Book of Abstract (incl. addendum) - IFSA symposium 2012

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Workshop 1.2 Family Farms as Educational Farms – Possibilities and Perspectives back at the school, e.g. in different subjects or interdisciplinary projects. The third and fourth types of collaboration are longer; enabling children to follow the seasonal growing cycle and be active on the farm e.g. by having a small plot, where they can grow potatoes. Teachers organize the visits with a farmer over a growing season, but other schools, even municipalities, have a formalized long-term collaboration with a farm. Preliminary findings suggest that teachers and farmers have quite different learning goals and values. Farmers are highly motivated, believing it is important that children connect to food production, understand the connectedness in nature, that our actions have an impact and that people have a choice, but it is also a means for farmers to present and bring about an understanding of (conventional or organic) agriculture in the public. Teachers' objectives are linked to subjects and ministerial requirements. Some have a broader focus on developing children’s action competence, critical thinking and food citizenship. Yet some teachers lack knowledge, motivation and time, limiting the integration in the classroom. Collaboration between farms and schools in Sweden – what does it take to succeed? Christina Lundström and Magnus Ljung Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Sweden Christina.Lundstrom@slu.se In the new curriculum for the Swedish comprehensive school, there is on one hand few formal demands regarding teaching of agriculture and food production, but on the other hand great opportunities to use these contexts for learning in several subjects. The question is how this potential can be utilized? Our study shows that teachers believe that it is important that students know how our food is produced, and many teachers would like to learn more about farming and food production. Teachers believe that the teaching of agriculture and food production should include food security and recycling, and how to decrease environmental impacts. Furthermore, teachers reckon that pupils ought to have an opportunity to grow food in school, and believe that skills as responsibility, cooperation and problem solving can be developed through practical work on a farm. Nevertheless, few teachers visit farms with their pupils and if they do - it is occasional visits. Instead, teaching of agriculture and food production, are carried out as briefings, discussions or by studying books or the Internet in classroom settings. Although the area is considered important and the teachers see many opportunities, they do not exploit the potential they see. The structural obstacles are large and the added value is not clear. The farms who see educational activities as an exciting area of development must therefore take an active role in the implementation process. This article discusses the characteristics of the entrepreneurs who nevertheless have managed to reach school and translate good intentions into action - collaborations truly systemic and unique in its nature. Further, what makes the partnership come into place? Which of the school's challenges does farm cooperation help to deal with and how is the work rooted in the curriculum? Based on three case studies tentative conclusions are drawn that we hope will support other farmers in their ambitions to bring about tangible interactions. Measuring interest in agriculture – A pilot study of a project on the role of school farms and subsequent curricular teaching units Malte Bickel and Susanne Bögeholz Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Germany Mbickel@gwdg.de Agriculture becomes increasingly important due to its impact on environment, biodiversity and climate change. Structural changes in farming have tremendously diminished the number of farms, farm 22
Workshop 1.2 Family Farms as Educational Farms – Possibilities and Perspectives owners and workers as well as the transparency of agricultural production processes. As a consequence, young people today lack opportunities to get into contact with agriculture. Yet, society has to cope with agriculturally-induced problems and to contribute to sustainable development. But how shall today´s young people do so in the future if they have hardly any relation to farming? One attempt to answer this question is to bring agriculture closer to young people by means of targeted educational activities. Many out-of-class learning locations do so trying to actively develop a basic understanding of agricultural production and its environmental, social and economic impacts. School farms e.g. offer a whole week stay on a farm for school classes, involving their active participation in different fields of primary food production and processing. They intend to make young people get interested in agriculture since interest is widely considered as an important condition for learning. The aim of our study is to evaluate i) whether school farms are able to trigger and develop an interest in agriculture and ii) whether a subsequent teaching unit at school helps to keep this interest alive. The teaching unit contains four different treatments that systematically vary elements to trigger and maintain interest in a 2x2 design. Pupils´ interest in agriculture will be analysed in an extended pre-post test design before and after a week´s stay on a school farm and after the subsequent teaching unit at school. The presentation will outline the research design and display preliminary findings of the ongoing study. Farm Based Education and Farm to School in the United States: Networks, Case Studies, Best Practices Erica Curry Farm Based Education Association, Shelburne Farms, Vermont (U.S.) Ecurry@shelburnefarms.org Over the last decade there has been a substantial increase in the interest of food and agriculture in the United States. This movement has been referred to as the “local food movement” and is embodied by communities in a variety of ways. Farm Based Education (FBE) and Farm to School (FTS) programs provide key opportunities for communities to build healthier local food systems across the country. The Farm Based Education Association and National Farm to School Network are both national networks that support practitioners working in these fields. The aim of a presentation at workshop 1.2 is to share information with the IFSA Community about the FBE and FTS movements in the United States. This presentation will be an engaging opportunity to hear about how this work relates to the Green Care movement in Europe. The presentation will include the following elements: • Discussion of the Best Practices of FBE and FTS in the United States • Case Studies of FBE and FTS programs across the country, including Michael Kaufmann from Green Chimneys in New York State. Founded in 1947 and a member of the FBEA, Green Chimneys is a nationally renowned, non-profit therapeutic organization that restores possibilities and creates futures for children with emotional, behavioral, social and learning challenges. • Highlights of research and evaluation results • A hands-on demonstration of a farm based education activity to emphasis the importance of interactive learning. • An opportunity for dialogue and discussion about how to strengthen opportunities for learning and networking between the Green Care and FBE and FTS communities. 23
Page 1 and 2: Content: Producing and reproducing
Page 3 and 4: Overall programme Producing and rep
Page 5 and 6: Producing and reproducing farming s
Page 7 and 8: Abstract of plenary sessions: Produ
Page 9 and 10: Abstract of plenary sessions: Produ
Page 11 and 12: Workshop 1.1 Knowledge flows in plu
Page 21: Workshop 1.2 Family Farms as Educat
Page 25 and 26: Workshop 1.2 Family Farms as Educat
Page 27 and 28: Workshop 1.3 Understanding agricult
Page 39 and 40: Workshop 2.2 Comparing the impacts
Page 41 and 42: Workshop 2.3 Systems thinking and p
Page 53 and 54: Workshop 3.1 Farming Systems’ ada
Page 59 and 60: Workshop 3.2 Succession in farming
Page 61 and 62: Workshop 3.2 Succession in farming
Page 63 and 64: Workshop 3.3 Restructuring family f
Page 69 and 70: Workshop 4.1 ‘Civic food networks
Page 71 and 72: Workshop 4.1 ‘Civic food networks
Page 73 and 74:
Workshop 4.1 ‘Civic food networks
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Workshop 4.2 Sustainable local publ
Page 81 and 82:
Workshop 4.2 Sustainable local publ
Page 83 and 84:
Workshop 5.1 The landscape as the b
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Workshop 5.2 European realities - a
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Workshop 5.3 Research-Education-Act
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Workshop 6.1 Balancing and communic
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Workshop 6.2 Merging the unmergeabl
Page 113 and 114:
Workshop 6.2 Merging the unmergeabl
Page 115 and 116:
Workshop 6.3 Organics: their dynami
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Workshop 6.4 Integrated simulation
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
WS 1.3 Producing and reproducing fa
Page 133 and 134:
Producing and reproducing farming s
show all

Book of Abstract (incl. addendum) - IFSA symposium 2012

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?