- Email: [email protected]
Poultry Science Departments: Unconsolidated Versus Consolidated1
Poultry Science Departments: Unconsolidated Versus Consolidated1 D . E . BlGBEE AND C. S. SHAFFNER Department of Poultry Science, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland 20742 (Received for publication October 19, 1971)
POULTRY SCIENCE 51: 1175-1180,
I
N THE 1970 fourth quarter issue of "Agricultural Science Review," Dr. R. J. Heldreth wrote concerning "The Legitimacy of Colleges of Agriculture." He stated, "I do not believe that Colleges of Agriculture are in any real danger of losing their legitimacy. But I do believe that in the coming decade they may face the unhappy prospect of becoming less legitimate, unless certain trends are checked." In like turn we can ask, What of the legitimacy of Poultry Science Departments within Colleges of Agriculture? Over the past few years we have observed a trend toward consolidation of poultry departments with other related departments. Approximately one-half of the colleges in the U.S., with poultry programs, have carried out a consolidation. This would imply that separate departments no longer "pay off" in relation to the public they serve. However, does consolidation provide a means toward legitimacy or a tactful procedure for extinction? A comment by one of our respondents, as well as the data from our survey, tend to support the latter opinion. The respondent's state1 Miscellaneous Article No. 791. Contribution No. 4487 of the Maryland Agricultural Experiment Station (Department of Poultry Science).
1972
ment was, and we quote, "From a personal standpoint, we who are established here can work in the areas where we are needed, and do not lose from a personal standpoint. However, I doubt seriously when we retire whether there will be replacements for us. It may mean that in our case that poultry science will be pushed out entirely. However, this is just an opinion on my part." We do not have to learn to live with a concept of passive acceptance. The poultry complex as a whole is worthy of separate authority within our university system. It is to this point that we conducted the survey herein reported. A survey was conducted to determine the attitude of the personnel of consolidated and unconsolidated University poultry departments and of poultry industry groups toward consolidation of poultry departments with other academic units. Ten of each of the above groups were contacted with an appropriate questionnaire (Table 8). Five members of each department or organization were asked to reply. Responses were received from eight consolidated departments, eight unconsolidated departments and seven commercial organizations, with 26, 12, and 19 individual responses respectively. In the case of four un-
1175
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Rutgers University Libraries/Technical Services on June 7, 2015
ABSTRACT A survey of ten consolidated, unconsolidated departments and commercial firms, respectively, concerning attitudes toward consolidation of Poultry Departments with other academic units was conducted. The results indicate that 75 percent of all respondents prefer separate departmental status for Poultry Science academic units. However, the trend is toward consolidation in order to achieve administrative efficiency in the area of undergraduate instruction. Combined undergraduate curriculums have worked well as an answer to this problem, yet administrations appear reluctant to retain the research and extension functions of the departments as separate entities. It is our opinion that continued departmental consolidation will further threaten the legitimacy of colleges of agriculture by reducing the commodity "pay-off" in research and extension which is basic to their existence.
1176
D.
E . BlGBEE AND C. S. SHAFFNEE
TABLE 1.—General opinion concerning consolidation of animal departments as the most advantageous departmental organization, expressed as percentage 0} all respondents from consolidated and unconsolidated departments and industry Favor consolidation Source
No
31 0 28 24
58 100 72 75
No opinion 11 1
consolidated departments and two commercial organizations a summary opinion was received and these were counted as a single response. The results presented in Table 1 indicate that separate poultry departments are preferred by 75% of all respondents. Uncombined departments show a unanimous desire to remain autonomous. There is an indication from commercial companies and consolidated departments, however, that consolidation can be made to work satisfactorily. Data shown in Table 2 reflect the source of consolidation, reasons for it, and some indication of how well it has succeeded. These data are based on responses from TABLE 2.—Origins and justification for consolidation, expressed as percent of respondents from institutions with consolidated animal science departments A. Source of idea to consolidate 1. Poultry Department 0 2. Other Department 0 3. Administration 100% B. Reasons for consolidation1 1. Administrative economy 88% 2. Improve academic programs 50% 3. To stimulate interdepartmental research 27% C. Has the consolidation been successful in attaining these goals? Yes 38%, No 23%, No opinion 23% No Response 16% 1 Respondent could check more than one answer, thus the percentages are a ranking of the reasons for consolidation.
