National Expansion of Queensland’s School’s Education Competition
From Poultry Hub
In 2003/04 the Australian Egg Corporation Limited (AECL) sponsored the development of an operations manual for the project containing time lines, a list of possible research areas students might like to investigate, 40 relevant Australian poultry information web sites and all necessary support material for the projects annual operation.
Project Objectives
- To extend the WPSA Schools competition to at least two other states outside of Queensland.
- To investigate the most sustainable ways of providing support to the school activities.
- To arrange a meeting with participants being the executive members of the National Association of Agricultural Educators and the state branches of the Association. The outcome to form a consultative committee to plan the development of a ‘training package’ for the schools project.
- By means of the consultative committee, provide input to the advisers involved in the development of the new Federal curriculum.
Methodology
At the commencement of the 2008 school year, the WPSA project had been operational in Queensland for eight years, 85% of Queensland’s Agricultural teachers (both state and independent and a small number of interstate schools) had taken part in the project. The project has grown approximately 5% each year from the initial 11 Agricultural schools (with poultry facilities), to currently where twenty–six Queensland schools took part in the 2008 competition (Appendix 1).
The competition requires students to do a review of the poultry industry and develop a report based upon the information they collect that supports their trial hypothesis as well as trial procedure and results and a poster that displays these outcomes.
Agriculture students enjoy the physical components of the competition i.e. contact with the chickens and the responsibility associated with looking after them. Teachers have witnessed the benefits the competition has as a teaching tool and as such have been anxious to undertake and promote it each year. With this in mind, it was decided to use these positives to target a small number of schools to expand the competition nationally.
Competition Outcomes for 2008
As a result of this approach a number of interstate agricultural teachers made contact directly to the competition co-ordinator (DPI&F) or through the education co-ordinator (CRC) with their interest in competing. Following enquiries from these new schools (listed below), they were sent information leaflets from the operations manual outlining the steps of the competition process.
This competition through its hands on approach satisfies teacher requirements, develops student skills in team building, report writing, experimental design and statistics to name a few. Provides an opportunity for students to meet poultry industry members and academics and contains a unique mechanism for transferring information through to the community. The continued annual operation and expansion of the competition also maintains a student base for future industry employment. Out of the 11 new schools which demonstrated interest New England Girls School (Negs) in Armidle NSW and Tintinara Area School in South Australia joined the 2008 competition.
Agricultural Coordinator Meeting 2008
Agricultural teachers agreed that with any agriculture program as well as academic learning, it was extremely important for students to have hands on contact with the animal that they were researching. They also stated that most states have the option to teach agriculture in the junior years (7-10) and a more advanced program for years 11 and 12 requiring information targeted at two levels.
The outcomes of any industry proposed education program should provide students with relevant information on all aspects of poultry management and production by supplying our education providers with clear, concise support packages of information.
Kits should include poultry lesson sheets, information on management, anatomy, diseases and common farm yard problems like moulting and feather pecking all of which should be included into an interactive CD-ROM for teacher/student use.
It was also apparent that agricultural coordinators/teachers and education providers were not aware of the amount of supporting information, either in written form like “The story of Eggs”, “The story of Chicken” and in electronic format such as “Anatomy of the Chicken”, “It all starts with an Egg” and “From Hatchery to Home” that is currently available.
Conclusions
Although the 2008 WPSA Competition was only tested in two new schools within the states of New South Wales and South Australia, the WPSA competition did however demonstrate its versatility as a national poultry competition for year levels 6-12. It also demonstrated that it was able to fit into different states agricultural teaching parameters.
This competition has evolved to its present format through annually satisfying the changing needs of educators where it still continues to provide:
- A teaching aid that develops skills in team building/therapy, report writing, experimental design, probabilities, statistics and many others.
- Students with career information and industry contacts.
- A unique opportunity for students to meet industry livestock professionals, nutritionists, veterinarians, agricultural scientists and academics.
- Information to younger Australians on healthy choices for good quality and nutritious foods.
For the Australian Poultry industry it also continues to provide some unique opportunities:
- The animals’ size and temperament makes it extremely suitable for all ages and all Ag schools/Boarding schools and possibly even age care facilities.
- It provides an easy vehicle for new industry practices/information to move freely to the community e.g. with Avian Influenza.
- Information is always current and can be channelled easily into each year’s competition.
- It combats negative Industry publicity and
- Provides an agriculture base for future industry employment.
The educational and industry benefits derived from the existing competition can be delivered nationally to the target audience (students, teachers and the community) under three main scenarios.
The first scenario would be for the poultry industry and poultry organisations to annually contribute funds to sponsor the operation of the competition in each of the states similar to how the Queensland competition has developed and currently operates.
