AGRICULTURE & NATURAL RESOURCES
PROGRAM REVIEW 2012-13
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Agriculture and Natural Resources Program (AGNR) provides quality instruction for
students seeking a terminal certificate or degree, students planning to transfer to a 4-year
institution, and professional development for individuals working in the industry. The
program has three major focus areas; Sustainable Tropical Crop Management,
Landscape Maintenance and Horticulture, and Cultural and Natural Resource
Management.
Mission:
We envision a program that promotes active student engagement by providing high
quality instruction in agriculture, horticulture, and natural resources with an emphasis on
entrepreneurship and sustainability.
I. Quantitative Indicators
The Agriculture and Natural Resources program is rated as Cautionary. Agriculture and
Natural Resources program demonstrates strength in several areas. The program has
experienced steady growth in the past three years as indicated by the data. The Demand
indicators show number of majors has risen slowly from 57 to 62.5. The number classes
has increased from 14 to 21 allowing the SSH of both majors and non-majors to increase
dramatically while still having 83% or more class fill rates. Although this section is
cautionary because of Jobs data, this is due in part to the nature of the selecting one
particular job code. The selected code does not always accurately depict the number of
employment opportunities for our program as we have 3 major focus areas. In addition,
students in both Landscaping and Crop Management have opportunities to start their own
business.
The Efficiency Indicators have remained steady over the course of three years and
remains healthy. Two special things to note not indicated by this data. First, the program
has been able to secure grant funds to pay for lecturers to teach quite a few of the
agriculture classes. Secondly, although there are 2 BOR appointed faculty for this
program, one is on Maui and one is on Molokai. Therefore the program cannot leverage
the resources of two faculty, sharing non-teaching duties for instance, that a single-island
program can do. Also each faculty has to teach virtually all the various courses in
Agriculture which are in very different disciplines. Therefore the data does not reflect the
“on the ground” reality that the two locations act as single faculty programs that cannot
share teaching responsibilities, facilities and field maintenance or supplies.
The major weaknesses of the program are in the Effectiveness data. Note course
completion is around 75% which may not be too different from a typical science class but
is below the Perkins goal of 90%. Persistence from Fall to Fall is only 45%. Graduation
rates are fairly low so this low rate cannot be accounted for by graduates leaving the
program. Around 60% of students are part time so they would take longer to graduate so
should be coming back. Although some students are current professionals with no
intention of getting a degree, there are still too many students who start the program but
drop out before getting a degree or certificate. Perkins completion numbers reflect the
low rate of students receiving credentials. Efforts to address this issue include AGNR
student orientation in Fall semester, internships over summer, scheduling classes to meet
needs, and increased advising by the program coordinator and assigned counselor.
II. Outcome and Goal Achievement
A. Program Learning Outcomes
1. The Program Learning Outcomes for the Associate in Applied Science in
Sustainable Tropical Crop Management are as follows:
Knowledge
Use basic business principles to manage projects or design a horticultural business enterprise.
Skill
Recommend cultural practices, solve problems, plan projects, and cultivate horticultural crops in a sustainable
manner based on sound biological and technological principles.
Value
Explain the relationships between agroecosystems, economics, human culture, and natural environments.
The Program Learning Outcomes for the Associate in Applied Science in Horticulture
and Landscape Maintenance are the same as above including the additional PLO:
Value
Design gardens that demonstrate aesthetic principles
B. Analysis of Student Outcomes and Goal Achievement
1. Courses Assessed in AY 12-13
PLO 3: Explain the relationships between agroecosystems, economics, human culture,
and natural environments. Assessed in AG 174 - F12 and AG 281-SP13.
PLO 2: Recommend cultural practices, solve problems, plan projects, and cultivate
horticultural crops in a sustainable manner based on sound biological and technological
principles. Assessed in AG 251 - F12.
PLO1: Use basic business principles to manage projects or design a horticultural
business enterprise. Assessed in AG 252 - SP 13.
In addition the CASLO assessment of written communication was assessed in Fall 12
using the AG 200 research papers assignments.
2. Program Map
Assessment of Intended Program Learning Outcomes
Courses in Program
1. Use basic business principles
to manage projects or design a
horticultural business enterprise.
AG
122
1
AG AG
174 200
1
2
AG
201
1
AG
230
3
AG
235
1
AG
250
1
AG
251
2
AG
252
3
AG
260
1
AG
269
0
AG
281
1
AG
264
1
AG
266
1
2. Recommend cultural practices,
solve problems, plan projects,
and cultivate horticultural crops
in a sustainable manner based on
sound biological and
technological principles.
2
2
3
2
0
2
2
3
3
2
0
2
1
2
3. Explain the relationships
between agroecosystems,
economics, human culture, and
natural environments.
2
2
2
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
3
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
(Landscape and Horticulture
only)
4. Design gardens that
demonstrate aesthetic principles.