TABLE 3.—Influence of major changes in institutional organization of personnel on consolidation of animal departments, based on responses from consolidated animal science departments A. General reorganization of the University or College Yes 2 No 6 B. Retirement or resignation of the Department Head Yes 2 No 6
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Rutgers University Libraries/Technical Services on June 7, 2015
Consolidated Dept. Unconsolidated Dept. Industry Overall
Yes
consolidated departments. They all indicate that the idea to consolidate came from their central administrations. The primary reason for consolidation was to achieve administrative economy in relation to decreasing undergraduate enrollments. One college Dean said, "50-60 students were necessary to justify a separate department." Does this infer that the importance of poultry research and extension functions in a Land-Grant institution can be justified only in terms of their ability to generate undergraduate students? In a time when administrative reorganization within the academic community is in vogue, we found little connection between this phenomenon and consolidation of animal departments, Table 3. Two departments of the eight that responded were consolidated in conjunction with a general university or college reorganization. Consolidation of two other departments coincided with the retirement of the Chairman. If these data are accurate estimates, Table 4, poultry has not fared well under consolidated administrations. This may be due in part to the lack of poultrymen in the upper echelons of the various colleges. At any rate, in only one case can we cite the appointment of a poultryman to the headship of a consolidated department. Respondents from consolidated departments indicate little progress in their respective budgets, nineteen percent indicated an increase in budget allotments, 23% no change, while 42% have experienced budget decreases
POULTRY SCIENCE DEPARTMENTS
TABLE 4.—Influence of a consolidated administration on administrator selection, personnel changes, budget and curriculum, based on responses from consolidated animal science departments A. Was a poultryman appointed head of the department? Yes 1 No 7 B. Status of the budget allotment for poultry Increased 19%, No change 23%, Decreased 42%, No Response 16% C. Personnel 1. Has the number of poultry positions Increased 4%, Decreased 50%, No Change 46% 2. What happens when poultry positions become vacant? Rapidly filled 38% Remain open 10% Shifted to other commodity area 34% Closed 17% D. Curriculum 1. Does the program offer a poultry science major? Undergraduate 1 Graduate 2 Both 2 None 3 2. Teach specialized poultry courses Yes 8 No 0 3. Student numbers—Totals of all responding institutions Undergraduate 45 Graduate 62
TABLE 5.—Some characteristics of unconsolidated poultry departments A. Institutional reorganization In progress 1 Completed 1 B. Will your department head be resigning or retiring in the near future? Yes 1 No 7 Will a replacement be sought? Yes 1 No 0 C. Are you presently planning a departmental consolidation? Yes 0 No 8 D. Are you involved in interdepartmental or interdisciplinary programs? Yes 7 No 1 E. Do you have a combined curriculum with other departments? Undergraduate 2, Graduate 1, Both 3, None 2 F. Student numbers Undergraduate 78, Graduate 115
course. The responding departments reported having a total of 45 undergraduate and 62 graduate students. Turning now to responses from the unconsolidated departments, some of their characteristics are presented in Table 5. One college was in the process of reorganization, one had just completed a reorganization and 6 reported no current organizational change being contemplated. Only one department will be having a change in leadership and a replacement is being sought. In no instance was a consolidation being considered. Seven of the eight departments reported involvement in interdepartmental curriculum or research activities and programs. All but two departments had combined departmental curriculums of one kind or another. Two departments had combined undergraduate curriculums only, one had graduate only, three were combined at both levels and two did not have any combined curriculum. There is some corollary here with consolidated departments, 6 of these departments were involved in some type of combined curriculum prior to consolidation. The total enrollment reported by the uncombined departments was 78 under-
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Rutgers University Libraries/Technical Services on June 7, 2015
since consolidation. The number of poultry positions in the consolidated departments have increased according to 4% of the respondents, while 50% indicate a reduction, as shown in Table 4. When poultry positions have become vacant, 38% of the respondents indicated they are filled with reasonable speed, 10% said they remained open, 34% indicated they were shifted to other commodity areas and 17% replied that they were closed out. Other data in Table 4 reflects something of the attitude of consolidated departments toward poultry in their curriculum. Of the eight schools which reported, one offered only an undergraduate major in poultry science, two offer only a graduate major, and two offered both undergraduate and graduate majors. Three schools offered no poultry major at all. All schools did, however, teach at least one specialized poultry
1177
1178
D . E . BlGBEE AND C. S. SHAFFNER
TABLE 6.—Some characterization of the services requested by the poulti y industry from the universities
