Copyright 2007, Ashley Basinger

Competencies for a U.S. Horticulture Undergraduate Major: A National Delphi-Study

by

Ashley Ruth Basinger, B.S., M.S.

A Dissertation

In

AGRONOMY

Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Texas Tech University in

Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for

the Degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Approved

Dr. Cynthia McKenney

Dr. Ellen Peffley

Dr. Dick Auld

Dr. David Doerfert

John Borreli Dean of the Graduate School

May, 2007

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to acknowledge the continual guidance and expert advice from Dr.

Cynthia McKenney, Dr. Dick Auld, Dr. Ellen Peffley and Dr. David Doerfert. Each one

was helpful in insuring my success in completing my Ph.D. program. I especially

appreciate Dr. Cynthia McKenney’s care to make me a well-rounded person in my skills

as a teacher and a professional in horticulture. Dr. Peffley has been a great mentor and

having great expectations for my future. Dr. Auld is a wonderful encourager and I

appreciated his constant checking on my progress. Dr. Doerfert’s class on research

methods helped me tremendously in performing this study and I appreciate his advice

within educational research.

Also, I would like to thank Dr. Gil Reeve for his advice throughout this project

and opening his schedule anytime I had a question.

I would like to express my gratitude for the family God has blessed me with. My

parents have been a strong tower to lean on and always openly show their pride of my

educational aspirations despite my embarrassment. Joel and Amber have been especially

instrumental in raising the bar in education to inspire my own dreams.

ii

Texas Tech University, Ashley Basinger, May 2007

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS…………………………………………………………...…..ii ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………………………….vi LIST OF TABLES……………………………………………………………………..viii LIST OF FIGURES……………………………………………………………………..ix CHAPTER

I. INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………1

Background and Setting…………………………………………………..1 Statement of the Problem…………………………………………………3 Objectives…………………………………………………………………3 Definition of Terms……………………………………………………….3 Delimitations and Limitation s of the Study……………………………....4 Basic Assumptions………………………………………………………...5 Significance of the Problem……………………………………………….5 Summary…………………………………………………………………..5

II. LITERATURE REVIEW……………………………………………………..7

Theoretical Framework……………………………………………………8

Functional Context Theory………………………………………..8

Science Model……………………………………………………..8 Curriculum Development and Review…………………………….9 History of Horticulture in the U.S………………………………………..10 Horticulture Curriculum………………………………………………….11 Competency-Based Education…………………………………………...11

iii


Delphi Technique………………………………………………………...14 Summary of Literature Review…………………………………………..16

III. METHODOLOGY…………………………………………………………..18 Research Design………………………………………………………….18 Selection of Sample……………………………………………………...19 Outcome Measures……………………………………………………….20 Pilot Survey………………………………………………………………20 Delphi Survey……………………………………………………………20 Round I…………………………………………………………...20 Round II………………………………………………………….22 Round III…………………………………………………………22 Conditions of Testing…………………………………………………….23 Confidentiality…………………………………………………………...23 Bias………………………………………………………………………24 Validity and Reliability………………………………………………….24 Procedures for Analysis of Data…………………………………………25 Coding of Demographic Data……………………………………………26 Budget and Timeline……………………………………………………..26 Assessment of Student Competency Skills………………………………27

IV. FINDINGS…………………………………………………………………...28

Round I Instrument: Characteristics of Panel Members………………...29 Round I Instrument: Institution and Department Characteristics……….33 Description of Round I, II and III Discipline and Competency Results…36

iv


Horticulture Technical Competency Results…………………………….37 Life Science Technical Competency Results…………………………….38 Professional Competency Results………………………………………..40 Analysis of Student Survey of Competencies……………………………69

V. CONCULSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS ………………………………….72

Summary of Research Limitations and Delimitations…………………...72 Research Conclusions and Discussion…………………………………...72 Future Implications for Curriculum Development and Assessment……..77

LITERATURE CITED………………………………………………………………80 APPENDICES

A. DEPARTMENT HEAD RECRUITMENT LETTER……………….84 B. PANEL MEMBER LETTER………………………………………..86 C. NON-RESPONDENT LETTER……………………………………..88 D. IOWA STATE HORTICULTURE OUTCOMES ASSESSMENT....90 E. ROUND I SURVEY………………………………………………....96 F. ROUND II SURVEY………………………………………………114 G. ROUND III SURVEY……………………………………………...131 H. STUDENT COMPETENCY SURVEY……………………………149

v


ABSTRACT

Competency-based curriculum involves defining set knowledge, skills and values

for a particular education. Many technical undergraduate majors have developed a list of

competencies for evaluation, assessment, and improvement of higher education

curriculum.

This national Delphi-study is the first a concise list of competencies described for

a horticulture curriculum. A sample of horticulture educators within the U.S. (N=22)

were selected as experts in horticulture education and curriculum improvement through

an email requirement letter sent to each university chairperson. Average panel member

was a 51-60 year old Male, with a Ph.D. in Horticulture. Panel members had an average

of 21 years of teaching experience and their department had been involved in assessment

for 6-20 years. Institutional average size was 15,000-25,000, with a departmental

enrollment size of 50-200. Age, teaching position, bachelor’s degree earned by panel

member and department size did not significantly impact the panel members’ decision on

ranking of competencies. The three round Delphi-study results provided a list of

competencies considered to be important or not important in the general horticulture

education field. Final competencies described a total of 108 competencies, with 41

horticulture technical competencies, 34 life science technical competencies and 33

professional competencies.

A competency skill survey was given to seniors in the Plant & Soil Science

Department the following semester enrolled a capstone course (N=20). Results showed a

significant difference between Horticulture and Agronomy students mainly in

vi


horticulture competencies, but Agronomy student rated their skills lower in other

important competencies as well.

Overall, the described competency skills list may be used for future assessment

and development. Horticulture programs may start with confidence in having learning

outcomes approved from horticulture experts throughout the United States.

vii


LIST OF TABLES

1. Summary of Core Requirements for Horticulture Certification in ASHS……….12

2. Location and work area for each Delphi Study panel member identifying competencies in the U.S. horticulture baccalaureate degree……………………..30

3. Frequency of degree levels of the Delphi Study panel members identifying

competencies in the U.S. horticulture baccalaureate degree……………………..31

4. Frequency distribution of gender and 10-year age spans of the Delphi Study panel members identifying competencies in the U.S. horticulture baccalaureate degree…………….……………………………………………….32

5. The current position and years of teaching for the Delphi Study panel

members identifying competencies in the U.S. horticulture baccalaureate degree…………………………………………………………………………….32

6. The department degree offerings for the Delphi Study panel members

identifying competencies in the U.S. horticulture baccalaureate degree…...……33

7. Department assessment responsibilities for the Delphi Study panel members identifying competencies in the U.S. horticulture baccalaureate degree………...34

8. Types of Departmental Assessments for the Delphi Study panel members

identifying competencies in the U.S. horticulture baccalaureate degree………...35

9. Central tendency profile of panel member and affiliated academic institution for the Delphi study identifying competencies in the U.S. horticulture baccalaureate degree.………………………………………….35

10. Results of a Kruskal-Wallis test comparing responses from groupings of

horticulture and agronomy undergraduate students with respects to student’s perception of skills with the Horticulture Competency Skill Set. N= 20……….70

viii


LIST OF FIGURES

1. A model of Science (based on Gott and Mashieter, 1991)…………………....9 2. Theoretical Framework connects Functional Context Theory and Science

Model to Competency Based Curriculum……………………………………17

3. Ratings of Topics to be considered in the Horticulture Curriculum, as determined by the National Delphi study, with three subheadings of Horticulture, Life Science and Professional………………………………....43

4. Ratings of Horticulture Plant Identification discipline competencies as

determined by the National Delphi study in Rounds I, II, and III…………...44

5. Ratings of Horticulture Field and Greenhouse Management discipline competencies as determined by the National Delphi study in Rounds I, II, and III……………………………………………………………………..45

6. Ratings of Horticulture Landscape Management discipline competencies as determined by the National Delphi study in Rounds I, II, and III………...46

7. Ratings of Agriculture Chemical discipline competencies as

determined by the National Delphi study in Rounds I, II, and III…………...47

8. Ratings of Horticulture Technology discipline competencies as determined by the National Delphi study in Rounds I, II, and III…………...48

9. Ratings of Life Science Biological Science discipline

competencies as determined by the National Delphi study in Rounds I, II, and III…………………………………………………………..49

10. Ratings of Life Science Physical Science discipline competencies

as determined by the National Delphi study in Rounds I, II, and III………...50

11. Ratings of Life Science Plant Physiology discipline competencies as determined by the National Delphi study in Rounds I, II, and III………..51

12. Ratings of Life Science Plant Genetics/Biotechnology discipline


13. Ratings of Life Science Plant Breeding discipline competencies

as determined by the National Delphi study in Rounds I, II and III…………53

ix


14. Ratings of Life Science Abiotic, Biotic Factors discipline competencies

as determined by the National Delphi study in Rounds I, II, and III………..54

15. Ratings of Life Science Principles of Soils discipline competencies as determined by the National Delphi study in Rounds I, II, and III………..55

16. Ratings of Life Science Environmental awareness discipline


17. Ratings of Professional Writing/Verbal discipline and


18. Ratings of Professional Research Skills discipline and competencies

as determined by the National Delphi study in Rounds I, II, and III...………58

19. Ratings of Professional Problem Solving Skills discipline and competencies as determined by the National Delphi study in Rounds I, II, and III………………...……………………………………..59

20. Ratings of Professional Decision Making Skills discipline

and competencies as determined by the National Delphi study in Rounds I, II, and III……………………………………………...……….60

21. Ratings of Professional Leadership/Collaborative Skills

discipline and competencies as determined by the National Delphi study in Rounds I, II, and III……………………...………………………………..61

22. Ratings of Professionalism discipline and competencies as determined by the National Delphi study in Rounds I, II, and III……...……62 23. Ratings of Professional Ethical/Professional Judgement and

competencies as determined by the National Delphi study in Rounds I, II, and III……………………………………………………….…63

24. Ratings of Professional Life Learning Skills discipline and

competencies as determined by the National Delphi study in Rounds I, II, and III….........................................................................………64

25. Ratings of Professional Global Perspective discipline and

competencies as determined by the National Delphi study in Rounds I, II, and III...…………………………………………………..……65

26. Ratings of Professional Historical Perspective discipline and

x


competencies as determined by the National Delphi study in Rounds I, II, and III………………………………………………………….66

27. Ratings of Literature and Art discipline and competencies as

determined by the National Delphi study in Rounds I, II, and III……………………………………………………………………..……...67

28. Ratings of Professional Writing/Verbal discipline and competencies as

determined by the National Delphi study in Rounds I, II, and III………...…68 29. Horticulture Matrix shows alignment of 3 courses within 3 program level learning outcomes………………………………………….78

xi


CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Background and Setting

Evidence of quality education is the primary agenda of accreditation agencies in

their evaluation of the American higher education system. American academe is

increasingly viewed as an economic service to give industry the competitive edge.

Financial backers and employers of the institution desire more than the traditional use of

evidence through grades, certificates, and degrees to measure student’s knowledge, skills,

and abilities (Baker, 2004). Accreditation institutions are in place to insure quality has

moved from presuming quality by the institutional characteristics, intentions and assets,

to requiring documentation of achievement of intended outcomes to validate claims of

quality and effectiveness (Baker, 2004).

Universities will usually give departments freedom to determine different

methods of documenting student learning outcomes. Forms of direct assessment

documentation are assignments embedded in a course, portfolios, and evaluations of

student performance (Hernon, 2004). Indirect assessment measures are surveys (Exit

Survey, Alumni, Employer) and tracking student data. In “Knowing What Students

Know” (Pellegrino et al., 2001) one recommendation for institutions to improve quality is

to practice using large-scale assessment to sample a broad range of competencies that

could be shared with teachers, students and other education stakeholders. This summary

goes on to say, “Knowledge and skills to be assessed and the criteria for judging the

desired outcomes should be clearly specified and available to all potential examinees” (p.


1

13). Knowledge and skill can be measured by defined competencies, which are

established behavior requirements needed for the student to be successful.

Competencies have been used in curriculum evaluation and reform to measure

learning and to keep academic entities accountable for the growth of that learning. Many

undergraduate majors already have defined competencies that are needed for assessing

what students have learned throughout their degree programs. One example is the

architecture major, where the National Architecture Accreditation Board has defined 37

competencies (student performance criteria) used to review curriculum within

architecture programs. Architecture programs use those competencies to develop a

matrix of courses offered with their related competencies which are met by the

curriculum. Industry and academia also use competencies to define the skills within the

major and positions within a company (Keech, 1998; Kochanski, 1997). Competencies

have also been used to describe student growth in a course within a distance education

program (Dooley and Linder, 2002).

In the United States, the Horticulture undergraduate major has no defined set of

national competencies and currently does not have an accreditation organization that

reviews these programs. In the 1980s, the American Society of Horticulture Science

created a curriculum committee to review curriculum for the major and determine its

relevancy (Hegwood and Merritt, 1987). From this committee, a summary of core

requirements was established for a certified horticulturist designation. The requirements

included required courses in the degree program as well as a minimum of five years of

experience in the field. These efforts at creating core requirements fell short of setting

course content and required skills needed within the horticulture field (Certified


2

Professional Horticulturist Bulletin). Completion of a competency based curriculum for

the horticulture major would facilitate unity in horticulture programs and provide

assurance to industry professionals of the educational background potential employees

have acquired.

Statement of the Problem

The purpose of this study is to develop a competency-based curriculum for the

horticulture undergraduate major using a national Delphi study to gather input from

horticultural experts in academia and industry.

Objectives

The first objective of this study is to describe a set standard of competencies

needed for a bachelor’s degree in general horticulture. The second objective is to

develop an associated instrument to assess the competencies of horticulture students and

their progress in the competencies to measure learning outcomes.

Definition of Terms

Accreditation- public recognition that an institution or program meets the accrediting

agency’s established requirements (Baker, 2004).

Assessment- the systematic collection, review and use of information about educational

programs undertaken for the purpose of improving student learning and

development (Palomba and Banta, 1999).


3

Competency- ability (including knowledge, skills and or attitudes) to perform a specific

set of related task successfully to meet a specified standard (Chamberlain, 1992).

Curriculum- an intentional design for learning negotiated by faculty in light of their

specialized knowledge and in the context of social expectations and students’

needs (Toombs and Tierney, 1995).

Curriculum evaluation- judgments applied to assessment efforts of the curriculum

(Ratcliff, 1997).

Delphi Method- a structured process for collecting and distilling knowledge from a group

of experts by means of a series of questionnaires interspersed with controlled

opinion feedback (Alder and Ziglio, 1996).

General Horticulture- the science and art of producing nutritious food crops (fruit, nuts

and vegetables) and landscape plants (flowers, ornamentals and landscape plants)

(adapted from Preece and Read, 1993).

Student Learning Outcome - “statements describing what students should know,

understand, and be able to do with their knowledge when they graduate” (Huba &

Freed, 2000, p. 9)

Delimitations and Limitations of the Study

This study was delimited to horticulture educators within four-year institutions of higher

education in the United States. Sample size was also delimited to horticulture educators

considered as the expert in curriculum/assessment within their department.

This research design resulted in the following limitations. Opinions of the experts

represented a population of the United States horticulture educators and cannot be


4

generalized as opinions of over the total population of horticulture educators. List of

horticulture competencies was from previous program assessments and expert educators

and this list may not be up to date. The study was further limited as a sample of four-year

programs, which does not represent community colleges and two-year institutions

offering horticulture courses within the United States.

Basic Assumptions

The first assumption is the researcher collected an extensive list of competencies

relevant to the general horticulture industry. A second assumption is the panel of experts

selected has knowledge of the most relevant competencies for the horticulture major.

Significance of the Problem

There has been no written standard for competencies required for a bachelor's

degree in horticulture in the United States. The results from this study provide general

horticulture program guidelines to assist with curriculum review with regards to

competencies deemed relevant by horticulture educators and industry professionals. The

results may be used as an assessment tool for evaluating a degree programs and making a

curriculum matrix with competencies vs. courses offered in the major.

Summary

The United States undergraduate horticulture programs have no accreditation

organization evaluating the quality and relevancy of the curriculum offered by individual

universities. Horticulture educators can take a proactive step implementing a curriculum


5

system to evaluate necessary knowledge and skills for the horticulture major. A national

Delphi-study was used to determine a set of necessary competencies. This survey

resulted in a guideline to assist with curriculum review by general horticulture programs

and the development of a curriculum matrix of competencies vs. courses offered by

individual programs.


6

CHAPTER II

LITERATURE REVIEW

Over the past twenty years, higher education in the United States has been

criticized of not delivering a quality education. The report “Integrity in the College

Curriculum: A report to the Academic Community” by the Association of American

Colleges and Universities (1985) describes the need for change within undergraduate

curriculum. This report concluded:

As for what passes as a college curriculum, almost anything goes. We

have reached a point which we are more confident about the length of

a college education than its content and purpose. Indeed, the major in

most colleges is little more than a gathering of courses taken in one

department, lacking structure and depth, as is often the case in the

humanities and social sciences, or emphasizing content to the neglect

of the essential style of inquiry on which the content is based, as is too

frequently true in the natural and physical sciences. (p.2)

The undergraduate horticulture program as a whole in the United States has no

guidelines as to what constitutes the horticulture major. This chapter provides evidence

for the main assumption that a competency-based curriculum is needed for the

horticulture major. The following sections are: a) Theoretical Framework, b) History of

the Horticulture major, c) Evaluation of Horticulture Curriculum, d) Competency-based

Education, e) Delphi- Technique, and, f) Summary of the Literature.


7

Theoretical Framework

Functional Context Theory

The principle of Competency Based-Curriculum (CBC) can first be explained by

the Functional Context Theory. This theory approaches the idea of making instruction as

relevant and meaningful as possible in terms of the learner’s prior knowledge. Materials

used by the learner will be similar to the “real world” and enhance the transfer of

knowledge. The cognitive system is the model underlying this approach of learning.

Cognition can be defined as “the act or process of knowing in the broadest sense:

specifically, and intellectual process by which knowledge is gained from perception or

ideas” (Webster’s Dictionary). There are three interaction components within this model:

1) a knowledge base 2) processing skills including language, problem-solving and

learning strategies and 3) information displays that present information. The Functional

Context Theory was developed by Thomas Sticht specifically for adult technical and

literacy training in military programs but has other applications for learning skills in

general. The Functional Context Theory is the basis for major workplace training and

literacy programs sponsored by the Department of Education (Kearsley, 1994).

Science Model

A simplified model for science curriculum by Gott and Mashiter (1991) breaks

down the cognitive system needed to solve a problem, involving interaction of conceptual

and procedural understanding. The model in Figure 1 divides the understanding of

knowledge into facts and skill. This may also be applied to a competency-based

curriculum for science fields as the fundamental basis of what types of knowledge are


8

necessary to adequately cover scientific problems. The horticulture major is an applied

science and the factors of conceptual and procedural understanding affect the type of

competencies needed for the horticulture major as a branch of science.

Solve problems

Cognitive processes

Conceptual understanding

Procedural understanding

Facts Skills

Figure 1. A model for Science (based on Gott and Mashiter, 1991) Curriculum Development and Review

Curriculum Development refers to the process of decision as to what elements go

into an educational program for both instruction and learning (Schubert, 1986). Schellede

and Lepisto (1984) describe curriculum development as a continual process. In this

model, there are four major areas which initiate the curriculum development process:

faculty philosophy and objectives, faculty resources, competitive analysis and

marketplace needs.


9

History of Horticulture in the U.S.

The Compact Oxford English Dictionary defines horticulture as, “the art or

practice of garden cultivation and management” (2007). The word horticulture is based

from the Latin word Hortus, (a garden) and cultura (cultivation). George Acquash (1999,

p XXX ) defines modern horticulture as, “the science and art of cultivating fruits

vegetables and ornamental plants.” Horticulture began in the U.S. with Native Americans

as the original inhabitants, growing vegetables for survival. The Spaniards introduced

most of the European plants, while the French, Dutch, and Swedes brought over their

favorite edible plants as well as ornamentals. However, the British greatly influenced the

early inhabitants with knowledge of growing methods in agriculture and horticulture

(Hedrick, 1950). George Washington and Thomas Jefferson are well known for their

enthusiasm for gardening with flowers, shrubs, and trees creating a park-like setting. The

average American did not have time for pleasure gardening and great ornamental gardens

were often under the care of European gardeners.

When America began growing in population and wealth after the Civil war, the

change brought more leisure time to spend on interests such as horticulture. Leading

horticulturist visited Europe to keep in touch with new developments and bring in new

exotic plants. American breeders had more access to create improved varieties from

vegetables to ornamentals. This wealth of new plant material became known through

various channels, such as gardening magazines and books. These sources include the

latest scientific data on plant culture, diseases, soils, and insect pests (Ravenswaay,

1977).


10

Modern horticulture has made many advances in the way crops and other plants

are produced, with increased productivity per acre, mechanization, and the ability to grow

large acreages of plants. This growth and diversity in horticulture may be recognized by

the broad specialty areas which include fruit culture, vegetable culture, ornamental

horticulture, and landscape architecture. In academia, Landscape Architecture is

frequently considered to be its own discipline and will not be considered under

horticulture in this report. Allied industries that are directly involved in horticulture

include the nursery and seed industries. These industries constitute the bulk of

employers for the general horticulture major (Acquaah, 1999).

Horticulture Curriculum

National standards have not been defined for an undergraduate degree in the

horticulture major. In the U.S. faculty within a department usually decide on the

curriculum for the horticulture degree. The American Society for Horticulture Science

(ASHS, 2007) developed core requirements through the horticultural certification

committee. This certification is available to individuals who possess a bachelor’s degree

for an accredited university and have five years of professional work experience in the

industry. The core requirements for the Certified Professional Horticulturist are written

in the Certified Horticulturist bulletin and described in Table 1.

Competency-Based Education

A group of educational authors defined competency-based education (CBE) as

the:


11

…form of education that derives a curriculum from a specification

of a set of outcomes-general and specific-and the means by which

they will be assessed that faculty, students, and interested third

parties can make reasonable objective judgments with respect to

student achievement or non-achievement of these outcomes; that

tends to conceive learning experiences in terms of these outcomes;

and that certifies student progress on the basis of demonstrated

achievement of these outcomes (Grant, 1979, p. 5-6).

