| Title of Project: | Internet Modules in Plant Biotechnology | |
| Project Director: | Dr. Donald J. Lee | |
| Applicant Organization: | University of Nebraska |
| Congressional District Number: | 2 | |
| Period of Proposed Project Dates: | 7/1/1999 to 6/30/2000 |
The development of up-to-date teaching materials in crop genetic engineering requires an efficient transfer of information from the researcher to the teacher. Crop genetics is advancing at a rapid rate. Applications of this knowledge lead to new genetically engineered crops, which have been rapidly integrated into American food production systems. Production practice and consumer choices have all been impacted by this technology. Entire new products and markets will emerge as a result of the technology. The researchers and teachers in this project have the common goal of developing educational programming that makes the understanding of this complex science and its latest advances accessible to a variety of learners.
The need for educational programming on this subject will continue to grow as genetic advances and the products of genetic engineering and modification are used on more farms and more acres. The initial popularity of the first genetically engineered crops developed indicates that this technology will be integral to the mainstream of our American food production capacity. For example, Bt corn, genetically engineered to have resistance to the European corn borer without the application of chemicals, was grown on 15 to 20 million acres in 1998, a three to four fold increase over 1997 acres. Similarly, Roundup Ready soybean, which contains a bacterial gene for glyphosate herbicide resistance, encompasses nearly 50 percent of the soybean acres in the U.S. The popularity of these products is not universal. Recently, a midwestern popcorn producing company was unable to market a large proportion of the Bt versions of its product because European customers did not want genetically engineered food. Professionals in the food production industry and consumers need relevant programming now to help establish a baseline understanding of genetic engineering. This programming should be designed so that lessons and issues can be explored as the student learns. This project will design programming that can establish a foundation and grow to meet future needs.
A void exists between the reporting of scientific details in the research literature and the description of key features that differentiate genetically modified crops and often serve as selling points for these products. The users and supporters of this technology need an unbiased distillation of the important facts from the literature. They also need this information presented in an accessible way. Understanding genetic engineering requires the learner to visualize molecular and cellular level processes and relate these to the expression of new traits expressed in the crop plant. The challenge of effectively teaching this science is to combine accurate details in text with appropriate visuals. This is a creative and time consuming endeavor but well suited for the emerging electronic technologies. Using the Internet for sharing well-crafted modules will enhance the teaching effectiveness and efficiency of participants in the network.
Description of modules:
The modules initially developed for this network will focus on lessons that cover the basic groundwork for understanding genes, biotechnology and the impact of genetics on weed pest management. This approach will lay a foundation in a basic science that underpins many aspects of crop production. The lessons will be built around applied examples that the target audience can easily connect with their own first hand experience. Lessons that show the impact of genetics, biochemistry and herbicides on plant physiology will also be contributed in the initial development of the library. This programming meets priority needs of the primary audience and will begin to establish the breadth of lessons needed by extension educators. In this way the library will begin to establish itself as an active port for the flow of key instructional programs.
The modules proposed to initiate this network and the contributors are as follows:
How genes work
Chromosomes, genes, proteins, and amino acids; the inheritance and molecular genetics of herbicide and insect resistance. Don Lee, University of Nebraska.
Discovering genes: Gene libraries and gene cloning . Don Lee, University of Nebraska.
"Poast" herbicide resistant corn. Dave Sommers University of Minnesota.
Gene cassettes: designing genes for specific needs Yang Yen, South Dakota State University.
Crop Genetic Engineering Fundamentals
Basic steps of genetic engineering. Patty Hain, University of Nebraska
Tissue culture: the art and science of plant cloning. Yang Yen, SDSU.
Transformation methods. Tom Clemente, University of NE.
Alternative marker genes used in plant transformation. Heidi Kaeppler, University of Wisconsin.
Biochemistry and Physiology; How Proteins Influence Plant Growth and Development.
Genetic modification of metabolism in plants. Tom Cheesbrough,South Dakota State University.
Pigment synthesis, light harvesting and herbicides. John Markwell,University of Nebraska.
Herbicide injury and mode of action. Scott Nissen, Colorado State University.
Herbicide resistance in crops and weeds. Alex Martin, University of Nebraska.