This would allow the competition to:
- Run on an individual state basis (providing individual coordinators could be sourced)
- Possibly develop nationally over time
- Provide an ad hoc approach to the competitions development and operation under individual state coordinators
- Provide an uncoordinated approach to the delivery of industry information
- Run the risk over time of having several similar competitions which even though they may develop along the same lines, it is highly likely would head in different directions.
- Would still require a poultry industry organisation to operate the national component part of the competition and
- Would tend to divide sponsors and industry organisations/groups e.g. eggs vs meat by their states and industry loyalties.
The second and most logical way to operate the competition and maintain its successful format is to appoint a dedicated full time national competition coordinator funded by the poultry industry, with the competition being controlled, developed and delivered by a national poultry industry organisation with a dedicated poultry education programme.
This would provide the following advantages:
- Control by a national poultry industry organisation.
- A national and consistent approach to delivering a poultry educational program into the Australian schools system.
- A consistent approach that would enable continued development of poultry education and training materials on a national basis.
- A vehicle suitable for supplying poultry industry information to the national agriculture sector as the need required.
- National representation with state and national agricultural teachers and coordinators at their annual agricultural conferences.
- A coordinated national approach to career opportunities and pathways into the poultry industry.
- A mechanism for maintaining Australia’s poultry agricultural requirements current and developed uniformly.
This approach would/could however have many operational disadvantages such as:
- Arranging bird deliveries to participating schools throughout various states,
- The coordination of end of year activities like the open days/venues in each participating state.
- Distribution of prizes and associated media coverage over a number of states.
- Providing students access to farm visits and work experience within states.
- The possibility of non-required participation by state Departments both in coordination and agriculture skilling.
- Potential industry sector bias.
These operational disadvantages would be extremely difficult as well as time consuming for a national coordinator to organise as part of an ongoing national education competition.
The third and most practical way to manage these operational components would be to have a series of co-ordinator which could implement the competitions annual operation in each state. This approach could still maintain a consistent operational format (The manual of operation) with competition changes, development and coordinated delivery being controlled under a national poultry industry organisation. Having a number of coordinators would resolve any time issues resulting from different state curriculums and is likely to develop more local industry support within each state or area due to personal industry contact and participation.
This approach would also allow the national controlling organisation to concentrate their efforts to the running of the national component of each year’s competition which could be achieved by selecting the best two school reports and posters from each participating state. A panel of industry members would then select the top three national schools. Which could be awarded additional prizes and national media coverage for their schools and their states.
This third scenario would achieve all the benefits of the second scenario, as well as satisfying any of the disadvantages. All that is required would be an annual coordinators meeting to discuss the previous year’s outcomes and any operational changes required for the upcoming year’s format and liaison throughout the year between the coordinators.
Resulting from the attempt to expand the 2008 competition into other states, the Agriculture coordinators meeting and other promotions of the competition, a degree of interest has developed from the other states particularly the South Australian governments’ agriculture sector who would like to coordinate their state’s participation in 2009 with an estimated sixteen schools.
The Role of Australia's Poultry Organisations
Previous discussions over a number of years with the management committee of the Australian branch of the World’s Poultry Science Association (WPSA) have stated that they would like to maintain their connection in the expansion, sponsorship and annual operation of the competition.
Whatever approach is decided upon, it is important that the World’s Poultry Science Association should remain linked to this competition. This competition was originally a WPSA Queensland sub-branch initiative; WPSA has played an important role in the development, sponsorship and success to date of the current competition, as well as providing a national and international alignment to poultry industry education, one of this associations major objectives.
With all the above operational scenarios, it is imperative that all industry bodies like the Australian Egg Corporation Limited (AECL), The Australian Chicken Meat Federation (ACMF), Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation (RIRDC), continue to support this activity in a coordinated role.
Throughout the development of this competition national and state poultry organisations as well as the general industry have always provided some ad hoc support towards its annual operation. If this competition is to be successful nationally, it is essential that it be controlled by a national poultry organisation that can coordinate all other affiliated poultry groups to become more heavily involved with the competition’s annual operations.
This controlling organisation needs to canvass Industry at all levels into providing state coordinators, financial support, birds, poultry products, promotional material, and venues for open days, student work experience and training on a state by state basis.
The major target audience (agricultural students) are at a point in their lives where they are consuming large amounts of information and they require correct/unbiased information to be able to make informed decisions about the environment and safe food.
The knowledge they gain in these early years, has a flow on affect that will last them the rest of their lives reaching several generations, today’s students are tomorrow's parents and consumers. This knowledge will help cement community support for industry sustainability both socially and ecologically well into the future.