Competency based education (CBE) is a ‘systems approach’ to curriculum design

and instruction developed out of the work of Ralph Tyler (1949). Tyler describes

education as a purposeful activity with schools having defined goals and then using these

goals for what is taught and evaluated to measure students learning (Toohey, 1999).

Table 1. Summary of Core Requirements for Horticulture Certification in ASHS Professional Core Course Hours Plant Physiology 3 Sem. Hrs.-4 Qtr. Hrs. Horticulture Crops 12 Sems. Hrs.-16 Qtr. Hrs. Plant Management/Plant Production 6 Sem. Hrs. -9 Qtr. Hrs. Biology 3 Sems. Hrs.-4Qtr. Hrs. Genetics 3 Sem. Hrs.-4 Qtr. Hrs. Soil Science 3 Sem. Hrs.-4 Qtr. Hrs. Chemistry 8 Sem. Hrs.-4 Qtr. Hrs. Total Professional Core Required 41 Sems. Hrs.-57 Qt. Hrs. Supporting Core Horticultural Specialization 6 Sem. Hrs.-9Qtr. Hrs. Mathematics 3 Sem. Hrs.-4Qtr. Hrs. Communications 6 Sem. Hrs.-9 Qtr. Hrs.

CBE had a prominent influence on college curriculum during the 1960’s when a

push began to be made for measured learning outcomes (Fincher, 1985). This effort was


12

to ensure college graduates where competent in the subjects encompassed in their degree

plan. At least nine national reports came out in 1983 that addressed the curricular needs

of secondary schools, showing that quality education had become a matter of public

policy and debate. The theme of each report defined a major concern for academic

competence and its decline over a twenty-year time frame. The College Board took

action in its Educational Equality Project specifying basic academic competencies all

college students should have at the time they enter college (Fincher, 1985).

In 1985, the Corporate-Higher Education Forum, a Canadian organization,

commissioned the Making the Match program to investigate the skill development of

university students and graduates. The result of this research is a common language of

general skills needed by college and university graduates for lifelong learning and

employability. The skills are grouped into four base competencies: managing self,

communicating, managing people and tasks, and mobilizing innovation and change

(Evers, 1998).

The accreditation of universities and specific programs are examples of the CBE.

The Accrediting Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) established eleven

learning outcomes for engineering and technology graduates (Association of American

Colleges and Universities, 2004). Similarly, students preparing to become pharmacists

must learn to think critically, communicate effectively, evaluate ethical issues, develop

people skills and acquire the means for continuous learning, as well as, learn specific

technical knowledge about chemical compounds and their impact on the human body.

Regional accreditations are now requiring assessment of desired student outcomes as a

central part of their process (Association of American Colleges and Universities, 2004).


13

Defined student learning outcomes is a measuring tool for institutional

effectiveness and accountability. However, institutionally generated outcomes are

general and are usually outputs of retention and graduation rates. Educational

expectations should be identified by creating objectives and standards within the core

curriculum through school or college policy programs, departmental plans and finally in

course syllabi (Dugan, 2004).

Delphi Technique

The Delphi technique uses an expert panel with several rounds of specific

questions to arrive at a group consensus on a particular subject. The methodology is an

advantageous survey technique as it allows the researcher to have respondents reach

group consensus without the high costs associated with focus group research, while still

maintaining anonymity of the participants. The Delphi technique provides a systematic

approach using group decision making for assessing particular needs, forecasting trends

or arriving at a consensus (Keech, 1998). Benefits of the Delphi method are generation of

ideas/problem solving by known experts in the field and evaluation of others’ ideas

(Delbecq et al., 1975).

This technique was first used during the 1950s by the Rand Corporation to obtain

reliable consensus from a group of experts. This study was for the U.S. Air Force, from

the perspective of a Soviet strategic planner, what would constitute an optimal industrial

target in the U.S. and then estimate the number of A-Bombs necessary to complete its

destruction (Keech, 1998). Seven experts were given a series of five questionnaires

submitted at weekly intervals, with interviews following the first and third questionnaires


14

with each of the respondents. This allowed for the development of opinion without being

overly influenced by other’s participants. The Delphi technique was offered as a

plausible research methodology to generate group decision making, however, there were

weaknesses in this first study. Some members of the panel had contact with other

members due to work projects, thus violating anonymity. In addition, there was the

possibility of the presence of leading questions and answers inadvertently presented by

the researchers as they gathered the information supplied by the respondents (Keech,

1998).

The first round in this type of survey is usually initiated by a thorough literature

search and personal interviews (Centron, 1969). In each of the following several rounds,

the Delphi survey develop towards a greater consensus of opinion ultimately providing a

statistical summary of the group responses (Weatherman and Swenson, 1974). One

concept is that it is not obvious there are rounds and after each round, the survey is

adjusted and resent for further input.

Delphi research is commonly used for policy decisions and research priorities, but

Murry and Hammons (1985) explained that the Delphi method is used in higher

education to develop goals and objectives, improve curriculum, assist in strategic

planning, and develop criteria. It is specifically used in defining competencies for

undergraduate curriculum. Bailey-Evans (1994) performed a national Delphi study to

define the competencies that should be included in a model curriculum for agriculture

communications. In this study, the researcher designed a three-round modified Delphi

technique from a panel of experts within a selection of professional organizations. Keech

(1998) also used a three round Delphi technique for determining competencies desired for


15

entry-level retail management positions, with expert panel sample consisting of corporate

recruiters from retail organizations in the U.S. This technique is a cost-effective and

accurate method to arrive at a group consensus on the identification of specific

competencies (Keech, 1998).

Summary of Literature Review

Curriculum development of an undergraduate horticulture degree program needs

to be relevant, up to date, and have a process of evaluation to ensure quality is delivered

to the students. A competency-based curriculum is an approach many technical fields are

moving to in order to provide a quality relevant education. Figure 2 shows a curriculum

development model linking the connection between functional theory, the science model,

and curriculum development for producing a competency-based curriculum. Functional

Context Theory is the basis for having a relevant curriculum that states real world

examples are necessary for an efficient curriculum (Kearsley, 1994). This is especially

true with general horticulture, an applied science that involves many hands-on skills and

facts. The science model influences the content of the curriculum, outlining the

necessary knowledge needed to develop critical thinking involving both skill and facts as

the medium (Gott and Mashiter, 1991).

A curriculum needs to have identified objectives, as well as skills, that will be

obtained by completion of the program. The Curriculum Development model includes

the following four components of decision making for curriculum development: faculty

philosophy and objectives, faculty resources, competitive analysis and marketplace needs

(Schellede and Lepisto, 1984).


16

Figu

re 2

. Th

eore

tical

Fra

mew

ork

conn

ects

Fun

ctio

nal C

onte

xt T

heor

y an

d Sc

ienc

e M

odel

to C

ompe

tenc

y B

ased

Cur

ricul

um.

Com

pete

ncy-

Bas

ed C

urric

ulum

Scie

nce

Mod

el

Facu

lty P

hilo

soph

y an

dO

bjec

tives

Facu

lty R

esou

rces

Com

petit

ive

Ana

lysi

s

Mar

ketp

lace

N

eeds

Func

tiona

l Con

text

The

ory

Com

pete

ncy-

Bas

ed C

urric

ulum

Scie

nce

Mod

el

Facu

lty P

hilo

soph

y an

dO

bjec

tives

Facu

lty R

esou

rces

Com

petit

ive

Ana

lysi

s

Mar

ketp

lace

N

eeds

Func

tiona

l Con

text

The

ory


17

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

This methodology chapter contains the following sections: 1) Research Design,

2) Selection of Sample, 3) Pilot Survey, 4) Delphi-Survey, 5) Conditions of Testing, 6)

Confidentiality, 7) Bias, 8) Validity and Reliability, 9) Procedures of Data Analysis 10)

Coding of Demographics, 11) Budget and Timeline, and 12) Assessment of Student

Competency Skills .

Research Design

The research design consisted of a three-round Delphi method technique. The

Delphi method technique used in this study consisted of a sequential series of

questionnaires sent to a panel of horticulture undergraduate educators involved in general

horticulture. A pilot study was conducted to insure face and content validity in the

Round I questionnaire design. The first round of the Delphi study ranked competencies

in the questionnaire and identifying new competencies. A competency had to receive a

score of 75% importance to remain on the list of competencies for the horticulture

undergraduate major. Any competencies not receiving a score of 75% importance was

removed from the questionnaire. The Round II questionnaire consisted of new

competencies added by the participant’, high ranking scores from Round I questionnaire,

and a new section with ranking the main topics of the competencies. The Round III

questionnaire contained new competencies from Round II and showed all rankings from

Round I and II questionnaires. Previously eliminated competencies were included in


18

Round III upon request by a few participants. The Round III questionnaire was the final

round of ranking the competencies without the option of adding any new competencies.

Selection of Sample

The population for this study was comprised of general horticulture leaders from

specific horticulture professional organizations within the United States. The total

number of current horticulture programs is approximately 100 as determined by Childers

(1989). Sample for the expert panel consisted of horticulture educators for Round I, II,

and III (n=22, 19, and 17), to represent a range of horticulture programs. A recruitment

letter was emailed to the department head of each Horticulture program that had an

available email (Appendix A). Individual department heads were requested to forward

the email to the individual within the department identified by their department heads as

being experts in higher education curriculum in the discipline of horticulture. Panel

members would accept being apart of the study by sending an email to the researcher.

Another letter was then emailed with the hyperlink to Round I of the survey (Appendix

B). Only during the first round of the survey were non-respondents contacted to increase

participation. Non-respondents were first contacted by email (Appendix C), and then by

phone. Upon contacting the non-respondents by email and then by phone, an additional

three participants were added to Round I. The sample increased from 19 to 22 panel

members.


19

Outcome Measures

The Delphi technique was used in the study, consisting of a three-round design.

The instrument was a redesigned questionnaire using a list of competencies from Iowa

State’s Horticulture Assessment Survey (Appendix D), and “Making the Match

Questionnaire on Skills” (Evers et al., 1998.) Dr. Ann VanDerZanden was contacted in

for permission to use the Iowa State Assessment Survey for forming the survey

instrument (VanDerZanden, 2005). Fredrick Evers was contacted by phone and email

with no response. The survey instrument used a Likert-type scale five-subject ranking of

very important, important, neutral, unimportant, and very unimportant.

Pilot Survey

A pilot survey was administered to a selection of faculty from other universities to

evaluate content, face validity and clarity of the first round questionnaire. The sample of

participants for the pilot test questionnaire (n= 6) were horticulture educators from Texas

Tech University, Texas A&M University, Arkansas, Iowa State University, and Utah

State University. The criteria for the participants were experience in horticulture

education, higher education, or educational surveys.

Delphi Survey

Round I

The Round I questionnaire consisted of two main sections (Appendix C). The

first section consisted of a list of disciplines defined in the ASHS Certified Professional

Horticulturist Application Booklet (ASHS, 2007) as educational areas necessary for


20

certification. Disciplines were placed in three groups: 1) Technical Knowledge:

Horticulture, 2) Technical Knowledge: Life Science, 3) Professional Skills. Thirty-five

competencies from the Iowa State outcomes assessment survey were modified, and

included in three groupings. “Making the match” questionnaire was used for eight

competencies under the subject Decision Making and Visioning (Fredrick et al., 1998).

Competencies were added and reworded under each section by the researcher and pilot

study panelists. After the pilot survey, a total of 25 disciplines and 97 competencies were

added to Round I.

For Round I, panel members were asked to evaluate each competency listed

concerning importance to the horticulture undergraduate program. The response choices

used a five point likert-type scale consisted of the following choices: 5=Very Important;

4=Important; 3=Neutral; 2=Unimportant; 1=Very Unimportant. After the end of each

section, a comment box was provided for any new competencies the panelist wanted to

add, or suggestions for changing an existing competency (Bailey-Evans, 1994; Keech,

1998).

The second section contained 13 demographic questions asking about the

respondent’s personal/professional characteristics and university’s characteristics and

current assessment measures. The responses in this section were made by checking

appropriate boxes next to the given choices as well as items with a space for open-ended

responses.


21

Round II

The Round II questionnaire was developed from the data complied from Round I

and was used to determine the identified curriculum areas (Appendix D). Only

competencies that had 75% of the rank Very Important (5), and Important (4) were

included. The format for Round II was similar to part B of the first round, with the same

disciplines with new added competencies by the panel members. However, results of

Round I were given in each section to inform the panel member of what decisions had

been made. The purpose of Round II was to approve new competencies added by the

group and to have them give their opinion on the results from Round I. Round II

contained a section for rating the 25 major disciplines. These items also utilized a likert-

type scale of importance. (Bailey-Evans, 1994; Keech, 1998).

Round III

Round III was the final collection of the respondent’s opinions for disciplines and

competencies deemed important for a horticulture baccalaureate curriculum. The

percentage of respondents who marked “important” or “very important” for each item in

Round II was listed beside each discipline area and competencies. Each item that did not

have 75% importance rating had the word cut next to the competency, representing that it

would be eliminated from the curriculum list. A space was provided at the bottom of

each item for the participants to explain reasons for disagreement (Bailey-Evans, 1994;

Keech, 1998).


22

Each round of the Delphi questionnaire was administered through email. The

questionnaire was developed in SelectSurveyASP 8.1.1 (ClassApps.com, 2004) and an

email with a hyperlink attached was sent to each panel member.

Conditions of Testing

The Delphi-method survey took place over a six month period to administer and

collect data. The pilot study and amending the survey for Round I took approximately

one month. Each round was given one month for total completion. The panel members

were given two weeks to complete the survey and email it back to the researcher. The

data was then analyzed to make amendments for the next survey round.

The panelists were given a detailed cover letter explaining the research, time

frame, steps in the process, and benefits of the study. An email was given at the

beginning of the initial week of the survey and as a reminder of the deadline each week

until it was completed by the panelist.

Confidentiality

Procedures were developed to maintain privacy between the panel members in

this research study. A research proposal containing a copy of the survey instrument and

recruitment letter was sent to the University Human Subjects Committee and the

projected was approved by the committee. Survey completion by panel member was

tracked by a separate web-link from the questionnaire where the participants entered their

name. The purpose of the separate web-link was to maintain separation of the survey

results from the individual panel member, while obtaining confirmation of which panel


23

members actually completed the survey. Once a round was completed, if the panel

member did not participate they were not included in further rounds.

Bias

Bias is ,“the tendency for some extraneous factor to affect the answers to survey

questions or the survey results in genera, in a systematic way, so that results are “pushed”

or “pulled” in some specific direction” (Alreck and Settle, 1995, p.442). To reduce the

amount of bias present in this study, the population of four-year colleges with a

horticulture degree were attempted to be found through Childers survey review (1989)

and 68 identifiable programs were contacted by the researcher.

Non-response bias can be a serous problem as some demographic groups may be

over represented or under represented when many individuals fail to respond. After the

second email/ phone call, 22 panel members were obtained from the 68 programs, a

response rate of 32%. Sheehan (2001) reported the average response rate of 31-36% for

email surveys. The response rate was deemed sufficient to continue the Delphi-study.

Validity and Reliability

Validity and reliability of the survey instrument is based on the use of previously

tested survey instruments, pilot survey and sampling of population. Alreck and Settle

define validity as, “The degree to which the survey data or results are free from both

systematic bias and random error” (1995, p.457). Reliability is defined “The degree to

which the results are free from random error, as opposed to systematic bias, often

expressed in terms of confidence intervals or confidence levels (Alreck and Settle, 1995,


24

p.453). The instrument was modified from two existing instruments that had previously

been tested. The modified survey instrument was reviewed by two horticulture experts,

piloted by six horticulture education experts to confirm construct validity and reliability.

The entire identified population of horticulture programs were included in the emailing

list, resulting in a reduction of sampling error. This reduction allows for a high level of

validity and reliability in the results of the survey.

Procedures for Analysis of Data

SelectSurveyASP Advanced 8.1.1 was the software used for the Competency

Delphi Survey data was exported from the email survey to an excel spreadsheet. Data

from each round was downloaded to excel spreadsheet format. Data was analyzed using

SPSS 15.0 (SPSS, Inc, 2007). Delphi and Student Survey Data were ordinal in nature.

Non-parametric techniques are used when the data are ordinal and not numeric (Siegal,

1956). Descriptive statistics used were frequencies and percentages. Kruskal-Wallis was

used to analyze differences in independent variables among groups. The Kruskal-Wallis

test is a one-way analysis of variance by ranks. The null hypothesis is tested if multiple

independent samples come from the same population. Unlike a standard parametric

ANOVA, normality is not assumed, which allows this test to be used for ordinal variables

(SPSS, 2007). Kruskal-Wallis assumes that the variable under study has an underlying

continuous variable. Statistics given in a Kruskal-Wallis test are frequency, mean rank,

chi-square and Asymptotic significance. Significant level for determining statistical

difference between groupings mean ranks was p < .05.


25

Coding of Demographic Data

Demographic independent variables were coded for grouping into more concise

categories. All groups were coded and agreed upon by two researchers. Panel member

bachelor degrees were categorized in the two groups: 1) Horticulture and 2) Biological

Science. These groups were then analyzed for difference of bachelors and possible

affects on ranking of competencies using Kruskal-Wallis. Horticulture degrees that were

grouped under horticulture were Horticulture/Turf Management, Landscape, Floriculture,

Ornamental Horticulture, Forestry, Plant Science. Other Bachelor degrees were the

following: Mathematics, Biology, Zoology, Philosophy/Liberal Arts, and

Botany/Chemistry. Master’s degrees were grouped as Horticulture and Biological

Science, and Ph.D.’s were grouped as Horticulture and Plant Science. Departmental

degree offerings were also grouped from panel members’ descriptions. Some panel

members would give course offerings and specializations. These would be grouped

under a horticulture degree. Other degrees were coded in the categories of Production,

Environmental, Landscape/Turf, and Plant Science.

Budget and Timeline

The survey instrument was designed by the researcher requiring time and labor,

but no direct costs were incurred. SelectSurveyASP Advanced software with web survey

capability was provided by the Teaching, Learning and Technology Center at Texas Tech

University. Other facilities such as computer access, e-mail access and office facilities

were provided by the university.


26

The time required to conduct the study included four months to do background

research, develop the survey and administer the pilot survey. Round I was launched on

March 8, 2006 and ended April 28, 2006. Round I survey was extended to recruit non-

respondents and increase sample-size. Round II survey was launched on March 1, 2006

and ended on March 19, 2006. Round III was launched May 31, 2006 and ended June

20, 2006. Total time for the administering the Delphi-method survey was four months.

Panel members were given a final report of the results in July 2006.

Assessment of Student Competency Skills

Upon completion of the Horticulture Competency Skill Set, students in a senior

capstone course were tested with a modified Student Evaluation survey. Sampling size

was 20 students, 12 Horticulture Majors and 8 Agronomy Majors. The student

evaluation survey had all competencies put in alphabetical order, not by type of discipline

(Appendix H). Students were given a likert-scale of high ability = 2, adequate ability =1

and no ability = 0. Students were given 45 minutes to complete the survey. Data from

the survey was analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis test and are reported in Chapter IV.


27

CHAPTER IV

FINDINGS

The purpose of this study was to describe competencies for the horticulture

undergraduate curriculum, using input from a sample of horticulture educators actively

involved in improvement of curriculum. In the findings of the national Delphi survey,

the following questions were analyzed:

1. What characteristics are found in horticulture educators considered as experts in

curriculum and assessment? To determine this, demographic questions from Round I

were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Descriptions of educational level, type of

education, major type, gender, age, years of teaching, and departmental size are

provided in tables 3-6.

2. Is there any difference in the participants or horticulture program that would indicate

a difference in opinion? To identify difference between panel members, the

independent variables of age, teaching position, bachelor’s degree (Horticulture and

other), and department size were analyzed using the Krusckal-Wallis test. Kruskal-

Wallis test showed no significant difference between these groups.

3. What disciplines and competencies are considered important in being included in a

curriculum for horticulture as identified by horticulture curriculum experts? In order

to answer this question, panel member’s rankings of the disciplines and competencies

are described in percentage of importance. Figures 3-28 describe the disciplines and

competencies according to the percentage of importance by the Delphi-survey panel

members.


28

4. What are the current forms of assessment at the participating educational programs?

The answer to this question was determined by an open-ended question in Round I.

This question was, “If your department participates in outcomes assessment, what are

your current methods of assessing learning outcomes.” Panel members’ answers of

departmental assessment are described in Table 8.

5. Is there a difference skill between groupings of horticulture and agronomy students

on the Horticulture Competency Skill survey? Students’ self-evaluation survey of

skill was analyzed by grouping by the majors Agronomy and Horticulture using the

Kruskal-Wallis test. Departmental students’ ratings of skill on the Competency Skill

Survey are given in Table 10.

Round I Instrument: Characteristics of Panel Members

Round 1 of the Delphi study was mailed to the 22 respondents who agreed to

participant in this study. Panel member locations and academic affiliations are presented

in Table 2. Eighteen states were represented in the National Horticulture Competencies

Delphi Survey.


29

Table 2. Location and work area for each Delphi Study panel member identifying competencies in the U.S. horticulture baccalaureate degree. N=22

Academic Area University Affiliation LocationHorticulture and Crop Division University of Arizona Tucson, AZ

Horticulture and Crop Science California Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo, CA

Environmental Horticulture (2)

University of California, Davis Davis, CA

Plant & Soil Science University of Delaware Newark, DEHorticulture Science Florida Southern College Lakeland, FLHorticulture University of Georgia Athens, GATropical Plant and Soil Science University of Hawaii, Manoa Honolulu, HI

Agriculture Illinois State University Normal, ILHorticulture Iowa State University Ames, IAAgriculture Murray State University Murray, KY

Plant & Soil Sciences Mississippi State University Mississippi State, MSDepartment of Agriculture, Biology, Chemistry and Physics

Lincoln University Jefferson City, MO

Plant Sciences & Plant Pathology Montana State University Bozeman, MT

Agronomy & Horticulture University of Nebraska Lincoln, NEHorticulture Cornell University Ithaca, NYNatural Resources and Experimental Design

North Carolina A&T University Greensboro, NC

Horticulture Pennsylvania State University University, PA

Horticulture, Forestry and Landscape Parks

South Dakota State University Brookings, SD

Agriculture Sam Houston State University Huntsville, TX

Agriculture Texas State University San Marcos, TXPlant, Soil Science and Biometerology Utah State University Logan,UT


30

Characteristics of the panel members are described to show qualifications, and

consider the application of homogenous qualities within the sample population. A small

sample of 10 to 15 respondents is adequate for a sample when the group is homogeneous

(Ferguson, 2000). In analyzing highest education degree achieved, 19 of the panel

members (86.3%) received their doctorate, with six continuing on with a post-doctorate.