graduate and 115 graduate students. One of the ultimate aims of poultry departments is to serve the poultry complex. Therefore, it was deemed necessary to poll commercial attitudes toward departmental consolidation. Their responses to our questionnaire are summarized in Tables 1, 6, and 7. As stated earlier (Table 1), 72% of the individual respondents felt that an unconsolidated departmental structure would best meet the industries' academic needs. Table 6 shows something of the services requested of the university from commercial concerns. Seventy-five percent of the respondents indicated that the services were not of an interdisciplinary nature. Yet when we consider the disciplines most frequently called upon (veterinary medicine, nutrition, technology, business and economics) we can see a real need for interdisciplinary expertise. However, does consolidation with other broad animal disciplines facilitate the service need of the poultry complex or any other animal industry? When a commercial organization has a need for university service, where does it go if there is no poultry department in it's state? A list is presented in Table 7. First of all they call on the specialist in the consolidated department, if they are available. Second, they depend on having suitable people on their own staff. Third, they go to universities that do have poultry departments. Then they go to individuals with reputations for service, or to commercial
TABLE 7.—Where does the poultry industry obtain university assistance when there is no Poultry Department per se? A. Poultry specialist in combined department if available B. Company resources C. Other states D. People with national reputation E. Commercial laboratories
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Rutgers University Libraries/Technical Services on June 7, 2015
A. Are the services usually interdisciplinary in character? Yes 25% No 75% B. What disciplines are most frequently employed? 1. Veterinary medicine 2. Nutrition 3. Technology 4. Business and economics
laboratories and consultants. We interpret this to mean, they go to the individual who has expertise regardless of his affiliation. Now we come to the always obvious question of any investigation, what does all this mean? In the case of surveys, it often means what the surveyor set out to prove. To wit, consolidation of poultry departments with other academic units is an administrative mistake. Seventy-five percent of our respondents favor unconsolidated departments. However, we must face reality. There are individual situations which call for one system or the other as being best for an institution's needs and abilities to serve the poultry complex, and the public. Each college of agriculture must answer the following questions. What are the needs of our poultry complex, and public? What are our abilities to meet those needs? At least half the colleges have said the needs are minimal and can best be met with consolidated departments. There is reason to doubt, we believe, certain elements of this expedient philosophy. First, the combining of animal undergraduate curriculums provides the administrative efficiency needed in this area. Also we can say from our own experience at Maryland, that this procedure has improved the quality of both curriculum opportunities and the students graduated. Second, where are the technology and technically trained people of the future going to be produced? We cannot look to combined
POULTRY SCIENCE DEPARTMENTS
1179
TABLE 8.—Questionnaires submitted to consolidated and unconsolidated departments and commercial groups B. Unconsolidated 1. Is your college or university in the process of reorganization , just reorganized or contemplating a reorganization _? (check one) 2. Is your Department chairman close to or about to retire? Yes , No If so, will a replacement be sought? Yes , No 3. Is your department extensively engaged in interdepartmental and/or interdisciplinary programs? Yes , No 4. Do you have a combined curriculum with other departments? Yes , No If so, are they at the graduate and/or undergraduate level ? 5. Do your State poultrymen consider your present departmental status to be to their advantage? Yes , No 6. If departmental consolidation should take place, would your commercial poultrymen consider this advantageous , disadvantageous ? 7. Is your college presently planning to consolidate the Poultry Department with some other related departments? Yes , No If yes, is the impetus from the administration , another department , Poultry Department , industry8. How many students do you have in your department; undergraduate , graduate ? 9. Would you consider consolidation to be advantageous to your department? Yes
,No 10. Please give any comments concerning the advantages and disadvantages of consolidating Poultry Departments. C. Commercial 1. In your opinion can the Universities best serve the poultry industry with a consolidated Animal Department or a separate Poultry Departments ? (check one) 2. In going to the University for assistance, are the problems interdisciplinary in nature requiring expertise from many different departments? Yes , No If so, which disciplines are most frequently called upon? 3. If your State, or some State you operate in does not have a Poultry Department per se, how do you obtain this type of service? 4. In your experience, has the trend toward consolidated departments helped or hindered your efforts to obtain college trained technical personnel? 5. Please give any additional comments concerning the advantages and disadvantages of consolidated animal departments, as they relate to university-industry relations.
