The first in a series of three English-language International Training Courses in Aquaculture, financed jointly by AGFUND and the Government of Hungary, was held from 13 April to 10 July 1987.
Eighteen participants from fifteen countries in Asia, Africa and the Caribbean attended this course in Warmwater Fish Hatchery Management.
The course was divided between two centres in Hungary, the first two months being spent at the Warmwater Fish Hatchery, Százhalombatta, and the final month at the Fish Culture Research Institute, Szárvás. Instruction took the form of approximately 50 percent practical classes and 50 percent lectures. Most of the teachers were Hungarian experts, with the addition of international consultants recruited by FAO to cover specialist topics when necessary. Field study tours to visit commercial fish-farms and ancillary industries were also arranged.
The quality and success of the course was evaluated by the participants in confidential questionnaires. These revealed a high level of satisfaction with most aspects of the organization and teaching, though some improvements to the design of practical classes, allowing more personal student involvement in tasks, were considered desirable for future courses. The First International Training Course in Aquaculture was thus a successful and encouraging start to the planned series.
The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) identified three key factors limiting the success and expansion of aquaculture in developing countries, i.e. a shortage of fish seed, lack of knowledge about and availability of fish feeds, and a shortage of skilled fish-farm managers. To help address these problems, a series of three International Training Courses in Aquaculture were organized (project GCP/INT/435/AGF). The courses were to be taught in the English language, and each to be of three months' duration.
For some years, FAO has assisted the development of Hungary as a centre of expertise in warmwater fish culture. The Government of Hungary readily agreed to host the International Training Courses, to help finance them, and to make the necessary facilities and teachers available. Co-financing was generously provided by the Arab Gulf Programme for the United Nations Development Organizations (AGFUND) under a trust fund agreement signed on 18 March 1986. FAO took responsibility for implementation of the project in cooperation with the Hungarian Government.
This report reviews the implementation of the first of the three courses, held in Hungary from 13 April to 10 July 1987. The course on Freshwater Fish Hatchery Management was designed to teach a range of fundamental and advanced techniques for the mass-production of warmwater fish larvae in hatcheries, and for subsequent feeding and growing of these small fish in ponds to the fry or fingerling stage of development. Shortages of larvae, fry and fingerlings for stocking grow-out facilities have often been the main cause of failures in development plans. However, using modern methods, one modest hatchery can provide millions of juveniles. Properly distributed, these young fish can be sufficient to support a substantial nationwide industry. Thus, in this field a single individual properly trained as a hatchery manager or extension adviser can have a major beneficial impact on the growth of aquaculture in his/her country. The course aimed to train 18 such individuals.
Nominations were invited from 21 countries in Asia, Africa and the Caribbean in which FAO considered modern freshwater hatchery technology to be applicable. The 18 candidates selected for training came from 15 different countries: Burma, China, India, Indonesia, Jamaica, Kenya, Lesotho, Malaysia, Nepal, Nigeria, Pakistan, Turkey, Vietnam, Zambia and Zimbabwe. A full list of the names and addresses of participants is given in Appendix 1.
The trainees were all graduates in agriculture, fisheries or a related subject, but otherwise their professional backgrounds varied widely. Some were employed in their home countries as fish hatchery managers, some as extension advisers, some university teachers and some as extension workers. One was an employee of his country's Agriculture and Fisheries Development Bank. Their ages ranged from the early twenties to fifty years. Two participants had some language difficulty, but not to the extent that they were unable to follow the course. Generally, it was felt that the range of experience was a positive factor, and round-table discussions in which trainees presented details of conditions and fish-farming in their own countries were enjoyed by everyone.
The course was held at two centres in Hungary: from 13 April to 13 June at the Warmwater Fish Hatchery (TEHAG), Százhalombatta, and from 13 June to 10 July at the Fish Culture Research Institute (HAKI), Szárvás. At TEHAG, accommodation was in the hatchery's own guest rooms, whilst at HAKI, students lived in a motel close to the Institute.