Three member’s highest education level was a Masters degree (13.6%). Horticulture is

central tendency for all three degree levels with over 77% of the participants earning their

B.S. and M.S. in horticulture and more than 50% achieving their Ph.D. in horticulture

(Table 3). All doctoral degrees were obtained in a plant science related field with 12 of

the 19 obtaining their doctorate specifically in Horticulture.

Table 3. Frequency of degree levels of the Delphi Study panel members identifying competencies in the U.S. horticulture baccalaureate degree. Degree

Frequency

(N=22) Percent

Central

Tendency Bachelor's Horticulture 17 77.3 Horticulture Other 5 22.7 Master's Horticulture 17 77.3 Horticulture Biological Science 5 22.7 PhD Horticulture 12 54.5 Horticulture Plant Soil Science 7 31.8 None 3 13.6

The respondents for this study were predominantly male with 18 of the 22 panel

members identifying they were male. Age was ranked in 10 year increments with 50% of

the panel members identifying themselves between the ages of 51-60 (Table 4).


31

Table 4. Frequency distribution of gender and 10-year age spans of the Delphi Study panel members identifying competencies in the U.S. horticulture baccalaureate degree.

Personal Characteristic

Frequency (N=22)

Percent

Central Tendency

Gender Female 3 13.6 Male 18 81.8 Male

No Answer 1 4.5

Age 31-40 3 13.6 41-50 6 27.3 51-60 11 50.0 51-60 61-70 2 9.1

Teaching characteristics in Table 5 show 17 of the 22 panel members had over ten

years experience, with nine of them having over 21 years of teaching experience.

Averaging teaching load over a two year period is 2.5 classes in a lower division subjects

and 4.5 in higher division courses.

Table 5. The current position and years of teaching for the Delphi Study panel members

identifying competencies in the U.S. horticulture baccalaureate degree.

Teaching Characteristics

Frequency

(N=22)

Percent

Central Tendency

Current Position Instructor 3 13.6 Assistant Professor 6 27.3 Assistant Professor Associate Professor 3 13.6 Full Professor 6 27.3 Full Professor Chair 4 18.2 Years of Teaching 1-9 5 22.7 10-20 8 36.4 21+ 9 40.9 21+


32

Round I Instrument: Institution and Department Characteristics

The number of years the departments had participated in assessment varied

dramatically. The number of departments that had not participated in assessment was

27.3% with 22.7% having participated in assessment between 1-5 years. The central

tendency for the group was 6-20 year span of years of assessment, representing 31.8% of

the responding participants. Four panelist, representing 18.2% of the total panel, chose

not to respond to this demographic question.

Panel member’s institutional student population were distributed in the categories

of 1,000-15,000 students, 15,000-25,000 students, and 25,000-75,000 students with

similar frequencies of seven (31.4%), eight (36.4) and seven (31.4%), respectively. The

average panel member was affiliated with an institution with a student population of

15,000-20,000. Department size frequencies were eight (0-50 students, 36.4%), five (50-

100 students, 22.7%), eight (100-200 students, 36.4%) and one panel member made no

response. The average department size average was either large at 100-200 students or

small at 0-50 students.

Table 6. The department degree offerings for the Delphi Study panel members identifying competencies in the U.S. horticulture baccalaureate degree.

Department Degrees Offered Frequency Percentage Central Tendency Horticulture 18 81.8 Horticulture Production 3 13.6 Environmental 3 13.6 Landscape/Turf 3 13.6 Plant Science 3 13.6

Eighteen of the twenty-two panel member’s departments offered an

undergraduate degree in Horticulture. Other degrees offered were narrowed down to the

categories of Production, Environmental, and Landscape/Turf. Twelve of the 22 panel


33

members had some experience with assessment in their department. The average was 6-

20 years of experience with departmental assessment.

Table 7. Department assessment responsibilities for the Delphi Study panel members

identifying competencies in the U.S. horticulture baccalaureate degree. Assessment Responsibilities Frequency Percentage

Round 1 Survey Options Teach classes 22 100.0 Student Advisor 18 81.8 Coordinate course offerings 14 63.6 Handle institution documentation with course offering 14 63.3 Submit content description 11 50.0 Coordinate peer reviews 7 31.8 Coordinate internship/co-op experience for students 7 31.8 Supervise student evaluation of faculty 4 18.2 Counsel teaching faculty on methodology 4 18.2

Frequencies of assessment responsibilities of the panel members are displayed in

Table 8. Assessment responsibility with the highest frequency was teaching classes,

followed by being a student advisor. Another main duty of most of the panel was

handling course offerings and institutional documentation of courses. A comment box

was given for any other duties they felt would be part of the assessment process. Other

assessment type mentioned in the open comment box with a 1 panel member frequency

(4.5%) were the following, (1) Coordinate international exchange program, (2) Faculty

senate chair, (3) Curriculum committee, (4) Enterprise project advisor, (5) Manage

horticulture program, (6) Create new majors, (7) Counsel undergraduate research project,

(8) Prepare assessment document, (9) Coordinate assessment for College, and (10) Off-

campus and Director of Horticulture Program. Two panel members (9%) also listed club

advisor as a responsibility they considered to be assessment. It was surprising that only


34

one panel member mentioned dealing with the actual documentation and coordination of

the assessment process in the comment section.

Table 8. Types of Departmental Assessments for the Delphi Study panel members identifying competencies in the U.S. horticulture baccalaureate degree.

Types of Assessment Frequency Percentage Graduate exit interviews 3 13.6Employer surveys 2 9.0Student evaluations 2 9.0Employer interviews 1 4.5Alumni interviews 1 4.5Program review 1 4.5Graduate follow up survey 1 4.5Selected upper division course assignments 1 4.5Exit exams 1 4.5Yearly evaluations 1 4.5Use of PEARL 1 4.5Pre/Post tests 1 4.5Pass rates on professional exams 1 4.5Senior capstone course 1 4.5

Table 9. Central tendency profile of panel member and affiliated academic institution

for the Delphi study identifying competencies in the U.S. horticulture baccalaureate degree.

Profile Central Tendency PercentageGender Male 81.8Age range 51-60 50.0Position Assistant Professor and Full Professor 27.3Degree PhD 63.6Degree type Horticulture 54.5Years of teaching 21+ 40.9Student population 15,000-25,000 36.4Department population 0-50 and 100-200 36.4Assessment years 6-20 31.8


35

Description of Round I, II, and III Discipline and Competency Results

Figures 3-28 describe the percentage of panel approval for every topic and

competency introduced in the Delphi Survey. Each figure summarizes the different

topics along with the competencies associated with that topic. The competencies for

Round I, II and III are separated on the y axis in sequential order and are designated by

separate colors. In addition, on each figure the red vertical line indicates the 75%

importance rating which was previously identified as the minimal level of acceptance to

remain on the curriculum list. This 75% acceptance level is a criteria frequently used for

Delphi Study work and is the result of pooling the top two categories together. In Round

I, the 75% importance level means that 17 out of the 22 participants voted either four or

five on the competency ranking for it to remain on the list. Round II had 20 panel

members requiring 15 panel members (75%) to rate the competency a four or five.

Round III had 17 members and the 75% agreement of required 13 out of 17 to score four

or five on the competency. Panel members requested previously eliminated

competencies be added a second time to Round III. These competencies have a red +

sign next to them indicating the competency was added back in Round III.

In Round I, 25 disciplines were introduced in the study in Round I and 17 of these

were approved (Figure 3). A total of 108 competencies were approved in Round III.

Topics and competencies were placed into the following three categories: 1) Horticulture

Technical Competencies, 2) Life Science Competencies and 3) Professional

Competencies. Horticulture Competencies had 41 competencies approved, the highest

number of all the categories. Life Science and Professional Competencies also


36

maintained a high level of acceptance with 34 and 33 competencies approved

respectively.

Horticulture Technical Competency Results

The following description covers Horticulture Technical competencies

determined by the survey to be important and these competencies are represented in

Figures 2-6. Figure 4 presents Plant identification topical approval rate of 100%. In

Round I, eight panelists made comments that the researcher consolidated into four new

competencies. Round III consisted of two competencies from Round 2 that were split into

two separate competencies each at the request of a panel member. The higher

competency rating of 82% and 94% compared to 80% in Round II indicates the panel

members agreed with the competency change. Overall, the three competencies that were

eliminated focused on taxonomy and the knowledge of dichotomous keys.

Field and Greenhouse Management discipline (Figure 5) had a 95 % approval

rating by the panel. All of these competencies were approved as important for the

horticulture major. Three field competencies and one greenhouse competency were

added in Round 2 from several panel members’ comments. In Round III, two panel

members requested the addition of these competencies.

Landscape management discipline (Figure 6) was approved by 100% of the panel

with only one competency eliminated with a 73% approval rating. Three competencies

were added in Round II from the comments of five panel members. In Round III, two

competencies were added from a single panel member’s comments.

Figure 7 indicates a high approval rating for Agriculture Chemicals (100%) and

all of the Agriculture Chemical competencies ranging from 85% to 100%. Four new


37

competencies were added in Round II from three panel members’ comments. One new

competency was added in Round III from a single panel member’s comments.

Figure 8 reveals a high approval for Technology (95%) with five competencies

being approved in the first round while two were removed with a 67% and a 73%

ranking. One additional competency was added in Round III from a panel member’s

comments and was approved with a 94% importance ranking.

Life Science Technical Competency Results

Biological Science was the first topic introduced in the Life Sciences topic area

(Figure 9). Biological Science’s importance rating as a topic was 90%, considered to be

very important, but lower than any of the horticulture topics. In all three Rounds, only

one competency was approved. This competency was “demonstrate fundamental

knowledge of biological science,” a very broad competency that changes with

interpretation. The competency that described understanding “cellular structure and

function” had an approval of 73%. Sixteen panel members considered cellular structure

to be an important knowledge competency, however, four of the panel members

considered it neutral and two others unimportant to the horticulture curriculum. Three

other members eliminated competencies dealing with using a microscope, plant ecology,

and plant taxonomy.

Physical science discipline had a low approval rating of 60%, indicating the topic

is not considered important in a horticulture undergraduate curriculum (Figure 10).

However, competencies were rated high at 77% to 91%. A possible reason for this could

be the competencies were rated in Round I, and the topics were ranked in Round II at the

end of the survey.


38

Plant Physiology discipline was ranked at 90% importance for the horticulture

curriculum (Figure 11). In Round I, six of seven competencies were approved with a

rating of 91-100%. Round II had three competencies added with 90-100% importance

ranking. Three more competencies were added in the third round from a single panel

member’s comments. Round III had one competency eliminatedregarding “selecting

plants for interior and landscape plantings”. This competency is similar to the

competency under the Landscape Management topic that expects students to “Recognize

appropriate placing for specific plants.” Reasons for this competency being cut may have

been repetition of a similar competency and incorrect placement under a topic.

Plant Genetics/Biotechnology discipline received a low importance rating of 65%,

however, three competencies had 82-90% approval (Figure 12). The approved

competencies dealt with broad knowledge of genetics, relationships with plant

improvement and understanding modern genetic engineering.

Plant Breeding discipline was given a low rating of 65% but had a similar trend as

Plant genetics in that two competencies were approved with a rating of 82-91% (Figure

13). The one competency that was eliminated in Round 1 was requested to appear again

in Round 3 by a panel member.

Abiotic, Biotic Factors were considered very important as a Life Science topic

with 100% approval (Figure 14). Three competencies were approved in Round I, with a

ranking of 86-100%. No new competencies were added after Round I.

The topic of Principles of Soils had a high rating of 100% approval as well

(Figure 15). The four competencies in Round I had importance rankings of 82-100%.

From two panel members’ comments, two new competencies were added in Round II


39

with 90% approval. All competencies passed the 75% importance rating in the Principles

of Soils topic.

Figure 16 shows Environmental Awareness discipline made the cut off point at

only 75% importance ranking. Two competencies were approved in Round I with

ranking of 91-96%. The competency cut with a 68% importance ranting in Round I dealt

with how humans are affected by environmental change. Round II had three new

competencies added from one panel member’s comments. Two of the three were

approved with a rating of 75-90%. Round III had one competency added from one panel

member with an approval of 77%.

Professional Competency Results

Writing/ Verbal Skills had a very high importance rating of 100% under

Professional competencies (Figure 17). All three competencies introduced in Round I

and Round 2 were ranked high from 95-100 %. No competencies were eliminated.

Research Skills scored very low in importance rating at 50% (Figure 18).

However, one competency in Round I and three competencies in Round III were

approved. Competencies introduced in Round III were similar to Round 1 with more

detailed.

Problem Solving Skills had a high importance ranking of 95% (Figure 19). Only

two competencies appeared in Round I for this topic, with rankings of 91 and 100%.

Decision-making skills had a very high importance of 100% for the horticulture

curriculum by all panel members (Figure 20). In Round I, five out of six competencies

were approved with a rating of 82-91%. The cut competency expected the student to

“identify political implications of the decision to be made.” Panel members may have


40

seen this competency as competency belonging in the general education curriculum

rather than horticulture. Another Decision-making competency was introduced in Round

II and ranked with 90% importance

The Leadership/collaborative Skills topic had a high approval of 90% (Figure 20).

Of the eight competencies introduced in all rounds, five had an approval of 77-91%. The

three competencies eliminated all dealt with group skills, motivation, conducting a

meeting and helping a group make a decision. Manager skills would incorporate these

group skills, which might be more important for an advanced degree, or training

considered to me given while working in the industry.

Professionalism had a high rating of 100% importance from the panel (Figure 22).

Round I had five competencies approved with a rating of 86-100%. Round II had two

competencies introduced from a single panel member. Both competencies were

eliminated with a 45-60% rating. In Round III, the competency that dealt with obtaining

an internship was approved with a rating of 94%.

Ethical/Professional Judgement was given a high rating of 90% (Figure 23). Five

competencies were introduced in Round I, with three having an importance rating from

77-91%. Two competencies that were cut dealt with moral issues.

Figure 24 describes Life learning skills, a topic with a low acceptance at the 85%

importance level. Two competencies in Round I were approved with 77-91% importance

rating and one competency in Round III. The competency in Round III dealt with finding

information on the Internet.

Global Perspective received a low ranking of 55% importance ranking (Figure

25). Four of the competencies that were eliminated in Round I were asked to be voted on


41

again by two panel members. None of the competencies were approved, although one

competency came close with rankings of 71% in Round I and 73% in Round III. This

competency dealt with a global perspective on environmental issues. All the

competencies voted on a second time were very close rankings from Round I to Round

III, with the largest difference being eight percentage points.

Historical perspective also received a low score of 37% importance in the

horticulture curriculum (Figure 26). Only one competency was under this topic and it

was eliminated the first round with a score of 45%. Two panel members requested this to

be reconsidered., The historical competency received a higher rating of 57% in Round

III, but did not have a high enough percentage to prevent being eliminated a second time.

Literature and Art was given a low ranking score of 35%, similar to Historical

Perspective (Figure 27). One competency was under this topic and it was eliminated with

41% importance rating. Two panel members requested this to be reconsidered and it

received a lower score of 35% in Round III.

Visioning received a ranking of 40% (Figure 28) and consisted of only one

competency. The competency “understand the scope of horticulture and its relation to

other disciplines” had an acceptable approval rating of 86%. The other three

competencies introduced in Round I were reconsidered in Round III upon request by two

panel members, however, they did not receive a high enough rating to be approved on the

final horticulture competency list.


42

Figu

re 3

. R

atin

gs o

f Top

ics t

o be

con

side

red

in th

e H

ortic

ultu

re C

urric

ulum

, as d

eter

min

ed b

y th

e N

atio

nal

Del

phi s

tudy

, with

thre

e su

bhea

ding

s of H

ortic

ultu

re, L

ife S

cien

ce a

nd P

rofe

ssio

nal.

020

40

60

80

100

% o

f Im

po

rtan

ce

Hort

icu

ltu

re

Pla

nt

Identification

Fie

ld a

nd G

reenhouse

Managem

ent

Landsc

ape M

anagem

ent

Agricultura

l Chem

icals

Technolo

gy

Lif

e S

cie

nce

Bio

logic

al Scie

nce

Physi

cal Scie

nce

Pla

nt

Physi

olo

gy

Pla

nt

Genetics/

Bio

technolo

gy

Pla

nt

Bre

edin

g

Abio

tic,

Bio

tic F

acto

rs

Princip

les

of

Soils

Environm

enta

l Aw

are

ness

Pro

fessio

na

lW

riting/V

erb

al Ski

lls

Rese

arc

h S

kills

Pro

ble

m S

olv

ing S

kills

Decis

ion M

aki

ng S

kills

Leaders

hip

/Colla

bora

tive S

kills

Pro

fess

ionalis

m

Eth

ical/Pro

fess

ional Ju

dgem

ent

Life

long L

earn

ing S

kills

Glo

bal Pers

pective

His

torical Pers

pective

Lite

ratu

re a

nd A

rt

Vis

ionin

g

* Li

ne re

pres

ents

requ

ired

75%

impo

rtanc

e le

vel

*


43

Figu

re 4

. R

atin

gs o

f Hor

ticul

ture

Pla

nt Id

entif

icat

ion

disc

iplin

e co

mpe

tenc

ies a

s det

erm

ined

by

the

Nat

iona

l Del

phi

stud

y in

Rou

nds I

, II,

and

III.

94

80

80

100

86

100

100

050

100

% o

f Im

po

rtan

ce

29

70

70

59

Pla

nt

Ide

nti

fic

ati

on

Ide

ntif

y pl

ants

co

mm

only

use

d in

the

dis

cipl

ine

by

scie

ntif

ic a

nd c

om

mo

n na

me

Use

fund

am

enta

l kno

wle

dge

of

taxo

nom

y

Use

dic

ho

tom

ous

ke

ys

Unde

rsta

nd b

asic

pla

nt m

orp

ho

logy

Ide

ntif

y ge

ogra

phic

ori

gin

, e

co

logy a

nd a

dapt

abili

ty o

fco

mm

on p

lants

to

env

iro

nm

ent

De

scri

be

ba

sic f

am

ily c

ha

racte

ristic

s

Fin

d a

nd e

xam

ine

so

urc

es o

f in

form

atio

n to

ide

ntify

pla

nts

Re

co

gniz

e v

isua

lly c

om

mo

n culti

va

rs in

field

of

inte

rest

Ide

ntif

y ge

ogra

phic

ori

gin

of

co

mm

on p

lant

s

Ide

ntif

y a

da

pa

tabili

ty o

f co

mm

on p

lants

to

envi

rone

me

nta

l co

nditio

ns*

* Lin

e r

epre

sents

required 7

5%

im

port

ance leve

l


44

Figu

re 5

. R

atin

gs o

f Hor

ticul

ture

Fie

ld a

nd G

reen

hous

e M

anag

emen

t dis

cipl

ine

com

pete

ncie

s as d

eter

min

ed b

y th

e N

atio

nal D

elph

i stu

dy in

Rou

nds I

, II,

and

III.

94

76

9595

919191

95

100

95

020

4060

8010

0

% o

f Im

port

ance

Fiel

d &

Gre

enho

use

Man

agem

ent

Def

ine

and

sele

ct p

lant

ing

met

hods

for d

iffer

ent h

ortic

ultu

re c

rops

Con

stru

ct a

nd m

anag

e di

ffere

nt ir

rigat

ion,

ferti

lizat

ion,

and

pes

tm

anag

emen

t sys

tem

s

Und

erst

and

form

ulat

ions

and

man

age

soil-

base

d, a

rtific

ial s

ubst

rate

s u

sed

in h

ortic

ultu

re

Iden

tify

stra

tegi

es fo

r effi

cien

t and

abu

ndan

t pro

duct

ion,

har

vest

, and

) sto

rage

of h

igh

qual

ity c

rops

(foo

d, fl

ower

s, tu

rf

Per

form

tech

niqu

es in

bot

h se

xual

and

ase

xual

pro

paga

tion

of p

lant

s

Und

erst

and

cons

truct

ion,

and

mai

nten

ance

of a

gre

enho

use

,Kno

w h

ow to

app

ly a

ppro

pria

te p

lant

man

agem

ent i

nvol

ving

prun

ing

)trai

ning

, PG

R's

and

env

ironm

ent (

ligh

t, nu

tritio

n, w

ater

and

soi

l

Dem

onst

rate

abi

lity

to p

rodu

ce a

qua

lity

plan

t and

turn

a p

rofit

Und

erst

and

basi

s fo

r sch

edul

ing

crop

s

Rou

nd 1

Rou

nd 2

Rou

nd 3

**

Line

repr

esen

ts re

quire

d 75

% im

porta

nce

leve

l


45

Figu

re 6

. R

atin

gs o

f Hor

ticul

ture

Lan

dsca

pe M

anag

emen

t dis

cipl

ine

com

pete

ncie

s as d

eter

min

ed b

y th

e N

atio

nal D

elph

i stu

dy in

Rou

nds I

, II a

nd II

I.

