricultural scientists and engineers. Data that the committee reviewed coupled with its collective

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 7 judgment regarding likely future employment in the next decade produced several conclusions, however: • Little overall change is expected in the supply-demand balance for basic or applied agricultural Ph.D. scientists, although fluctuations will be different in various specialty fields. A lasting shortage in any field is unlikely. • In the next decade, there will be a continuing increase in industrial employment. • Among all sectors, work other than research and teaching— marketing, management, and regulatory activities and underlying abilities, such as communication skills—are becoming more im- portant. In 1985, 27 percent of the Ph.D.s in applied agricultural dis- ciplines employed in industry report research as their primary work activity (see Chapter 4). Slightly more than one-half of aca- demic scientists in applied agricultural disciplines report research or teaching as their primary activity. In industry and government, doctoral scientists are focusing more on marketing, management, and regulatory activities as areas of responsibility. In addition to research, students need more opportunities to gain experience in the areas of problem solving, practical research collaboration, and writing and speaking. PRINCIPAL CONCLUSIONS Two conclusions of the committee helped to identify the steps toward greater proficiency in agricultural science and technology: • Although there may be an adequate supply of candidates, the key will be to attract into agricultural and food industry careers more of the brightest, best-trained young scientists and use their skills to advantage in single-discipline and multidisciplinary teams. • The overall quality—skills, knowledge, and intelligence— of doctoral scientists must be continuously improved. To improve quality, a series of research and education system reforms will be needed, with adequate funding and professional opportunities, such as fellowships and continuing education. The committee notes that employers are already drawing upon scientists and engineers from disciplines other than those included

8 EDUCATING AGRICULTURAL SCIENTISTS in traditional basic and applied agricultural sciences. If recent trends continue, nearly one-half of newly hired Ph.D .s in the next decade will be trained outside applied agricultural science fields. New initiatives are needed, however, to better use the skills, often in a multidisciplinary research environment, of all Ph.D.s; period- ically retrain and upgrade skills of active scientists; and attract the most gifted individuals to careers in the agricultural and food sciences. RECOMMENDATIONS The committee believes that agricultural science and tech- nology educators, administrators, recruiters, and practitioners must focus attention on the quality of doctoral scientists, basic skills, broadening and redirecting, and multidisciplinary interac- tions. Improvements in these areas would benefit all active and prospective agricultural scientists and engineers. Moreover, these areas need attention throughout an individual's career. To respond to these needs, the committee offers four rec- ommendations involving (1) up-to-date projections of supply and demand of agricultural scientists and engineers, (2) core curricu- lum and re-education in the basic sciences, (3) multidisciplinary interactions, and (4) fellowships. The impetus to act upon most of these recommendations must come from individuals in leadership positions. To be successfully adopted, the recommendations will require commitment of funds as well as professional rewards. The USDA, Congress, public and private foundations, academic leaders, and associations should seek out and support ways to implement the committee's recom- mendations. Projecting Supply and Demand An institution or organization with appropriate technical expertise working under the guidance of public sector agencies, particularly the USDA and National Science Foundation (NSF), should develop projections of supply and demand of agricultural scientists at least every three to five years. Projections should take into account rapid change in the agri- cultural sector, demographics, and scientific and technologic op- portunities.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 9 Congress should commit funds to support compilation, analy- sis, and distribution of such data. Analysis results will help execu- tive branch agencies and Congress to plan and monitor educational programs, policies, and investments to enhance the competence of doctoral scientists working within agriculture. Core Curriculum and Re-education in the Basic Sciences To meet the need for basic science training, academic institutions should require agricultural science students to take core curriculum courses taught within basic science departments, such as chemistry and biology. At each stage of a scientist's career, the ability to carry out basic science studies at the frontiers of knowledge and the experi- ences gained from them are valuable in preparing him or her for research, teaching, extension, and management activities in the public and private sectors. To provide future scientists with appropriate skills, emphasis should be increased on educational, research, and work experiences during graduate training and professional careers. The USDA and NSF should offer guidance and support to academic institutions pursuing student and faculty development initiatives responsive to this need. The skills that agricultural scientists need in the future will change at a rate even faster than in the past decade. As in all other disciplines, scientists in agriculture will have to continuously update their abilities and knowledge throughout a 30- to 40-year professional career to remain at the forefront of science. A sci- entist's progression must begin with basic science training and research experiences that increasingly develop his or her problem recognition, experimental design, and related analytic skills. Multidisriplinary Interactions More financial and administrative support should be provided for multidisciplinary team research. University leaders and the USDA should implement a strategy for professional renewal by multidis- ciplinary research throughout the careers of agricultural scientists

