HOW TO CHANGE AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH AND EXTENSION TO MAKE IT A BETTER INVESTMENT

Research and Development/Tech Change/Emerging Technologies,

THE ECONOMICS OF RURAL PLACES AND AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS

Community/Rural/Urban Development, Teaching/Communication/Extension/Profession,

THE ECONOMICS OF A PUBLIC LAND POLICY

Land Economics/Use,

Land, Economic Change, and Agricultural Economics

This paper analyzes in three contexts the effects of changing economic conditions and varying economic perspectives on the way land is considered in economic doctrine. The first considers agricultural land use where agriculture is connected to the rest of the economy exclusively through input and commodity markets, and when all other parts of the economy are assumed to remain constant. The second connects agriculture to the remainder of the economy by virtue of a shared natural environment, facilitating a discussion of natural resource and environmental economics in relation to agricultural, institutional, and land economics. The third context permits economic change in the entire economy with particular attention given to population density, space, and distance. Private and public decision making are discussed with attention to federal, state, and local division of powers.Land Economics/Use,

AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH: ACADEMIC CROWN JEWELS OR COUNTRY COUSIN?

Research and Development/Tech Change/Emerging Technologies, Teaching/Communication/Extension/Profession,

ENVIRONMENT POLICY EDUCATION

Environmental Economics and Policy,

The effective use of competition as a pedagogical tool to develop competence, confidence and enjoyment in physical education lessons in primary school

Competition sits prominently within the National Curriculum for Physical Education (PE) (DfE, 2013) yet there is little guidance for teachers in how competition should be delivered. Additionally, much of the current research in this field focusses on competitive sport that takes place outside of curriculum time and considers the attitudes of older children. This thesis seeks to address some of these gaps in research by focussing on competition delivered within primary school PE lessons. Howells et al. (2018) propose a Model for Effective Learning in Competition (MELC) that explores the relationship between the level of challenge within an activity and the level of success achieved, suggesting that there is a ‘Competition Learning Zone’ (CLZ) when these two are in equity. Additionally, Howells et al. (2018) consider three different ‘types’ of competition and how each can foster learning. This thesis investigates the application of the MELC and CLZ to develop competence, confidence and enjoyment in primary PE during the three different types of competition within two primary schools in the South East of England across two different age phases. The findings support the ideas presented by Howells et al. (2018) with a higher percentage of children improving in confidence and competence when competitive targets were introduced, regardless of age or gender. Additionally, when competition was absent children’s scores regressed at a higher rate. Children responded far more positively in terms of enjoyment when targets were low or mid-level whereas high targets had less impact on improvement, although they did lower confidence, particularly amongst girls. Moreover, the children expressed a preference for competing against others, whereas they produced their best results when competing alongside others, which interestingly was the format of competition that they enjoyed the least

A model for effective learning in competition: a pedagogical tool to enhance enjoyment and perceptions of competency in physical education lessons for young children

To date, little research on competition has focused on young children (6–7-year-olds). A total of ninety-seven participants (51 boys and 46 girls) from two English primary schools completed two physical education (PE) lessons, which included three different activity challenges. The control group undertook the same activities in both lessons. The experimental group did likewise but were set high-, low-, or mid-level targets in lesson two based on individual scores from lesson one. The children completed a post-session questionnaire to assess (i) enjoyment levels and (ii) which activity they perceived they performed best in. The results found that children both improved and enjoyed the lesson most when low- or mid-level targets were set. Indeed, when targets were absent (in the control group), children’s competency scores regressed. Likewise, children perceived that they performed best in the activity where lower targets were set. Their perceived competency included both tangible and intangible reasons. From these results, it is recommended that for practitioners working with 6–7-year-old children, the most effective learning in competition uses individualised and competitive targets and challenges as a means to garner greater enjoyment in PE. Understanding each child’s self-efficacy and motivation is key, which requires ongoing evaluation and assessment during PE lessons