CODE
3 = A focus of 2 = Evaluate Using
course
Outcome
1 = Not evaluated
0 = Not included
3. Assessment Plan
Associate in Applied Science Sustainable Tropical Crop Production
PLO F 2012 SP 2013
1
AG 252
2 AG 251
3
AG 174 AG 281
F 2013
Sp 2014 F 2015 SP 2016 F 2016
AG 230
AG 252
AG
AG 200 and/or AG 252 AG 200/
AG
251
200/AG
AG 251
251
AG 174 AG 281
S 2017
AG 230
AG 252
Associates in Applied Science Horticulture and Landscape Maintenance
PLO F 2012
1
2
3
4
SP 2013 F 2013
AG 200/
AG 235
Sp 2014 F 2015
AG 230
AG 200
AG 174 AG 281
AG 174
AG 250
SP 2016 F 2016
S 2017
AG 230
AG 200/
AG 235
AG 281
AG 250
4. Assessment Strategy & Instruments
The assessment strategies employed in each course varies but consist of one or more
of the following strategies:
a. Projects - major class projects that demonstrate a PLO are assessed using an
appropriate rubric.
b. Embedded Test Questions - test questions that demonstrate a PLO could be multiple
choice, essay, or short answer. The results of these selected questions are compiled
to be included in the assessment.
c. Production Projects - the production of crops or gardens that are done together as a
class are assessed. Groups or individuals are assigned to grow certain varieties or
areas and individuals are assessed based on the outcome of the product(s) and
whether the yield and quality meet acceptable standards.
d. Written or Oral Assignments - Research papers, class presentations, spreadsheets
may also be incorporated into assessments.
5. Expected Level of Achievement
Criteria for success can vary depending on the assessment instrument. Projects are
generally graded based on rubrics where points are given for separate portions of the
project. The points awarded are then divided by total possible points. Test questions can
be right or wrong or an essay question may be given variable points based on the content
and writing and grammar. Production projects are based on simple rubrics of exceptional,
meets standards, does not meet standards. Written and oral presentations are graded via
points generated by a rubric. Generally for most assessment tools the Criteria for
success is based on the standard curve of 80% and above Exceeds, 70%-79% Meets,
60-69% Developing, and Below 60% No Proficiency.
6. Results of Program Assessment
AG 174: Insects and Their Control
PLO 3: Explain the
relationships
between
agroecosystems,
economics, human
culture, and natural
environments.
Final Exam results of
Pest Identification
Student Insect
Collections
Exceeds (80- Meets (70-
does not
meet
100%)
(69%>)
79%)
Exceeds
Meets
does
not
meet
does
meets plus not
exceeds
meet
14
2
3
74%
11%
16%
84%
16%
14
2
3
74%
11%
16%
84%
16%
Final Exam: Student
can identify 2/3
important parts of all
IPM programs
12
3
3
63%
16%
16%
79%
16%
Final Exam: Student
can identify 3/4
different cultural
control measures used
in Hawaii
11
4
3
58%
21%
16%
79%
16%
In this class an average of 82% of students met or exceeded the requirements targeted
for this PLO. Sixteen percent did not and these were students who were chronically
absent or dropped out after the withdraw date. Overall, students were fairly successful in
learning the material and should be able to demonstrate the PLO outcome as related to
insects and insect control in the field.
AG 281: Weed Science
Exceeds
Meets
(80-100%) (70-79%)
No
Proficiency
(59%>)
3
EP
MP
DP
NP
74%
9%
4%
13%
Weed Collection
17
2
Developing
Proficiency
(60-69%)
1
Final Exam Weed
Control Essay 1
11
8
3
1
48%
35%
13%
4%
Final Exam Weed
Control Essay 2
10
9
3
1
43%
39%
13%
4%
PLO 2
In AG 281, 83% of student met or exceeded the first criteria, 83% met or exceeded the
second criteria, 82% met or exceeded the third criteria for an average of about 82.5%
meeting the requirements of this PLO. More practice in class could be done on
preparing students to formulate comprehensive weed control plans. This would help
students tie the course objectives together and make more complete essays for this final
exam assessment.
AG 251: Sustainable Crop Production I
Developing
Exceeds Meets
PLO 2
(80-100%) (70-79%)
No
Proficiency(5
9%>)
EP
Proficiency
(60-69%)
Planting
schedule
assignment
7
0
0
3
70%
Crop
Production,
Harvest,
Packing
7
3
0
0
70%
MP
DP
NP
30%
30%
This was the first semester that curriculum changes were put into place for this class and
the subsequent AG 252. So refinement of assignments as well as PLO assessment is
needed. This class is a very hands-on course with few traditional assignments and tests.