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Rutgers University Libraries/Technical Services on June 7, 2015
A. Consolidated 1. Did consolidation coincide with a general reorganization of the College or University? (Check appropriate item) Yes , No Did the consolidation coincide with the retirement of the last Department chairman? Yes , No Was the consolidation intended to generate administrative economies , improve academic programs and stimulate interdisciplinary research ? Has it succeeded? Yes , No 4. Was the impetus to consolidate from the Poultry Department , another department of the institution , Central Administration , or other ? (Please specify if other). 5. Was poultryman appointed chairman of the consolidated department? Yes , No 6. Was consolidation preceded by involvement in interdepartmental and/or interdisciplinary curriculum programs or institutes? Yes , No 7. (Check appropriate items) Does the consolidated program offer specialized poultry courses , poultry degree specialty ,if so, at what levels; undergraduate , graduate ? How many current participants; undergraduate , graduate ? 8. Did the State commercial poultry enterprises and associations consider the consolidation to be to their advantage? Yes , No 9. Do the State commercial poultry enterprises and associations consider your present departmental status to be to their advantage? Yes , No (Are they reasonably satisfied)? 10. Has your total budget for Poultry Science increased , decreased , remained the same since consolidation? 11. Has the consolidation added any new positions in poultry? Yes , No Has there been a reduction in poultry oriented faculty since consolidation? Yes No 12. (Check appropriate items) When poultry positions have become vacant, have they been rapidly filled , remained open , shifted to other commodity areas or closed out ? 13. In your opinion has the consolidation been advantageous to all concerned? Yes , No 14. Please add any remarks you wish concerning the advantages and disadvantages of departmental consolidation.
1180
D . E . BlGBEE AND C. S. SHAFFNEE
too long in the days of the family farm. The poultry industry led the way into agribusiness. We must adapt extension programs to the needs of management and labor, helping each to coexist for the benefit of both. In summary, our survey indicates that poultry departments are consolidated arbitrarily by college administrations to achieve administrative economy in the face of decreasing undergraduate enrollments. They appear to have forgotten the other departmental functions, research and extension. These consolidations have been preceded by involvement in interdepartmental and interdisciplinary programs, which we consider facilitated the consolidation. Those with some experience do not feel that consolidation has been successful in achieving its goals. Consolidation has further removed industry from its contacts with the college administration and diluted academic influence in the poultry complex. It is our opinion that continued departmental consolidation will further threaten the legitimacy of colleges of agriculture by reducing the commodity "pay off" in research and extension which is basic to their existence. Our future challenge is not self preservation, but to rethink our relationship to the whole of the poultry complex, then to put these plans into effect so that we all, producer, contractor, and academician are working together to best satisfy America's appetite for poultry and eggs.
REFERENCES Heldreth, D. R. F., 1970. The legitimacy of colleges of agriculture. Agricultural Science Review, 8 ( 4 ) : 41.
