Campus Farming and Agrifood Education: Learning Sustainable Agriculture and Kinship With the Land2
Author: Chi-I Lin ( Center for General Education, Si Wan College,National Sun Yat-sen University), Yuh-Yuh Li (Center for General Education, Si Wan College, National Sun Yat-sen University)
Vol.&No.:Vol. 68, No. 4
Date:December 2023
Pages:129-156
DOI:https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.202312_68(4).0005
Abstract:
In the Global Education 2030 Agenda, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO, 2017) emphasized that addressing the imbalance between humans andnature and promoting sustainable agriculture to end hunger and ensure food security are among themost essential educational goals. Community-based agriculture can be a key driver of change (UNESCO, 2017). On April 22, 2015, the Japanese government began promoting food and agriculture education and established the Basic Act on the Promotion of Urban Agriculture. One of the proposed strategies in this act is to “start from education and establish roots.” Similarly, on April 19, 2022, Taiwan established the Food and Agriculture Education Act, which was promulgated on May 4, 2022. According to Article 1 of the Food and Agriculture Education Act, the goals of food and agriculture education are to promote nationwide food and agriculture education; strengthen the link between diet, environment, and agriculture; enhance national health; inherit and promote a culture of food and agricultural; promote sustainable development of rural areas, agriculture, and the environment; establish a sound national food and agriculture education system; and cultivate talent. The fundamental goal of food and agriculture education is to strengthen the connection between diet, environment, and agriculture. One strategy to achieve this goal is to focus on strengthening the connection between humans and nature.
The relationship between humans and the environment has not received considerable attention from scholars in the fields of the social sciences and humanities. However, scholars have begun to shift their focus toward the interaction between humans and the environment. Aldo Leopold, regarded as the father of environmental ethics, was the first scholar in the Western world to consider the relationship between humans and the environment. He introduced the concept of land ethics as a means of evaluating how humans should relate to their environment. According to Aldo Leopold’s land ethics, humans are members of a biotic community and must maintain the integrity of the land. Leopold emphasized the importance of the land, arguing that it is not merely a resource for human use but rather a mutually interdependent ecological community. Expanding on these reflections regarding humanity, Zalasiewicz et al. (2010) observed that human history has transitioned from the Holocene epoch to the Anthropocene epoch, a transition that began in approximately 1750. Consequently, humans have become the primary agents shaping the Earth’s environment. The challenge of the Anthropocene epoch, however, lies in the growing alienation between humans and the land, which has led to humans altering the natural environment and has posed a threat to the sustainable existence of human society.
Seeking to understand the kinship between humans and the land represents a humanistic approach to environmental ethics. Such an approach can be challenging to employ in traditional classroom settings to achieve target learning outcomes. In the present study, we investigated how agrifood education can foster an ecological perspective in university students that strengthens the connection between humans and the environment. In addition to imparting the principles of sustainable agriculture, a key objective of agrifood education is cultivating a sense of kinship with the land. Our primary research question was as follows: Beyond the acquisition of knowledge regarding sustainable agriculture, how and to what extent does the integration of information regarding small-scale farming practices into agrifood curricula enhance students’ sense of kinship with the land?
In accordance with postpositivist approaches, we adopted a sustainability transdisciplinary education model as a teaching strategy and established a small campus farm. This small campus farm was established to facilitate on-site learning regarding sustainable agriculture and related practices. By directly involving students in the farming experience, we sought to create a positive and enjoyable learning environment and foster a deep connection with the land. The campus farm served as a platform for integrating interdisciplinary knowledge regarding agrifood. Situated within the university campus, it combined the elements of the land, natural vitality, and a communal space. It enabled the students to understand the importance of preserving the natural environment and enhanced their understanding of the inherent and interconnected relationships between individuals and society as well as between individuals and the environment.
We used concept mapping and open-ended questions to gather research data at the beginning and end of a semester, and we analyzed data obtained from 111 undergraduate students. Concept maps were used to evaluate the students’ understanding of sustainable agricultural development. Subsequently, these concept maps were independently evaluated by two experts on the basis of predetermined criteria, and the interrater reliability was determined. To measure the students’ sense of connection to the land, an open-ended survey was conducted, and the textual content of the students’ responses was analyzed. This survey was conducted at two time points: at the beginning of the study and at the end of the study. The first part involved a thematic apperception test similar to that used in psychology, in which the students were presented with an image of a piece of land and asked to record their thoughts and associations with the image. In the second part, students werepresented with open-ended questions through which they were asked to express their ideas regarding different agricultural cultivation methods.
