MASTER FARMER
TEACHING SMALL FARMERS MANAGEMENT
BRUCE M. LANSDALE
WESTVIEW PRESS 1986
PART VI
Chapter 3: The Farm School Model (Cont)
- Are there dimensions to agricultural schools other than training programs?
- Is there a place for adult education in secondary agricultural schools?
- What are the most useful methods in management training?
THE YEARS OF EXPANSION
Charles House had graduated in engineering from Princeton University and was especially interested in the student’s technical training. When he succeeded his father as director in 1929, he reduced the training program from five to four years and changed the language of instruction from English to Greek. Only applicants who owned land were accepted. Half the students spent each morning in the classrooms, whereas the others were divided equally between the agricultural and industrial departments. In the afternoon they changed places. He felt, as his father had before him, that the boys would learn from example. One of the school’s favorite stories is about the official who came looking for Charles House and was directed to the shops. When he arrived he saw a pair of legs sticking out from under a car and said, “Can you tell me where the Director is?” The person under the car replied, “What do you want him for?” The visitor told him that it was none of his business. At this point Charles stuck his head out from under the car and said, “I am the Director. What can I do for you?”
Each department of the school was organized as a separate accounting unit and was required to pay its own way as well as to contribute to the school’s income. Charles House believed that it was important for the students to learn not only the practical skills in the departments but the management details. He felt that the only way to learn to manage a profitable enterprise was to work in one.
In his advanced years Dr. House had contended that if he had to do it again he would have trained girls rather than boys. “If you train a boy,” he said, you train an individual. If you train a girl, you train a whole family.” In the postwar years Charles House and the British Quakers fulfilled his dream by starting a school for village girls near the Farm School.
In 1946 short courses for adults were started in cooperation with the Greek Ministry of Agriculture. A farm machinery shop and a canning center were established in a unit that housed forty trainees. This represented a new approach to training master farmers as well as village women. These activities were integrated with the Ministry of Agriculture’s new home economics program.
One of the primary concerns throughout the school’s early years was to find and train staff members who possessed both practical skills and theoretical knowledge. Programs were developed to send young people, mainly graduates of the Farm School, both for short-term training and for full university courses. Because trainees who studied abroad for extended periods suffered cultural shock when they returned, it became school policy to limit the training to two years.
During Charles Houses’s tenure the physical plant of the Farm School was considerably enlarged. A separate dormitory building was constructed in which to house and feed students. Agricultural demonstration units in poultry, dairy, and hog farming and in horticulture were introduced. An industrial quadrangle was added that contained shops for training students in electricity, machine shop work, carpentry, plumbing, and painting. New staff housing and additional athletic areas for the students were completed. From a small school with limited facilities the Farm School was developed into a comprehensive educational institution.
PROGRAM DIRECTIONS
From 1955 until the present, the school has expanded its program in a number of areas. Although it is difficult to separate one aspect of the program from another, each plays a separate role in the development of the master farmer. When Charles House retired, the Board of Trustees undertook a comprehensive survey of the school and the work of its graduates in order to assess the impact of the school on Greek agriculture. The survey included a summary of the graduates’ occupations in 1955:
On the basis of a 10% sample of all graduates since 1927, it appears that 41% of the graduates go into farming in Greece; another 28% have gone into various agricultural services. This makes a total of 69% in farming or related services. The rest are either on scholarship in the United States, have emigrated, are unknown, or are in non-farm occupations.
The most recent graduate survey in the late 1970s indicates that 58% of the graduates are employed in agriculture and related services, reflecting changes in the country as a whole. Between 1950 and 1980 the farm population has decreased from 60% to 26% of the total population. The opportunities for further study open to farm school graduates and the appeal of urban positions have also played significant roles. The proportion of graduates in occupations related to agriculture has increased relative to that for graduates operating their own farms.
The need for equivalency
A major complaint of the graduates in 1955 was that their graduation certificate was not equivalent to the diploma issued by the Ministry of Education.
- Finally, in 1978 the school was recognised by the Ministry of Education as a fully equivalent vocational lyceum.
The new approach
Management training became a focal point in the revised program. Some of the staff who had met members of the Future Farmers of America (FFA) were very impressed by their self-confidence, their public-speaking ability, and the assurance with which they managed their home farms. The staff felt challenged to develop comparable young men and women who held their heads high and were proud to be farmers.
- Members of the FFA gain practical experience by managing agricultural enterprises on their own farms to supplement their classroom instruction.
- The school became an agricultural bank and extended credit to groups of students who raised such produce as pigs, chickens, cows, vegetables, and field crops.
- Students were required to prepare budgets, keep records, and manage their enterprises effectively.
- With their profits they were able to take field trips at the end of their senior year.
The small farm enterprises, known as student projects, became the backbone of the school’s management training program. Students were involved in the production departments, in which they were paid as laborers. By the time they reached their senior year those who had acquired the necessary skills were made responsible for the management of whole departments on weekends. The schools’ staff is still trying to improve the management training. Ideally, students working as members of a small team should have a few projects for which they must assume sole responsibility at school or in the village.
The school has designed a number of one-person units – the optimum enterprise that can be run by a farmer and his family. These units serve as demonstrations for the short courses and training areas for the regular students. In each of these, careful records are kept that are the basis for management instruction.
Running short courses for adults over the past 35 years has confirmed that they should be a basic part of any agricultural institute. They benefit not only the trainees but the staff members who come into contact with the trainees. Teachers become involved in the concerns and problems of the farmers, which ensures more stimulating instruction for the regular students and avoids the danger of stagnation. Short-course trainees continually challenge the school to keep its programs up to date and relevant to the actual needs of the villages.