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Rutgers University Libraries/Technical Services on June 7, 2015
departments with any long range certainty. Our survey indicates poultry is de-emphasized where consolidation has occured. Also, we cannot expect a few states to bear the expense of satisfying these needs for poultry technology and people. Third, it takes away the commodity orientation of agriculture. When we (the university) are confronted with the good and bad of American agriculture we deal with it not as food and fiber but as peas and corn, cotton and wool, eggs and chicken. Today the American people enjoy an abundance and variety of food that is the envy of the world. The reason is, that Colleges of Agriculture, through commodity orientation of their experiment stations and extension services have developed and disseminated the technology that makes it so. In short, our commodity departments have made modern agriculture what it is today. Must we sacrifice the research and extension "pay off" of our commodity departments in order to achieve administrative economy of undergraduate education. The challenge is not self preservation, but how do we (poultry departments) continue to "pay off" in service to the poultry complex and the American public? First we should evaluate our role in American agriculture. We have continued to produce graduates for production poultry, while our science has reduced the numbers of people needed to produce poultry. The need now is for decision makers who can make money with the technology of poultry. We may have been over zealous in our efforts to maintain academic freedom in our research. Granted we must be protective on this point, but let us exert some of our vaunted "reason" on the real problems of poultry people. Our extension efforts have remained
POULTRY SCIENCE 51: 1175-1180,
I
N THE 1970 fourth quarter issue of "Agricultural Science Review," Dr. R. J. Heldreth wrote concerning "The Legitimacy of Colleges of Agriculture." He stated, "I do not believe that Colleges of Agriculture are in any real danger of losing their legitimacy. But I do believe that in the coming decade they may face the unhappy prospect of becoming less legitimate, unless certain trends are checked." In like turn we can ask, What of the legitimacy of Poultry Science Departments within Colleges of Agriculture? Over the past few years we have observed a trend toward consolidation of poultry departments with other related departments. Approximately one-half of the colleges in the U.S., with poultry programs, have carried out a consolidation. This would imply that separate departments no longer "pay off" in relation to the public they serve. However, does consolidation provide a means toward legitimacy or a tactful procedure for extinction? A comment by one of our respondents, as well as the data from our survey, tend to support the latter opinion. The respondent's state1 Miscellaneous Article No. 791. Contribution No. 4487 of the Maryland Agricultural Experiment Station (Department of Poultry Science).
1972
ment was, and we quote, "From a personal standpoint, we who are established here can work in the areas where we are needed, and do not lose from a personal standpoint. However, I doubt seriously when we retire whether there will be replacements for us. It may mean that in our case that poultry science will be pushed out entirely. However, this is just an opinion on my part." We do not have to learn to live with a concept of passive acceptance. The poultry complex as a whole is worthy of separate authority within our university system. It is to this point that we conducted the survey herein reported. A survey was conducted to determine the attitude of the personnel of consolidated and unconsolidated University poultry departments and of poultry industry groups toward consolidation of poultry departments with other academic units. Ten of each of the above groups were contacted with an appropriate questionnaire (Table 8). Five members of each department or organization were asked to reply. Responses were received from eight consolidated departments, eight unconsolidated departments and seven commercial organizations, with 26, 12, and 19 individual responses respectively. In the case of four un-
1175
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Rutgers University Libraries/Technical Services on June 7, 2015
ABSTRACT A survey of ten consolidated, unconsolidated departments and commercial firms, respectively, concerning attitudes toward consolidation of Poultry Departments with other academic units was conducted. The results indicate that 75 percent of all respondents prefer separate departmental status for Poultry Science academic units. However, the trend is toward consolidation in order to achieve administrative efficiency in the area of undergraduate instruction. Combined undergraduate curriculums have worked well as an answer to this problem, yet administrations appear reluctant to retain the research and extension functions of the departments as separate entities. It is our opinion that continued departmental consolidation will further threaten the legitimacy of colleges of agriculture by reducing the commodity "pay-off" in research and extension which is basic to their existence.
1176
D.
E . BlGBEE AND C. S. SHAFFNEE
TABLE 1.—General opinion concerning consolidation of animal departments as the most advantageous departmental organization, expressed as percentage 0} all respondents from consolidated and unconsolidated departments and industry Favor consolidation Source
No
31 0 28 24
58 100 72 75
No opinion 11 1
consolidated departments and two commercial organizations a summary opinion was received and these were counted as a single response. The results presented in Table 1 indicate that separate poultry departments are preferred by 75% of all respondents. Uncombined departments show a unanimous desire to remain autonomous. There is an indication from commercial companies and consolidated departments, however, that consolidation can be made to work satisfactorily. Data shown in Table 2 reflect the source of consolidation, reasons for it, and some indication of how well it has succeeded. These data are based on responses from TABLE 2.—Origins and justification for consolidation, expressed as percent of respondents from institutions with consolidated animal science departments A. Source of idea to consolidate 1. Poultry Department 0 2. Other Department 0 3. Administration 100% B. Reasons for consolidation1 1. Administrative economy 88% 2. Improve academic programs 50% 3. To stimulate interdepartmental research 27% C. Has the consolidation been successful in attaining these goals? Yes 38%, No 23%, No opinion 23% No Response 16% 1 Respondent could check more than one answer, thus the percentages are a ranking of the reasons for consolidation.
