Abstract
A competency-based curriculum involves defining set knowledge, skills, and values for a particular education. Many technical undergraduate majors have developed a list of competencies for evaluation, assessment, and improvement of higher education curriculum. This national Delphi study is the first concise list of competencies described for a horticulture curriculum. A sample of horticulture educators within the United States (n = 22) were selected as experts in horticulture education and curriculum improvement through an e-mail requirement letter sent to university chairs. Information on age, teaching position, and bachelor's degree earned by panel member and department size was collected and it was determined these factors did not impact the panel members' decision on ranking competencies. The three-round Delphi study results provide a list of competencies considered to be important or not important in the general horticulture education field. The final compilation of competencies describes a total of 108 specific learning outcomes, with 41 horticulture technical competencies, 34 life science technical competencies, and 33 professional competencies. Overall, this competency skills list may be useful for future assessment and development of horticulture curricula.
Evidence of a quality education is the primary agenda of accreditation agencies in their evaluation of American higher education institutions. The American academe is increasingly viewed as an economic service providing industry a competitive edge. Employers and financial backers of these institutions desire more than traditional evidence such as grades, certificates, and degrees to measure student's knowledge, skills, and abilities (Baker, 2004). In “Knowing What Students Know” (Pellegrino et al., 2001), one recommendation for institutions to improve quality is to use large-scale assessment to sample a broad range of competencies shared by teachers, students, and other education stakeholders. Pellegrino et al. (2001) goes on to say, “Knowledge and skills to be assessed and the criteria for judging the desired outcomes should be clearly specified and available to all potential examinees.” Knowledge and skill can be measured by defined competencies, which are established behavior requirements needed for students to be successful.
Competencies have been used in curriculum evaluation and reform to measure learning and to keep academic entities accountable for the growth of that learning. Many undergraduate majors have defined competencies assessing effectiveness of their degree programs. In the United States, the horticulture undergraduate major has no defined set of national competencies and currently does not have a nationwide accreditation organization that reviews these programs. In the 1980s, the American Society for Horticulture Science created a curriculum committee to review curricula for the major and to determine their relevancy (Hegwood and Merritt, 1987). From this committee, a summary of core requirements was established for a certified horticulturist designation. The requirements included required courses in the degree program as well as a minimum of five years of experience in the field. While addressing core requirements, these efforts and those of the committee that has updated this document fall short of setting specific course content and required skills needed within the horticulture field (American Society for Horticultural Science, 2008). Completion of a competency-based curriculum for the horticulture major would facilitate unity in horticulture programs and provide assurance to industry professionals of the education potential employees have acquired. The purpose of this study was to develop a competency-based list for the horticulture undergraduate major using a national Delphi study to gather input from horticultural experts in academia. The Delphi method is based on a structured process for collecting and distilling knowledge from a group of experts by means of a series of questionnaires interspersed with controlled opinion feedback (Alder and Ziglio, 1996). This method of surveying individuals and collecting interactive comments provides a useful venue when creating a collaborative work.
Materials and methods
The research design consisted of a three-round Delphi method technique consisting of a sequential series of questionnaires sent to a panel of horticulture undergraduate educators involved in general horticulture. The population for this study was comprised of general horticulture leaders from specific horticulture professional organizations within the United States. Childers (1989) determined the total number of horticulture programs is approximately 100. A recruitment letter was emailed to the 68 identifiable department heads of horticulture programs within the United States. Individual department heads were requested to forward the e-mail to the horticultural curriculum expert within their department. These individuals became panel members when they sent an e-mail to the researcher accepting participation in the study. A second letter was then emailed to the newly identified panel members with a hyperlink to round 1 of the survey. Nonrespondents were contacted during round 1 by e-mail and then by phone. This recruitment increased the sample from 19 to 22 panel members. The sample size for the expert panel of horticulture educators was n = 22 (32%) for round 1, n = 19 (27.9%) for round 2, and n = 17 (25%) for round 3.