8810

0

9484

818686

7610

010

0

100

020

4060

8010

0%

of Im

porta

nce

73

Land

scap

e M

anag

emen

t

Unde

rsta

nd b

oth

hard

scap

e an

d gr

eens

cape

pro

blem

s

Iden

tify

sour

ce o

f the

pro

blem

Appl

y di

ffere

nt p

runi

ng te

chni

ques

Desi

gn a

n ap

prop

riate

irrig

atio

n sc

hedu

le fo

r a la

ndsc

ape

Desi

gn a

n ap

prop

riate

ferti

lity

sche

dule

for a

land

scap

e

Desi

gn a

n ap

prop

riate

mow

ing

sche

dule

for a

land

scap

e

Dete

rmin

e ap

prop

riate

tim

e m

anag

emen

t for

task

Und

erst

ands

land

scap

e bi

ddin

g

Reco

gniz

e ap

prop

riate

pla

cing

for s

peci

fic p

lant

s

Reco

gniz

e an

d so

lve ro

ot p

robl

ems

such

as

enci

rclin

g ro

ots,

J a

ndU

root

s

Und

erst

and

how

and

why

of p

lant

ing

a pl

ant

Roun

d 1

Roun

d 2

Roun

d 3

* Lin

e re

pres

ents

requ

ired

75%

impo

rtanc

e le

vel


46

Figu

re 6

. R

atin

gs o

f Hor

ticul

ture

Lan

dsca

pe M

anag

emen

t dis

cipl

ine

com

pete

ncie

s as d

eter

min

ed b

y th

e N

atio

nal

Del

phi s

tudy

in R

ound

s I, I

I, an

d II

I.Fi

gure

7.

Rat

ings

of A

gric

ultu

re C

hem

ical

dis

cipl

ine

com

pete

ncie

s as d

eter

min

ed b

y th

e N

atio

nal D

elph

i stu

dy in

R

ound

s I, I

I, an

d II

I.

100

85

909090

9596

100

100

020

4060

8010

0

% o

f Im

porta

nce

Ag. C

hem

ical

s

Und

erst

and

effe

cts

of p

est c

ontro

l on

envir

onm

ent

Des

ign

and

calc

ulat

e ap

prop

riate

app

licat

ion

of a

gric

ultu

ral

com

poun

ds

Iden

tify

and

appl

y ap

prop

riate

saf

ety

proc

edur

e re

gard

ing

agric

ultu

ral

com

poun

ds

Rec

ogni

ze g

over

nmen

tal r

egul

atio

ns th

at im

pact

agr

icul

tura

lch

emic

al a

pplic

atio

n an

d us

e

,Des

ign

an a

ppro

pria

te c

hem

ical

app

licat

ion

sche

dule

(tim

e, ro

tatio

n) l

imita

tions

Cal

cula

te a

nd m

ake

conv

ersi

ons

for a

pply

ing

Be

able

to o

btai

n a

pest

icid

e lic

ense

Und

erst

and

the

cont

ent o

f a p

estic

ide

labe

l

Rou

nd 1

Rou

nd 2

Rou

nd 3

**

Line

repr

esen

ts re

quire

d at

75%

impo

rtanc

e le

vel


47

Figu

re 8

. R

atin

gs o

f Hor

ticul

ture

Tec

hnol

ogy

disc

iplin

e co

mpe

tenc

ies a

s det

erm

ined

by

the

Nat

iona

l Del

phi s

tudy

in

Rou

nds I

, II,

and

III.

94

77

86

91

82

100

95

020

4060

8010

0%

of I

mpo

rtanc

e

73

67

Tech

nolo

gy

Unde

rsta

nd n

ew te

chno

logi

es w

ithin

the

horti

cultu

redi

scip

line

Ope

rate

typi

cal h

ortic

ultu

re e

quip

men

t

Ope

rate

com

mon

wor

d pr

oces

sing

sof

twar

e

Ope

rate

com

mon

spr

eads

heet

sof

twar

e

Ope

rate

com

mon

pre

sent

atio

n so

ftwar

e

Ope

rate

a c

ompu

ter t

o or

gani

ze a

nd in

terp

ret i

nfor

mat

ion

Unde

rsta

nd a

utom

atio

n sy

stem

s wi

thin

a g

reen

hous

e e

nviro

nmen

t

Ope

rate

equ

ipm

ent s

uch

as a

sol

uble

sal

ts m

eter

, pH

met

er, l

ight

met

er a

nd a

pply

dat

a co

llect

ed fr

om it

Roun

d 1

** L

ine

repr

esen

ts c

ut o

ff at

75%

impo

rtanc

e le

vel

R

ound

2 h

ad n

o ne

w co

mpe

tenc

ies

Roun

d 3


48

Figu

re 9

. R

atin

gs o

f Life

Sci

ence

Bio

logi

cal S

cien

ce d

isci

plin

eco

mpe

tenc

ies a

s det

erm

ined

by

the

Nat

iona

l Del

phi s

tudy

in

Rou

nds I

, II a

nd II

I.

18

73

10

0

90

02

04

06

08

01

00

% o

f Im

po

rta

nc

e

40

54

Bio

log

ica

l S

cie

nc

e

De

mo

nstr

ate

fund

am

enta

l kno

wle

dg

e o

f b

iolo

gic

al s

cie

nce

Und

ers

tand

ce

llula

r structu

re a

nd

functio

n

Op

era

te a

mic

rosco

pe

and

loca

ting

str

uctu

res o

n a

slid

e

Und

ers

tand

pla

nt p

op

ula

tio

ns in e

co

log

y a

s w

ell

as a

gricultu

re

Re

late

cro

pp

ing

re

latio

nship

s o

f ho

rtic

ultu

re c

rop

s to n

ative

re

lative

s

*

* Lin

e r

epre

sents

required 7

5%

im

port

ance leve

l

Round 1

Round 3

Round 2


49

Figu

re 1

0. R

atin

gs o

f Life

Sci

ence

Phy

sica

l Sci

ence

dis

cipl

ine

com

pete

ncie

s as d

eter

min

ed b

y th

e N

atio

nal D

elph

i stu

dy in

R

ound

s I, I

I, an

d II

I.

18

73

10

0

90

02

04

06

08

01

00

% o

f Im

po

rta

nc

e

40

54

Bio

log

ica

l S

cie

nc

e

De

mo

nstr

ate

fund

am

enta

l kno

wle

dg

e o

f b

iolo

gic

al scie

nce

Und

ers

tand

ce

llula

r str

uctu

re a

nd

functio

n

Op

era

te a

mic

rosco

pe

and

lo

ca

ting

str

uctu

res o

n a

slid

e

Und

ers

tand

pla

nt p

op

ula

tio

ns in e

co

log

y a

s w

ell

as a

gri

culture

Re

late

cro

pp

ing

re

latio

nship

s o

f ho

rtic

ulture

cro

ps to

na

tive

re

lative

s

*

* Lin

e r

epre

sents

required 7

5%

im

port

ance leve

l

Round 1

Round 3

Round 2


50

Figu

re11

. R

atin

gs o

f Life

Sci

ence

Pla

nt P

hysi

olog

y di

scip

line

com

pete

ncie

s as d

eter

min

ed b

y th

e N

atio

nal D

elph

i stu

dy

in R

ound

s I, I

I, an

d II

I.

8268

76

9010

095

100

9110

0

100

100

100

90

020

4060

8010

0

% o

f Im

port

ance

68

Plan

t Phy

siol

ogy

Und

erst

and

envir

onm

enta

l fac

tors

influ

enci

ng p

lant

gro

wth

Und

erst

and

Pho

tosy

nthe

sis

Und

erst

and

Res

pira

tion

Und

erst

and

the

diffe

renc

e be

twee

n C

3, C

4, C

AM

Und

erst

and

phot

oper

iod

Und

erst

and

plan

t hor

mon

e in

fluen

ce

Rec

ogni

ze h

ow a

pla

nt re

spon

ds to

env

ironm

enta

l stre

ss

Und

erst

and

herb

aceo

us a

nd w

oody

pla

nt a

nato

my

Und

erst

and

plan

t nut

rient

upt

ake

and

use

Und

erst

and

plan

t res

pons

es to

pro

gram

min

g by

mea

ns o

f lig

ht, a

ndte

mpe

ratu

re

,Man

ipul

ate

plan

t man

agem

ent s

ched

ulin

g fo

r gre

enho

use

appl

icat

ion

.ove

rwin

terin

g, e

tcS

elec

t pla

nts

for i

nter

ior a

nd la

ndsc

ape

plan

tings

,Und

erst

and

plan

t phy

siol

ogy

for p

ost-h

arve

st h

andl

ing

of c

uts

flow

ers

fruits

, and

who

le p

lant

s

Rou

nd 1

Rou

nd 2

Rou

nd 3

**

Line

repr

esen

ts c

ut o

ff at

75%

impo

rtanc

e le

vel


51

Figu

re 1

2. R

atin

gs o

f Life

Sci

ence

Pla

nt G

enet

ics/

Bio

tech

nolo

gydi

scip

line

com

pete

ncie

s as d

eter

min

ed b

y th

e N

atio

nal

Del

phi s

tudy

in R

ound

s I, I

I, an

d II

I.

71

82

70

90

82

020

4060

8010

0

% o

f Im

porta

nce

45

646465Pl

ant G

enet

ics/

Bio

tech

nolo

gy

Und

erst

and

the

prin

cipl

es o

f gen

etic

s

Iden

tify

how

to u

se g

enet

ics

for p

lant

impr

ovem

ent

Rec

ogni

ze th

e po

tent

ial i

mpa

ct o

f bio

tech

nolo

gy o

n th

e en

viron

men

t

Und

erst

and

the

futu

re o

f gen

etic

s th

roug

h pr

ofes

sion

al d

evel

opm

ent

Und

erst

and

the

rela

tions

hip

of g

enet

ics

to p

lant

impr

ovem

ent t

hrou

ghpl

ant b

reed

ing

and

sele

ctio

n

Und

erst

and

the

base

s fo

r gen

etic

s an

d be

abl

e to

ext

end

that

kno

wle

dge

to u

nder

stan

ding

gen

etic

ally

mod

ified

org

anis

ms

and

plan

t bre

edin

g

Und

erst

and

the

diffe

renc

e an

d si

mila

ritie

s be

twee

n cl

assi

cal p

lant

bree

ding

and

mod

ern

gene

tic e

ngin

eerin

g ap

proa

ch

Und

erst

and

how

mut

atio

ns a

rise

Rou

nd 1

Rou

nd 2

Rou

nd 3

**

Line

repr

esen

ts re

quire

d 75

% im

porta

nce

leve

l


52

Figu

re 1

3. R

atin

gs o

f Life

Sci

ence

Pla

nt B

reed

ing

disc

iplin

e co

mpe

tenc

ies a

s det

erm

ined

by

the

Nat

iona

l Del

phi s

tudy

in

Rou

nds I

, II,

and

III.

82

91

68

020

4060

8010

0

% o

f Im

port

ance

65B

asic

Pla

nt B

reed

ing

Und

erst

and

the

fund

amen

tal p

rinci

ples

of p

lant

bre

edin

g

Rec

ogni

ze th

e po

tent

ial i

mpa

ct p

lant

bre

edin

g ha

s on

agr

icul

ture

Und

erst

and

the

fund

amen

tal p

rinci

ples

of p

lant

bre

edin

g

Rou

nd 1

Rou

nd 3

*

+ R

anke

d ag

ain

in R

ound

3 b

y pa

nel m

embe

r req

uest

* Lin

e re

pres

ents

requ

ired

75%

impo

rtanc

e le

vel

+


53

Figu

re 1

4. R

atin

gs o

f Life

Sci

ence

Abi

otic

, Bio

tic F

acto

rs d

isci

plin

e co

mpe

tenc

ies a

s det

erm

ined

by

the

Nat

iona

l Del

phi

stud

y in

Rou

nds I

, II,

and

III.

86

96

100

100

020

4060

8010

0

% o

f Im

port

ance

Abi

otic

, Bio

tic F

acto

rs

Rec

ogni

ze th

e co

mm

on b

iotic

and

abi

otic

stre

sses

Und

erst

and

pote

ntia

l effe

ct o

f bio

tic/a

biot

ic s

tress

on

plan

ts a

t var

ious

sta

ges

of d

evel

opm

ent

Rec

ogni

ze o

ptio

ns fo

r stre

ss re

duct

ion

with

min

imal

dist

urba

nce

to e

nviro

nmen

t and

hum

an b

eing

s

Rou

nd 1

** L

ine

repr

esen

ts re

quire

d 75

% im

porta

nce

leve

lP

anel

mem

bers

did

not

add

any

new

com

pten

cies

in R

ound

II a

nd

Rou

nd II

I


54

Figu

re 1

5. R

atin

gs o

f Life

Sci

ence

Prin

cipl

es o

f Soi

ls d

isci

plin

e co

mpe

tenc

ies a

s det

erm

ined

by

the

Nat

iona

l Del

phi

stud

y in

Rou

nds I

, II,

and

III.

9090

86

100

100

82

100

020

4060

8010

0

% o

f Im

port

ance

Prin

cipl

es o

f Soi

ls

Iden

tify

the

diffe

rent

soi

l tex

ture

s

Rec

ogni

ze th

e so

il-w

ater

rela

tions

hip

invo

lved

with

gro

win

g h

ortic

ultu

re c

rops

Und

erst

and

the

influ

ence

s of

soi

l pH

on

plan

ts a

nd fe

rtiliz

atio

n m

etho

ds

-Und

erst

and

the

mov

emen

t of w

ater

thro

ugh

the

soil-

plan

t-air

con

tinuu

m

App

ly k

now

ledg

e of

soi

ls to

fiel

d so

ils, d

ispl

aced

soi

ls a

nd a

rtific

ial

sub

stra

tes

in c

onta

iner

s

Ass

ess

soil

type

in th

e irr

igat

ion

man

agem

ent s

ched

ule

Rou

nd 1

Rou

nd 2

**

Line

repr

esen

ts re

quire

d 75

% im

porta

nce

leve

l

Pan

el m

embe

rs d

id n

ot a

dd a

ny n

ew c

ompt

enci

es in

Rou

nd II

I


55

Figu

re 1

6. R

atin

gs o

f Life

Sci

ence

Env

ironm

enta

l aw

aren

ess d

isci

plin

e co

mpe

tenc

ies a

s det

erm

ined

by

the

Nat

iona

l D

elph

i stu

dy in

Rou

nds I

, II,

and

III.

7775

90

70

91

68

96

75

020

4060

8010

0

% o

f Im

po

rtan

ce

En

viro

nm

enta

l Aw

aren

ess

Und

erst

and

the

impa

ct o

f hum

an a

ctiv

ities

on

the

envi

ronm

ent

Rec

ogni

ze h

ow s

ocie

ties

are

affe

cted

by

envi

ronm

enta

l cha

nge

Und

erst

and

how

phy

sica

l and

bio

logi

cal p

rope

rtie

s ar

e in

terli

nked

with

in e

colo

gica

l sys

tem

s

Rec

ogni

ze g

over

nmen

tal r

egul

atio

ns c

once

rnin

g th

e en

viro

nmen

tan

d w

hy t

hey

wer

e en

acte

d

Und

erst

and

the

basi

s fo

r IP

M a

nd o

rgan

ic p

ract

ices

Iden

tify

inva

sive

spe

cies

issu

es

Iden

tify

and

anal

yze

solu

tions

to

spec

ific

envi

ronm

enta

l iss

ues

)air/

wat

er p

ollu

tion,

ero

sion

, m

icro

bial

con

tam

inat

ion(

Rou

nd 1

Rou

nd 2

Rou

nd 3

**

Line

rep

rese

nts

requ

ired

75%

impo

rtan

ce le

vel


56

Figu

re 1

7. R

atin

gs o

f Pro

fess

iona

l Writ

ing/

Ver

bal d

isci

plin

e an

d co

mpe

tenc

ies a

s det

erm

ined

by

the

Nat

iona

l Del

phi s

tudy

in

Rou

nds I

, II,

and

III.

100

9596

100

020

4060

8010

0

% o

f Im

port

ance

Writ

ing/

Verb

al S

kills

Spe

ak e

ffect

ively

on

subj

ect m

atte

r with

in p

rofe

ssio

nal

cur

ricul

um

Writ

e co

ncis

ely

on s

ubje

ct m

atte

r with

in p

rofe

ssio

nal c

urric

ulum

App

ly c

ritic

al th

inki

ng w

ith re

spec

t to

anal

yzin

g an

d in

terp

retin

g a

vaila

ble

info

rmat

ion

Rou

nd 1

Rou

nd 2

*

* Li

ne re

pres

ents

requ

ired

75%

impo

rtanc

e le

vel

Pan

el m

embe

rs d

id n

ot a

dd a

ny n

ew c

ompt

enci

es in

Rou

nd II

I


57

Figu

re 1

8. R

atin

gs o

f Pro

fess

iona

l Res

earc

h Sk

ills d

isci

plin

e an

d co

mpe

tenc

ies a

s det

erm

ined

by

the

Nat

iona

l Del

phi s

tudy

in

Rou

nds I

, II a

nd II

I.

80

85

80

64

96

68

73

020

4060

8010

0

% o

f Im

port

ance

45

50R

esea

rch

Ski

lls

Sum

mar

ize

basi

c re

sear

ch d

ata

Ana

lyze

bas

ic re

sear

ch d

ata

Inte

rpre

t re

sear

ch d

ata

Und

erst

and

the

scie

ntifi

c m

etho

d

Con

duct

and

impl

emen

t a

rese

arch

hyp

othe

sis

and

cont

rols

Inte

rpre

t gr

aphi

cal r

epre

sent

atio

n of

dat

a, e

nviro

nmen

tal s

umm

arie

s, a

ndflo

w c

hart

s

Rec

ogni

ze th

e us

e of

sta

tistic

s an

d be

abl

e to

inte

rpre

t bas

ic s

tatis

tical

conc

epts

Pre

sent

con

clus

ions

or

reco

mm

enda

tions

and

be

able

to s

uppo

rt th

em

**

Line

repr

esen

ts r

equi

red

75%

impo

rtan

ce le

vel

Pan

el m

embe

rs d

id n

ot a

dd a

ny n

ew c

ompt

enci

es in

Rou

nd II

I

Rou

nd 1

Rou

nd 2


58

Figu

re 1

9. R

atin

gs o

f Pro

fess

iona

l Pro

blem

Sol

ving

Ski

lls d

isci

plin

e an

d co

mpe

tenc

ies a

s det

erm

ined

by

the

Nat

iona

l D

elph

i stu

dy in

Rou

nds I

, II,

and

III.

91

100

95

020

4060

8010

0

% o

f Im

porta

nce

Prob

lem

Sol

ving

Ski

lls

Wor

k ef

fect

ivel

y w

ith o

ther

s on

com

plex

issu

es

Def

ine

prob

lem

and

iden

tify

reso

urce

s an

d a

ltern

ativ

e so

lutio

ns

Rou

nd 1

*

* Li

ne re

pres

ents

requ

ired

75%

impo

rtanc

e le

vel

Pan

el m

embe

rs d

id n

ot a

dd a

ny n

ew c

ompt

enci

es in

Rou

nd II

and

R

ound

III


59

Figu

re 2

0. R

atin

gs o

f Pro

fess

iona

l Dec

isio

n M

akin

g Sk

ills d

isci

plin

e an

d co

mpe

tenc

ies a

s det

erm

ined

by

the

Nat

iona

l D

elph

i stu

dy in

Rou

nds I

, II,

and

III.

90

8282

91

86

82

100

020

4060

8010

0

% o

f Im

port

ance

46

Dec

isio

n M

akin

g S

kills

Mak

e ef

fect

ive d

ecis

ions

in a

sho

rt tim

e pe

riod

Ass

ess

long

-term

effe

cts

of d

ecis

ion

Mak

e de

cisi

ons

on th

e ba

sis

of th

orou

gh a

naly

sis

of a

situ

atio

n

Iden

tify

polit

ical

impl

icat

ions

of t

he d

ecis

ion

to b

e m

ade

Kno

ws

ethi

cal i

mpl

icat

ions

of t

he d

ecis

ions

to b

e m

ade

Rec

ogni

ze a

ll th

ose

affe

cted

by

the

deci

sion

Exp

ress

and

def

end

deci

sion

s ef

fect

ively

Rou

nd 1

Rou

nd 2

**

Line

repr

esen

ts c

ut o

ff at

75%

impo

rtanc

e le

vel

Pan

el m

embe

rs d

id n

ot a

dd a

ny n

ew c

ompt

enci

es in

Rou

nd II

and

R

ound

III.


60

Figu

re 2

1. R

atin

gs o

f Pro

fess

iona

l Lea

ders

hip/

Col

labo

rativ

e Sk

ills d

isci

plin

e an

d co

mpe

tenc

ies a

s det

erm

ined

by

the

Nat

iona

l Del

phi s

tudy

in R

ound

s I, I

I, an

d II

I.

53

77

47

90

8586

9190

020

4060

8010

0

% o

f Im

port

ance

50

Lead

ersh

ip /

Col

labo

rativ

e S

kills

Mot

ivate

and

org

aniz

e a

grou

p of

pee

rs a

nd s

ubor

dina

tes

in d

efin

ing

and

sol

ving

a pr

oble

m

Wor

k ef

fect

ively

in a

team

situ

atio

n ei

ther

as

a le

ader

or a

par

ticip

ate

Dem

onst

rate

hig

h st

anda

rds

of a

chie

vem

ent

Cap

abili

ty o

f rec

ogni

zing

alte

rnat

ive v

iew

poi

nts

Impl

emen

t a s

olut

ion

to a

pro

blem

Con

duct

a p

rofe

ssio

nal m

eetin

g

Sum

mar

ize

conc

isel

y a

grou

p's

deci

sion

Iden

tify

and

lead

a g

roup

thro

ugh

the

deci

sion

mak

ing

proc

ess

**

Line

repr

esen

ts re

quire

d 75

% im

porta

nce

leve

l

Rou

nd 1

Rou

nd 2

Rou

nd 3


61

Figu

re 2

2. R

atin

gs o

f Pro

fess

iona

lism

dis

cipl

ine

and

com

pete

ncie

s as d

eter

min

ed b

y th

e N

atio

nal D

elph

i stu

dy in

Rou

nds

I, II

, and

III.