TABLE 3.—Influence of major changes in institutional organization of personnel on consolidation of animal departments, based on responses from consolidated animal science departments A. General reorganization of the University or College Yes 2 No 6 B. Retirement or resignation of the Department Head Yes 2 No 6
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Rutgers University Libraries/Technical Services on June 7, 2015
Consolidated Dept. Unconsolidated Dept. Industry Overall
Yes
consolidated departments. They all indicate that the idea to consolidate came from their central administrations. The primary reason for consolidation was to achieve administrative economy in relation to decreasing undergraduate enrollments. One college Dean said, "50-60 students were necessary to justify a separate department." Does this infer that the importance of poultry research and extension functions in a Land-Grant institution can be justified only in terms of their ability to generate undergraduate students? In a time when administrative reorganization within the academic community is in vogue, we found little connection between this phenomenon and consolidation of animal departments, Table 3. Two departments of the eight that responded were consolidated in conjunction with a general university or college reorganization. Consolidation of two other departments coincided with the retirement of the Chairman. If these data are accurate estimates, Table 4, poultry has not fared well under consolidated administrations. This may be due in part to the lack of poultrymen in the upper echelons of the various colleges. At any rate, in only one case can we cite the appointment of a poultryman to the headship of a consolidated department. Respondents from consolidated departments indicate little progress in their respective budgets, nineteen percent indicated an increase in budget allotments, 23% no change, while 42% have experienced budget decreases
POULTRY SCIENCE DEPARTMENTS
TABLE 4.—Influence of a consolidated administration on administrator selection, personnel changes, budget and curriculum, based on responses from consolidated animal science departments A. Was a poultryman appointed head of the department? Yes 1 No 7 B. Status of the budget allotment for poultry Increased 19%, No change 23%, Decreased 42%, No Response 16% C. Personnel 1. Has the number of poultry positions Increased 4%, Decreased 50%, No Change 46% 2. What happens when poultry positions become vacant? Rapidly filled 38% Remain open 10% Shifted to other commodity area 34% Closed 17% D. Curriculum 1. Does the program offer a poultry science major? Undergraduate 1 Graduate 2 Both 2 None 3 2. Teach specialized poultry courses Yes 8 No 0 3. Student numbers—Totals of all responding institutions Undergraduate 45 Graduate 62
TABLE 5.—Some characteristics of unconsolidated poultry departments A. Institutional reorganization In progress 1 Completed 1 B. Will your department head be resigning or retiring in the near future? Yes 1 No 7 Will a replacement be sought? Yes 1 No 0 C. Are you presently planning a departmental consolidation? Yes 0 No 8 D. Are you involved in interdepartmental or interdisciplinary programs? Yes 7 No 1 E. Do you have a combined curriculum with other departments? Undergraduate 2, Graduate 1, Both 3, None 2 F. Student numbers Undergraduate 78, Graduate 115
course. The responding departments reported having a total of 45 undergraduate and 62 graduate students. Turning now to responses from the unconsolidated departments, some of their characteristics are presented in Table 5. One college was in the process of reorganization, one had just completed a reorganization and 6 reported no current organizational change being contemplated. Only one department will be having a change in leadership and a replacement is being sought. In no instance was a consolidation being considered. Seven of the eight departments reported involvement in interdepartmental curriculum or research activities and programs. All but two departments had combined departmental curriculums of one kind or another. Two departments had combined undergraduate curriculums only, one had graduate only, three were combined at both levels and two did not have any combined curriculum. There is some corollary here with consolidated departments, 6 of these departments were involved in some type of combined curriculum prior to consolidation. The total enrollment reported by the uncombined departments was 78 under-
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Rutgers University Libraries/Technical Services on June 7, 2015
since consolidation. The number of poultry positions in the consolidated departments have increased according to 4% of the respondents, while 50% indicate a reduction, as shown in Table 4. When poultry positions have become vacant, 38% of the respondents indicated they are filled with reasonable speed, 10% said they remained open, 34% indicated they were shifted to other commodity areas and 17% replied that they were closed out. Other data in Table 4 reflects something of the attitude of consolidated departments toward poultry in their curriculum. Of the eight schools which reported, one offered only an undergraduate major in poultry science, two offer only a graduate major, and two offered both undergraduate and graduate majors. Three schools offered no poultry major at all. All schools did, however, teach at least one specialized poultry
1177
1178
D . E . BlGBEE AND C. S. SHAFFNER
TABLE 6.—Some characterization of the services requested by the poulti y industry from the universities