The instrument was a modified questionnaire using a list of competencies from Iowa State University's Horticulture Assessment Survey and “Making the Match Questionnaire on Skills” (Evers, 1998). Permission was gained to use a modification of the Iowa State Assessment Survey (A.M. VanDerZanden, personal communication). The response choices used a five-point Likert-type scale consisted of the following choices: 5 = very important, 4 = important, 3 = neutral, 2 = unimportant, and 1 = very unimportant. After the end of each section, a comment box was provided for any new competencies the panelist wished to add or suggestions for changing an existing competency (Bailey-Evans, 1994; Keech, 1998). The second section contained 13 demographic questions asking about the respondent's personal/professional characteristics, the university's characteristics, and the current assessment measures already in place. The demographic questions allowed the participant to respond by checking the appropriate boxes, as well as provided for open-ended responses.
The instrument was tested for face validity and reliability through a pilot survey. The pilot survey was administered to a selection of faculty from other universities to evaluate content, face validity, and clarity of the first round questionnaire. The sample of participants for the pilot test questionnaire (n = 6) contained horticulture educators from Texas Tech University, Texas A&M University, University of Arkansas, Iowa State University, and Utah State University. The criterion for the participants was experience in horticulture education, higher education, or educational surveys. After the pilot survey, a total of 25 subdisciplines of horticulture and 97 competencies were added to round 1.
In round 1, panel members were asked to evaluate each competency listed concerning its importance to the horticulture undergraduate program. Each competency had to have 75% of the participants agree that it should be retained to remain on the list of competencies for the horticulture undergraduate major in the next round. Any competencies not receiving a ranking of 75% acceptance rate were removed from the questionnaire. Protocol for selecting the cutoff point for Delphi studies usually varies between a 65% and 75% acceptance rate. Round 2 consisted of new competencies added by the panel members, high-ranking scores from round 1, and a new section with ranking the main topics of the competencies. The round 3 questionnaire was the final round of ranking the competencies and did not include the option of adding any new competencies. Table 2 represents the final revision of the questionnaire that was used to rank the competencies.
The Delphi study data were ordinal in nature; thus, nonparametric techniques were used (Siegel, 1956). The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to analyze differences in independent variables among groups. The significance level for determining statistical difference between groupings mean ranks was held at P ≤ 0.05 throughout the study.
Results and discussion
Panel member locations and academic affiliations collected during round 1 are presented in Table 1. Eighteen states were represented in this national Delphi study. Characteristics of the panel members are described to show qualifications and homogeneity within the sample population. A small sample of 10 to 15 respondents is adequate for a sample when the group is homogeneous (Ferguson, 2000). In analyzing the highest education degree achieved, 19 of the panel members (86.3%) received their doctorate, with six continuing on with a postdoctorate. Three members' highest education level was a Masters degree (13.6%). Horticulture was the most frequent major for all three degree levels, with over 77% of the participants earning their B.S. and M.S. in horticulture, and more than 50% achieving their Ph.D. in horticulture. All doctoral degrees were obtained in a plant science-related field, with 12 of the 19 obtaining their doctorate specifically in horticulture.
Locations and work areas for 22 participating Delphi study panel members identifying competencies with a U.S. horticulture baccalaureate degree.
Delphi study topic area, round of acceptance, competency description, and percentage of acceptance after three rounds of panel members' surveys to determine the inclusion of specific competencies in an undergraduate horticulture curriculum.
The central tendency of the panel member showed that they typically: 1) had a Ph.D. in horticulture, 2) held a position of assistant professor or full professor, 3) were 51 to 60 years in age, and 4) had been teaching for 21 or more years. The average expert's institutional size was 15,000 to 25,000 students. The department size was between 50 and 200 students with the associated unit participating in six or more years of assessment. From these profile demographics, it was determined the targeted audience had been sampled. Kruskal-Wallis analysis did not detect a difference in the rankings of a panel member with respect to their baccalaureate degree, age, position, or department size.