94

45

100

91

868686

100

020

4060

8010

0

% o

f Im

port

ance60

Pro

fess

iona

lism

Und

erst

and

care

er o

ppor

tuni

ties

in th

e ho

rticu

lture

dis

cipl

ine

Be

acqu

aint

ed w

ith m

ajor

hor

ticul

ture

indu

strie

s

Dev

elop

indu

stry

con

nect

ions

with

in th

e fie

ld o

f int

eres

t

Und

erst

and

basi

c bu

sine

ss m

anag

emen

t con

cept

s

,Rea

lize

need

for c

ontin

uing

edu

catio

n th

roug

h sh

ort c

ours

esse

min

ars

and

conf

eren

ces

Iden

tify

curr

ent t

rend

s an

d to

pics

thro

ugh

curre

nt li

tera

ture

and

med

ia

Obt

ain

appr

opria

te c

lient

ski

lls

Obt

ain

expe

rienc

e in

at l

east

one

inte

rnsh

ip

Rou

nd 1

Rou

nd 2

Rou

nd 3

* Li

ne r

epre

sent

s re

quire

d 75

% im

port

ance

leve

l*


62

Figu

re 2

3. R

atin

gs o

f Pro

fess

iona

l Eth

ical

/Pro

fess

iona

l Jud

gmen

t and

com

pete

ncie

s as d

eter

min

ed b

y th

e N

atio

nal D

elph

i st

udy

in R

ound

s I, I

I, an

d II

I.

55

77

86

9190

020

4060

8010

0

% o

f Im

port

ance59

Ethi

cal/P

rofe

ssio

nal J

udge

men

t

Und

erst

and

ethi

cal i

ssue

s in

volve

d in

the

form

atio

n of

pro

fess

iona

l ju

dgm

ents

in h

ortic

ultu

re

Dev

elop

s an

eth

ical

per

spec

tive

and

sens

e of

mor

al re

spon

sibi

lity

and

val

ues

Dis

cuss

con

tem

pora

ry e

thic

al a

nd m

oral

issu

es in

pro

fess

iona

l and

priv

ate

life

Und

erst

and

the

resp

onsi

bilit

y of

the

indi

vidua

l in

sust

aina

ble

man

agem

ent o

f ene

rgy,

soi

l, w

ater

and

pla

nts

Rem

ain

awar

e of

cha

ngin

g le

gisl

atio

n w

ith re

gard

s to

eth

ical

and

mor

al is

sues

*

* Lin

e re

pres

ents

cut

off

at 7

5% im

porta

nce

leve

l

Pane

l mem

bers

did

not

add

any

new

com

pten

cies

in R

ound

II an

d Ro

und

III

Rou

nd 1


63

Figu

re 2

4. R

atin

gs o

f Pro

fess

iona

l Life

Lea

rnin

g Sk

ills d

isci

plin

e an

d co

mpe

tenc

ies a

s det

erm

ined

by

the

Nat

iona

l Del

phi

stud

y in

Rou

nds I

, II,

and

III.

7777

91

85

020

4060

8010

0

% o

f Im

porta

nce

Life

Lea

rnin

g Sk

ills

Sta

y up

date

d on

late

st d

evel

opm

ents

in h

ortic

ultu

re

Gai

n ne

w k

now

ledg

e fro

m e

very

day

expe

rienc

es

,Use

the

inte

rnet

to s

eek

out n

ew te

chno

logi

es, i

nfor

mat

ion

trend

s an

d bu

sine

ss m

anag

emen

t ski

lls

Rou

nd 1

Rou

nd 3

*

* Lin

e re

pres

ents

cut

off

at 7

5% im

porta

nce

leve

l

Pane

l mem

bers

did

not

add

any

new

com

pten

cies

in R

ound

II


64

Figu

re 2

5. R

atin

gs o

f Pro

fess

iona

l Glo

bal P

ersp

ectiv

e di

scip

line

and

com

pete

ncie

s as d

eter

min

ed b

y th

e N

atio

nal D

elph

i st

udy

in R

ound

s I, I

I, an

d II

I.

4765

7165

73

020

4060

8010

0

% o

f Im

port

ance

47

2355

6457

41

60

55G

lob

al P

ersp

ectiv

e

Dem

onst

rate

a g

loba

l per

spec

tive

on a

gric

ultu

ral i

ssue

s

Dem

onst

rate

a g

loba

l per

spec

tive

on e

nviro

nmen

tal i

ssue

s

Dem

onst

rate

a g

loba

l per

spec

tive

on e

cono

mic

issu

es

Dem

onst

rate

a g

loba

l per

spec

tive

on n

atur

al r

esou

rce

issu

es

Und

erst

andi

ng o

f cul

tura

l div

ersi

ty w

ithin

the

nat

ion

and

arou

nd t

he w

orld

Dem

onst

rate

und

erst

andi

ng o

f diff

eren

t be

liefs

and

pra

ctic

es

App

ly fu

ndam

enta

l con

cept

s of

eco

nom

ics

and

hum

an in

tera

ctio

n

Und

erst

and

the

geop

oliti

cal a

nd e

cono

mic

influ

ence

of t

he U

nite

dS

tate

s on

glo

bal s

ocio

econ

omic

dyn

amic

sD

emon

stra

te a

glo

bal p

ersp

ectiv

e on

agr

icul

tura

l iss

ues

Dem

onst

rate

a g

loba

l per

spec

tive

on e

nviro

nmen

tal i

ssue

s

Und

erst

andi

ng o

f cul

tura

l div

ersi

ty w

ithin

the

nat

ion

and

arou

nd t

hew

orld

Dem

onst

rate

und

erst

andi

ng o

f diff

eren

t be

liefs

and

pra

ctic

es

*+

Ran

ked

agai

n in

Rou

nd 3

by

pane

l mem

ber

requ

est

* Li

ne r

epre

sent

s cu

t of

f at

75%

impo

rtan

ce le

vel

Pan

el m

embe

rs d

id n

ot a

dd a

ny n

ew c

ompt

enci

es in

Rou

nd II

Rou

nd 1

Rou

nd 3

+

+

+

+


65

Figu

re 2

6. R

atin

gs o

f Pro

fess

iona

l His

tD

oric

al P

ersp

ectiv

e di

scip

line

and

com

pete

ncie

s as d

eter

min

ed b

y th

e N

atio

nal

elph

i stu

dy in

Rou

nds I

, II,

and

III.

59

020

4060

8010

0

% o

f Im

port

ance

45

37Hi

stor

ical

Per

spec

tive

App

reci

ate

a hi

stor

ical

per

spec

tive

to th

e ro

le o

fsc

ienc

e an

d te

chno

logy

in a

gric

ultu

re

*

+ R

anke

d ag

ain

in R

ound

3 b

y pa

nel m

embe

r req

uest

* Li

ne re

pres

ents

cut

off

at 7

5% im

porta

nce

leve

lP

anel

mem

bers

did

not

add

any

new

com

pten

cies

in R

ound

II

App

reci

ate

a hi

stor

ical

per

spec

tive

to th

e ro

le o

fsc

ienc

e an

d te

chno

logy

in a

gric

ultu

re

Rou

nd 1

Rou

nd 3

+


66

Figu

re 2

7. R

atin

gs o

f Lite

ratu

re a

nd A

rt di

scip

line

and

com

pete

ncie

s as d

eter

min

ed b

y th

e N

atio

nal D

elph

i stu

dy in

R

ound

s I, I

I, an

d II

I.

35

020

4060

8010

0

% o

f Im

port

ance

41

35Li

tera

ture

and

Art

App

reci

ates

and

inte

rpre

ts w

ork

of li

tera

ture

and

the

arts

App

reci

ates

and

inte

rpre

ts w

ork

of li

tera

ture

and

the

arts

*

Rou

nd 1

Rou

nd 3

+ R

anke

d ag

ain

in R

ound

3 b

y pa

nel m

embe

r req

uest

* Li

ne re

pres

ents

cut

off

at 7

5% im

porta

nce

leve

lP

anel

mem

bers

did

not

add

any

new

com

pten

cies

in R

ound

II+


67

Figu

re 2

8. R

atin

gs o

f Pro

fess

iona

l Writ

ing/

Ver

bal d

isci

plin

e an

d co

mpe

tenc

ies a

s det

erm

ined

by

the

Nat

iona

l Del

phi s

tudy

in

Rou

nds I

, II,

and

III.

41

6564

86

47

020

4060

8010

0

% o

f Im

port

ance

55

36

40V

isio

ning

Und

erst

and

the

scop

e of

hor

ticul

ture

and

its

rela

tion

to o

ther

dis

cipl

ines

Con

cept

ualiz

e th

e fu

ture

of t

he in

dust

ry

Pro

vide

inno

vativ

e pa

ths

for r

elat

ed b

usin

ess

to fo

llow

Con

side

r a h

olis

tic p

ersp

ectiv

e of

the

rura

l and

urb

an e

cosy

stem

Con

cept

ualiz

e th

e fu

ture

of t

he in

dust

ry

Pro

vide

inno

vativ

e pa

ths

for r

elat

ed b

usin

ess

to fo

llow

Con

side

r a h

olis

tic p

ersp

ectiv

e of

the

rura

l and

urb

an e

cosy

stem

*+

Ran

ked

agai

n in

Rou

nd 3

by

pane

l mem

ber

requ

est

* Li

ne re

pres

ents

cut

off

at 7

5% im

porta

nce

leve

lP

anel

mem

bers

did

not

add

any

new

com

pten

cies

in R

ound

II

+

+

+

Rou

nd 1

Rou

nd 3


68

Analysis of Student Survey of Competencies

Plant & Soil Science department seniors in a capstone course were compared to

see if there were differences between the Agronomy and Horticulture Major. Only

competency results that showed asymptotic significance at the p < .05 statistical results

are shown in Table 11. Mean rank gives an indication of what group had higher

rankings that the other. Rankings were on a Likert-scale of high ability = 2, adequate

ability =1 and no ability = 0. Horticulture majors rated their skills significantly higher

than Agronomy in 31 competencies. Many of these skills are specific for the horticulture

major or contained the word “horticulture” within the competency. Agronomy student

ranked themselves lower on competencies in the plant physiology category that are useful

for their major. The specific plant physiology competencies were environmental factors

affecting plant growth, understanding photosynthesis and plant hormone influence. Other

professional skills Agronomy students ranked themselves lower dealt with writing in

their major, problem solving, working in a team as a leader/participant, identifying

current trends through literature and media, and gaining new knowledge of everyday

experiences.


69

Table 10. Results of a Kruskal-Wallis test comparing responses from groupings of horticulture and agronomy undergraduate students with respects to student’s perception of skills with the Horticulture Competency Skill Set. N= 20.

Competency Major f Mean Rank

Chi-Square

Asymp. Sig.

Plant Identification

1. Identify plants commonly used in the discipline by scientific and common name

Horticulture 12 13.25 Agronomy 8 6.38 7.983 .005

2. Find and examine sources of information to identify plants


3. Identify adaptability of common plants to environmental conditions


Field and Greenhouse Management

1. Define and select planting methods for different horticulture crops


2. Perform techniques in both sexual and asexual propagation of plants


3. Know how to apply appropriate plant management involving pruning, training, PGR’s and environment


Landscape Management

1. Understand both hardscape and greenscape problems


2. Design an appropriate mowing schedule for a landscape


3. Understand landscape bidding Horticulture 12 12.88 Agronomy 8 6.94 5.954 .015

Technology

1. Understand new technologies within the horticulture discipline

Horticulture 12 13.04 Agronomy 8 6.69

6.876 .009

2. Operate typical horticulture equipment Horticulture 12 12.83 Agronomy 8 7.00

5.542 .019

3. Operate common presentation software Horticulture 12 12.42 Agronomy 8

7.63 4.498 .034

Biological Science

1. Relate cropping systems of horticulture crops to native relatives

Horticulture 12 12.83 Agronomy 8 7.00

5.278 .022


70

Table 10. Continued

Competency Major f Mean Rank

Chi-Square

Asymp. Sig.

Plant Physiology

1. Understand environmental factors influencing plant growth

Horticulture Agronomy

12 8

12.33 7.75

4.211 .040

2. Understand Photosynthesis Horticulture Agronomy

12 8

12.17 7.75

4.222 .040

3. Understand plant hormone influence Horticulture Agronomy

12 8

12.42 7.63

4.498 .034

4. Understand herbaceous and woody plant anatomy


12 8

13.46 6.06

9.029 .003

5. Select plants for interior and landscape plantings


12 8

13.75 5.63

10.179 .001

Principles of Soils

1. Recognize the soil-water relationship involved with growing horticulture crops


12 8

13.25 6.38

9.123 .003

Writing/Verbal Skills

1. Write concisely on subject matter within professional curriculum


12 8

11.79 8.56

5.406 .020

Leadership Skills

1. Work effectively in a team situation either as a leader or a participant


12 8

12.67 7.25

6.371 .012

Professionalism

1. Understand career opportunities in the horticulture discipline


12 8

13.79 5.56

10.557 .001

2. Be acquainted with major horticulture industries


12 8

13.38 6.19

8.237 .004

3. Identify current trends and topics through current literature and media


12 8

13.38 6.19

8.527 .003

Lifelong Learning Skills

1. Stay updated on latest developments in horticulture


12 8

12.83 7.00

5.747 .017

2. Gain new knowledge from everyday experiences


12 8

12.00 8.25

5.029 .025

Visioning

1. Understand the scope of horticulture and its relation to other disciplines


12 8

14.08 5.13

13.247 .001

2. Provide innovative paths for related business to follow


12 8

12.50 7.50

5.278 .022


71

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

This research study had two objectives which were to describe a set standard of

competencies for a bachelor’s degree in general horticulture and to use the described

competencies to assess student learning. Limitations of this research study will be

summarized and then conclusions from the data analysis will be discussed.

Summary of Research Limitations and Delimitations

This study was delimited to horticulture educators within four-year institutions of

higher education in the United States. Sample size was also delimited to horticulture

educators considered as the expert in curriculum/assessment within their department.

This research design resulted in the following limitations. Opinions of the experts

represented a population of the United States horticulture educators and cannot be

generalized as opinions of over the total population of horticulture educators. The list of

horticulture competencies is from previous program assessments and expert educators

and may not be up to date with industry changes. A further limitation was a sample of

four-year programs, which does not represent community colleges and two-year

institutions offering horticulture courses within the United States.

Research Conclusions and Discussion

In view of these limitations, conclusions can be taken from this study.

The conclusions and discussion of implications to the research questions are as follows:


72

1. What characteristics are found in horticulture educators considers as experts in

curriculum and assessment?

A typical horticulture educator with expertise in curriculum and assessment is an

individual who: 1) has a Ph.D. in horticulture, 2) holds a position of assistant professor

or full professor, 3) is around 51-60 years in age, and 4) has been teaching for 21 or more

years. The average expert’s institutional size was 15,000-25,000 students. Departmental

size was less than 50 to 200 students with six or more years experience with assessment.

These profile demographics reveals the reaching of the targeted sampling. The sample

was homogenous in respect to Ph.D. in a plant science related field.

2. Is there any difference in the participants or horticulture program that would indicate a

difference in opinion?

Kruskal-Wallis analysis showed not difference in the rankings of a panel member

with respect to their baccalaureate degree, age, position or departmental size.

Differences in panel members’ background or program have not have not had an effect

on opinion. This uniformity of opinion is shown in the high percentage rate of approval

for the Horticulture disciplines and competencies from the Delphi Study. All five

disciplines received a rating of 95-100% and only seven of the 46 competencies were

elimanted.

3. What disciplines and competencies are considered important in being included in

horticulture undergraduate curriculum, as identified by horticulture curriculum experts?


73

The following horticulture disciplines that should be included in the horticulture

curriculum are: 1) Plant Identification, 2) Field and Greenhouse Management, 3)

Landscape Management, 4) Agricultural Chemicals, and 5) Technology. A high rating

of importance was given for all five disciplines (95-100%). Given that the horticulture

experts were not allowed to discuss the survey with anyone until after Round 3, the panel

members have a uniform understanding of what horticulture major should contain. The

panel member’s uniform understanding of necessary competencies reveals an equality of

standards for the horticulture departments’ curriculum, even though there has not been a

formal national competency curriculum in place. The following disciplines approved as

life science competencies are: 1) Biological Science, 2) Plant Physiology, 3) Abiotic,

Biotic Factors, 4) Principles of Soils, and 5) Environmental Awareness. Physical

Science, Plant Genetics/Biotechnology and Plant Breeding had a lower than 75%

importance rating and were eliminated from the horticulture curriculum. Low importance

of the physical science discipline may possibly be due to the decrease in total required

hours for a horticulture undergraduate degree. Plant Genetics/Biotechnology and Plant

Breeding may also have been cut due to becoming a separate major in many institutions.

. Professional Disciplines approved are the following: 1) Writing/Verbal, 2) Problem

Solving, 3) Decision Making, 4) Leadership/Collaborative, 5) Professionalism, 6)

Ethical/Professional Judgment, and 7) Lifelong Learning. Professional Disciplines

eliminated were Global Perspective, Historical Perspective, Literature and Art and

Visioning. These disciplines frequently fall under the General Education curriculum of

an institution so may not be integrated in a major’s field. Global Perspective

competencies may be found in a multi-cultural class, explaining why these may have


74

been eliminated from the curriculum. Even though Visioning as a discipline was

eliminated from the curriculum, the competency “understand the scope of horticulture

and its relation to other disciplines” had a high approval of 86%. This competency could

be important for a student tailoring their education to a specific job they desire. In

addition, students completing a minor in another field or obtaining a specialization may

be required to complete these areas of study. Eighteen of the twenty-two panel members

were student advisors, which may account for the importance level found on that one

competency.

After the Delphi-study commenced, a committee member suggested that the 75%

importance level might skew the results given the decrease in sample size from Round 1

(N = 22), Round II (N=19), and then an additional decrease in Round III (N=17). In the

rankings a median of 4 was considered to be the minimal approval level for

competencies. All competencies with 75% approval or greater had a 4 or 5 median. A

total of 33 competencies eliminated in the study with lower than 75% approval had a

median of 4. However, in Round I the competencies’ approval rating ranged from 55-

73%. This shows a broad range in acceptance using the 4 median. The competency with

55% showing a scatter plot of two bell shaped curves representing the ranking; thus, the

median was not used for completing the Horticulture Competency List. Future Delphi-

study might consider using a combination of statistical information such as frequencies

and median to determine a standard for elimination procedures.


75

4. What are the current forms of assessment at the participating educational programs?

Table 8 in Chapter IV describes the panel members’ horticultural departmental

usage of different forms of educational assessment. Many indirect methods are being

utilized, such as surveys and evaluations. However, most methods are not repeated at

any of the universities. Student evaluations have been a major source of assessment of

teaching, although many of these evaluations do have questions pertaining to student

learning. Direct measurements being used by panel members’ departments are pre/post

tests, exit exams, past rates on professional exams, selected course assignments, and use

of a capstone course. Assessments repeated in more than one university were graduate

exit interviews (n=3), employer surveys, (n=2), and student evaluations, (n=2).

Increasingly, accreditation organizations and thus Universities will require departments to

have multiple methods of assessment that include indirect and direct methods. There was

no indication by panel members that learning outcomes were used to assess students.

Banta (2002) found institutions approach to assessment often involved collection of easy

obtainable measures such as student progress, academic plans and satisfaction. Only

53% of the institutions examined the cognitive assessment of competence within the

major. Many horticulture departments are at the beginnings of developing assessment

measures. Good assessment requires attention to the student learning outcomes (Hernon,

2004). Once outcomes are developed, The Horticulture Competency Curriculum List

derived from this study may be used as a tool to develop instruments for evaluation and

assessment at the program, course and student learning level.


76

Future Implications for Curriculum Development and Assessment

The main objective for this study was to describe a set of competencies necessary

for the Horticulture undergraduate major. An extensive Horticulture Competency

Curriculum list has been developed that now can be used with confidence with expert

opinion backing the results. Horticulture departments will be able to use this and quickly

develop a competency curriculum that meets their individual needs. Assessment has not

become a positively accepted part of scholarly teaching and instruction, and eliminating

research on learning outcomes could enhance horticulture faculties’ experience with

starting up program assessment (Allen, 2004).

Once learning outcomes are developed, the second step in assessment is to

develop or select assessment measures (Huba and Freed, 2000). Departments can start

curriculum evaluation by using the Horticulture Competency Curriculum list as a survey

for faculty and students.

Prior to this study, Iowa State Horticulture Department used their competency list

as a faculty survey and had each faculty member evaluate what competencies were being

taught in their courses (Iowa States Horticulture website). A similar student self-

evaluation survey should also be developed. This self-evaluation survey could be used as

a pre-test for incoming freshman/transfer students and as a post-test for graduating

seniors.

Once a faculty survey is given, a curriculum matrix may then be developed that

aligns major program learning outcomes with course offered (Allen, 2004, p 43). An

adapted example of Allen (2004) is shown in Figure 30.


77

Horticulture Curriculum Matrix

Course Program Objective

1

Program Learning

Outcome 2

Program Learning

Outcome 3

1311 I P

2313 I

3403 D P I

I = Introduced, P= Practiced, D = Demonstrated

Figure 29. Horticulture Matrix shows alignment of three courses with three program level learning outcomes. (Allen, 2004, p43)

By having a visual of what is occurring within the curriculum, the curriculum

improvement committee may make recommendations on changes based on this matrix.

For example, for Learning Outcome 2, students are never given a basic working

knowledge of the outcome or required to actually demonstrate their knowledge/ skill to

give proof that they have indeed learned important outcome. If changes were made to the

course to actually demonstrate the student’s skill, some form of assessment

documentation would be essential to give insight on program quality.

Finally, the importance of this research work in horticulture competencies is a

foundation for future communication in Horticulture curriculum and assessment. At the

2005 ASHS national conference, over 100 horticulture professors and educators attended

a workshop on learning outcomes. Many professors desired collaboration on this


78

increasingly demanded issue of assessment. Future research should involve collaboration

with horticulture departments on assessment measures and deriving instruments for use in

testing student skills. A future survey will be sent out by the researcher to panel

members involved in the Delphi-study on usage of the Horticulture Curriculum

Competency List for use with program assessment.