graduate and 115 graduate students. One of the ultimate aims of poultry departments is to serve the poultry complex. Therefore, it was deemed necessary to poll commercial attitudes toward departmental consolidation. Their responses to our questionnaire are summarized in Tables 1, 6, and 7. As stated earlier (Table 1), 72% of the individual respondents felt that an unconsolidated departmental structure would best meet the industries' academic needs. Table 6 shows something of the services requested of the university from commercial concerns. Seventy-five percent of the respondents indicated that the services were not of an interdisciplinary nature. Yet when we consider the disciplines most frequently called upon (veterinary medicine, nutrition, technology, business and economics) we can see a real need for interdisciplinary expertise. However, does consolidation with other broad animal disciplines facilitate the service need of the poultry complex or any other animal industry? When a commercial organization has a need for university service, where does it go if there is no poultry department in it's state? A list is presented in Table 7. First of all they call on the specialist in the consolidated department, if they are available. Second, they depend on having suitable people on their own staff. Third, they go to universities that do have poultry departments. Then they go to individuals with reputations for service, or to commercial
TABLE 7.—Where does the poultry industry obtain university assistance when there is no Poultry Department per se? A. Poultry specialist in combined department if available B. Company resources C. Other states D. People with national reputation E. Commercial laboratories
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Rutgers University Libraries/Technical Services on June 7, 2015
A. Are the services usually interdisciplinary in character? Yes 25% No 75% B. What disciplines are most frequently employed? 1. Veterinary medicine 2. Nutrition 3. Technology 4. Business and economics
laboratories and consultants. We interpret this to mean, they go to the individual who has expertise regardless of his affiliation. Now we come to the always obvious question of any investigation, what does all this mean? In the case of surveys, it often means what the surveyor set out to prove. To wit, consolidation of poultry departments with other academic units is an administrative mistake. Seventy-five percent of our respondents favor unconsolidated departments. However, we must face reality. There are individual situations which call for one system or the other as being best for an institution's needs and abilities to serve the poultry complex, and the public. Each college of agriculture must answer the following questions. What are the needs of our poultry complex, and public? What are our abilities to meet those needs? At least half the colleges have said the needs are minimal and can best be met with consolidated departments. There is reason to doubt, we believe, certain elements of this expedient philosophy. First, the combining of animal undergraduate curriculums provides the administrative efficiency needed in this area. Also we can say from our own experience at Maryland, that this procedure has improved the quality of both curriculum opportunities and the students graduated. Second, where are the technology and technically trained people of the future going to be produced? We cannot look to combined
POULTRY SCIENCE DEPARTMENTS
1179
TABLE 8.—Questionnaires submitted to consolidated and unconsolidated departments and commercial groups B. Unconsolidated 1. Is your college or university in the process of reorganization , just reorganized or contemplating a reorganization _? (check one) 2. Is your Department chairman close to or about to retire? Yes , No If so, will a replacement be sought? Yes , No 3. Is your department extensively engaged in interdepartmental and/or interdisciplinary programs? Yes , No 4. Do you have a combined curriculum with other departments? Yes , No If so, are they at the graduate and/or undergraduate level ? 5. Do your State poultrymen consider your present departmental status to be to their advantage? Yes , No 6. If departmental consolidation should take place, would your commercial poultrymen consider this advantageous , disadvantageous ? 7. Is your college presently planning to consolidate the Poultry Department with some other related departments? Yes , No If yes, is the impetus from the administration , another department , Poultry Department , industry8. How many students do you have in your department; undergraduate , graduate ? 9. Would you consider consolidation to be advantageous to your department? Yes
,No 10. Please give any comments concerning the advantages and disadvantages of consolidating Poultry Departments. C. Commercial 1. In your opinion can the Universities best serve the poultry industry with a consolidated Animal Department or a separate Poultry Departments ? (check one) 2. In going to the University for assistance, are the problems interdisciplinary in nature requiring expertise from many different departments? Yes , No If so, which disciplines are most frequently called upon? 3. If your State, or some State you operate in does not have a Poultry Department per se, how do you obtain this type of service? 4. In your experience, has the trend toward consolidated departments helped or hindered your efforts to obtain college trained technical personnel? 5. Please give any additional comments concerning the advantages and disadvantages of consolidated animal departments, as they relate to university-industry relations.