Genetically Engineered Crop Development ,Detection and Performance
Backcross breeding : Inbred line conversion. Steve Baenziger, University of Nebraska.
Transgene inheritance and expression; the problem of gene silencing. Shawn Kaeppler, University of Wisconsin.
PCR and elisa tests: detecting transgenes or their proteins. Deana Namuth, University of Nebraska.
A hybrid yield performance map. Joseph Lauer University of Wisconsin.
"The basic steps in genetic engineering" (http://deal.unl.edu/genetics/) is a module now being constructed by web designers from the DEAL (Distributed Environments for Active Learning) lab at the University of Nebraska. Patty Hain, one of the proposal contributors, has assembled the subject matter and visuals for the site to serve as an autotutorial for learners to establish a baseline understanding in the crop genetic engineering process. Navigation through the site will be dictated by the successful completion of quizzes for six sequential lessons. The first lesson is an overview of the five steps in the genetic engineering process. The next five lessons build in details of each of the steps. All six lessons are launched from an overview schematic that provides a visual connection between the lessons. Many Internet sites provide information on plant genetic engineering. This site is designed to guide a learner to an understanding of plant genetic engineering.
Students will use this site in a number of ways depending on their learning goals.
Some students may only need to complete the overview lesson #1 to gain the desired insights. Successful completion of the six lessons may be the ultimate learning objective for students wanting to complete extension credits. Many students will use the module to prepare themselves for more detailed understanding. The modular design of additional lessons will serve these students.
The module lessons proposed will facilitate a layering of instructional programming. For example, a concept with many practical impacts is the use of marker genes in transformation. Once students learn what marker genes are and why they are needed in genetic engineering they can appreciate the importance of developing alternative marker genes. By clicking on key words or icons, lessons that teach about alternative marker genes used in crops with weedy relatives can be accessed. Some marker genes control herbicide resistance so a teacher may also want their students to understand herbicides and how they interact with plant cells. Therefore the herbicide mode of action module can be linked. The "genes" module will provide the detail needed to understand why genetic mutations could result in herbicide resistance. Educators will be able to take advantage of this layering to create a roadmap that helps their students meet learning goals.
The production of web sites that start from a visual road map that unifies lessons will be a strategy used in developing these modules. A common expectation for these modules is for the learner to relate events at the cell and molecular levels to traits of the entire plant. Therefore a visual road map similar to the genetic engineering page will be created that will allow the student to magnify from the plant to the organ, tissue, cell and cell compartment levels. Then lessons in the biochemistry and physiology area can be launched from this visual road map. Students can start their learning about herbicide mode of action, for example, by viewing injury at the whole plant level and then work towards understanding the cellular events and molecular interactions that complete the story. All lessons can be hyperlinked to additional "point and click" sites that would enhance the learners understanding such as the "Virtual Cell" (http//ampere.scale.uiuc.edu/~m-lexa/cell/?) that gives students a three dimensional look inside of the plant cell and magnifies it to the molecular level. Visual road maps used to unify these lessons will also help in linking to a broader array of lessons such as soil fertility and plant pathology. The interdisciplinary nature of crop science will greatly benefit from a system that unifies concepts and lessons.
Glossary: Collaborators will contribute to the building of a glossary database that defines biotechnology terminology in simple language. Module text can be hyperlinked to this glossary as well as to related modules.
Interactive Quizzes: To further direct comprehension of the topics, module contributors will provide a set of questions and answers that can be used to assess a learners mastery of objectives. These questions may be integrated into on-line quizzes or study guides. When possible, questions will also be integrated into the visuals and animations to challenge the learner to make predictions, recall principles or determine relationships. Therefore, each module will be developed as an interactive lesson and the network will consist of a library of compatible integrated modules.
This design offers many advantages for the participants in the network. A few applications are illustrated in the following scenarios.
1) An extension educator or private consultant can design a workshop that takes their participants through selected modules in the network. They can access the network real-time through the Internet or download selected visuals ahead of time. They may also contract for the production of CD ROMS from the module producers for their workshop participants to purchase. Workshop participants can earn the certification credits approved for each module by the ASA (see "Evaluation" section)
2) A farmer may use a University the web site of a cooperative extension project to look at yield test data. In the future, these web sites can be designed to help farmers systematically compare performance data of hybrids or varieties that have similar features. Linking these sites to animations or diagrams that compare the genetically engineered features of crops may assist the farmer in the variety evaluation process.