Another focal point of the school’s curriculum has been innovative technology. The school has taken the lead in introducing agricultural technology in a number of fields. This does not mean importing the latest US or European equipment but rather adapting the technology developed abroad to Greek conditions (see Appendix A).
- The school has developed 70 such innovations.
- The incorporation of this technology in training programs has stimulated staff and students to seek new solutions to old problems and innovative approaches to current concerns.
People visiting the school become aware of an intangible dimension beyond the structure and function of the various departments. It is referred to by staff as the “spirit of Dr. House” – the quality of the school. In some institutions this quality can be sensed in the personal involvement and dedication of the teachers for the students, the warmth among the students themselves, and a spirit that at the Farm School expresses the founder’s inspiration.
Influences outside the school
Integrating the program more closely with the Greek government through the Ministries of Agriculture and Education has been one of the major objectives of the school in recent years. Experience in European and developing countries indicates that agricultural schools supervised by the Ministry of Education tend to use a theoretical approach and to be removed from the practical problems of farmers. On the other hand, agricultural schools under the Ministry of Agriculture lack the much-prized formal equivalency. For the Farm School this difficulty has been over come by establishing a joint Ministry of Agriculture and Ministry of Education committee, which is responsible for supervising the training program. The Ministry of Agriculture also provides substantial support for the student’s training, which leads it to become more involved. A new short-course center completed at the school was financed by funds from the World Bank and the Ministry of Agriculture.
- The school has been less successful in organizing joint courses for men and women in continuing education programs. A future challenge will be to integrate this instruction.
The increasing number of trainees from Third World countries who come to study development in Greece has prompted the school to seek ways of sharing the Farm School experience with others. The fact that Greece has progressed so remarkably since World War II makes it a far more suitable training ground than the more advanced Western countries. Although the total concept of the Farm School cannot be transferred, many principles and specific practices could effectively be applied elsewhere.
WEAKNESSES AND SHORTCOMINGS
Many of the Farm School’s accomplishments during the last 80 years have been outlined, but the school has also experienced shortcomings and failures. As a private institution, the school has difficulty attracting permanent staff because it must compete with the greater financial security that the Greek Government offers to agriculturists and others. At the same time, however, it is fortunate to have had a highly qualified and dedicated nucleus of staff members that, despite personnel turnover in a number of areas, enables the school to continue to operate effectively. It is vital for any such institution to train staff constantly, recognizing that though many members may stay only a few years they often make significant contributions in government service later – applying what they learned at the Farm School in their new jobs.
Another sphere in which more could have been accomplished is in developing initiative in the student projects. Too many students work on each project, and they do not learn proper planning and record keeping. They are eager to earn money but not sufficiently motivated to follow the proper management techniques. Because the concept of projects is still new to Greece, it takes a long time for staff members to learn to supervise them effectively. The turnover in the staff members responsible for student projects disrupts their continuity.
Too much time is given to lecturing and not enough to allowing the students to take the initiative in discussions and in practical work. Despite constant pressure on the instructors to speak less and to encourage the students to work more, they still tend to revert to the traditional Greek classroom pattern.
The school should have more long-range planning. Although a ten-year plan has been prepared, it requires constant reassessment, particularly as changes in the national government policies affect education and agriculture throughout the country. Both as a private and as a foreign institution in Greece the school has always been slightly suspect among those who have not had close personal contact with it. It is vital that the planning of the school be closely identified with the program of the government in office.
Consistency in management has often been a weakness. Although clearly defined objectives have been required from each department, some staff members have been delinquent in preparing them or ambiguous in describing them. Some departments have also failed to follow through on the objectives, particularly in relation to time schedules. In this area staff turnover has again been a major factor. Following up on the implementation of objectives is a constant challenge in institutions such as the Farm School.
Although continuing education has played a very useful role in relating the school to village problems, the courses for adults have often failed to meet trainee needs. In courses in which teaching staff and administrators rather than the villagers dictate content, attendance has been poor and interest only perfunctory. By interviewing and having discussions with the villagers during the planning process, the staff can overcome the tendency to ignore the villagers and include their input in teaching packages. The lack of recognition of the peasant’s understanding of village life and needs is a common problem in training centers throughout the world.
- Even though the school has made progress in some areas of technology, it is behind in others.
- Because so many innovations have been made in so many fields, it is difficult to keep pace with the changing technology.
- For many years the school operated an effective graduate follow-up program in which a full-time staff member worked with the graduates in their villages.
- This position is probably the most difficult to fill, for it requires someone with broad technical skills willing to spend many hours travelling to the villages.
- Few people, even in the surrounding community of Thessaloniki, have any detailed understanding of the school’s program or its objectives and accomplishments.
- The school requires a more effective public relations program to make known the variety of educational and technical programs that it operates.
- The hands-on training of the students deserves further study. Although members of the teaching staff have prepared a list of the basic skills that the students need to learn, they have not yet defined the specific activities through which the students develop these skills.
- One or more faculty members should be specifically engaged in preparing teaching packages and audiovisual aids, as well as translating available material from other languages.
In this chapter a summary of both the positive aspects and the weaknesses of the Farm School programs has been presented. It indicates how imperative periodic evaluation and review are to an institutions. Organizations, like human beings, suffer from a gap between their objectives and the discipline needed to make realities of their dreams. The school has gained much from its own experiences and the success of others.
Chapter 4: Dynamic Training Centers
- What leads to excellence in an institution?
- What attributes should schools try to develop?
- Can the staff of institutions be both compassionate and businesslike?