In round 1, 25 horticulture subdiscipline areas were introduced in the study and 17 of these were approved in round 3. In addition, a total of 108 competencies were approved in the final round. Topics and competencies were placed into the following three categories: 1) horticulture technical competencies, 2) life science competencies, and 3) professional competencies. Horticulture technical competencies had 41 elements approved, which was the highest number of all the categories. Life science and professional competencies also maintained a high level of acceptance, with 34 and 33 competencies approved, respectively.
The following horticulture subdisciplines received 95% to100% importance rating for including in the horticulture curriculum: 1) plant identification, 2) field and greenhouse management, 3) landscape management, 4) agricultural chemicals, and 5) technology. The horticulture experts did not discuss the survey with anyone and still retained a uniform understanding of what the horticulture major should contain. Even though there has not been a formal national competency curriculum, this uniformity reveals an equality of standards for the horticulture curriculum.
The following subdisciplines were approved for the life science competencies: 1) biological science, 2) plant physiology, 3) abiotic/biotic factors, 4) principles of soils, and 5) environmental awareness. Physical science, plant genetics/biotechnology, and plant breeding ranked lower than 75%; thus, they were eliminated from the horticulture curriculum. The low importance ranking of these subdisciplines may have been due to the trend to reduce the total required hours for a horticulture undergraduate degree. In addition, plant genetics/biotechnology, physical science, and plant breeding may have also been cut due to these courses being housed in separate departments at many institutions.
The professional disciplines approved are the following: 1) writing/verbal, 2) problem solving, 3) decision making, 4) leadership/collaborative, 5) professionalism, 6) ethical/professional judgment, and 7) lifelong learning. Professional disciplines eliminated were global perspective, historical perspective, literature and art, and visioning. These disciplines frequently fall under the general education curriculum of many institutions, thus they may not have been viewed as part of the horticulture major. Similarly, global perspectives may have been considered a multicultural class. Even though the visioning discipline was eliminated from the curriculum, the competency of “understand the scope of horticulture and its relation to other disciplines” had a high approval of 86%.
The main objective for this study was to describe a set of competencies necessary for the horticulture undergraduate major. This extensive horticulture competency curriculum list is available to aid horticulture departments in developing a competency curriculum that meets their individual needs. Assessment has not become an accepted part of scholarly activity; however, as long as the higher education accrediting organizations require documentation of how these practices are implemented, horticulture departments across the nation will continue to be interested in this area of study.
Literature cited
Alder, M. & Ziglio, E. 1996 Gazing into the oracle: The Delphi method and its application to social policy and public heath Jessica Kingley London, PA
American Society for Horticultural Science 2008 ASHS Certified Horticulturist: A program of the American Society for Horticultural Science 30 Dec. 2008 <http://www.ashs.org/downloads/CHbrochure.pdf>.
Bailey-Evans, F.1994 Enhancing the agricultural communications curriculum: A national Delphi-study Texas Tech University Lubbock, TX MS Thesis.
Baker, R. 2004 Keystones of regional accreditation: Intentions, outcomes, and sustainability 1 14 Hernon P. & Duncan R. Outcomes assessment in higher education: Views and perspectives Libraries Unlimited London
Childers, N.F. 1989 Educational institutions offering horticulture and or landscape architecture in the United States and Canada HortScience 24 211 217
Evers, F.T. 1998 The bases of competence: Skills for lifelong learning and employability Jossey-Bass San Francisco
Ferguson, S.D. 2000 Researching the public opinion environment: Theories and methods Sage Publications Thousand Oaks, CA
Hegwood, D.A. & Merritt, R.H. 1987 Horticultural curricula can benefit from national initiatives HortScience 22 351 352
Keech, K.M. 1998 Industry-based curriculum competencies for entry-level retail management positions: A national Delphi-study Texas Tech University Lubbock, TX Ph.D. Dissertation.
Pellegrino J.W., Chudowsky N. & Glaser R. 2001 Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment National Academy Press Washington, DC
