Missouri Association of
Professional
Soil Scientists

The meeting began with opening remarks from the Vice Chancellor and Dean for Agriculture, Food and Natural Resources and the MU Provost.

Dean Tom Payne addressed the group and stressed that things have changed. He pointed out the two objectives for the workshop:

Dean Payne emphasized the need for this group to help in the transition. Bonnie Bourne, facilitator, will help address the above objectives.

Provost Brady Deaton welcomed everyone and indicated that he was pleased to see so many multiple dvisions coming together. He stressed that a fundamental role of a land grant institution is to reach out and comments he receives are deeply appreciated. The University's goals are to re-inspire the State. Provost Deaton stated that the problems we face are critical and we must have participation from around the State. This meeting is the first step.

Bonnie Bourne then explained the morning's activity. Each group is to identify and prioritize needs. The facilitator and recorder for each of the seven tables stood and introduced themselves.

At this point Don Purdy asked to read a statement.* He expressed his concern over actions that he believes has weakened the field of soil science at the University of Missouri. He requested that Provost Deaton establish a task force to address the issues surronding the decision to dissolve the Department of Soil Science. He asked why many basic and advanced courses are not being taught. He asked why the department status was removed and who had the authority to make that decision. He pointed out that on of the School's review team recommendations was to eliminate soil science but it's first recommendation was to hire necessary faculty. Why was that action not taken?

* Full text available upon request.

In response, Dean Payne said that he is the one with the authority to remove department status. He said he would love to hire faculty and staff but the reality is that 2.1 million has been cut from the College's budget. The College has lost 17 faculty and 35 staff. The team that reviewed the Soil Sciences Department recommended several options which included adding needed faculty. They recognized the fiscal challenges facing Missouri, MU, and the College and said if positions could not be added, there should not be a department since the critical mass had been lost over time. Dean Payne emphasized that he did not like to do what he did and did not do it lightly. Fiscally we cannot hire new faculty at the present time. He expressed his hope that the fiscal situation in Missouri would change so needed faculty positions could be replaced. In the meantime, he asked if we could meet the challenge to support the need for Soils by partnering on Campus and around the State to have an Environmental Soil Science Program. He reiterated that the participants were asked to come today to help with the change, and expressed his hope that there would be constructive outcome to help guide development of the program.

Provost Deaton indicated that he would be listening to everyone. At the end of the day we should have a sense of what we want to recommend to the University.

The morning session continued with the seven groups creating their list of needs. Participants then voted on their top five items. The top 8-10 items from each group were presented to the entire assembly.

The afternoon session was divided into three areas: undergraduate education; professional training/outreach; ad research/graduate education. The three groups discussed strategies and actions that could address the needs identified in the morning session and reported them to the entire assembly for discussion. After discussion, participants then voted for their top three choices of recommendations in each category.

Closing remarks were made by Dr. Al Vogt and Dr. Marc Linit, respective Unit leaders for Natural Resources and Plant Sciences. They concluded the session with the following points:

List of appendices

Date: November 7, 2002 8:30-4:00
Location: Memorial Union - Mark Twain Ballroom

Objectives
-To Strengthen MU's traditional soils effort into an integrated "environmental soil science" program in undergratduate education, research and graduate education, professional training and outreach.
-To obtain input from Key Stakeholders in developing a comprehensive soil science program founded on new and existing collaboration among faculty in multiple departments and with off-campus stakeholders.

Process Objectives
-Be productive
-Listen, learn and share
-Stay tuned in
-Have fun

