Since its creation, the Faculty of Agronomy (FA) has been engaged in forestry education. In the curriculum of 1939, forestry education was limited to subjects on silviculture, and only in the fourth year of study. The unique curriculum consisted of 34 disciplines throughout the first four years and fieldwork during the fifth and last year. Students were exposed to a wide range of techniques and information, but without any form of hierarchical organization. The first students who graduated from the Faculty were kept on and employed within the forestry education system.
In 1959, the Forestry Department was created within the FA to administer forestry education within the department, and to develop and participate in forestry research.
The first curriculum revision was made in 1957, and implemented in 1963. This new plan proposed specializations ("orientaciones") that students had to choose during their fourth year of study. This curriculum was therefore divided in two cycles: a basic cycle, required by all students which lasted three years (six semesters), and a specialized cycle, designed so students could obtain the basic scientific background for the application of specific techniques. The specialized cycle lasted two years and had three specializations. The first, crop and animal production (agrícola-ganadera), focused on cereal crop production as well as cattle and dairy production. The second, horticultural production (granjera), concentrated on horticultural, fruit, and small animal production. The third specialization focused on forestry (Rabufetti, 1983). The fifth and final year was a common cycle, which included systematic disciplines, used mainly for focusing on socio-economic subjects including farm management, agricultural economics and statistics. This year also required the preparation of a project or thesis. The thesis was an introduction for those students who were going to work in research; students interested in extension or production tended to select farm projects.
The forestry specialization centred on three thematic areas: forestry and natural resources, wood technology and socio-economic sciences. Once a student completed the basic cycle, if he or she had chosen the forestry specialization, then the following disciplines were mandatory: forestry, forest technology, dendrology, parks and gardens, topography and hydrology. These courses were supplemented by other short-term courses, including forest phytopathology, forest entomology and forest soils. Upon successful completion of these courses, graduates received the diploma of Agronomic Engineer, Specialization in Forestry. Table 5 presents the structure of this curriculum (Bianchi and Sans, 1990; Sans, 1991).
While it underwent several changes over time, the 1963 curriculum was used for more than twenty years. During that period, the experimental station at Paysandú was created and served as a field school for crop and animal production, where internships were available to students in their fourth year. The other experimental stations in Salto and Melo were used for periods of short-term training, lasting approximately 20 days for the horticultural and forestry specializations. Another experimental station was also dedicated to forestry research.
In general terms, the 1963 plan suited a country where agriculture is considered the most important socio-economic sector. Although forest training was limited to the fourth year of study, the plan marked the beginning of the forest specialization for the Agronomic Engineering degree in Uruguay.
With minor changes, this curriculum was operational until 1989, when a new curriculum was introduced.
Table 5: Structure of the previous curriculum at Faculty of Agronomy
BASIC CYCLE | |||
First semester |
Second semester |
Third semester | |
geology |
Botany |
morphology, genesis and taxonomy of soils | |
analytical chemistry and physics |
Biometrics I |
biometrics II | |
biochemistry |
Microbiology |
genetics | |
animal anatomy and physiology | |||
Fourth semester |
Fifth semester |
Sixth semester | |
soil fertility and fertilizers |
agricultural machinery |
animal breeding | |
plant diseases |
economy |
plant breeding | |
entomology |
ecology |
animal nutrition | |
plant physiology |
|||
SPECIALIZED CYCLE (Forestry major) | |||
First semester |
Second semester | ||
dendrology I (4h/semester) |
dendrology II ( 2h/semester) | ||
forest ecology (4h/sem.) |
nursery and forestry production II (4h/sem.) | ||
photogrametry and photo interpretation (4h/semester) |
forest industries (6 h/sem.) | ||
Nursery and forestry production I (4h/sem.) |
rural production management (6 h/sem.) | ||
Anatomy and description of woods (4h/sem.) |
dasometry (6 h/sem.) | ||
Agricultural economics (4h/sem.) |
|||
Third semester |
Fourth semester | ||
forest policies, laws and administration (2h/sem.) |
forest breeding (4 h/sem.) | ||
forest management and planning (6 h/sem.) |
forest hydrology and basin management (4 h/sem.) | ||
parks and gardens (6 h/sem. ) |
forestry protection (4 h/sem.) | ||
forest harvesting and logging (4 h/sem.) |
national parks and wild areas (4 h/sem.) | ||
wood drying and processing (6 h/sem.) |
pulp and paper (4 h/sem.) | ||
( Source: Rabufetti, 1983; Bianchi and Sans, 1990; Sans, 1991) |
In 1979, the Faculty of Agronomy, through an agreement of cooperation with the Faculty of Forestry Sciences of the University of Chile, initiated a review of the forestry curriculum with the support of UNDP and FAO. The main goal of this agreement was to strengthen forestry teaching and research in a way that responded to the requirements of the forestry sector. Rabufetti (1983) identified the main deficiencies of the 1963 curriculum:
As identified by FAO (1997), agricultural institutions face a number of major challenges. Due to increasing urbanization and fed by the out-migration from rural areas, government often gives priority to urban needs for health, education and social services at the expense of rural areas and the agricultural sector. Such action leads to an even greater impoverishment in rural areas and encourages migration.
Thus, the new curriculum tried to overcome these important issues, including ways to provide urban students at agricultural schools a greater appreciation of rural life, and at the same time, making agricultural education more relevant to rural development.
A round table for Latin America stressed the necessity for the early integration of students in rural life, through practical training prior to their admission, as well as practical training throughout their studies (FAO, 1997).
Trends in agriculture and forestry also prompted a revision in curricula. These trends include: the dramatic reduction in small and medium farmers; the reduction in the role of the public in the technical and planning duties; a decrease in the number of agricultural researchers; the drastic decline in the national agricultural extension system; and competition from the private sector.