The best outcome for the poultry industry and Australia’s educational sector would be if the national operation of this competition is controlled under the Australian Poultry Co-operative Research Centre CRC’s education program. The Poultry CRC has a strong proven national focus on industry training and skills development, has no particular liaison to any particular industry sectors and has the support of the Australian poultry industry and their members.
Recommendations
1. That the Australian Poultry Co-operative Research Centre (CRC) takes control of the WPSA Poultry Education Competition and coordinate its delivery into Australian schools.
2. That the World’s Poultry Science Association (WPSA) retains its current link to the competition.
3.That the competitions operational manual originally developed for use by Queensland schools, contains some impediments which could hamper the competitions national expansion and adoption. Continued discussions with agricultural co-ordinators, have highlighted five major concerns which should be updated, particularly in the areas of:
- The time lines of operation should be used as a guide only, enabling school to compete over shorter time frames like one term/semester and would be particularly suited to teachers where poultry is only a part of their annual teaching curriculum.
- Scrapping the requirement of year 10+ to be able to participate in the competition, which allows composite classes e.g. 9/10 and lower grades years 6 or 7 to also take part.
- Removing the restrictions placed on non-agricultural schools making it possible for them to compete without maintaining a poultry flock on site.
- Not restricting the information to only poultry production and management but including information that will keep the community better informed on issues such as exotic diseases e.g. bird flu (A.I), genetically modified organism (GMO) and other topical poultry information.
- Expand some web site sections in the manual such as The Australian Poultry CRC, Australian Egg Corporation Limited, Australian Chicken Meat Federation and the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation to make them more descriptive and student interactive.
4. That the competition should provide more defined links to existing information and avenues where work experience for poultry training/career opportunities can be promoted.
5. Educators are not aware what poultry information is available to support their poultry programs. More needs to be done through the recently developed agricultural co-ordinators network to promote what is currently available and to develop more interactive support material.
6. There are some Agricultural teachers/coordinators that teach a set program for certificate 1 or 2 and therefore cannot fit the competition into their annual curriculum. These teachers/schools should still be provided access to the poultry information kits and web links.
7. That schools are encouraged to maintain an equal interest in all industry sectors and mechanisms included in the operation of the competition to help balance these interests out.
Queensland Participating Schools 2008
- Atherton State High School
- Beenleigh State High School
- Boonah State High School
- Bowen State High School
- Caboolture State High School
- Calvary Christian College
- Charters Towers State High School
- Chinchilla State High School
- Cleveland District State High School
- Clifton State High School
- Corinda State High School
- Dakabin State High School
- Genesis Christian College
- Gordonvale State High School
- Kepnock State High School
- Kilcoy State School
- Loganlea State High School
- Maleny State High School
- Middlemount Community School
- Murgon State High School
- Nanango State High School
- Noosa District State High School
- Pittsworth State High School
- Ravenshoe State High School
- Warwick State High School
- West Moreton Anglican College
National Sponsors (2000 – 2008)
- Adisseo Australia Pty Ltd
- WPSA Australian Branch
- Alltech Biotechnology Pty Ltd
- WPSA Queensland Sub-branch
- Australian Chicken Meat Federation
- Woodlands Enterprises
- Australian Egg Corporation Limited (AECL)
- Australian Poultry CRC(Co-operative Research Centre)
- Baiada Poultry
- Bartter Enterprises
- BEC Feed Solutions Pty Ltd
- Bond Enterprises
- Darwalla Milling Co
- Degussa Australia
- Dept of Primary Industries & Fisheries, Qld (DPI&F)
- Elanco Animal Health
- Fort Dodge Australia Ltd
- Golden Cockerel Pty Ltd
- Inghams Enterprises
- Intervet Australia
- Jabiru Agribusiness Pty Ltd
- McLean Farms
- OzBioPharm Pty Ltd
- Pace Farms Pty Ltd
- Phibro Animal Health
- Queensland Chicken Growers Council
- Ridley Agriproducts
- Riverina Australia Pty Ltd
- SPAFAS
- SunnyBrand Chickens Pty Ltd
- Sunny Queen Pty Ltd
Acknowledgments
The Author would like to thank the Australian Poultry Co-operative Research Centre (CRC) for its annual sponsorship of the World’s Poultry Science Association (WPSA) School’s Poultry Education Competition and for funding its national expansion. The assistance and support provided by Dr Julie Roberts and Australia’s Agricultural Teachers for their help and advice is also appreciated.
References
- Australian Egg Corporation Limited (AECL) 2004 World’s Poultry Science Association (WPSA) High School’s Poultry industry Education Competition Operational manual.
- Australian Poultry Cooperative Research Centre “Education and Training in the Australian Poultry Industry” September 2005.