The research participants primarily comprised university students enrolled in a two-semester general education course on food and agriculture. These students were affiliated with various colleges within the university, including the College of Science, College of Engineering, College of Marine Sciences, College of Management, College of Social Sciences, and College of the Humanities and Arts. Most of the students had only a basic understanding of agriculture, with a few having a family background in farming. Male students accounted for 57.7% of the participants, and female students accounted for 42.3%. The distribution among academic years was as follows: 25.2% freshmen, 36.9% sophomores, 2.7% juniors, and 35.5% seniors.
Our results indicated the following. First, by the end of the course, the students’ understanding of and their attitude toward sustainable agriculture considerably improved. Second, the students’ sense of kinship with the land substantially improved. Third, the change in the students’ attitudes toward sustainable agriculture and their sense of kinship with the land correlated with their on-site campus farming experience. Fourth, concept mapping is an effective tool for evaluating students’ understanding of sustainable agriculture.
Overall, our findings provide key empirical insights into the planning and execution of current agrifood educational practices. The humanistic perspective inherent to the concept of kinship with the land is fundamental for the successful implementation of sustainable agriculture education. However, spatial accessibility must be considered when establishing a farm. Notably, students must have a robust foundation with respect to the concept of sustainability to be able to grasp higher-level sustainability concepts. In addition, sustainable literacy must be developed and enriched through ongoing sustainable education.
Keywords:kinship with the land, concept of sustainable agriculture, agrifood education, campus farming, concept mappingprogram
《Full Text》
References:
- 何昕家、張子超(2011)。從永續發展教育觀點探究校園環境空間規劃設計。環境與藝術學刊,10,28-53。http://www.nhu.edu.tw/~envart/learning/10/10_02.pdf【Ho, S.-J., & Chang, T.-C. (2011). Space in school and ESD: A study on integrating education for sustainable development in planning and designing space in school. Journal of Environment & Art, 10, 28-53. http://www.nhu.edu.tw/~envart/learning/10/10_02.pdf】
- 吳清山(2018)。素養導向教師教育內涵建構及實踐之研究。教育科學研究期刊,63(4),261-293。https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.201812_63(4).0009【Wu, C.-S. (2018). Construction and practice of competency-based teacher education. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 63(4), 261-293. https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.201812_63(4).0009】
- 李育諭(主編)(2016)。2015年科技素養計畫—青少年永續發展素養調查概況報告。國立中山大學公民素養推動研究中心。【Li, Y.-Y. (Ed.). (2016). 2015 scientific literacy research project: Report of research methodology in the investigation of high school students’ sustainability literacy in Taiwan. The Research Center for Promoting Civic Literacy of National Sun Yat-sen University.】
- 林文傑(2016)。日本振興都市農業基本法簡介。農政與農情,286。https://www.coa.gov.tw/ ws.php?id=2504564【Lin, W.-C. (2016). A brief introduction to Japan’s basic law for the promotion of urban agriculture. Agriculture Policy & Review, 286. https://www.coa.gov.tw/ws.php?id=2504564】
- 林季怡、李育諭(2018)。跨領域永續課程提升大學生整體性思考及衝突問題解決能力:以海洋永續教育為例。科學教育學刊,26(1),1-27。https://doi.org/10.6173/CJSE201803_26(1).0001【Lin, C.-I., & Li, Y.-Y. (2018). Sustainability interdisciplinary education for facilitating undergraduate students' holistic thinking and conflict resolution competencies: A study on education for ocean sustainability. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 26(1), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.6173/CJSE.201803_26(1).0001】
» More
- 何昕家、張子超(2011)。從永續發展教育觀點探究校園環境空間規劃設計。環境與藝術學刊,10,28-53。http://www.nhu.edu.tw/~envart/learning/10/10_02.pdf【Ho, S.-J., & Chang, T.-C. (2011). Space in school and ESD: A study on integrating education for sustainable development in planning and designing space in school. Journal of Environment & Art, 10, 28-53. http://www.nhu.edu.tw/~envart/learning/10/10_02.pdf】