By the end of the day we hope to have a plan which will guide our next steps

Agenda

8:30	Welcome and Introduction Background and purpose - Dean Payne, Provost Deaton and others
9:15	Small group activity to identify and prioritize needs Participants introduce to other participants at their table. Facilitator asks team to select a recorder. Facilitator then helps the group to go around the table with each member presenting one idea from his/her "needs" list, not duplicating what has already been said, until the lists are exhausted. Recorder records the ideas on a flipchart. Needs lists are posted so the group can see all of them. Facilitator helps members to discuss and clarify the items Group members choose their top five items. When ready, each member will put a mark beside his/her top five items on the flipchart list. Then the marks for each item will be tallied and the top eight to ten will be circled (The group has chosen their top eitht to ten items, and the entire list will be saved for further consideration)
10:30	Break
10:45	Large Group Each group reports their top eight to ten issues. This is recorded on a computer and projected onto the screen so the larger group can see the entire list, and if necessary combine any duplicates. Discussion and Clarification.
12:00	Lunch ( During lunch, copies of the needs priorities lists from all the groups will be made to distribute for the small group work in the afternoon. )
1:00	Three subgroups to brainstorm strategies and actions that address the needs identified in the first small group. Groups form around the categories of (1) undergraduate, (2) graduate education and research, (3) professional training/outreach Facilitator asks groups to nominate a recorder. Facilitator asks group to read through the list and check items they would like to discuss. Then facilitators use the following questions to guide the discussion: Undergraduate Education What knowledge and skills are needed by undergraduated entering environmental soil science careers that are not currently being met? What courses/curricula are needed to meet the needs? What approaches are available for provideing educational needs? Professional Training / Outreach What are the priority training/outreach needs not being met? What additional priority training/outreach services should be provided? What approaches can be taken? Research and Graduate Education: What are the priority research needs that are not being met? What kind of graduate educational programs are needed to address research priorities? What are approaches for providing the needed graduate education? Recorders will record ideas under each of the question categories. They will also record any ideas that do not fit into any of the questions but that the group feels is important.
2:00	Afternoon Break
2:15	Reports and discussion in larger group. Each group should have approximately 20 minutes to report and then discuss with the larger group.
3:15	Summary - Al Vogt and Marc Linit
4:00	Adjourn

Table 1	Steve Anderson - Facilitator Bob Ball (USDA) Jim Gaughan (MDHSS; for Daryel Brock) Dan Downing (Ag. Ext.) - recorder Gene Garrett (SNR-Forestry) John Kabrick (MDC) Leanne Spurling (Sunny Acres Farm) Nancy Giddens (MoAg)
Table 2	Joe Bachant (MDC) Jonathan Baer (D.G. Purdy & Assoc.) Clair Baffaut (FAPRI) - recorder John Bowders (Civil/Env. Eng.) Gary Colliver (Agriliance) Glenn Davis (Ag. Ext) - Facilitator Wyn Kelley (MDNR) Gabe Ramsey (Central MO Agri Service) Joe Slater (Fert. & Ag. Lime Control Service)
Table 3	Mike Aide (SMSU) Bryan Garton (Ag. Ed.) Sam Kiger (Civil/Env. Eng.) Bill Kurtz - recorder Bob Lerch Brent Morrow (Smith's) Peter Motavalli - Facilitator Brent Meyers (Agronomy) Dennis Potter (NRCS) John Yang (Lincoln Univ.)
Table 4	Clark Gantzer - Facilitator Frank Gordon (USDA) Steve Jeanetta (Ag. Ext.) - recorder John Lory (Plant Sci.) Don Purdy (D.G. Purdy & Assoc.) Robin Rhodes (St. Joseph-Buchanan Co. Health Dept.) Don Schuster (USDA) Scott Totten (DNR) Pieter Los
Table 5	Frieda Eivazi (Lincoln Univ.) Sarah Fast (MDNR) Ben Fuqua (SMSU) Matt Herring (Univ. Ext.) Newell Kitchen - Facilitator Russ Kremer (MO Farmer's Union) Todd Lorenz (Univ. Ext.) Bill Pauls (USDA) Bob Sharp (Agronomy) Gene Stevens (Ag. Ext.) - recorder
Table 6	Tom DeWitt (NRCS) Crystal Frey Gary Hoette (Univ. Ext.) Erik Loehr (Civil/Env. Eng.) Dean Martin (MDNR) Brian Mayhan (CARES) Peter Scarf - Facilitator Christine Smith (SMSU) Tom Wacek (Urbana Labs) Randy Miles - recorder
Table 7	John Ikerd Scott Killpack (Univ. Ext.) Bob Kremer - Facilitator Nancy Mungai Bob Broz Manjula Nathan - recorder Jim Pickett (Conco Quarries) Bart Spurling (Sunny Acres Farms) Lynn Stanley (USDA) Richard Tummons (USDA)