3) A teacher who needs to reach a distance audience can assemble an Internet course with links to the modules. They can customize each course to meet their students needs by controlling the navigation order to links and criteria for meeting learning objectives. On line testing and grading can be integrated into the course.
4) A high school or college teacher can access the network to enhance live teaching or to supplement printed course materials. Their students can also use the network as a means of introduction to the science and scientists in crop genetics and genetic engineering.
5) A researcher or graduate student can use the network for independent learning or provide key visuals for background information to enhance research seminars.
1)Agricultural professionals
2)Precollege and college students; general adult consumers
3)Graduate students and researchers
A vital contributor to our nations food production system is the agribusiness professional. Currently there are 14,000 professionals in the American Society of Agronomy (ASA) certification programs. All are required to take 40 hours of continuing education every two years. An estimated 10,000 more agribusiness professionals do not participate in ASA certification programs but support the industry. The numbers of farms and farmers is decreasing in the U.S. but the complexity of farming and the number of management choices that need to be made are increasing. The need for professionals to support farmers is therefore expanding. Agribusiness companies need a workforce that can adjust to changes and deliver the information needed to support their products. Therefore, the demand for educational programming will be high for technologies such as genetic engineering.
Genetic engineering can be a somewhat hidden science in that the alteration done on these plants does not generally have an obvious impact on their appearance. The deployment of the technology does, however, impact the management of these crops. Furthermore, the strategy used in designing the genetically engineered plant will impact trait expression and potentially dictate performance. Therefore, by understanding the genetic engineering process, producers and crop advisors will be able to speak the technical language and ask the right questions regarding these new products. Sales staff will also have the knowledge base needed to describe their product line and accurately contrast it with competitors.
The initial products of genetic engineering impact crop management decisions, future genetically engineered products will include crops with altered end-use values. For example, work is being done to produce tobacco plants that can produce anti-cancer proteins because they have been genetically engineered with human genes. Corn has been genetically engineered to make industrial enzymes that have in the past been isolated from bacteria grown in fermentation chambers. With these types of products, marketing as well as management choices will be influenced by this technology. Knowledge of the genetic control of these traits and the influence of environment can help in weighing the risks versus rewards of these products.
Personnel in agribusiness and the producers they serve will be the primary target audience of this proposed project. Professional demands on this group has created a need for them to understand the science behind genetically engineered crops. This understanding will help them properly integrate and maximize the benefits of these products. Programming for this constituency requires educators to provide critical details on technical information, which emphasizes the impact of genes on plant productivity and response to management environment.
A secondary audience of consumers, students and researchers will benefit from this programming as well. Consumers need to be familiar with the essential features of genetics and genetic engineering so they can evaluate the end products offered them through this technology. Young students need to see how researchers are applying an understanding of science principles to solve the challenges of food production. Finally industry and university professionals, as well as graduate students would benefit from a venue that allows them to access and share their latest research results with their colleagues as well as the public.
The initial collaborators in this proposal represent teachers, researchers, and extension educators from five land-grant institutions. Collectively we will develop and contribute the subject matter framework for the internet-based instruction modules. The collaborators have overlapping goals in reaching the learning needs of their clientele and recognize the necessity of sharing programming resources. This module collection will establish an economy or library for future network participants to access when assembling programs that meet the educational needs of their clients.
A second level of new collaboration will be among the information technology groups from two of the institutions. The DEAL lab at the University of Nebraska and the South Dakota State University Instructional Technology group will produce the modules listed in the proposal. These technology groups have software developers and multimedia designers who team with faculty to develop distance educational programs. The developers and designers from these technology units will continually test and evaluate operational aspects of the software during the design and prior to release for stability, reliability and usability. The technology units have expertise in server and client software support. Final products of the project will be supported by the hosting institution.
The project will construct and catalog these modules in accordance with Edcoms Instructional Management Systems guidelines (http://www.imsproject.org/). As such, the content can be made available in a wide range of online educational settings by following these standards which are being implemented to facilitate the growth and availability of educational resources on the Internet.