- 吳清山(2018)。素養導向教師教育內涵建構及實踐之研究。教育科學研究期刊,63(4),261-293。https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.201812_63(4).0009【Wu, C.-S. (2018). Construction and practice of competency-based teacher education. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 63(4), 261-293. https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.201812_63(4).0009】
- 李育諭(主編)(2016)。2015年科技素養計畫—青少年永續發展素養調查概況報告。國立中山大學公民素養推動研究中心。【Li, Y.-Y. (Ed.). (2016). 2015 scientific literacy research project: Report of research methodology in the investigation of high school students’ sustainability literacy in Taiwan. The Research Center for Promoting Civic Literacy of National Sun Yat-sen University.】
- 林文傑(2016)。日本振興都市農業基本法簡介。農政與農情,286。https://www.coa.gov.tw/ ws.php?id=2504564【Lin, W.-C. (2016). A brief introduction to Japan’s basic law for the promotion of urban agriculture. Agriculture Policy & Review, 286. https://www.coa.gov.tw/ws.php?id=2504564】
- 林季怡、李育諭(2018)。跨領域永續課程提升大學生整體性思考及衝突問題解決能力:以海洋永續教育為例。科學教育學刊,26(1),1-27。https://doi.org/10.6173/CJSE201803_26(1).0001【Lin, C.-I., & Li, Y.-Y. (2018). Sustainability interdisciplinary education for facilitating undergraduate students' holistic thinking and conflict resolution competencies: A study on education for ocean sustainability. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 26(1), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.6173/CJSE.201803_26(1).0001】
- 林哲安、方偉達、袁孝維、陳凱俐、鄭辰旋(2016)。推動臺灣生態農業—以新南田董米為例。宜蘭大學生物資源學刊,12,135-164。https://doi.org/10.6175/job.2016.12.19【Lin, J., Fang, W.-T., Yuan, H.-W., Chen, K.-L., & Cheng, J. C.-H. (2016). Promotions of Taiwan’s ecological agriculture– A case study of Shinnan Tiandong Rice. Ilan University Journal of Bioresources, 12, 135-164. https://doi.org/10.6175/job.2016.12.19】
- 林達森(2003)。概念圖的理論基礎與運用實務。花蓮師院學報(教育類),17,107-132。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=a0000147-200312-x-17-107-132-a【Lin, T.-S. (2003). On concept map: Its theory and practical use in education. Journal of National Hualien Teachers College, 17, 107-132. https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=a0000147-200312-x-17-107-132-a】
- 食農教育法(2022年5月4日)。全國法規資料庫。https://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawAll. aspx?pcode=M0090039&kw=食農教育法【Food and Agricultural Education Act (May 4, 2022). Laws & Regulations. https://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/ LawAll.aspx?pcode=M0090039&kw=食農教育法】
- 康以琳、張瑋琦(2016)。人與食物的距離—鄉村小學食農教育課程發展之行動研究。教育實踐與研究,29(1),1-34。【Kang, Y.-L., & Chang, W.-C. (2016). An action research on food and farming education curriculum development in a rural elementary school. Journal of Educational Practice and Research, 29(1), 1-34.】
- 符碧真、李紋霞(2020)。建立高等教育「教與學的學術」文化:借鏡國際經驗展望臺灣教學實踐研究的推動。教育科學研究期刊,65(4),105-137。https://doi.org/10.6209/ JORIES.202012_65(4).0004【Fwu, B.-J., & Lee, J. W.-S. (2020). Establishment of scholarship of teaching and learning culture in higher education: Using international experience to examine the promotion and development of Taiwan’s teaching practice research. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 65(4), 105-137. https://doi.org/10.6209/ JORIES.202012_65(4).0004】
- 陳美芬(2005)。農業資源融入九年一貫課程的重要性。載於陳美芬、劉鎮寧(主編),走訪鄉村─戶外農業體驗教學與九年一貫課程設計(頁7-12)。行政院農業委員會。【Chen, M.-F. (2005). The significance of integrating agricultural resources into a grade 1-9 curriculum. In M.-F. Chen & J.-N. Liou (Eds.), Visiting countryside (pp. 7-12). Council of Agriculture, Executive Yuan.】
- 葉欣誠、于蕙清、邱士倢、張心齡、朱曉萱(2019)。永續發展教育脈絡下我國食農教育之架構與核心議題分析。環境教育研究,15(1),87-140。https://doi.org/10.6555/JEER.15.1.087【Yeh, S.-C., Yu, H.-C., Chiu, S.-C., Chang, H.-L., & Chu, H.-H. (2019). Analysis of the framework and core themes of food and agricultural education in the context of education for sustainable development in Taiwan. Journal of Environmental Education Research, 15(1), 87-140. https://doi.org/10.6555/JEER.15.1.087】