The National Project Manager, Mr. Istvan Ozorai, handled administrative and financial matters from his office at the Ministry of Agriculture and Food in Budapest. The Course Director was Dr. Gizella Tamás from TEHAG, and during that part of the course held at Szárvás, her place was taken by Dr. Agnes Kintzly. Representing FAO, the Course Co-Director and Coordinator was Dr. David Edwards, who was also responsible for formulating the programme of instruction in collaboration with the staff of both host institutes. Most of the teaching was done by professional staff of TEHAG and HAKI, with a major input being provided by the Course Director, Dr. Tamás. In addition, contributions were made by experts of the Agrober Company, and the Hungarian Veterinary, Limnological, and Water Quality Institutes.
The course was designed to provide training in freshwater fish propagation and culture. The greater emphasis was given to the management of hatcheries for common carp and the major Chinese carps, followed by European catfish and pike-perch. Other fish species cultured in Hungary, including ornamentals, received less attention. Consultants were recruited internationally by FAO to give instruction in the culture of important fish species not routinely reared in Hungary. Dr. K. Rana, of the University of Stirling in Scotland, taught about tilapia culture and Mr. J. Janssen, of the African Regional Aquaculture Centre (ARAC) in Port Harcourt, Nigeria, lectured on African catfish propagation. In addition, Dr. E. Woynarovich, a senior ex-FAO consultant from Hungary, covered the Indian major carps; and the Course Co-Director, Dr. D. Edwards, spoke briefly on the culture of rainbow trout and other salmonid species.
Approximately half of the time each day was devoted to lectures and the other half to practical classes. Additional opportunities were given for students to work alongside production workers at TEHAG and HAKI outside normal class hours. In this way, each trainee could gain extra practice in those areas of special interest to him.
Study tours were organized to commercial fish-farms, research institutions, cooperatives and feed mills. There were also excursions to places of historic, cultural and entertainment interest. Round-table discussions were held to help trainees relate the course to practices and conditions in their own countries. A full programme of activities is given in Appendix 2.
Throughout, the participants' attendance at both lectures and practical classes was 100 percent, providing an indication of their high level of interest and motivation. Further informal evaluation of students' progress was made during question and answer sessions following lectures, and by close observation of their competence in performing tasks during practicals. All the trainees were considered through this evaluation to have performed satisfactorily and to have understood the main concepts of the training.
The training course was officially opened by Mr. I. Munka, Secretary General of the Hungarian National FAO Committee, and closed by Dr. Istvan Doboczky, Deputy Minister of Agriculture for the Government of Hungary. A certificate was awarded to each trainee.
All teachers were invited to submit written texts on the subject covered by their lectures several months in advance of the course. Edited copies were given to the trainees on arrival in Hungary. Subsequently, the collected papers were bound together to produce an instructional handbook which will be of use in future courses.
Background reading material was provided for each student in the form of relevant FAO publications. All printed material given remained the property of the trainees.
Following the first part of the programme, held at TEHAG, the trainees were asked to fill in a confidential questionnaire designed to evaluate the perceived usefulness of the course so far and their degree of satisfaction with it. At the end of the course a similar questionnaire tested the response to the second period of instruction, at HAKI, and to the course as a whole.
Trainees' responses to multiple choice questions are summarized in Appendix 3. The overall level of student satisfaction at both Institutes was good, and all trainees reported themselves either well or moderately satisfied with thè whole course (6:12:0)*.
T = TEHAG, H = HAKI
Concerning the technical quality of the course, all participants felt that both the lectures (9:9:0) and practical sessions (9:9:0) at TEHAG would be useful to them in their future jobs. The standard of lecturing at TEHAG was rated satisfactory to good (6:11:1), and a two-thirds majority (12:6) considered the practical classes well organized.