10 EDUCATING AGRICULTURAL SCIENTISTS from academia, industry, and government. All sectors need to re- main current with advances in science and instrumentation. There- fore, sectors should help to develop, implement, and pay for new educational strategies and opportunities. Multidisciplinary interaction is a way to identify research op- portunities, develop new technologies, and pursue creative solu- tions to problems that require knowledge in combined sciences such as biochemistry, cell biology, immunology, physiology, and genetics. Such interaction should include frequent contact with colleagues working in other sectors, fields, states, and countries. This collaboration can advance science and benefit the individuals involved. A strategy to support multidisciplinary collaboration among scientists at different career stages can contribute to the scientists' renewal and retraining. Frequent interactions with colleagues are often the best way for scientists to remain current with new in- struments, methodologies, and knowledge. To increase interaction, more incentives should be directed toward research teams in the form of grants, laboratory space and equipment, and professional recognition. In academia, such interaction is an essential part of teaching and learning the scientific method and strategies for conducting research programs. Opportunities to work with graduate and post- doctoral students who have learned new skills can partially meet the faculty's continuing education needs. Such interaction can be particularly valuable when a student from a newly established ba- sic science subdiscipline brings new insights to a research team. Multidisciplinary research can be supported within the university by establishing graduate programs that cut across departmental lines; recognizing and rewarding faculty contributions to coop- erative research programs; promoting collaborative projects and exchanges between scientists in land-grant universities, non-land- grant universities, industry, and government laboratories; and re- cruiting new faculty to create multidisciplinary research programs that can attract competitive funding. Academia is not alone in its need for change. Private and pub- lic research laboratories and institutions, respectively, also need strategies to support multidisciplinary interaction and retraining and attract higher-quality individuals. If the skills and abilities of agricultural scientists and engineers

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 11 are to be broadened, individuals at progressive career stages should have the opportunity to: • Expand technical skills—through multidisciplinary inter- actions and sabbaticals, for example—to promote interaction with U.S. and foreign scientists in other basic and applied fields and with the general public; • Increase knowledge of agriculture at home and abroad— including policy and socioeconomic concerns—in pursuing science and technology goals. Fellowships Expanded national graduate and postgraduate fellowship programs are needed to support advanced scholarship and research within food and agricultural sciences and related engineering fields, with particular emphasis on multidisciplinary research opportunities. The fellowships should assure keen competition, drawing individuals who have demonstrated excellence into agricultural science careers. Funds to support new fellowships should be awarded to a variety of educational institutions, including private colleges and collaborative ventures among schools on a single campus. Successful but currently underfunded USDA and NSF programs should be expanded. These programs must receive sufficient support to meet their obligations to individuals and institutions. The fellowship programs should be periodically assessed to ensure that they are responsive to needs. The committee also believes that new fellowship opportunities will be most valuable if they aim toward excellence in agriculture-related basic sciences, support multidisciplinary research activities, and foster communi- cation among disciplinary and national boundaries. In 1984 Congress appropriated $5 million to establish the USDA National Needs Graduate Fellowship Program. This appro- priation and the competitively awarded grants it provided enabled 60 universities to enroll 302 students in graduate degree programs in biotechnology, food science and nutrition, agricultural engineer- ing, and agricultural marketing. Funding for the program ceased in its third year (1986), leaving some departments with a financial burden in providing continuing support to fellowship recipients pursuing doctoral degrees. In 1987, the USDA provided $2.8 mil- lion for new fellowships. Considerably fewer fellowships will be

12 EDUCATING AGRICULTURAL SCIENTISTS awarded, however, because the USDA now provides recipients the full three years of support out of each year's appropriation. The number of federally supported fellowships should be in- creased. Support is also needed for new centers of excellence, cur- riculum reform, and faculty retraining opportunities (NRC, 1985a, 1987). A relatively modest investment would support the recom- mended increase in fellowship program opportunities. Combined federal and state support of the traditional agricultural research system accounts for $1.9 billion, which includes the $2.8 million that the USDA spends annually on graduate fellowships (USDA, 1986). Federal, state, and private institutions spend slightly more than $4 billion annually for agricultural research in the United States (NRC, 1987).

Next: CHALLENGES IN FOOD, FIBER, AND AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRIES »
Educating the Next Generation of Agricultural Scientists Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF
  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!