- 董時叡、蔡嫦娟(2012)。農村綠色生活推廣方案規劃研究:食農教育課程規劃設計(101農科-5.2.2-輔-#1(5))。科技部。https://www.grb.gov.tw/search/planDetail?id=2654226【Tung, S.-J., & Tasy, C.-J. (2012). Green lifestyle promotion plan in rural villages: A curriculum design of food and farming education (101農科-5.2.2-輔-#1(5)). National Science and Technology Council. https:// www.grb.gov.tw/search/planDetail?id=2654226】
- 鄭辰旋(2013-2014)。休閒農業體驗對兒童自然情意態度及其環境行為之影響(NSC 102- 2511-S-197-002)。科技部。https://www.grb.gov.tw/search/planDetail?id=3108925【Cheng, J.-C. (2013-2014). The influence of participating in leisure farming experiences on children’s affective attitude toward nature and their pro-environmental behaviors (NSC 102-2511-S-197-002). National Science and Technology Council. https://www.grb.gov.tw/search/planDetail?id=3108925】
- 顏建賢、曾宇良、張瑋琦、陳美芬、謝亞庭(2015)。我國食農教育推動策略之研究。農業推廣文彙,60,69-86。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Publication/alDetailedMesh?docid= P20110114002-201512-201601130008-201601130008-69-86【Yen, C.-H., Tseng, Y.-L., Chang, W.-C., Chen, M.-F., & Xie, Y.-T. (2015). A research on the promotion strategy of food and agriculture education in Taiwan. Agricultural Extension Anthology, 60, 69-86. https://www.airitilibrary.com/Publication/alDetailedMesh?docid=P20110114002-201512-201601130008-201601130008-69-86】
- Adamson, J., & Davis, M. (2017). Humanities for the environment-integrating knowledge, forging new constellations of practice. Routledge.
- Aikenhead, G. (2015). Humanist perspectives on science education. In R. Gunstone (Ed.), Encyclopedia of science education (pp. 467-471). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/ 978-94-007-2150-0_364
- Bramwell, S., Rosemeyer, M., & Barker, M. (2011). Evergreen state college interdisciplinary studies in sustainable agriculture. In L. Sayre & S. Clark (Eds.), Fields of learning: The student farm movement in North America (pp. 89-108). University Press of Kentucky.
- Bristow, T., & Ford, T. (Eds.). (2016). A cultural history of climate change. Routledge.
- Christie, B. A., Miller, K. K., Cooke, R., & White, J. G. (2013). Environmental sustainability in higher education: How do academics teach? Environmental Education Research, 19(3), 385-414. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2012.698598
- Clark, B., & Button, C. (2011). Sustainability transdisciplinary education model: Interface of arts, science, and community (STEM). International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 12(1), 41-54. https://doi.org/10.1108/14676371111098294
- Crutzen, P. J., & Steffen, W. (2003). How long have we been in the anthropocene era? Climatic Change, 61(3), 251-257. https://doi.org/10.1023/b:clim.0000004708.74871.62
- de la Salle, J., & Holland, M. (Eds.). (2010). Agricultural urbanism: Handbook for building sustainable food systems in 21st century cities. Libri.
- Duram, L. A., & Williams, L. L. (2015). Growing a student organic garden within the context of university sustainability initiatives. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 16(1), 3-15. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-03-2013-0026
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2006). The right to food guidelines: Information papers and case studies. https://www.fao.org/3/a0511e/a0511e00.pdf
- Goodman, D., & DuPuis, E. M. (2002). Knowing food and growing food: Beyond the production-consumption debate in the sociology of agriculture. Sociologia Ruralis, 42(1), 5-22. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9523.00199
- Hassard, J. (2008). Humanistic science education. The Art of Teaching Science. https:// jackhassard.org/humanistic-science-education/
- Johnson, B., & Činčera, J. (2015). Examining the relationship between environmental attitudes and behaviour in education programmes. Socialni Studia, 12(3), 97-111. https://doi.org/10.5817/ soc2015-3-97
- Kaplan, R. (1973). Some psychological benefits of gardening. Environment and Behavior, 5(2), 145-161. https://doi.org/10.1177/001391657300500202
- Kirschenmann, F. L., Clark, S., & Sayre, L. (2011). Fields of learning: The student farm movement in North America. The University Press of Kentucky.
- Klein, J. T. (2004). Interdisciplinarity and complexity: An evolving relationship. Emergence, Complexity & Organization, 6(1-2), 2-10.