Class participation and performance is very important. Students learn scheduling during
class in preparing the market garden. As part of a final assignment they are given a list of
6 crops and specific varieties. The students have to do a planting schedule to meet
market quantity and timing. They need to research the days to harvest and demonstrate
that they understand the timing and sequence of seed planting to transplant to harvest.
Seven out of ten students did well but 3 of the students did poorly or did not turn in this
assignment. All of the students that completed the semester met or exceeded the
various crop production components carried out in class. One of the challenges in this
class is making students aware of why certain tasks are being carried out and how these
tasks relate to the more academic parts of the lecture, projects and testing. Putting all the
pieces together – labor as well as management. The students who are the most
participatory did the best. Instructors need to keep students engaged and need to make
the connections with what is happening in the field to management issues. The Crop
Production tasks sometimes overwhelm; impacting the time needed in the classroom for
information and analysis.
AG 252: Sustainable Crop Production II.
Developing
Exceeds Meets
PLO 1
(80-100%) (70-79%)
Proficiency
(60-69%)
No
Proficiency(5
9%>)
EP
MP
DP
25%
Take Home
Final Market
Garden
Design &
Cost Project
5
1
2
0
62% 12%
Crop
Production
5
3
0
0
62%
NP
38%
This was the first semester this class has been taught. It was also taught concurrently
with a section of AG 251. This tended to muddy the waters somewhat but overall the
class did well. The market garden design portion was fairly good as students had done a
simpler more structured version in AG 251 and they had almost 2 semesters in the field.
Where students were developing proficiency was in the cost projection portion of the
design project. Therefore the goal is to put more time in the cost of production analysis in
future classes. All the students met the “in-field” portion of the class. The students were
also able to act as leaders to the AG 251 students. Leadership was not officially
assessed but the students that exceeded proficiency were best at these kinds of roles.
The students who exceeded proficiency in the crop production area have persisted Fall to
Fall and are all taking classes in Fall 13 working toward degrees. Two of the students
who only met the production goals are not currently working on agriculture degrees in AY
13-14.
AG 200: Introduction to Horticulture
CASLO: Written
Communication
“The minimally passing evidence
demonstrates written at the level of
skill appropriate for the degree.”
“The evidence presented shows
that students develop and
demonstrate relevant writing skills
they will need as graduates of the
program.”
YES
NO
16.7%
83.8%
66.7%
33%
This class was selected as it is a WI course. Both agriculture and non-agriculture majors
take this course. The WI assignment that was assessed was based on a similar
assignment given in this course at UH Manoa. The students complete a series of
research papers on a single crop.
The C paper clearly was not considered acceptable as an exit level. This is not surprising
as the writing assignments were designed for learning across the curriculum and an
English pre-requisite is not required. Each of these papers is worth 50 points with 30
points based on content, 10 points based on English and grammar, 5 points based on
style, and 5 points based on references. So students can cover the content but their
writing ability may be poor and still get a low C on a paper.
The assessment committee had several basic conclusions. One was that the course
needed an English pre-requisite. Either a technical writing course needs to be developed
by the English department or technical and research writing needs to be incorporated
much more within English 22 and 100. Better examples of writing need to be provided to
students during the course to guide them in the proper format and style of writing.
C. Program Plans and Goals
The Agriculture Program instituted curriculum changes for Sustainable Tropical Crop
Management degree in AY 12-13. AG 251 and AG 103 were offered in both Fall and
Spring on Maui to bring more students into the program. As the courses are taught,
revisions in delivery are being made. AG 103 was taught as a summer bridge course in
partnership with C3T to engage high school students with the college and integrate
written communication into the curriculum as it was team taught with an English
instructor. The new internship requirement for crop management made more students
stay enrolled during summer as they do their internships.
Assessment tools still need fine tuning so this is something that still requires more focus.
Getting all lecturers up to speed so that evaluation can take place on schedule is also a
challenge that needs to be addressed during the coming academic year.
As a result of the CASLO assessment of the AG 200 writing assignment, a pre-requisite
of English 22 or placement in English 100 will be put forward to the curriculum committee.
This is lower than perhaps many in the committee wished but should help while not
placing too great of a barrier so that students within the program can take the course in a
timely manner as it is only offered in Fall and not every year on Molokai. If a technical
writing course is offered perhaps a concurrent requirement will be added in the future. In
Fall 13, the instructor will be piloting Turnitin with the hope that students will get more
automatic grammar and English feedback and help with avoiding plagiarism. Students
will be asked at the end of the semester if this program and the instructor’s feedback
using this program were helpful. In addition, C3T funds have provided a tutor for the
students for writing in this class.
The PLO assessment is helping us craft activities in business and crop production
management in AG 251 and AG 252. It is a challenge to grow a commercial market
garden and put into place all the business, food safety and management information
retrieval and recordkeeping. Also finding methods to make students take on more
management decisions as they move forward is a goal to improve the curriculum in these
classes.