79

Literature Cited Acquaah, G. 1999. Horticulture: Principles and Practices. Prentice Hall, UpperSaddler River, NJ. Alder, M., and E. Ziglio. 1996. Gazing into the oracle: The Delphi method and its application to social policy and public heath. Jessica Kingley, London, PA. Allen, M. 2004. Assessing Academic Programs in higher education. Anker Publishing Co., Bolton, MA. Alreck, P. and R. Settle. 1995. The Survey Research Handbook. Richard D. Irwin, Inc., Chicago, IL. ASHS. 2007. Certified Professional Horticulturist: a program of the American Society for Horticultural Science. Application Certification Form., Alexandria, VA. http://www.ashs.org/downloads/CPH04combogreen.pdf Association of American Colleges. 1985. Integrity in the College Curriculum: A Report to the Academic community. Washington, D.C. Association of American Colleges and Universities. 2004. Taking responsibility for the quality of the baccalaureate degree. Washington, DC. Baily-Evans, F. 1994. Enhancing the agricultural communications curriculum: A national Delphi study. Unpublished master’s thesis, Texas Tech University, Lubbock. Baker, R. 2004. Keystones of regional accreditation: Intentions, outcomes, and sustainability. In: Outcomes assessment in higher education: views and perspectives. P. Hernon and R. Dunca (Eds). Libraries Unlimited: London, 1-14. Centron, M.J. 1969. Techonogical Forecasting. Gordan and Breach: New York. Chamberlain, V.M. 1992. Creative home economics instruction (3rd ed.) Glencoe Macmillian/McGraw-Hill, New York. Childers, N.F. 1989. Educational Institutions Offering Horticulture and or Landscape Architecture in the United States and Canada. HortScience. 24(2), 211-217. ClassApps.com. 2004. SelectSurveyASP Advanced 8.1.1 Compact Oxford English Dictionary. 2007. http://www.askoxford.com Delbecq, A.L., A.H. Van de Ven, and D. H. Gustafson. 1975. Group techniques for program planning: A guide to nominal group and Delphi processes. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman and Company.


80

http://www.ashs.org/downloads/CPH04combogreen.pdf

Dugan, R.E. 2004. Institutional assessment planning. In: Outcomes Assessment in Higher Education: Views and Perspectives, P.Hernon ad R.E. Dugan (Ed.) London: Libraries Unlimited. Dooley, K.E and J.R. Linder. 2002. Competency-based behavioral anchors as authenentication tools to document distance education outcomes. Journal of Agricultural Education 43(1): 24-35. Evers, F. T. 1998. The bases of competence: skills for lifelong learning and employability. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco. Fincher, C. 1985. Trends and Issues in Curricular Development. In: J C. Smart (ed.) Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, Vol. II. Agathon Press, Inc, New York.

Gott, R. and Mashiter, J. 1991. Practical work in science- a task-based approached? In: B.E. Woolnough, ed. Practical science Open University Press, Buckingham. Grant, G. 1979. Implications of competence-based education, p1-17. In: On Competence. G. Grant et. al (Eds). Jossey-Bass, San Francisco. Hendrick, U.P. 1950. A History of Horticulture in America to 1860. New York: Oxford University Press.

Hegwood, D.A. and R.H. Merritt. 1987. Horticultural curricula can benefit from National Initiatives. HortScience 22(3):351-352.

Hernon, P. 2004. Outcomes assessment in higher education: views and perspectives. P.Hernon and R. Dunca (Eds). Libraries Unlimited: London, 149-171. Huba, M. W. and J.E. Freed. 2000. Learner-centered assessment on college campuses: Shifting the focus from teaching to learning. Allyn & Bacon, Boston, MA. Kearsley, G. 1994. Functional context. Theory into practice database. http://tip.psychology.org/ Keech, K.M. 1998. Industry-based curriculum competencies for entry-level retail management positions: A national Delphi-study. Unpublished dissertation. Texas Tech University, Lubbock. Kochanski, J. 1997. Competency-based Management. Training and Development. 51(10), 41-45. Murray, Jr. J.W., and Hammons, J.O. 1985, Summer. Delphi: A versatile methodology for conducting qualitative research. Review of Higher Education 18(4): 423-436.


81

http://tip.psychology.org/

Palomba, C. and T. Banata. 1999. Assessment essentials. Planning, implementing and improving assessment in higher education. Jossey-Bass: San Francsico. Pellegrino, J.W., Chudowsky, N. and R. Glaser (Eds). 2001. Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. National Academy Press: Washington D.C. Preece, J.E, and P.E. Read. 1993. The biology of horticulture: An introductory textbook. John Wiley and Sons, Inc.: New York. Ratcliff, J.L. 1997. What is a curriculum and what should it be? In: Handbook of the undergraduate curriculum: a comprehensive guide to purposes, structures, practices and change. J.G. Gaff and J.L Raticliff (Eds). Jossey-Bass: San Francisco, p. 22. Ravenswaay, Charles. 1977. A nineteenth-century garden. Universe Books, New York. Schleede, J.M., and L.R. Lepisto. 1984. Marketing curriculum development: Model and application. Journal of Marketing Education 6(1) p. 2-9. Schubert, W.H. 1986. Curriculum: Perspective, Paradigm, and Possibility. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co. Inc. Sheehan, K. 2001. Email survey response rate: A review. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. 6(2), http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol6/issue2/sheehan.html Siegel, S. 1956. Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. New York: McGraw Hill Book Co. Inc. SPSS Inc. 2007. Statistical Package for the Social Sciences for Windows vs. 15.0. SPSS Inc., Chicago Il. Stitch, T. 1997. Functional Context Education: Making learning relevant. San Diego Consortium for Workforce Education and Lifelong Learning. Toohey, S. 1999. Designing courses for higher education. Open University Press, Buckingham. Toombs, W.E., and W.G. Tierney. 1995. Curriculum definitions and reference points. In: Revisioning curriculum in higher education. J. Haworth and C. Conrad (Eds.) Simon and Schuster: Needham Heights, 330-344. Tyler, R. W. 1949. Basic principle of curriculum and instruction. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.


82

Weatherman, R., and K. Swenson. 1974. Delphi technique. In: Futurism in education: Methodolgies, S.P Henley and J.R. Yates, (Eds). McCutchan: Berkeley, CA. VanDerZanden, A. 2005. Personal communication.


83

APPENDIX A DEPARTMENT HEAD RECRUITMENT LETTER


84

March 8, 2006 Dear Horticulture Department Chairman/ Curriculum Director: This letter is in regards to recruiting horticulture educators for a National Delphi-study on Horticulture Competencies in the U.S. horticulture undergraduate degree. This is an invitation to a web-based Delphi-survey (three rounds) for horticulture educators who may be identified as experts within the field of curriculum development and assessment. Please forward this email to your qualified professor/personnel who are involved in curriculum development/departmental assessment, or may be identified as your expert in horticulture education. Dear Horticulture Professor/ Curriculum Expert: I am writing to ask for your time in completing a web-based survey titled “National Horticulture Competencies Delphi Survey”. This is a survey that is part of a research project on developing a list of competencies for the U.S. Horticulture undergraduate major. The purpose of horticulture competencies is to measure student learning and use in the future for assessment of horticulture programs and their curriculum. A competency is a skill, knowledge, or value necessary for a student to fulfill a desired course/program. These competencies are often established by experts in a specific area. As an expert within the field of horticulture education, you will be asked a series of questions on your opinion of what students should know when they complete their degree at a four year institution. This would encompass skills they would gain from the general education curriculum as well as the horticulture curriculum. Most questions are set on a likert-scale and will be quick to answer. This survey will be in three rounds, with each round requiring around a 20 minute commitment. If you would like to take the survey, once you begin you will have 1 week for each round, with 1 week break in between each round. The survey will begin March 27 and the third round end around May 6. Please forward me your email address if you are interested in becoming a part of this survey. As part of this study, you will be given the final results from the Delphi-study. I will then send you a link to access the Delphi- survey. Your email will not be linked with the survey you take, but will be asked for at the end of the survey to keep track of who has taken the survey. I appreciate your time on this project Sincerely, Ashley Basinger Graduate Student Texas Tech University Plant & Soil Science Department [email protected]


85

APPENDIX B PANEL MEMBER LETTER


86

Thank you for your interest and help! Here are the instructions for the survey. Please email me if you have any questions. The following Horticulture Curriculum Survey is a three-round Delphi survey. After the first round, the competencies will change depending on how they are rated. The second and third round will incorporate changes made by the participants. Due to the nature of the survey building off of your previous answers, each round is time-sensitive, and you will be given two weeks to complete each round. If for some reason you are not able to complete a certain round, I would prefer if you not complete any future rounds. This survey will be anonymous and will be included in my research results. If you are a participant I ask that you would keep the contents of this Delphi-survey confidential until the three-round survey is complete. The deadline for the first round to be completed is April 10th, 2006. I will send an email reminder 3 days before the deadline. Here is the following link that will give you direct access to the survey. http://tyr.tltc.ttu.edu/surveys/TakeSurvey.asp?SurveyID=4K0563MM393LG After you finish, the survey will take you to another link that will then ask for your email address. I appreciate your participation! Sincerely, Ashley Basinger Plant & Soil Science Department Texas Tech University 806.742.5103 [email protected]


87

http://tyr.tltc.ttu.edu/surveys/TakeSurvey.asp?SurveyID=4K0563MM393LG

APPENDIX C NON-RESPONDENT LETTER


88

March 28, 2006 This is a friendly reminder about the Horticulture Delphi Survey that was sent to you a couple of weeks ago. The first survey must be taken by April 10 for the participants to be included in the study. Please disregard if you have already forwarded the survey or taken the survey. Dear Horticulture Department Chairman/ Curriculum Director: This letter is in regards to recruiting horticulture educators for a National Delphi-study on Horticulture Competencies in the U.S. horticulture undergraduate degree. This is an invitation to a web-based Delphi-survey (three rounds) for horticulture educators who may be identified as experts within the field of curriculum development and assessment. Please forward this email to your qualified professor/personnel who are involved in curriculum development/departmental assessment, or may be identified as your expert in horticulture education. Dear Horticulture Professor/ Curriculum Expert: I am writing to ask for your time in completing a web-based survey titled “National Horticulture Competencies Delphi Survey”. This is a survey that is part of a research project on developing a list of competencies for the U.S. Horticulture undergraduate major. The purpose of horticulture competencies is to measure student learning and use in the future for assessment of horticulture programs and their curriculum. A competency is a skill, knowledge, or value necessary for a student to fulfill a desired course/program. These competencies are often established by experts in a specific area. As an expert within the field of horticulture education, you will be asked a series of questions on your opinion of what students should know when they complete their degree at a four year institution. This would encompass skills they would gain from the general education curriculum as well as the horticulture curriculum. Most questions are set on a likert-scale and will be quick to answer. This survey will be in three rounds, with each round requiring around a 20 minute commitment. If you would like to take the survey, once you begin you will have 1 week for each round, with 1 week break in between each round. The survey will begin March 27 and the third round end around May 6. Please forward me your email address if you are interested in becoming a part of this survey. As part of this study, you will be given the final results from the Delphi-study. I will then send you a link to access the Delphi- survey. Your email will not be linked with the survey you take, but will be asked for at the end of the survey to keep track of who has taken the survey. I appreciate your time on this project Sincerely, Ashley Basinger Graduate Student Texas Tech University Plant & Soil Science Department [email protected]


89

APPENDIX D IOWA STATE HORTICULTURE ASSESSMENT


90

Department of HorticultureOutcomes Assessment and Curricular Revision

Updated December 2002

• INTENDED LEARNING OUTCOMES OF THE PROGRAM:

GOALS:The general goal of the proposed horticulture curriculum is to provide students a unique education that isa liberal, science-based, effective in personal developing skills, and that will prepare them formanagement-level positions in nurseries, seed companies, landscaping firms, greenhouses, gardencenters, orchards, food processing companies, vegetable farms, or positions where a problem-solvingapproach is needed. This horticulture curriculum will provide graduates with the education and trainingnecessary for them to become effective professionals and leaders in horticulture, their community, theircountry and the world. Students will accrue knowledge, grow in wisdom, and develop their skills relativeto:

1. TECHNICAL KNOWLEDGE. The curriculum will provide graduates with the theoretical andpractical scientific knowledge needed for continued efficient and sustainable production ofhorticulture crops, i.e. fruits, vegetables, spices, turf, and ornamentals as well as the information andsubject-matter mastery required for the exercise of wise judgement in dealing with complex issues inresource management. Business education is essential to effectiveness of the otherwise competentprofessional horticulturist, and it must be instilled in the student that education is a life-long pursuit.

Student Expectations:

• Understand the scope of horticulture and its relationships to other disciplines (e.g., biological,physical, and social sciences) and professions.

• Develop a basic understanding of plant, soil, water, and environmental principles in bothcontrolled environments and field conditions.

• Understand basic technical principles and methods related to production of horticultural crops:plant nutrition, soils and artificial substrates, propagation, breeding, establishment andmaintenance of permanent planting, preparation and planting practices of annual and perennialcrops, cropping systems and cultivation practices, efficient and environmental sound fertilization,pest control strategies, harvesting and marketing strategies and assessment of quality standardsfor horticultural crops.

• Understand basic strategies for efficient and abundant production, harvest, and storage of high-quality food, flowers, turf and herbaceous/woody ornamental crops.

• Be able to recognize common biotic and abiotic stresses, their potential effects on plants atvarious stages of plant development, and options for reduction of stresses with minimaldisturbance to the environment, and human beings.

• Understand formulation and management of soil-based and artificial (soilless) substrates used inhorticultural production. Understand how pest control affects environment and human concerns.

• Be able to identify plants commonly used in the subdiscipline of the graduate.


91

2. PROFESSIONAL SKILLS. Students will develop the personnel management and technical skillsneeded to function in the forefront of an increasingly complex and global society. Oral and writtencommunication, computer and leadership skills, and the critical, integrative thinking capacity thatdevelops competent problem-solving and decision-making is emphasized. Skills development will beintegrated into horticulture courses.

Student Expectations:Communications• Be able to present an effective oral report.

• Be able to orally answer questions extemporaneously in an organized and understandableway.

• Be able to write a concise, grammatically correct report.

• Be able to debate issues in a professional manner.

Leadership• Possess the management skills necessary to motivate and organize a group of peers and

subordinates in defining and solving a problem.

• Be able to work effectively in a team situation either as leader or participant.

• Possess high standards of achievement.

Computer• Be able to productively use word processing, spreadsheet and presentation software.

• Be able to use the computer effectively to organize and interpret information.

• Be competent in electronic communications, including assessing and use of databases, theInternet, electronic bulletin boards, etc.

Problem solving• Given a situation, be able to define the problem, identify the resources needed to solve it and

propose alternative solutions based on the resources and/or needs of the client and theextended global community.

• Be able to analyze and interpret simple research data, understand the mean and probability.

• Be aware of need for continuing education through short courses, seminars, conferences.

General Professional• Have a holistic perspective of the ecosystem, both rural and urban, and the interface between

them.

• Understand basic business concepts: how to interpret a financial statement, calculate a profitor loss and return on investment, to construct a budget.

• Be able to use libraries, electronic repositories of information, and other information sourcesin support of further personal and professional growth.


92

• Be able to perform mathematical calculations appropriate to the profession, and interpretgraphical and tabular information.

• Understand and use terminology appropriate to the field of expertise.

• Be able to interpret laws and regulations as they relate to agricultural production andproducts.

• Be able to prepare a resume and prepare for job and internship interviews.

3. PERSPECTIVE. The graduate should have a holistic perspective of horticulture. Students must beable to visualize integrated systems that operate within a political environment and on a global scale.Students must be able to visualize what makes the whole system work, and understand theresponsibilities of the horticulturist within the system with respect to production and utilization ofhorticultural corps, in both rural and urban settings.

Student Expectations:• Possess an awareness of the rural and urban influence of horticulture, in the U.S. and around the

world.

• Know the basic elements of the metric system of weights and measures.

• Possess a general familiarity with horticultural practices used in other regions of the world andhow, for political, cultural and economic reasons, they differ from those of the Midwestern U.S.

4. ETHICS/VALUES. The curriculum should lead students in development of an appreciation ofethical resource management responsibilities in regional, national and world social and economiccontexts. It must instill an awareness for sustainable management of energy, soil, water, wildlife andother natural resources. Horticulture courses should provide opportunities for ethical debate andvalue judgment that expand one's tolerance and appreciation for the complexities of societal issues.The horticulture curriculum will foster development of a personal, professional code of ethics.

Student Expectations• Be able to recognize and deal appropriately with moral, ethical, and legal conflicts: Recognize a

conflict-of-interest situation involving oneself and one's client or employer; differentiate betweenthe public good and personal goal.

• Appreciate the responsibility of the individual in sustainable management of energy, soil, water,and plants.

5. DIVERSITY. For society to function effectively and justly for each person, graduates mustappreciate the richness that our diverse backgrounds and philosophies bring to the whole. Toleranceof the opinions and practices of others is the hallmark of an educated person.

Student Expectations• Appreciate that our cultural diversity, as expressed through the humanities and arts, adds richness

to our lives.

• Have tolerance of different beliefs and practices.


93

• Apply fundamental concepts of economics and the social sciences to human interaction andorganization.

Student outcomes established for the new horticulture curriculum are essential to the mission of theHorticulture Department and the College of Agriculture to provide modern, high quality undergraduateacademic programs that develop global leaders, advance horticulture, and promote urban development.Student outcomes reflect the general educational goals of the university which help students develop anappreciation of science and technology, an understanding of humane and ethical values, and a globalappreciation of human, cultural, and biological diversity in our society. Our student outcomes also reflectmore specific discipline expectations related to the scientific and technical background, and problemsolving, management, business, and computer skills we believe are essential components of a well-educated horticulturist.


94

INTENDED STUDENT OUTCOMES FOR THE GENERAL EDUCATIONCOMPONENTS OF CURRICULA WITHIN

THE COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE

The intended student outcomes described below are consistent with the goals for undergraduateeducational programs of Iowa State University which are characterized by: "Enhanced liberal educationalcomponents that ensure all undergraduate students, regardless of disciplinary major, literacy in scienceand technology; environmental awareness; communication and analytical skills; humane and ethicalvalues; knowledge of the intellectual, historic, and artistic foundations of our culture; and internationaland multi-cultural awareness and sensitivity." (The Strategic Plan for Iowa State University, 1990).

Expectations of College of Agriculture Graduates:

CommunicationsBe able to speak and write clearly and persuasively.

Demonstrate the skills necessary to prepare effective visual presentation.

Be able to receive information effectively through reading, listening and observation.

Problem-Solving/Critical ThinkingBe able to work effectively with others on complex, issue-laden problems requiring holistic problem-solving approaches.

Demonstrate an ability to:-distinguish verifiable facts from value claims-determine the accuracy of statements-identify assumptions and detect bias-distinguish relevant from irrelevant information-prioritize needs

Be able to summarize, analyze, and interpret simple research data.

EthicsDevelop an ethical perspective and sense of moral responsibility and values.Be able to discuss contemporary ethical and moral issues in professional and private life.Be able to critically evaluate their own arguments and those of others.

Environmental AwarenessUnderstand the physical and biological properties of the environment and how these properties areinterlinked within ecological systems.

Understand how human activities, such as modern agricultural practices, impact on the environment andhow societies are affected by environmental change.

International/Multi-Cultural AwarenessHave an awareness and understanding of cultural diversity within our own nation and around the world.

Develop a global perspective on agricultural, environmental, economic, and natural resource issues.


95

APPENDIX E ROUND I SURVEY


96

Modify Survey

Modify Survey

This survey has at least one response. Only limited changes are allowed on a survey with responses. To fully edit this survey, you must first delete all of the responses, which can be done by clicking here.

National Hort. Competencies Delphi Surv - Basinger

Competencies for the B.S. Horticulture Major

The following pages contain a comprehensive list of technical skills on a likert agreement scale from Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree. Rate each skill according to your agreement with the importance of a student obtaining that skill within a general horticulture undergraduate curriculum. You will be able to select on one level of agreement for each skill.

1. I. Technical Knowledge Competencies: A: Plant Identification Students will be able to:

Very Important Important Neutral Unimportant Very

Unimportant

Identify plants commonly used in the discipline by scientific and common name

Use fundamental knowledge of taxonomy

Use Dictomous Keys Understand basic plant morphology

2. Please add any additional competencies or changes you feel necessary to the previous competencies dealing with plant identification.

http://tyr.tltc.ttu.edu/surveys/ModifySurvey.asp?SurveyID=125 (1 of 17)2/24/2007 3:21:03 PM


97

http://tyr.tltc.ttu.edu/surveys/SurveyList.asp

http://tyr.tltc.ttu.edu/surveys/CreateSurvey.asp


http://tyr.tltc.ttu.edu/surveys/LibraryList.asp

http://tyr.tltc.ttu.edu/surveys/TemplateList.asp

http://tyr.tltc.ttu.edu/surveys/EmailListList.asp

http://tyr.tltc.ttu.edu/surveys/Reports.asp

http://tyr.tltc.ttu.edu/surveys/User.asp?State=Edit

http://tyr.tltc.ttu.edu/surveys/Logout.asp

http://tyr.tltc.ttu.edu/surveys/ChangeStatus.asp?SurveyID=125&Launch=Yes&Status=Open


javascript:clearSurvey('125');

http://tyr.tltc.ttu.edu/surveys/Survey.asp?Nav=ModifySurvey&SurveyID=125

http://tyr.tltc.ttu.edu/surveys/Page.asp?SurveyID=125&PageNumber=1&SurveyName=National Hort. Competencies Delphi Surv - Basinger

javascript:movePage('125', '1');

javascript:reorderItem('517', '1', 'Down');

javascript:itemClicked('517', '1', 'Edit', '1');

javascript:moveItem('517', '1', '125', '1');

javascript:reorderItem('519', '2', 'Up');



Modify Survey


3. I. Technical Knowledge Competencies: B. Field Greenhouse Management Students will be able to:


Unimportant

Define and select planting methods for different horticulture crops

Construct and manage different irrigation, fertilization, and pest management systems

Understand formulations and manage soil-based, artifical substrates used in horticulture

Identify strategies for efficient and abundant production, harvest, and storage of high quality crops (food, flowers, turf)

Perform techniques in both sexual and asexual propagation of plants

4. Please add any additional competencies or changes you feel necessary to the previous competencies dealing with field/greenhouse management.


5. I. Technical Knowledge Competencies: C. Landscape Management Students should be able to:



98


javascript:viewPageConditions('125', '2', 'National Hort. Competencies Delphi Surv - Basinger');

javascript:removePageBreak('125', '2');















Modify Survey


Unimportant

Understand both hardscape and greenscape problems

Identify source of the problem

Apply different pruning techniques

Design an appropriate irrigation schedule for a landscape

Design an appropriate fertility schedule for a landscape

Design an appropriate mowing schedule for a landscape

6. Please add any additional competencies or changes you feel necessary to the previous competencies dealing with landscape management.