These technology groups have already established successful procedures for working with faculty in distance education productions for their respective institutions. This project will initiate a unified effort between the two institutions to develop educational components that can be seamlessly assembled and delivered.
Dr. Jim King will contribute the expertise of an instructional design specialist to work with faculty and developers during module construction at the University of Nebraska. Dr. King will also plan and implement a standard assessment tool for each module as they are developed (see evaluation and assessment).
An additional partner contributing to this proposal will be the American Society of Agronomy (ASA). ASA is a professional organization whose membership represents individuals from all technical areas of crop science and agronomy. The ASA will serve to facilitate the development of a review and evaluation process for the modules to enhance the quality and accessibility of the programming as well as the continued expansion of the network.
A collaboration with industry partners will be critical to insure that we develop relevant programming that is used by the agribusiness professional. Dave Nicolai, agronomy training supervisor, Mike Vandelot, corn hybrid specialist and Drew Ivers, soybean breeder for Cenex/Land O Lakes cooperatives will collaborate in the development and evaluation of programming. Cenex/Land O Lakes will be an ideal collaborator for several reasons. Agronomy professionals in product development, product service and sales are members of their workforce. They have an active education and training program and a history of collaboration with university teachers, extension educators and researchers from the collaborating institutions. Furthermore, they are interested in using the Internet to organize and centralize their education and training programs. They recognize that the Internet has a wealth of information that is relevant to their people. However, their people do not have the time to "mine the Internet" for answers to questions needing immediate attention. Furthermore, they recognize that information packaging is needed that allows their people to understand the relevant issues with genetically engineered products. They share our goals of developing these resources and will immediately use them to benefit their educational programs.
Biotechnology will have a growing impact on our food production systems. As the technology advances, more complex genetic modification is promised which will alter the crops intended use. These products will not always be the best choice in all situations. Management decisions will be highly dependent on the plants genetic make-up and knowledge of the interaction of genotype with environment will impact success. Professionals in the food production system will need to establish a base-line understanding of modern genetics and build upon that as new products developed from this technology are commercialized. This proposal sets out to provide a means of establishing that baseline.
Initiating the network of modules and affiliating the process with a professional society of the educational providers and users has the potential to trigger development of the more complete programming needed. Furthermore, the sharing of modules will give more educators the tools to deliver high quality distance programs. This will make educational programming more accessible for the learners who are widely distributed across the nation.
The proposal is unique in both the contents of the educational programs and the delivery environment. The potential impact of this innovation can be seen in addressing the clientele needs described by Dr. Joseph Lauer, Corn Production Extension Specialist for the University of Wisconsin.
"I think there are at least two issues farmers are trying to deal with concerning biotechnology. First, farmers do not really understand the process (nuts and bolts of the technology). For many it truly is a black box, because many never were exposed to these technologies during their educational careers. Developing resources to deal with potential misunderstandings of what is and isnt achievable would be very helpful. From an extension perspective, this would be useful especially if there was some sort of discussion format (i.e. chat room).
Second, farmers are skeptical of the performance and stability of new biotech derived hybrids and varieties. Do they really work? Are we living on borrowed time? Somewhere in your materials you need to incorporate performance information. You may be able to do this by pointers to university hybrid trials, etc. Farmers and extension would find this very useful."
The modules proposed for development will be targeted to shed light on the "black box" of biotechnology. The review of these modules can insure that practical links that would be valued by the user are incorporated. By developing these modules in an Internet environment, the integration of a chat room and yield performance links is a reality. These and future information access and sharing capabilities that the internet will provide will allow the educator to build programming that empowers their students to go beyond normal learning boundaries.
Cost/benefit
As the demand for plant genetics educational resources continues to expand,there will be financial incentive to supplement the existing expertise of scientists and educators with alternate means of instruction. Online, Internet based educational materials produced by leading educators can leverage the efforts of genetics experts by fostering learning opportunities more cost effectively than a guest lecture appearance. These resources could also be used by extension educators, secondary and post-secondary teachers where using an expert would be cost prohibitive or physically impossible.
