3.2 Broad training versus specialization
The early colleges of agriculture offered broad training
in general agriculture to prepare farmers and extension officers
for their occupations. With the changes in agriculture and
the increasing number and type of jobs, the universal trend
towards professional specialization did not exclude agricultural
colleges, and today easily 8 or 10, sometimes rather narrow
curricula are offered. To a certain extent, this is a logical
consequence of the ever increasing differentiation in workplaces
and requirements. Food technology and plant breeding have
little in common, and an agricultural economist will hardly
work in a plant pathology laboratory. A general training may
not accomplish anything in many cases because of insufficient
depth. This has, however, limitations. The extreme specialization
in our times requires a certain introduction to the problems
of agriculture as a whole to enable the graduate in his leadership
role to understand his place and his contribution so that
specialization will not turn into narrow-mindedness. In addition,
the degree of specialization depends partly on the level of
the development in agriculture. It appears that many developing
countries have taken over the American model with relatively
high specialization without taking into consideration the
different patterns of agriculture. A farmer with a bachelor
degree in agriculture requires a highly trained specialist
as his advisor. For the general problems, he has been trained
himself. A poor peasant needs an advisor who understands all
the facets of the farm and who can help him in all aspects.
Under such conditions, a specialist risks obsolescence. As
a consequence, each country — not each college —
needs in addition to training in specialized fields, possibilities
for training in allround agriculture to cater to the needs
of the future farmers, farm managers, extension officers,
etc.
|