7. I. Technical Knowledge Competencies: D. Agriculture Chemicals Students should be able to:


Unimportant

Understand effects of pest control on environment.

Design and Calculate appropriate application of agriculural compounds.

Identify and apply appropriate saftey procedure regarding agricultural compounds.

8. Please add any additional competencies or changes you feel necessary to the previous competencies dealing with Agriculture chemicals.



99














Modify Survey


9. I. Technical Knowledge Competencies: E. Technology Students should be able to:


Unimportant

Understand new technologies within the horticulture discippline

Operate typical horticulture equipment

Operate common word processing software

Operate common spreadsheet software

Operate common presentation software

Operate a computer to organize and interpret information

Understand automation systems within a greenhouse enviroment

10. Please add any additional competencies or changes you feel necessary to the previous competencies dealing with technology


11. I. Life Science Competencies: A: Biological Science Students will be able to:


Unimportant

Demonstrate fundmental knowledge of biological science

Understand cellular structure and function

Operate a microscope and locating structures on a slide



100


















Modify Survey

12. Please add any additional competencies or changes you feel necessary to the previous competencies dealing with biological science.


13. I. Technical Knowledge Competencies: B. Physical Science Students will be able to:


Unimportant

Demonstrate fundamental knowledge of physical science

Understand basic chemical reactions, pH and metric measurements

Use basic laboratory equipment and follow lab protocols

14. Please add any additional competencies or changes you feel necessary to the previous competencies dealing with physical science.


15. I. Technical Knowledge Competencies: C: Plant Physiology Students will be able to:


Unimportant

Understand environmental factors influencing plant growth

Understand Photosynthesis

Understand Respiration Understand the difference between C3, C4, CAM

Understand photoperiod



101





















Modify Survey

Understand plant hormone influence

Recognize how plant respond to environmental stress

16. Please add any additional competencies or changes you feel necessary to the previous competencies dealing with plant physiology.


17. I. Technical Knowledge Competencies: D. Plant Genetics/Biotechnology Students will be able to:


Unimportant

Understand the principles of genetics

Identify how to use genetics for plant improvement

Recognize the potential impact of biotechnology on the environment

Understand the future of genetics through professional development

18. Please add any additional competencies or changes you feel necessary to the previous competencies dealing with plant genetics/biotechnology.




102


















Modify Survey

19. I. Technical Knowledge Competencies: E: Basic Plant Breeding Students will be able to:


Unimportant

Understand the fundamental principles of plant breeding

Recongnize the potential impact plant breeding has on agriculture

20. Please add any additional competencies or changes you feel necessary to the previous competencies dealing with plant breeding.


21. I. Technical Knowledge Competencies: F. Abiotic, Biotic Factors Students will be able to:


Unimportant

Recognize the common biotic and abiotic stresses

Understand potential affect of biotic/abiotic stress on plants at various stages of development

Recognize options for stress reduction with minimal disturbance to environment and human beings

22. Please add any additional competencies or changes you feel necessary to the previous competencies dealing with abiotic/biotic factors.



103

















Modify Survey


23. I. Technical Knowledge Competencies: G. Principles of Soils Students will be able to:


Unimportant

Identify the different soil textures

Recognize the soil-water relationship involved with growing horticulture crops

Understand the influences of soil pH on plants and fertilization methods

Understand the movement of water through the soil-plant-air-continuum

24. Please add any additional competencies or changes you feel necessary to the previous competencies dealing with principles of soils.


25. I. Technical Knowledge Competencies: H: Environmental Awareness Students will be able to:


Unimportant

Understand the impact of human activities on the environment

Recognize how societies are affected by environmental change

Understand how physical and biological properties are interlinked within ecological systems



104


















Modify Survey

26. Please add any additional competencies or changes you feel necessary to the previous competencies dealing with environemental awareness.


27. III. Professional Skill Competencies: Writing/Verbal Skills Students will be able to:


Unimportant

Speak effectively on subject matter within professional curriculum

Write concisely on subject matter within professional curriculum

28. Please add any additional competencies or changes you feel necessary to the previous competencies dealing with writing and verbal skills.


29. III. Professional Skills Competencies: B. Research Skills Students will be able to:


Unimportant

Summarize basic research data

Analyze basic research data

Interpret research data Understand the scientific method

Conduct and implement a research hypthesis and controls



105





















Modify Survey

30. Please add any additional competencies or changes you feel necessary to the previous competencies dealing with research skills.


31. I. Professional Skills Competencies: C. Problem Solving Skills Students will be able to:


Unimportant

Work effectively with others on complex issues

Define problem and identify resources and alternative solutions

32. Please add any additional competencies or changes you feel necessary to the previous competencies

dealing with problem solving skills.

33. III. Professional Skills Competencies: B. Decision-Making Skills

Students will be able to:


Unimportant

Make effective decisions in a short time period

Assess long-term effects of decision

Make decisions on the basis of thorough analysis of a situation

Identify political implications of the decision to be made

Knows ethical implications of the decisions to be made

Recognizes all those affected by the decision



106



















Modify Survey

34. Please add any additional competencies or changes you feel necessary to the previous competencies dealing with decision-making skills.


35. III. Professional Skills Competencies: E. Leadership/Collaborative Skills Students will be able to:


Unimportant

Motivate and organize a group of peers and subordinates in defining and solving a problem

Work effectively in a team situation either as a leader or a participate

Demonstrate high standards of achievement

36. Please add any additional competencies or changes you feel necessary to the previous competencies dealing with leadership skills.


37. III. Professional Skills Competencies: F. Professionalism Students will be able to:


Unimportant

Understand career opportunities in the horticulture discipline

Be acquainted with major horticulture industries

Develop industry connections within the field of interest

Understand basic business management concepts



107





















Modify Survey

Realize need for continuing education through short courses, seminars and conferences

38. Please add any additional competencies or changes you feel necessary to the previous competencies dealing with professionalism.


39. III. Professional Skills Competencies: G. Ethical/Professional Judgement Students will be able to:


Unimportant

Understand ethical issues involved in the formation of professional judgments in horticulture

Develops an ethical perspective and sense of moral responsibility and values

Discuss contemporary ethical and moral issues in professional and private life

Understand the responsibility of the individual in sustainable management of energy, soil, water and plants

Remain aware of changing legislation with regards to ethical and moral issues

40. Please add any additional competencies or changes you feel necessary to the previous competencies dealing with ethical/professional judgment.



108














Modify Survey


41. III. Professional Skills Competencies: G. Lifelong Learning Skills Students will be able to:


Unimportant

Stay updated on lastest developments in horticulture

Gain new knowledge from everyday experiences

42. Please add any additional competencies or changes you feel necessary to the previous competencies dealing with lifelong learning skills


43. III. Professional Skills Competencies: I. Global Perspective Students will be able to:


Unimportant

Demonstrate a global perspective on agricultural issues

Demonstrate a global perspective on environmental issues

Demonstrate a global perspective on economic issues

Demonstrate a global perspective on natural resource issues

Understanding of cultural diversity within the nation and around the world

Demonstrate understanding of different beliefs and practices

Apply fundamental concepts of economics and human interaction



109


















Modify Survey

44. Please add any additional competencies or changes you feel necessary to the previous competencies dealing with global perspective.


45. III. Professional Skills Competencies: J. Historical Perspective Students will be able to:


Unimportant

Apply a historical perspective to the role of science and technology in agriculture

46. III. Professional Skills Competencies: K. Literature and Art



Unimportant

Appreciates and interprets work of literature and the arts

47. III. Professional Skills Competencies: L. Visioning



Unimportant

Understand the scope of horticulture and its relation to other disciplines

Conceptualize the future of the industry

Provide innovative paths for related business to follow

Consider a holistic perspective of the rural and urban ecosystem

48. Please add any additional competencies or changes you feel necessary to the previous competencies dealing with historical perspective, literature and art, visioning.



110






















Modify Survey


49. Please select your age range.

21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70+

Age range

50. Please select the your gender.

Female Male

Gender

51. How many years of higher education teaching experience have you obtained in horticulture?

0 1-3 4-6 7-9 10-13 14-16 16-20 21+

Years

52. How many years have you been employed with your current institution?

0-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21+

Years of employment


53. Select the appropriate job title for your current position

Undergraduate Program Coordinator

Assistant Professor

Associate Professor

Full Professor

Associate Chair

Chair

Other, please specify

54. What are your current responsibilities that involve assessment at your institution?

Coordinate course offerings

Submit content description

Coordinate peer review

Supervise student evaluation of faculty

Counsel teaching faculty on methodology

Counsel teaching faculty on course development

Handle institution documentation with course offering



111






























Modify Survey

Student Advisor

Teach classes

Coordinate intership/co-op expereince for students

Other, please specify

55. Please list the major area of study with each of the following degrees you have completed.

Major area of study

Bachelor's Degree

Master's Degree

Doctorol Degree Post-Doctoral experience

56. How many undergraduate courses in horticulture would you approximately teaching in a 2-year cycle?

# of Courses

Lower-Division

Upper-Division


57. Please select the current student population attending your institution.

1,000-

5,000 5,000-10,000 10,000-

15,000 15,000-20,000 20,000-

25,000 25,000-35,000 35,000-

50,000 50,000-75,000

Student population

58. What range best fits your department's current student population?

0-25 25-50 50-75 75-100 100-150 150-200

Number of students

59. What are your current horticulture degree offerings?

60. How many years has your institution been requiring outcomes assessment?

0 1-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 26+

Number of years



112



























Modify Survey

61. If you department participates in outcomes assessment, what are your current methods of assessing learning outcomes?

ClassApps.com ©2004 SelectSurveyASP Advanced 8.1.1



113






http://www.classapps.com/



APPENDIX F ROUND II SURVEY


114

Modify Survey

Modify Survey


Round II Horticulture Competencies - Basinger


Round II survey is organized in two parts. The first part is a list of Round I competencies showing how a percentage of participants that voted a rating of important/very important for that competency. Any competencies under 75% will be taken out of the list of competencies. The second part is new competencies introduced by the participants that need to be rated. Please, rate each skill according to your agreement with the importance of a student obtaining that skill within a general horticulture undergraduate curriculum. You will be able to select on one level of agreement for each skill. If you have any comments/disagreement with rating of any old skills or want to add to/change a new competency, please do so in the comment box following that section.

1st Round I. Technical Knowledge Competencies: A. Plant Identification Identify plants commonly used int the discipline by scientific and common name - 100% Use fundamental knowledge of taxonomy- 91% Use dichotomous keys- 64% cut Understand basic plant morphology - 100%

1. 2nd Round I. Added Technical Knowledge Competencies: A: Plant Identification*



Unimportant

Identify geographic origin, ecology and adaptability of common plants to environmental conditions

Describe basic family characteristics

Find and examine sources of information to identify plants

Recognize visually common cultivars used in field of interest



115














http://tyr.tltc.ttu.edu/surveys/Page.asp?SurveyID=175&PageNumber=1&SurveyName=Round II Horticulture Competencies - Basinger









Modify Survey



1st Round I. Technical Knowledge Competencies: B. Field Greenhouse Management Define and select planting methods for different horticulture crops - 100% Construct and manage different irrigation, fertilization, and pest management systems- 96% Understand formulations and manage soil-based, artifical substrates used in horticulture - 91% Identify strategies for efficient and abundant production, harvest, and storage of high quality crops (food, flowers, turf) - 90% Perform techniques in both sexual and asexual propagation of plants -91%

3. 2nd Round I. Technical Knowledge Competencies: B. Field Greenhouse Management*



Unimportant

Understand construction, and maintenance of a greenhouse

Know how to apply appropriate plant management involving pruning, training, PGR's and environment ( Light, nutrition, water and soil)




116





javascript:viewPageConditions('175', '2', 'Round II Horticulture Competencies - Basinger');













Modify Survey


1st Round I. Technical Knowledge Competencies: C. Landscape Management Understand both hardscape and greenscape problems- 100% Identify source of the problem - 100% Apply different pruning techniques - 76% Design an appropriate irrigation schedule for a landscape - 86% Design an appropriate fertility schedule for a landscape - 86% Design an appropriate mowing schedule for a landscape - 81%

5. 2nd Round I. Technical Knowledge Competencies: C. Landscape Management*

Students should be able to:


Unimportant

Determine appropriate time management for task

Understands landscape bidding

Recognize appropriate placing for specific plants



1st Round I. Technical Knowledge Competencies: D. Agriculture Chemicals Understand effects of pest control on environment-100% Design and calculate appropriate application of agricultural compounds - 95% Identify and apply appropriate safety procedure regarding agricultural compounds - 96%



117






















Modify Survey

7. 2nd Round I. Technical Knowledge Competencies: D. Agriculture Chemicals*



Unimportant

Recognize governmental regulations that impact agricultural chemical application and use

Design an appropriate chemical application schedule (time, rotation, limitations)

Calculate and make conversions for applying.

Be able to obtain a pesticide license



1st Round I. Technical Knowledge Competencies: E. Technology Understand new technologies within the horticulture discipline- 100% Operate typical horticulture equipment - 82% Operate common word processing software - 91% Operate common spreadsheet software - 86% Operate common presentation software - 67% cut Operate a computer to organize and interpret information - 73% cut Understand automation systems within a greenhouse environment - 77% 2nd Round No new competencies




118


















Modify Survey


1st Round II. Life Science Competencies: A: Biological Science Demonstrate fundamental knowledge of biological science- 100% Understand cellular structure and function- 73% cut Operate a microscope and locating structures on a slide - 54% cut

10. 2nd Round II. Life Science Competencies: A: Biological Science *


Unimportant

Understand plant populations in ecology as well as agriculture



1st Round II. Life Science Competencies: B. Physical Science Demonstrate fundamental knowledge of physical science- 77% Understand basic chemical reactions, pH and metric measurements- 95% Use basic laboratory equipment and follow lab protocols - 78% 2nd Round No new competencies




119

























Modify Survey


1st Round II. Life Science Competencies: C. Plant Physiology Understand environmental factors influencing plant growth - 100% Understand Photosynthesis - 100% Understand Respiration - 100% Understand the difference between C3, C4, CAM - 68% cut Understand photoperiod - 100% Understand plant hormone influence - 91% Recognize how a plant responds to environmental stress - 100%

13. 2nd Round II. Life Science: C. Plant Physiology*



Unimportant

Understand herbaceous and woody plant anatomy

Understand plant nutrient uptake and use

Understand plant responses to programming by means of light, and temperature



I. Life Science: D. Plant Genetics/Biotechnology Understand the principles of genetics- 82% Identify how to use genetics for plant improvement - 64% cut Recognize the potential impact of biotechnology on the environment- 63% cut Understand the future of genetics through professional development - 46% cut



120






















Modify Survey

15. I. Life Science: D. Plant Genetics/Biotechnology*



Unimportant

Understand the relationship of genetics to plant improvement through plant breeding and selection

Understand the bases for genetics and be able to extend that knowledge to understanding genetically modified organisms and plant breeding



I. Life Science: E: Basic Plant Breeding Understand the fundamental principles of plant breeding - 68 % cut Recognize the potential impact plant breeding has on agriculture - 87%




121


















Modify Survey


I. Life Science: F. Abiotic, Biotic Factors Recognize the common biotic and abiotic stresses - 100% Understand potential effect of biotic/abiotic stress on plants at various stages of development - 95% Recognize options for stress reduction with minimal disturbance to environment and human beings - 86%



1st Round II. Life Science: G. Principles of Soils Identify the different soil textures - 82% Recognize the soil-water relationship involved with growing horticulture crops - 100% Understand the influences of soil pH on plants and fertilization methods - 100% Understand the movement of water through the soil-plant-air-continuum - 87%

19. 2nd Round I. Life Science: G. Principles of Soils*



Unimportant

Apply knowledge of soils to field soils, displaced soils and artificial substrates in containers

Assess soil type in the irrigation management schedule




122

























Modify Survey


I. Life Science Competencies: H: Environmental Awareness Understand the impact of human activities on the environment - 96% Recognize how societies are affected by environmental change - 68% cut Understand how physical and biological properties are interlinked within ecological systems - 91%

21. Round II I. Life Science Competencies: H: Environmental Awareness*



Unimportant

Recognize governmental regulations concerning the environment and why they were enacted

Understand the basis for IPM and organic practices

Identify invasive species issues



1st Round III. Professional Skill Competencies: Writing/Verbal Skills Speak effectively on subject matter within professional curriculum - 95% Write concisely on subject matter within professional curriculum - 96%

23. 2nd Round III. Professional Skill Competencies: Writing/Verbal Skills*



Unimportant

Apply critical thinking with respect to analyzing and interpreting available information



123


























Modify Survey



1st Round III. Professional Skills Competencies: B. Research Skills Summarize basic research data - 73% cut Analyze basic research data - 46% - cut Interpret research data - 72% - cut Understand the scientific method - 92% Conduct and implement a research hypothesis and controls - 64% cut

25. 2nd Round III. Professional Skills Competencies: B. Research Skills*



Unimportant

Interpret graphical representation of data, environmental summaries, and flow charts

Recognize the use of statistics and be able to interpret basic statistical concepts

Present conclusions or recommendations and be able to support them




124


















Modify Survey


III. Professional Skills Competencies: C. Problem Solving Skills Work effectively with others on complex issues - 100% Define problem and identify resources and alternative solutions - 90%

27. III. Professional Skills Competencies: C. Problem Solving Skills*



Unimportant

Work effectively with others on complex issues

Define problem and identify resources and alternative solutions



1st Round

III. Professional Skills Competencies: B. Decision-Making Skills Make effective decisions in a short time period - 82% Assess long-term effects of decision - 86% Make decisions on the basis of thorough analysis of a situation - 91% Identify political implications of the decision to be made - 45% cut Knows ethical implications of the decisions to be made - 82% Recognize all those affected by the decision - 82%

29. III. Professional Skills Competencies: B. Decision-Making Skills*


Very

Important Important Neutral Unimportant Very Unimportant

Express and defend decisions effectively




125



























Modify Survey


1st Round III. Professional Skills Competencies: E. Leadership/Collaborative Skills Motivate and organize a group of peers and subordinates in defining and solving a problem - 50% cut Work effectively in a team situation either as a leader or a participate - 91% Demonstrate high standards of achievement - 87%

31. 2nd Round: III. Professional Skills Competencies: E. Leadership/Collaborative Skills*



Unimportant

Capability of recognizing alternative view points

Implement a solution to a problem



1st Round III. Professional Skills Competencies: F. Professionalism Understand career opportunities in the horticulture discipline - 86% Be acquainted with major horticulture industries - 91% Develop industry connections within the field of interest - 86% Understand basic business management concepts - 91% Realize need for continuing education through short courses, seminars and conferences - 95%

33. 2nd Round III. Professional Skills Competencies: F. Professionalism*



Unimportant

Identify current trens and topics through current literature and media

Obtain appropriate client skills



126


























Modify Survey



1st Round III. Professional Skills Competencies: G. Ethical/Professional Judgement Understand ethical issues involved in the formation of professional judgments in horticulture - 91% Develops an ethical perspective and sense of moral responsibility and values - 86% Discuss contemporary ethical and moral issues in professional and private life - 59% cut Understand the responsibility of the individual in sustainable management of energy, soil, water and plants- 77% Remain aware of changing legislation with regards to ethical and moral issues - 55% cut 2nd Round: No new competencies



1st Round III. Professional Skills Competencies: G. Lifelong Learning Skills Stay updated on lastest developments in horticulture - 91% Gain new knowledge from everyday experiences - 77% 2nd Round No new competencies




127
























Modify Survey


III. Professional Skills Competencies: I. Global Perspective Demonstrate a global perspective on agricultural issues - 60% cut Demonstrate a global perspective on environmental issues- 73% cut Demonstrate a global perspective on economic issues - 41% cut Demonstrate a global perspective on natural resource issues -57% cut Understanding of cultural diversity within the nation and around the world - 64% cut Demonstrate understanding of different beliefs and practices - 55% cut Apply fundamental concepts of economics and human interaction - 23% cut 2nd Round No new competencies



1st Round III. Professional Skills Competencies: J. Historical Perspective Appreciate a historical perspective to the role of science and technology in agriculture - 45% cut 2nd Round No new competencies

III. Professional Skills Competencies: K. Literature and Art

Appreciates and interprets work of literature and the arts - 36% cut 2nd Round No new competencies

III. Professional Skills Competencies: L. Visioning

Understand the scope of horticulture and its relation to other disciplines - 86% Conceptualize the future of the industry - 64% cut Provide innovative paths for related business to follow - 39% cut Consider a holistic perspective of the rural and urban ecosystem - 55% cut 2nd Round No new competencies



128


























Modify Survey


dealing with historical perspective, literature and art, visioning.

39. Please Rank the section of competencies to whether it should be included as a competency or not.

Please use the following comment box for ideas on combining sections or new names for sections.*


Unimportant

1. Plant Identification 2. Greenhouse Management

3. Landscape Management

4. Agriculture Chemicals

5. Technology

6. Biological Science

7. Physical Science

8. Plant Physiology 9. Plant Genetics/Biotechnology

10. Basic Plant Breeding 11. Abiotic, Biotic Factors

13. Principles of Soils 14. Environmental Awareness

15. Writing/Verbal Skills

16. Research Skills 17. Problem Solving Skills

18. Decision-Making Skills

19. Leadership/Collaborative Skills

20. Professionalism 21. Ethical/Professional Judgment

22. Lifelong Learning Skills

23. Global Perspective 24. Historical Perspective

25. Literature and Art

26. Visioning



129









Modify Survey

40. In the comment box, add any ideas of combining sections, changing names to be more appropriate, etc.




130









APPENDIX G ROUND III SURVEY


131

Modify Survey

Modify Survey


Round III Horticulture Competencies - Basinger


Round III survey is organized in two parts. The first part is a list of Round I & II competencies showing how a percentage of participants that voted a rating of important/very important for that competency. Any competencies under 75% will be taken out of the list of competencies. The second part is new competencies introduced or changes in old competencies by the participants that need to be rated. Please, rate each skill according to your agreement with the importance of a student obtaining that skill within a general horticulture undergraduate curriculum. You will be able to select on one level of agreement for each skill. If you have any comments/disagreement with rating of any old skills or want to add to/change a new competency, please do so in the comment box following that section.