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Rutgers University Libraries/Technical Services on June 7, 2015
A. Consolidated 1. Did consolidation coincide with a general reorganization of the College or University? (Check appropriate item) Yes , No Did the consolidation coincide with the retirement of the last Department chairman? Yes , No Was the consolidation intended to generate administrative economies , improve academic programs and stimulate interdisciplinary research ? Has it succeeded? Yes , No 4. Was the impetus to consolidate from the Poultry Department , another department of the institution , Central Administration , or other ? (Please specify if other). 5. Was poultryman appointed chairman of the consolidated department? Yes , No 6. Was consolidation preceded by involvement in interdepartmental and/or interdisciplinary curriculum programs or institutes? Yes , No 7. (Check appropriate items) Does the consolidated program offer specialized poultry courses , poultry degree specialty ,if so, at what levels; undergraduate , graduate ? How many current participants; undergraduate , graduate ? 8. Did the State commercial poultry enterprises and associations consider the consolidation to be to their advantage? Yes , No 9. Do the State commercial poultry enterprises and associations consider your present departmental status to be to their advantage? Yes , No (Are they reasonably satisfied)? 10. Has your total budget for Poultry Science increased , decreased , remained the same since consolidation? 11. Has the consolidation added any new positions in poultry? Yes , No Has there been a reduction in poultry oriented faculty since consolidation? Yes No 12. (Check appropriate items) When poultry positions have become vacant, have they been rapidly filled , remained open , shifted to other commodity areas or closed out ? 13. In your opinion has the consolidation been advantageous to all concerned? Yes , No 14. Please add any remarks you wish concerning the advantages and disadvantages of departmental consolidation.
1180
D . E . BlGBEE AND C. S. SHAFFNEE
too long in the days of the family farm. The poultry industry led the way into agribusiness. We must adapt extension programs to the needs of management and labor, helping each to coexist for the benefit of both. In summary, our survey indicates that poultry departments are consolidated arbitrarily by college administrations to achieve administrative economy in the face of decreasing undergraduate enrollments. They appear to have forgotten the other departmental functions, research and extension. These consolidations have been preceded by involvement in interdepartmental and interdisciplinary programs, which we consider facilitated the consolidation. Those with some experience do not feel that consolidation has been successful in achieving its goals. Consolidation has further removed industry from its contacts with the college administration and diluted academic influence in the poultry complex. It is our opinion that continued departmental consolidation will further threaten the legitimacy of colleges of agriculture by reducing the commodity "pay off" in research and extension which is basic to their existence. Our future challenge is not self preservation, but to rethink our relationship to the whole of the poultry complex, then to put these plans into effect so that we all, producer, contractor, and academician are working together to best satisfy America's appetite for poultry and eggs.
REFERENCES Heldreth, D. R. F., 1970. The legitimacy of colleges of agriculture. Agricultural Science Review, 8 ( 4 ) : 41.
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Rutgers University Libraries/Technical Services on June 7, 2015
departments with any long range certainty. Our survey indicates poultry is de-emphasized where consolidation has occured. Also, we cannot expect a few states to bear the expense of satisfying these needs for poultry technology and people. Third, it takes away the commodity orientation of agriculture. When we (the university) are confronted with the good and bad of American agriculture we deal with it not as food and fiber but as peas and corn, cotton and wool, eggs and chicken. Today the American people enjoy an abundance and variety of food that is the envy of the world. The reason is, that Colleges of Agriculture, through commodity orientation of their experiment stations and extension services have developed and disseminated the technology that makes it so. In short, our commodity departments have made modern agriculture what it is today. Must we sacrifice the research and extension "pay off" of our commodity departments in order to achieve administrative economy of undergraduate education. The challenge is not self preservation, but how do we (poultry departments) continue to "pay off" in service to the poultry complex and the American public? First we should evaluate our role in American agriculture. We have continued to produce graduates for production poultry, while our science has reduced the numbers of people needed to produce poultry. The need now is for decision makers who can make money with the technology of poultry. We may have been over zealous in our efforts to maintain academic freedom in our research. Granted we must be protective on this point, but let us exert some of our vaunted "reason" on the real problems of poultry people. Our extension efforts have remained