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 20 Appendix A The reports of the special interest groups are also consolidated in those cases where similar discussions were held at more than one of the four conferences. In a number of cases only one such group was organized. Where more than one discussion group formulated its response in very much the same way, both comments are retained, even though this results in a measure of duplication. There would seem to be added significance to a point arrived at independently several times by dif ferent groups. TOPIC I What are the broad areas of biological knowledge on which agricul ture and natural resource technology is dependent, and to which all students in agriculture and natural resources should be exposed? Which of these areas need greatest emphasis? Comment 1 The broad areas of biological knowledge that are needed by all college graduates include growth, reproduction, and their interaction with the environment as general properties of all living systems. Comment 2 We define an agricultural or natural resource student as being anyone enrolled in a degree program in a college of agriculture, forestry, or natural resources. We feel that all students who are enrolled in such colleges should be taught some biological science, the minimum being a one-year course in biology. Comment 3 Agricultural students actually represent six divergent areas, namely : ⢠Animal Sciences ⢠Plant and Soil Sciences ⢠Food Sciences ⢠Social Sciences ⢠Natural Resources ⢠Bioengineering
APPENDIX A Discussion Group Summaries EXPLAN A T O RY N O T E A t each o f the four regional conferences, a substantial portion o f the time was devoted to discussion groups. These were variously struc tured within a given conference , and from one conference to the next , but they fell into two categories : ⢠Groups having members of diverse interests, but addressing their attention to a set of questions formulated by the organizers of the conference . ⢠Rather homogeneous groups addressing themselves t o a rather specialized aspect of the curriculum problem . In summarizing these discussions, the comments of different groups in the first of these categories have been consolidated under the par ticular topic to which the comments are directed . No effort is made to identify either the members of the group or to indicate from which of the four conferences the suggestion emerged . Where commentary is limited , it can be assumed that that topic was not widely used in the series. 1 1 9