Lectures were also rated both satisfactory and useful at HAKI (3:15:0 and 6:12:0), but here the organization of practical classes attracted more criticism (7:11). At both centres the technical content, i.e. fish species covered (T 3:13:2 and H O:14:4), and the balance between theory and practice (T 2:15:1 and H 4:13:1), was considered satisfactory, as was the number and quantity of field trips (T 18:0 and H 16:2). However, lectures delivered through interpreters were sometimes found dull and difficult to understand (T 6:5:4 and H 8:8), even though the quality of translation was good. The round-table discussions (18:0), written texts of lectures (T 8:10:0 and H 5:13:1), and the background reading material (18:0) were very popular. The number of students on the course was generally thought to be about right (T 1:14:3 and H 1:15:2).
The standard of accommodation was considered satisfactory at both Institutes by most participants (T 16:2 and H 15:3). However, some reservations were expressed about Hungarian food (T 10:8 and H 12:6), especially about the scarcity of fresh vegetables, salads and fruit early in the course. This problem will always be faced in this country when courses begin during early spring, because these types of food are simply unavailable in the market at the time.
In addition to the multiple choice questions, students were invited to list those topics of instruction they considered received too much or insufficient coverage, and those which would be most useful to them. General comments about the whole course and suggestions for improvements in future courses were also solicited.
In summary, those subjects for which further information was most commonly sought were: fish feeds and nutrition; hatchery/pond design and planning genetics; broodstock management and selection; water quality; pond management. Common carp propagation and preparation of nursery ponds were felt by some to be overemphasized. These are not unanimous views, and to some extent reflect the background of the participants and the difficulty of making clear-cut distinctions between nursery production and on-growing. Certain of these areas will be covered more fully in subsequent courses.
As might be expected in view of the widely varying interests and experience of the participants, there was no consensus about which sections were most useful. Almost every field of study was highly valued by someone.
On the contrary, however, there was strong agreement in the responses to the question about desirable improvements for incorporation in future courses. Here, the criticisms concerning the organization of practical classes revealed in the answers to the multiple choice questions were clarified. Some students felt that too many of these classes took the form of demonstrations. A preference was expressed for practicals in which the trainees themselves performed all the tasks necessary for example in hatchery work, pond management, fish feeding and harvesting work. For some tasks it was recognized that a group of 18 people is too large to allow such direct involvement by everyone at the same time. In these cases, it was suggested that the group should be divided up into sub-units of four or five people.
Whilst the project management has sympathy with this view, it must also be said that most trainees failed to take full advantage of the opportunity to work in a small group with production staff when this was offered in the evening or early morning. Where possible, and subject to the availability of resources, further courses could be improved in this area. In some cases it may be necessary to incorporate the “voluntary” sessions with the main course, where it would be expected that participants would attend.
The evaluation questionnaire revealed that the trainees themselves perceived the objectives of the course as having been largely achieved. During round-table discussions, question sessions during lectures and practical classes, and in informal conversations, it was clear to the project management and instructors that a good level of knowledge in freshwater fish hatchery management had been acquired by most participants. The course must therefore be considered substantially successful.
However, in the second and third courses in the present series, attempts should be made to change the design and running of some of the practical classes to allow greater direct student participation, bringing them more into line with the reasonable expectations of trainees. To make this work, though, will also require a corresponding change in the attitude of participants who must realize that work in hatcheries (and indeed all forms of aquaculture) runs on a biological timescale which cannot be condensed into “office hours”. Advanced scheduling of practical tasks is also extremely difficult. Most of them depend on the occurrence of suitable water temperatures and environmental conditions, and the spring weather in Hungary is notoriously variable.
It is additionally recommended that the informal evaluation of the students' programme should in future be extended. This can be done by question and answer sessions at the end of each class or series of classes, and by setting students competitive group tasks e.g. design of a hatchery/fish-farm to meet specified production targets.
The difficulties of working via interpreters must also be taken into account if future courses are planned in languages other than English. To avoid laborious translations, more detailed written texts could be provided in advance, with question and answer sessions allowing clarification and elaboration on these. The use of more audio-visual material and an increase in the proporation of time devoted to practicals could also help.