I. Technical Knowledge Competencies: A. Plant Identification 1st Round Identify plants commonly used int the discipline by scientific and common name - 100% Use fundamental knowledge of taxonomy- 91% Use dichotomous keys- 64% cut Understand basic plant morphology - 100% 2nd Round Identify geographic origin, ecology and adaptability of common plants to environmental conditions - 78% Describe basic family characteristics - 73% cut Find and examine sources of information to identify plants - 94% Recognize visually common cultivars used in field of interest - 68% cut

1. 3rd Round I. Added Technical Knowledge Competencies: A: Plant Identification (Competencies are

broken apart and wording is changed)* Students will be able to:


Unimportant

1. Identify geographic origin of common plants

2. Identify adaptability of common plants to environmental conditions



132














http://tyr.tltc.ttu.edu/surveys/Page.asp?SurveyID=181&PageNumber=1&SurveyName=Round III Horticulture Competencies - Basinger









Modify Survey



I. Technical Knowledge Competencies: B. Field & Greenhouse Management 1st Round Define and select planting methods for different horticulture crops - 100% Construct and manage different irrigation, fertilization, and pest management systems- 96% Understand formulations and manage soil-based, artifical substrates used in horticulture - 91% Identify strategies for efficient and abundant production, harvest, and storage of high quality crops (food, flowers, turf) - 90% Perform techniques in both sexual and asexual propagation of plants -91% 2nd Round Understand construction, and maintenance of a greenhouse - 100% Know how to apply appropriate plant management involving pruning, training, PGR's and environment ( light, nutrition, water and soil) - 94%

3. 3rd Round I. Technical Knowledge Competencies: B. Field & Greenhouse Management*



Unimportant

Demonstrate ability to produce a quality plant and turn a profit

Understand basis for scheduling crops




133





javascript:viewPageConditions('181', '2', 'Round III Horticulture Competencies - Basinger');













Modify Survey


I. Technical Knowledge Competencies: C. Landscape Management 1st Round Understand both hardscape and greenscape problems- 100% Identify source of the problem - 100% Apply different pruning techniques - 76% Design an appropriate irrigation schedule for a landscape - 86% Design an appropriate fertility schedule for a landscape - 86% Design an appropriate mowing schedule for a landscape - 81% 2nd Round Determine appropriate time management for task - 73% cut Understands landscape bidding - 84% Recognize appropriate placing for specific plants - 94%

5. 3rd Round I. Technical Knowledge Competencies: C. Landscape Management*



Unimportant

1. Understand how and why of planting a plant (size, depth of hole, backfill, where the root collar or crown must be relative to grade)

2. Recognize and solve root problems such as encircling roots, J and U roots





134



















Modify Survey

I. Technical Knowledge Competencies: D. Agriculture Chemicals 1st Round Understand effects of pest control on environment-100% Design and calculate appropriate application of agricultural compounds - 95% Identify and apply appropriate safety procedure regarding agricultural compounds - 96% 2nd Round Recognize governmental regulations that impact agricultural chemical application and use - 94% Design an appropriate chemical application schedule (time, rotation, limitations) - 94% Calculate and make conversions for applying - 94% Be able to obtain a pesticide license - 89%

7. 3rd Round I. Technical Knowledge Competencies: D. Agriculture Chemicals*


Very


Understand the content of a pesticide label



I. Technical Knowledge Competencies: E. Technology 1st Round Understand new technologies within the horticulture discipline- 100% Operate typical horticulture equipment - 82% Operate common word processing software - 91% Operate common spreadsheet software - 86% Operate common presentation software - 67% cut Operate a computer to organize and interpret information - 73% cut Understand automation systems within a greenhouse environment - 77% 2nd Round No new competencies

9. 3rd Round I. Technical Knowledge Competencies: E. Technology*



Unimportant

Operate equipment such as a soluble salts meter, pH meter, light meter and apply data collected from it.



135






















Modify Survey



II. Life Science Competencies: A: Biological Science 1st Round Demonstrate fundamental knowledge of biological science- 100% Understand cellular structure and function- 73% cut Operate a microscope and locating structures on a slide - 54% cut 2nd Round Understand plant populations in ecology as well as agriculture - 42% cut

11. 3rd Round II. Life Science Competencies: A: Biological Science *


Unimportant

Relate cropping relationships of horticulture crops to native relatives



II. Life Science Competencies: B. Physical Science 1st Round Demonstrate fundamental knowledge of physical science- 77% Understand basic chemical reactions, pH and metric measurements- 95% Use basic laboratory equipment and follow lab protocols - 78% 2nd Round No new competencies 3rd Round No new competencies



136

























Modify Survey



II. Life Science Competencies: C. Plant Physiology 1st Round Understand environmental factors influencing plant growth - 100% Understand Photosynthesis - 100% Understand Respiration - 100% Understand the difference between C3, C4, CAM - 68% cut Understand photoperiod - 100% Understand plant hormone influence - 91% Recognize how a plant responds to environmental stress - 100% 2nd Round Understand herbaceous and woody plant anatomy - 95% Understand plant nutrient uptake and use - 100% Understand plant responses to programming by means of light, and temperature - 89%

14. 3rd Round II. Life Science: C. Plant Physiology*



Unimportant

1. Manipulate plant management scheduling for greenhouse application, over-wintering, etc.

2. Select plants for interior and landscape plantings

3. Understand plant physiology in regards to post-harvest handling of cuts (flower/fruit) and whole plants




137


















Modify Survey


II. Life Science: D. Plant Genetics/Biotechnology 1st Round Understand the principles of genetics- 82% Identify how to use genetics for plant improvement - 64% cut Recognize the potential impact of biotechnology on the environment- 63% cut Understand the future of genetics through professional development - 46% cut 2nd Round Understand the relationship of genetics to plant improvement through plant breeding and selection - 84% Understand the bases for genetics and be able to extend that knowledge to understanding genetically modified organisms and plant breeding - 79%

16. 3rd Round II. Life Science: D. Plant Genetics/Biotechnology*



Unimportant

1. Understand the difference and similarties between classical plant breeding and modern genetic engineering approach

2. Understand how mutations arise



II. Life Science: E. Basic Plant Breeding 1st Round Understand the fundamental principles of plant breeding - 68 % cut (upon request, vote again in Round III) Recognize the potential impact plant breeding has on agriculture - 87% 2nd Round No new competencies



138






















Modify Survey

18. 3rd Round II. Life Science: E. Plant Breeding*



Unimportant

Understand the fundamental principles of plant breeding



II. Life Science: F. Abiotic, Biotic Factors 1st Round Recognize the common biotic and abiotic stresses - 100% Understand potential effect of biotic/abiotic stress on plants at various stages of development - 95% Recognize options for stress reduction with minimal disturbance to environment and human beings - 86% 2nd Round No new competencies 3rd Round No new competencies





139






















Modify Survey

II. Life Science: G. Principles of Soils 1st Round Identify the different soil textures - 82% Recognize the soil-water relationship involved with growing horticulture crops - 100% Understand the influences of soil pH on plants and fertilization methods - 100% Understand the movement of water through the soil-plant-air-continuum - 87% 2nd Round Apply knowledge of soils to field soils, displaced soils and artificial substrates in containers - 95% Assess soil type in the irrigation management schedule - 95% 3rd Round No new competencies



II. Life Science Competencies: H: Environmental Awareness 1st Round Understand the impact of human activities on the environment - 96% Recognize how societies are affected by environmental change - 68% cut Understand how physical and biological properties are interlinked within ecological systems - 91% 2nd Round Recognize governmental regulations concerning the environment and why they were enacted - 73% cut Understand the basis for IPM and organic practices - 95% Identify invasive species issues - 79%

22. 3rd Round I. Life Science Competencies: H: Environmental Awareness*



Unimportant

Identify and analyze solutions to specific environmental issues (air/water pollution, erosion, microbial contamination)



140


















Modify Survey



III. Professional Skill Competencies: A. Writing/Verbal Skills 1st Round Speak effectively on subject matter within professional curriculum - 95% Write concisely on subject matter within professional curriculum - 96% 2nd Round: Apply critical thinking with respect to analyzing and interpreting available information - 100% 3rd Round: No new competencies



III. Professional Skills Competencies: B. Research Skills 1st Round Summarize basic research data - 73% cut Analyze basic research data - 46% - cut Interpret research data - 72% - cut Understand the scientific method - 92% Conduct and implement a research hypothesis and controls - 64% cut 2nd Round Interpret graphical representation of data, environmental summaries, and flow charts - 84% Recognize the use of statistics and be able to interpret basic statistical concepts - 84% Present conclusions or recommendations and be able to support them - 84% 3rd Round No new competencies



141





















Modify Survey



III. Professional Skills Competencies: C. Problem Solving Skills 1st Round Work effectively with others on complex issues - 100% Define problem and identify resources and alternative solutions - 90% 2nd Round No new competencies 3rd Round No new competencies



III. Professional Skills Competencies: D. Decision-Making Skills

1st Round Make effective decisions in a short time period - 82% Assess long-term effects of decision - 86% Make decisions on the basis of thorough analysis of a situation - 91% Identify political implications of the decision to be made - 45% cut Knows ethical implications of the decisions to be made - 82% Recognize all those affected by the decision - 82% 2nd Round Express and defend decisions effectively - 95% 3rd Round No new competencies




142






















Modify Survey


III. Professional Skills Competencies: E. Leadership/Collaborative Skills 1st Round Motivate and organize a group of peers and subordinates in defining and solving a problem - 50% cut Work effectively in a team situation either as a leader or a participate - 91% Demonstrate high standards of achievement - 87% 2nd Round Capability of recognizing alternative view points - 84% Implement a solution to a problem - 84%

28. 3rd Round: III. Professional Skills Competencies: E. Leadership/Collaborative Skills*



Unimportant

1. Conduct a professional meeting

2. Summarize concisely a group's decision

3. Identify and lead a group through the decision making process



III. Professional Skills Competencies: F. Professionalism 1st Round Understand career opportunities in the horticulture discipline - 86% Be acquainted with major horticulture industries - 91% Develop industry connections within the field of interest - 86% Understand basic business management concepts - 91% Realize need for continuing education through short courses, seminars and conferences - 95% 2nd Round Identify current trends and topics through current literature and media - 63% cut Obtain appropriate client skills - 47% cut



143






















Modify Survey

30. 3rd Round: III. Professional Skills Competencies: F. Professionalism*


Very


Obtain experience in at least one internship



III. Professional Skills Competencies: G. Ethical/Professional Judgement 1st Round Understand ethical issues involved in the formation of professional judgments in horticulture - 91% Develops an ethical perspective and sense of moral responsibility and values - 86% Discuss contemporary ethical and moral issues in professional and private life - 59% cut Understand the responsibility of the individual in sustainable management of energy, soil, water and plants- 77% Remain aware of changing legislation with regards to ethical and moral issues - 55% cut 2nd Round: No new competencies 3rd Round: No new competencies




144


















Modify Survey


III. Professional Skills Competencies: G. Lifelong Learning Skills 1st Round Stay updated on lastest developments in horticulture - 91% Gain new knowledge from everyday experiences - 77% 2nd Round No new competencies

33. 3rd Round: III. Professional Skills Competencies: G. Lifelong learning skills*



Unimportant

Use the internet to seek out new technologies, information, trends and business management skills



III. Professional Skills Competencies: I. Global Perspective 1st Round Demonstrate a global perspective on agricultural issues - 60% cut Demonstrate a global perspective on environmental issues- 73% cut Demonstrate a global perspective on economic issues - 41% cut Demonstrate a global perspective on natural resource issues -57% cut Understanding of cultural diversity within the nation and around the world - 64% cut Demonstrate understanding of different beliefs and practices - 55% cut Apply fundamental concepts of economics and human interaction - 23% cut 2nd Round No new competencies



145






















Modify Survey

35. 3rd Round: III. Professional Skills Competencies: H. Global Perspective (Round I competencies

requested to be revoted and revised)* Students will be able to:


Unimportant

1. Understand the geopolitical and economic influence of the United States on global socioeconomic dynamics (new)

2. Demonstrate a global perspective on agricultural issues

3. Demonstrate a global perspective on environmental issues

4. Understanding of cultural diversity within the nation and around the world

5. Demonstrate understanding of different beliefs and practices



III. Professional Skills Competencies: J. Historical Perspective 1st Round Appreciate a historical perspective to the role of science and technology in agriculture - 45% cut 2nd Round No new competencies

37. 3rd Round: III. Professional Skills Competencies: J. Historical Perspective (Round I cut competencies



Unimportant

1. Appreciate a historical perspective to the role of science and technology in agriculture



146



















Modify Survey

III. Professional Skills Competencies: K. Literature and Art

1st Round Appreciates and interprets work of literature and the arts - 36% cut 2nd Round No new competencies

38. 3rd Round: III. Professional Skills Competencies: K. Literature and Art (Round I cut competencies



Unimportant

1. Appreciates and interprets work of literature and the arts

III. Professional Skills Competencies: L. Visioning

1st Round Understand the scope of horticulture and its relation to other disciplines - 86% Conceptualize the future of the industry - 64% cut Provide innovative paths for related business to follow - 39% cut Consider a holistic perspective of the rural and urban ecosystem - 55% cut 2nd Round No new competencies

39. 3rd Round: III. Professional Skills Competencies: L. Visioning (Round I cut competencies requested to

be revoted and revised)* Students will be able to:


Unimportant

1. Conceptualize the future of the industry

2. Provide innovative paths for related business to follow

3. Consider a holistic perspective of the rural and urban ecosystem

40. Please add any additional competencies or changes you feel necessary to the previous competencies dealing with historical perspective, literature and art, visioning.



147




















Modify Survey


The following sections of competencies where ranked according to importance ot the horticulture major * 1. Plant Identification - 100% 2. Greenhouse Management - 95% 3. Landscape Management - 100% 4. Agriculture Chemicals - 100% 5. Technology - 95% 6. Biological Science - 89% 7. Physical Science - 79% 8. Plant Physiology - 95% 9. Plant Genetics/Biotechnology - 74% 10. Basic Plant Breeding - 53% 11. Abiotic, Biotic Factors - 100% 12. Principles of Soils - 100% 13. Environmental Awareness - 73% 14. Writing/Verbal Skills (Communication Skills) - 100% 15. Research Skills - 53% 16. Problem Solving Skills - 95% 17. Decision-Making Skills - 100% 18. Leadership/Collaborative Skills - 95% 19. Professionalism - 100% 20. Ethical/Professional Judgment - 89% 21. Lifelong Learning Skills - 79% 22. Global Perspective - 58% 23. Historical Perspective - 37% 24. Literature and Art - 37% 25. Visioning - 42%

41. In the comment box, add any ideas of combining sections, changing names to be more appropriate, etc.




148
















APPENDIX H STUDENT COMPETENCY SURVEY


149

PSS Senior Seminar Survey- Self Evaluation of Knowledge, Skills, Ability

yA yCheck the blank box under the ability that according to corresponds to your knowledge/ ability to perform. On the right of the statement Indicate where the ability/knowledge was obtained. High abilit dequate Abilit No ability Competency

Analyze basic research data Apply critical thinking with respect to analyzing and interpreting available information Apply different pruning techniquesApply fundamental concepts of economics and human interactionApply knowledge of soils to field soils, displaced soils and artificial substrates in containers Appreciate a historical perspective to the role of science and technology in agricultureAppreciates and interprets work of literature and the arts Assess long-term effects of decisionAssess soil type in the irrigation management schedule Be able to obtain a pesticide license Be acquainted with major horticulture industries Calculate and make conversions for applyingCapability of recognizing alternative view points Conceptualize the future of the industry Conduct a professional meetingConduct and implement a research hypothesis and controls Consider a holistic perspective of the rural and urban ecosystemConstruct and manage different irrigation, fertilization, and pest management systemsDefine and select planting methods for different horticulture crops Define problem and identify resources and alternative solutions Demonstrate a global perspective on agricultural issuesDemonstrate a global perspective on economic issues - Demonstrate a global perspective on environmental issuesDemonstrate a global perspective on natural resource issuesDemonstrate ability to produce a quality plant and turn a profitDemonstrate fundamental knowledge of biological scienceDemonstrate fundamental knowledge of physical scienceDemonstrate high standards of achievementDemonstrate understanding of different beliefs and practicesDescribe basic family characteristicsDesign an appropriate chemical application schedule (time, rotation, limitations) Design an appropriate fertility schedule for a landscapeDesign an appropriate irrigation schedule for a landscapeDesign an appropriate mowing schedule for a landscapeDesign and calculate appropriate application of agricultural compoundsDetermine appropriate time management for taskDevelop industry connections within the field of interestDevelops an ethical perspective and sense of moral responsibility and values Discuss contemporary ethical and moral issues in professional and private life Express and defend decisions effectively Find and examine sources of information to identify plantsGain new knowledge from everyday experiences Identify adaptability of common plants to environmental conditionsIdentify and analyze solutions to specific environmental issues (air/water pollution, erosion, microbial contamination)Identify and apply appropriate safety procedure regarding agricultural compounds Identify and lead a group through the decision making processIdentify current trends and topics through current literature and media Identify geographic origin of common plantsIdentify geographic origin, ecology and adaptability of common plants to environmental conditionsIdentify how to use genetics for plant improvement Identify invasive species issues Identify plants commonly used in the discipline by scientific and common nameIdentify political implications of the decision to be made Identify source of the problemIdentify strategies for efficient and abundant production, harvest, and storage of high quality crops (food, flowers, turf)


150


Identify the different soil textures Implement a solution to a problemInterpret graphical representation of data, environmental summaries, and flow chartsInterpret research dataKnow how to apply appropriate plant management involving pruning, training, PGR's and environment ( light, nutrition, water and soil)Knows ethical implications of the decisions to be madeMake decisions on the basis of thorough analysis of a situationMake effective decisions in a short time periodManipulate plant management scheduling for greenhouse application, overwintering, etc.Motivate and organize a group of peers and subordinates in defining and solving a problem Obtain appropriate client skills Obtain experience in at least one internshipOperate a computer to organize and interpret information Operate a microscope and locating structures on a slide Operate common presentation software Operate common spreadsheet softwareOperate common word processing softwareOperate equipment such as a soluble salts meter, pH meter, light meter and apply data collected from itOperate typical horticulture equipmentPerform techniques in both sexual and asexual propagation of plantsPresent conclusions or recommendations and be able to support them Provide innovative paths for related business to followRealize need for continuing education through short courses, seminars and conferencesRecognize all those affected by the decisionRecognize and solve root problems such as encircling roots, J and U rootsRecognize appropriate placing for specific plantsRecognize governmental regulations concerning the environment and why they were enactedRecognize governmental regulations that impact agricultural chemical application and useRecognize how a plant responds to environmental stress Recognize how societies are affected by environmental change Recognize options for stress reduction with minimal disturbance to environment and human beingsRecognize the common biotic and abiotic stressesRecognize the potential impact of biotechnology on the environmentRecognize the potential impact plant breeding has on agriculture Recognize the soil-water relationship involved with growing horticulture crops Recognize the use of statistics and be able to interpret basic statistical conceptsRecognize visually common cultivars used in field of interestRelate cropping relationships of horticulture crops to native relativesRemain aware of changing legislation with regards to ethical and moral issues Select plants for interior and landscape plantingsSpeak effectively on subject matter within professional curriculum Stay updated on latest developments in horticulture Summarize basic research data Summarize concisely a group's decisionUnderstand automation systems within a greenhouse environment Understand basic business management concepts Understand basic chemical reactions, pH and metric measurementsUnderstand basic plant morphologyUnderstand basis for scheduling cropsUnderstand both hardscape and greenscape problemsUnderstand career opportunities in the horticulture discipline Understand cellular structure and functionUnderstand construction, and maintenance of a greenhouse Understand effects of pest control on environmentUnderstand environmental factors influencing plant growthUnderstand ethical issues involved in the formation of professional judgments in horticulture Understand formulations and manage soil-based, artificial substrates used in horticulture


151


Understand herbaceous and woody plant anatomyUnderstand how and why of planting a plant (size, depth of hole, backfill, where the root collar or crown bust be relative to grade)Understand how mutations ariseUnderstand how physical and biological properties are interlinked within ecological systemsUnderstand new technologies within the horticulture disciplineUnderstand photoperiod Understand PhotosynthesisUnderstand plant hormone influence Understand plant nutrient uptake and use Understand plant physiology for post-harvest handling of cuts (flowers/fruit) and whole plantsUnderstand plant populations in ecology as well as agricultureUnderstand plant responses to programming by means of light, and temperatureUnderstand potential effect of biotic/abiotic stress on plants at various stages of developmentUnderstand RespirationUnderstand the bases for genetics and be able to extend that knowledge to understanding genetically modified organisms and plant breedinUnderstand the basis for IPM and organic practicesUnderstand the content of a pesticide labelUnderstand the difference and similarities between classical plant breeding and modern genetic engineering approachUnderstand the difference between C3, C4, CAM Understand the fundamental principles of plant breedingUnderstand the future of genetics through professional developmentUnderstand the geopolitical and economic influence of the United States on global socioeconomic dynamicsUnderstand the impact of human activities on the environment Understand the influences of soil pH on plants and fertilization methods Understand the movement of water through the soil-plant-air-continuum Understand the principles of geneticsUnderstand the relationship of genetics to plant improvement through plant breeding and selectionUnderstand the responsibility of the individual in sustainable management of energy, soil, water and plantsUnderstand the scientific method Understand the scope of horticulture and its relation to other disciplines Understanding of cultural diversity within the nation and around the worldUnderstands landscape bidding Use basic laboratory equipment and follow lab protocolsUse dichotomous keysUse fundamental knowledge of taxonomy Use the internet to seek out new technologies, information, trends and business management skillsWork effectively in a team situation either as a leader or a participate Work effectively with others on complex issues Write concisely on subject matter within professional curriculum

What is your Major?

Classification?

What job/career to you desire to have immediately after your graduation?

What job/career is your dream career?


152

Copyright 2007, Ashley Basinger

Documents

Transcript of Copyright 2007, Ashley Basinger