Agribusiness firms have demonstrated a willingness to pay for workshops that focus on plant genetic engineering and related crop management issues. Including fees and transportation, companies have spent $200/day for each participant in recent workshops that cover only portions of the subject
matter associated with this proposal. Those fees are used to offset the cost of bringing qualified experts to conduct workshops for a limited number of individuals. The industry has at its disposal a finite number of qualified experts with a finite amount of time available to teach these types of workshops. Even higher fees for workshops cannot help create more available expertise, at least not in the short term. These modules will provide expanded learning opportunities through traditional workshops, one-on-one consulting and independent, self-pace learning. The products of this effort will be able to save some travel and time involved in workshops for the cooperating scientist (assume 1 workshop less per year) and extend the training to an audience that would have been otherwise unreachable.
Secondary and post-secondary institutions have also demonstrated a willingness-to-pay for science related instructional resources over the Internet. Presently, companies such as the Peregrine Publishers, Inc. offer science resources to teachers for a fee. The Biology Place (http://www.biology.com) and the Chemistry Place (http://www.chemplace.com) sell access to resources for approximately $10/student for a semester. This proposed project will produce modules that will be useful to educators in high schools, community colleges and universities. It is reasonable to assume that willingness-to-pay for this content would be $5/class. Assuming class size of twenty-five students, such learning resources could be valued at $250/class. As for post-secondary and graduate education, these modules together could represent an entire semester of instruction on the topic of plant genetic engineering. Using these rough estimates of willingness-to-pay as a valuation for benefits, the following cost benefit table is offered.
Benefits
Professional Training. 2,000 sessions/year $200 per session, total: $400,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classroom Instruction. 500/classes/yr $250/class, total: $125,000
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Improved management, decision making savings: 50,000,000 acres, $.005/acres, total: $250,000
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Annual benefit: $775,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The estimated costs and funding sources are:
Cost of development
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Grant funding $100,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Matching resources by partners $100,000
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Total development cost $200,000
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual maintenance cost
Technology Support/Faculty time $ 50,000
Formative Testing of Modules
Students with the appropriate backgrounds will be hired at each development site to test the modules. Formative evaluation of the modules will occur on a weekly basis to adhere to the production schedule for the entire sequence of
modules. Preliminary testing will be supervised. The supervisor will be a spectator and the student will be asked to provide a play by play oratory of their questions, learning and navigation logic through the lesson. A qualitative assessment of problems and preferences will be gained from the supervised test. Improvements can be implemented and modified versions of the modules retested. Modules that complete this phase of testing will be forwarded to ASA for peer review (see below).
Module Usability
A study of the modules effectiveness in helping students gain understanding that allows them to address higher order questions will be implemented in a minimum of four educational settings.
1) A pilot study that evaluates the use the basics of crop genetic engineering module as an autotutorial. The pilot study will be conducted by Patty Hain for her graduate thesis project. Thirty subjects will be identified for this study. Participants in this pilot evaluation will be resident graduate students at the University of Nebraska in a variety of disciplines, extension educators, agribusiness professionals and producers.
2) A resident course in undergraduate genetics taught by Don Lee in the Department of Agronomy at the University of Nebraska. The 80 - 100 students in the course will evaluate a set of modules assembled for them to learn about gene expression, gene cloning and genetic engineering.
3) A graduate level distance course in crop genetic engineering taken by about ten students will be a third setting. Don Lee will also teach this course. A broader set of modules will be made available to these students.
4) Two, one-day live workshops developed in conjunction with Dave Nicolai, agronomy training coordinator for Cenex / Land O Lakes cooperatives. Dave will collaborate with Don Lee to organize these "Principles of Applied Biotechnology" workshops given in the winter of 2000. Workshop participants will be agronomy specialists from member cooperatives from five states. The workshops will feature modules from this proposal used to enhance the live lecture and hands on exercises in the workshop. Prior to the workshop, participants will be expected to complete "The basic steps of Genetics Engineering Module" via the web. This workshop will provide the project with a venue and audience to showcase the materials developed and to measure their effectiveness.