Assessment does support our goals of developing students who are more entrepreneurial
and ready to meet the needs of employers. It is not the only solution but helps us be
aware of where our students are doing well and in what areas that need more emphasis
or changes in teaching methods. An ongoing challenge, as in the rest of the college, is
getting students to engage, come to class, and complete assignments and continue
through the entire semester and on the next semester. Our non-traditional part time
students have many challenges outside of campus and moving the needle on completion,
persistence and graduation will require effort and resources from programs and campus.
III. Budgetary Consideration and Impact
The Agriculture and Natural Resources program has had a positive impact on the campus
as the program has been able to secure some grant funding to support lecturers and
upgrade equipment and supplies. The program has also had a rise in enrollment both on
Maui and Molokai. In addition, the program sells plants and vegetables that generates all
the supply money (approximately $5,000-8,000/year in expenses) needed by this
program. This program has not been accessing supply money from the STEM
department which has benefited the science classes as they have more supply money for
their labs.
The program has been assessing its PLO’s more frequently than required. Using grant
funds, the program has been able to offer the classes more often and therefore
graduation rates have increased. In order to continue moving in a positive direction, the
program on Maui requires another faculty member. An agriculture faculty member could
also be part-time science instructor and serve the Liberal Arts program. Currently several
Agriculture classes are natural science (AG 200 is an example) and an agriculture faculty
could also teach Intro to Biology, Botany, Ecology and perhaps other natural sciences
depending on their background. A single faculty member cannot offer all the AG classes
on a regular basis which impacts the ability of students to graduate in a timely manner.
Lecturers are difficult to find in the various fields that are needed. With facilities to
maintain and students to advise, lecturers are also not a viable option to grow the
program.
As the program tries to incorporate more industry involvement, we have incorporated
more field based learning. Getting students to and from locations is difficult without a
campus vehicle. Many students don’t have vehicles and other students don’t want to
drive to field trip locations with classmates. A 12 passenger van is greatly needed by the
program for field trips as well as to pick up and deliver supplies.
IV Engaged Community
AG&NR grows a pumpkin patch in the summer. In October 2012, over 250 grade school
children cycled through a series of science based activities put on by the department in
conjunction with the pumpkin patch. A Saturday “pick your own” sale for the public was
also provided that had activities and booths from other programs. This gets the public
onto campus and provides a field experience to encourage people to think more about
where their food comes from.
Numerous school groups tour our facility and we often provide an activity as well. For
example Kalama 7th graders visited in April 2013– approximately 120 children either
made worm compost or picked tomatoes in our market garden. The department holds an
annual plant sale in December. This generates funds for our program but also brings the
general public to campus and brings visibility to our program.
The program often does displays at college fairs and other events such as the Maui
Agriculture Festival.
Our staff and faculty participate or provide leadership in various groups including Maui
Association of Landscape Professionals, Maui Cattleman’s Association, Maui Farm
Bureau, Maui Nui Botanical Garden, Maui Farmers Union and Native Hawaiian Plant
Society. Faculty and staff have been speakers for various events including rotary club, the
annual arbor-day tree give away, and new farmers workshop.
Advisory committee members served on the CASLO assessment team. Other members
or their businesses regularly provide field trip opportunities for our classes and internship
opportunities.
V. Best Practices
The program has worked hard to upgrade equipment and technology. In AY 2012-13, the
program took delivery of a new tractor with a backhoe and loader bucket, a grain drill, and
a crop roller. These will allow the program to demonstrate different cover crop and weed
control techniques and allow more hands-on experience in tractor operations. In addition,
the program, also via grant funds, was able to secure many different kinds of hand tools,
hand planters, seed blockers etc. that students can try so they can evaluate the
productivity of specialized tools and implements on a small farm.
The program purchased COGPRO software a recordkeeping and best practices software.
The program also was able to purchase iPods for recordkeeping, video production and
other uses. The program is working on using grant funds to purchase iPads in the future
to have the ability to turn the AG lab classroom into a computer classroom as needed.
Faculty continue to expand the use of Laulima and alternative activities into classes.
More basic research writing assignments are being used in various classes which was
one of the recommendations of the CASLO evaluators had. Oral assignments, group
assignments and other methods are used. The program has always had a strong handson component which facilitates learning.
Faculty and Staff Awards: Cynthia Nazario-Leary was selected to be a member of the
2012-2013 Hawaii Agriculture Leadership Cohort. This cohort lasts 18 months and
members participate in one weekend per month workshops on various islands and will
attend a 2 week session in Washington D.C. Ann Emmsley presented a Poster at the
annual North American College Teachers of Agriculture conference at Virginia Tech. She
was also selected to present the Agriculture, Education, Training, and Incubation
Consortium presentation to USDA members at the NACTA conference.