As Taylor (1999) reported, the greatest problem facing agricultural training institutions is that the curricula they use are rigid and inflexible, not only in structure and content, but also in the way by which they are developed. A curriculum should be a dynamic instrument that reflects the educational objectives that are to be attained and the educational experiences that can be provided to achieve them. Since these objectives will change over time, so will the experiences required in order to achieve them. Therefore, continuous curriculum reform is needed, just as society itself changes.
Additionally, the Council of the University emphasized that as a public institution, new curriculum for the Faculty of Agronomy must be developed in order to respond to the real problems of production in Uruguay and should focus on agricultural development and the well-being of its inhabitants. Therefore, an effective instructional institution must be accessible, have good experimental programs as well as a permanent presence in selected regions. From this perspective, the Faculty becomes a reference frame for the problems of the agricultural sector as well as a training center.
Van Crowder (1997) has suggested that a complex combination of both internal, institutional demands as well as external, societal demands can influence a curriculum development process. Internal demands relate to the educational community, including the management, teaching staff, students, governing boards or ministries. The interests of the institutional groups are related to teaching, research and outreach tasks, as well as finances, equipment and supplies, compensation and codes of conduct. External demands relate to the labour needs of the agricultural sector, articulated by groups representing employers, families and communities. In this particular experience, both were considered although there was not a systematic methodology to gauge external demands.
The current curriculum was developed through a dialogue between the three segments of the Faculty - professors, students, and graduates - who have representation on the Faculty Council. These members are elected by direct vote to represent other colleagues. The main problems of the former curriculum were identified at several meetings carried out over more than one year.
Van Crowder (1997) described two main approaches to curriculum development: a classical/rational approach to curriculum development, which follows an "objectivist", product-oriented paradigm, and participatory/interactive approach. The aims and objectives for curriculum in the classical/rational model are determined by experts who believe they have sufficient technical knowledge to produce the desired product. It assumes that there is agreement by all interested groups (teachers, students, communities, and employers) on common educational goals and therefore, dialogue and consensus building among groups is not required. The participatory/interactive approach follows a "subjectivist" process-oriented paradigm. This model places emphasis on participation and interaction among the various stakeholders. This includes the learners themselves, who are seen as having an important role to play in curriculum formulation. The goal is to stimulate different actors to participate in a dynamic, interactive process that allows their perceptions of the "ideal curriculum" to be made explicit and compatible, then modified as necessary to produce a curriculum.
Although there are distinct philosophical differences between the two approaches, they are not diametric opposites and curriculum planning may include elements of both, as is the case with this study. At the FA, the classical/rational approach dominated the process. The limitations and constraints of this process have been identified recently, and generated a new cycle of curriculum revision, explained later in this paper. The curriculum development model applied in this case could be described as similar to what Taba (1962) identified as curriculum development based in "aims and objectives". The main steps in curriculum development were: a diagnosis of needs; the formulation of objectives; the identification and organization of curricula content; assessment of the organization's needs; identification, development, and organization of teaching experiences; and determination of what and how to evaluate.
The new curriculum was divided into three cycles:
1. Introduction to the Agricultural Reality (six months, 12 credits). The objective is to provide the student with a global understanding of the agricultural setting and to introduce them to scientific methods and techniques. This cycle includes an obligatory seminar and a workshop on the agricultural sector, the country and its regions. It has duration of 16 weeks, or 300 hours.
2. Central agronomic formation (seven semesters). This cycle includes the scientific analysis of the agricultural production components (natural resources, technological and socio-economic aspects) and its main interactions. Three workshops cover topics related to: national regions, their natural resources and their socio-economic and productive importance; the farm, productive processes, economic analysis and decisions making process; and, farming systems. This cycle involves optional and compulsory courses, as well as seminars.2.
The cycle has three sub-cycles:
(a) Natural resources, which includes:
(b) Productive technology, fourth year ( 28 credits, 700 hours, 32 weeks). Here the students have chance to choose six specializations:
The obligatory disciplines that the student must take if he or she decides on forestry production, are forestry, wood technology, dendrology, forest protection, natural environment and free spaces, dasometry, and photo interpretation.
This group of disciplines is supplemented by courses in socio-economics, including financial decisions and farm management, besides the mandatory forest workshop and visits to the field.
Due to the time constraints for forestry topics in previous years, the forestry workshop has been divided into two stages. During the first semester, students study the complexities of forest systems in Uruguay, and in the second semester concentrate on case studies and problems at the farm level. Throughout this stage, students interact closely with the production sector at all levels.
3. Synthesis and specialization (one-year). The purpose of this cycle is to deepen the students' technical knowledge about production, socio-economics and natural resources in addition developing their capacity to formulate hypotheses and approaches to solving real agricultural problems. Besides the compulsory and optional courses and seminars, a final project is required to receive the degree of Agricultural Engineer. This is similar to the thesis required by the 1963 curriculum. For this cycle, the student may take disciplines related to the final project, which may or may not be related to the forestry major.
The optional disciplines related to forestry are:
Other courses related to forestry, offered by other departments are:
Optional courses offered by the Department of Forestry vary from year to year and depend on the availability of professor staff time (a great number of professors are not full time), as well as the demand from students and the demands of the forestry sector.
The theoretical teaching is carried out at the main campus of the school in Montevideo, while practicum is undertaken in the main areas of forest production of the country, and at the experimental station Bañado Medina, where applied forestry investigation is developed (Bianchi et al, 1997). Figure 2 shows a schematic flowchart of the current curriculum.
Figure 2: Diagram of the current curriculum of the Faculty of Agronomy of Uruguay