The four evaluation audiences will provide a diverse set of teaching venues to evaluate the modules. All four groups of students will take customized pretest and post-test performance exams to measure competency changes. The studies will also measure the usability of the modules. We want to know how effectively the modules used in each setting allow the students to extract information, learn new concepts and make judgments or predictions that rely on their integration of these concepts. A series of questions will be prepared based on module objectives and practical issues. For example, we will test students comprehension of the conceptual materials by asking them to go through a section of the modules. We could then ask them to apply ideas in the section to compare genetically engineered products, predict the impact of genetic engineering on a management problem or critique a proposal for a new genetically engineered product. If the students make appropriate assessments, the materials will be accepted as presenting the information properly. If their answers do not match expectations, we will revise accordingly.
Summative Testing of Modules
These evaluations will look at both content and knowledge acquisition as well as module usability. Students taking courses based on the modules will be asked to evaluate the modules. We anticipate that this summative evaluation of the modules will occur as students finish each section. There will also be a final evaluation of the entire instructional sequence of modules. The summative study will then compare students pretest performance to post test performance. In the resident undergraduate course, we will also compare student scores to previous in-class exams to see if there is any change in expected scores.
Module Diversity
High school teachers will evaluate a selection of the modules. These teachers will assess their compatibility with a diversity of learners. Ed Brogie, a biology teacher at Hartington high school, Nebraska and Jeffrey Schellpepper, an agriculture teacher from Raymond Central high school, Nebraska will be contracted to review the modules. They will test the effectiveness of the modules in teaching settings that range from lecture presentation to independent student learning and research. They will also meet with the module development teams and provide suggestions for improvement. The consulting efforts of these teachers will be instrumental in guiding the development of programming that meets a breadth of audiences.
Dissemination of Modules
The integration of these modules into educational programming will be achieved in several ways. All of the subject matter contributors are providers of resident and distance education and the library of materials will be used in their ongoing programs. The modules or courses that use the Internet lessons will be linked to the web pages for the collaborating institutions. The module and course addresses will also be linked to the Cenex/Land O Lakes web site for company training and education. Broader dissemination of the modules will be achieved through the formal review of the modules described below.
ASA Professional Review
The ASA will establish, as a part of its Agronomic Education Initiative, a program to review the education modules for content and clarity.
1. A panel established as part of the ASA Education Initiative and led by Andrea Engebretson, the ASA Manager of Professional Education, will develop the educational criteria for the review of the modules, including reading level, organization, clarity in the presentation of scientific principles, and applicability to a professional audience.
2. Module creators will apply for international continuing education units (CEUs) through the ASA office. Applicants will specify the area that the CEUs will be in and the average time needed to complete the module for credit assignment. The review of the modules will be conducted under the auspices of the Journal of Natural Resources Life Sciences Education Editorial Board. Materials approved by the board will be given a Volume and Number as part of the ASA Educational Series. They will be posted on the JNRLSE web page.
3. Modules will be reviewed by two subject matter experts from the ASAs Certified Crop Adviser Continuing Education Editorial Board. Module creators submit $200 with each module and ASA matches the expert and user with each module. These experts are paid $100 each by ASA for providing their review. Materials found to be scientifically accurate, meeting the Certified Crop Adviser (CCA) performance objectives and including a 10 question examination will be awarded CCA Self Study Continuing Education Credits (CEU). Materials that earn credits will be advertised on the ASA website as well as in the paper version of the Ag Consultant Magazine
4. Modules approved for CCA Self Study CEU must include a short examination. For the learners to earn the CEU credit they must return the exam and $10 to ASA for grading. The module creator will receive 20 percent of this fee. As part of the examination an evaluation form about the unit will be included. Authors of the modules will receive a summary of the evaluation results for their module.
We envision the review process to have much of the same impact on the development of these educational modules that the peer review system has on the publication of research manuscripts. The establishment of a review system by the ASA will insure that modules will contribute unique quality programming to the practitioner audience. The user survey results compiled will allow the ASA and future contributors to determine what improvements and additions will have the largest impact on the intended user. ASA sponsorship of the network will also enhance the continued growth of this network as described in the following section.
Contributors represent university faculty from all three branches of the land grant mission. Thus the library will represent a venue in which researchers, teachers and extension educators combine efforts to offer teaching and extension programming to the target audiences.