- Klein, J. T. (2005). Integrative learning and interdisciplinary studies. Peer Review, 7(4), 8-10.
- Leopold, A. (1966). A sand county almanac: With other essays on conservation from Round River. Oxford University Press.
- Libman, K. (2007). Growing youth growing food: How vegetable gardening influences young people’s food consciousness and eating habits. Applied Environmental Education & Communication, 6(1), 87-95. https://doi.org/10.1080/15330150701319388
- Lin, C.-I. (2017). Reading the past for the future: Exploring undergraduate students’ environmental consciousness through a place-based ecocritical approach of using Shakespeare’s plays. Journal of General Education: Concept & Practice, 5(1), 111-136. https://doi.org/10.6427/JGECP. 201703_5(1).0004
- Lin, C.-I. (2022). Emergence of perceptions of smart agriculture at a community/campus farm: A participatory experience. Journal of Science Communication, 21(02), A02. https://doi.org/ 10.22323/2.21020202
- Lineberger, S. E., & Zajicek, J. M. (2000). School gardens: Can a hands-on teaching tool affect students’ attitudes and behaviors regarding fruit and vegetables? Hort Technology, 10(3), 593-597. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTTECH.10.3.593
- Martinez, S., Hand, M., Da Pra, M., Pollack, S., Ralston, K., Smith, T., Vogel, S., Clark, S., Lohr, L., Low, S., & Newman, C. (2010). Local food systems: Concepts, impacts, and issues. United States Department of Agriculture. https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.96635
- Oakley, J. (2011). Animality and environmental education: Toward an interspecies paradigm. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 16, 8-13. https://cjee.lakeheadu.ca/article/view/ 1091
- Ramchunder, S. J., & Ziegler, A. D. (2021). Promoting sustainability education through hands-on approaches: A tree carbon sequestration exercise in a Singapore green space. Sustainability Science, 16, 1045-1059. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-020-00897-5
- Remington-Doucette, S. M., Hiller Connell, K. Y., Armstrong, C. M., & Musgrove, S. L. (2013). Assessing sustainability education in a transdisciplinary undergraduate course focused on real world problem solving: A case for disciplinary grounding. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 14(4), 404-433. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-01-2012-0001
- Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., Persson, Å., Chapin III, F. S. Lambin, E. F., Lenton, T. M., Scheffer, M., Folke, C., Schellnhuber, H. J., Nykvist, B., de Wit, C. A., Hughes, T., van der Leeuw, S., Rodhe, H., Sörlin, S., Snyder, P. K., Costanza, R., Svedin, U., … Foley, J. A. (2009). A safe operating space for humanity. Nature, 461, 472-475. https://doi.org/10.1038/461472a
- Roseland, M. (2012). Toward sustainable communities: Solutions for citizens and their governments (4th ed.). New Society.
- Storstad, O., & Bjørkhaug, H. (2003). Foundations of production and consumption of organic food in Norway: Common attitudes among farmers and consumers? Agriculture and Human Values 20, 151-163. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024069627349
- Sutherland, S., & Katz, S. (2005). Concept mapping methodology: A catalyst for organizational learning. Evaluation and Program Planning, 28(3), 257-269. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.evalprogplan.2005.04.017
- United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2017). Education for sustainable development goals: Learning objectives. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002474/ 247444e.pdf
- United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. (1992). Agenda 21: Programme of action for sustainable development. UN Department of Public Information. https:// sustainabledevelopment.un.org/outcomedocuments/agenda21
- Van Bommel, K., & Spicer, A. (2011). Hail the Snail: Hegemonic struggles in the slow food movement. Organization Studies, 32(12), 1717-1744. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0170840611425722
- Van Matre, S. (1990). Earth education: A new beginning. Institute for Earth Education.
- Willer, H., & Kilcher, L. (Eds.). (2012). The world of organic agriculture: Statistics and emerging trends 2012. FiBL-IFOAM Report.
- Worster, D. (1996). The two cultures revisited: Environmental history and the environmental sciences. Environment and History, 2(1), 3-14.
- Zalasiewicz, J., Williams, M., Steffen, W., & Crutzen, P. (2010). The new world of the anthropocene. Environmental Science & Technology, 44(7), 2228-2231. https://doi.org/10.1021/es903118j
- Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Simmons, M. L., & Howes, E. V. (2005). Beyond STS: A research‐based framework for socioscientific issues education. Science Education, 89(3), 357-377. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20048