The American Society of Agronomy (ASA) will provide publicity and leadership that will foster the development of this library to support the curriculum needed for their certified crop advisors program. The societys involvement will bring visibility to the network among crop consultants and agricultural business people. Their efforts to review modules and survey users of the programming will provide a means to evaluate and publicize what can be learned about developing and using this type of programming. ASA will process evaluations and comments from module participants as well as organize focus groups made up of people who work in the field of crop genetics and genetic engineering. The focus group will help reassess modules and direct future curriculum direction. Industry representatives in these focus groups can also evaluate the value of this programming for their employees and customers. This will encourage their future contributions to share information resources and dollars to support future programming.
Project sustainability
Incentives for continued contributions by educators will be provided by the ASAs professional review of these modules. Modules "accepted" into the network will have documented peer review to allow educational professionals to account for their creative efforts. The module user surveys can also be used to quantify the impact of a contributors creative work. ASAs affiliation with both the developer and user of crop biotechnology will be an asset for sustaining the network. The ASA homepage will be a centralized resource for the target audience to learn about self-study modules, approved workshops and links to academic distance courses. The ASA can also encourage the future contributions of a wider spectrum of research, teaching and extension professionals. Their mission of serving the continuing education needs of the agricultural professional will drive the development of future programming in other areas of crop and soil science.
Program development will also be driven by the market place. The network established will give educators the opportunities to share resources and assembling affordable programming that fits the needs of their constituents. Modules developed will vary in their breadth of application and appeal. Some will be more marketable than others. Quality programming will certainly have value because the agribusiness industry is willing to invest in educating their workforce. For example, a major seed company sent one or their sales representative from a small town in Nebraska to a workshop in Indiana. The salesperson invested four days (counting travel) and nearly $1000 of their companies resources on this educational program in crops and soils principles offered by a private consulting firm.
The learner will be best served when they invest their time and money into educational programs that provide effective learning and the most up-to-date, unbiased information. We believe that the sharing of resources through this network will allow the public sector to continue to participate in the distance education market. Success in this market place will impact clientele, generate revenue to support programs and provide University Administration incentive to allocate resources to fund future efforts.
1) PIs Lee and Cheesbrough are assigned subject matter contributors. They collect materials including references, text, pictures, graphics, video, animations and relevant web site links. They work with the subject matter contributors to outline lesson objectives, a lesson plan and quiz questions. Materials for each module will be catalogued and shared among the PIs.
August 1999
1) All PIs and some subject matter contributors will meet in Lincoln, NE. Meeting will be either live or virtual by taking advantage of real time internet or satellite connection from the Deal lab facilities. Lesson plans and materials will be inventoried. Overlaps in programming will be identified. An overall production strategy will be developed by PIs Jorgenson and Roeber that maximizes resources by using common elements that are expensive to produce. Production assignments for each technology group will be made. A priority will be established for the modules based on their use in the initial assessment studies. A production timetable will be set.
2) The technology groups will build a joint web site to serve as an "on line meeting room" for contributors to share and preview parts of modules as they are developed. Because the modules proposed would be highly integrated, the "meeting room" will play a key role in coordinating development efforts.
Sept. - Dec 1999
1) Highest priority modules will be developed. Animators and web designers will work directly with the subject matter PIs and the individual contributors to develop materials. Module elements will be posted on the "meeting room" as they are developed to enhance the sharing of ideas.
2) Student testers will preview modules as they are completed.
3) Completed modules will be sent to ASA for peer review.
Jan - Feb 2000
1) Module development and testing continues
2) Modules assessed in workshop learning environments.
March - May 2000
1) Module development, testing and review continue.
2) Modules are assessed by undergraduate , graduate and high school audiences under the supervision of PI King.
June - August 2000
1) PIs "meet" to share results of assessments.
2) Proposed module development is completed.
3) PI Engebretson and ASA assemble a focus group to meet with PIs to reassess the library of modules and help develop future curriculum plans. Focus group will include key members of industry, producers, and educators.
Senior Personel
Don Lee (PI) 15%
Ron Roeber (PI) 3%
Jim King (PI) 3%
Other personnel
Hain 100%
Distance Education Lecturer 50%
Deal Lab Technical Support 50%
South Dakota State University
Senior Personnel
Jerry Jorgenson (PI) 3%
Tom Cheesbrough (PI) 3%
Other
Technical 10%
ASA
Engebretson 5%
Hall 1%
Cenex/Land O Lakes
Nicolai 5%