Only Ranked needs listed

TABLE 2	Participants
RANK	Idea Description	# Votes
1	Teach basic courses by qualified, dedicated, long term individuals	11
2	Dollars to support viable programs	7
3	Soils as a natural resource has been marginalized by society --> revalorize soils	7
4	Emphasize the connection between soils and crop production	5
5	Identify core courses to be taught in ESS	4
6	Develop educational programs for public schools	3
7	Emphasize the connection between soils and hydrology	2
8	Integrate real life problems	2
9	Teach one soil course to all university undergraduates	1
10	Focus on soil science	1

TABLE 3	Participants
RANK	Idea Description	# Votes
1	A professional track soils undergraduate option at the Bachelor of Science level	10
2	Require that all SNR graduates have at least one soils course	3
3	More communications between stakeholders within and outside the university	4
4	Need an introductory soils course with an integrated laboratory experience	3
5	Stronger ties to the job market	4
6	Viable department for graduate student recruitment	4
7	Enhance undergraduate soils program to attract more students	3
8	Enhance research through collaboration	3
9	Better integration and coordination among course offerings between academic divisions	3
10	Annual conference highlighting research dealing with environmental issues	4

TABLE 4	Participants
RANK	Idea Description	# Votes
1	Integrate through the unit structure all professional activities that used to be done through the dept. (without a dept. many basic functions/needs are not met)	6
2	Accessible courses for non-traditional students	4
3	Need a process for integrating communication with stakeholders/clients groups so that issues of common importance are raised and addressed	4
4	Courses need to be integrated into other departments on campus	3
5	Education ombudsman who can transfer information to the public -- may be through a newsletter, programs of excellence Encourage testing or evaluation of soil scientists through professional organizations	3
6	Graduates need hands on experience - internships	2
7	Soils need to have the same academic status and structure as departments elsewhere on the campus	2
8	Testing of practicing soil scientists	2
9	Urban environment curriculum around soil science	2
10	Other programs need to be integrated into the soils curriculum	2

TABLE 5	Participants
RANK	Idea Description	# Votes
1	Change the perception of the soil program	8
2	Every ag. graduate needs at least 3 hrs of soils	5
3	Interaction and cooperation across departments and institutions to take full advantage of existing expertise	5
4	Tailor undergraduate courses for multiple degree options	5
5	Develop an integrated sustainable soil management course	4
6	Update soil testing methods	3
7	Ensure a comprehensive and rigorous introductory soils course	3
8	Better communication and marketing of importance of soil science	3
9	Tailor undergraduate courses to meet job oppurtunities	3
10	Include a course in solving actual environmental problems related to soil/water/air	3

TABLE 6	Participants
RANK	Idea Description	# Votes
1	Remove barriers from other divisions to taking soil science courses (ie.A&S)	10
2	Require soil science course for more students in natural resources and environment	7
3	Reputation of service to the state of Missouri	6
4	Leadership in outreach/continuing education	6
5	Non-soil scientists should not be deemed soil scientists by administrators	6
6	High level technical expertise to support agencies! Experimental design	4
7	"Cross training", integrated interdisciplinary training for undergrads (i.e. risk-based assessment)	4
8	Educate well rounded soil scientists	2
9	Research crops, landscapes, environment	1
10	Integrate grad programs w/ 4 corners state institutions	1

TABLE 7	Participants
RANK	Idea Description	# Votes
1	Broaden land use planning/development across academic disciplines to relate to application in public sector - not limited to soil scientists only	8
2	Focus on holistic approach to soil science; treat soils as more than simply plant growth medium; consider biological aspects, "soil health," land stewardship, etc.	6
3	Soils graduate program needs in-depth/specific courses in soil research specialy [to meet grad program requirements]	5
4	Broaden scope of undergrad curriculum to include more diversified aspects to attract non-majors who will need soil science background in future occupations	5
5	Broaden emphasis of soils program beyond traditional production agriculture and commercial agriculture; expand to a greater public (urban) need	4
6	Match curriculum to meet needs of public including sustainable ag. organic farming	4
7	More industrial field trips to expose students to actual application of classwork	3
8	Outreach to citizens making present land use decisions	2
9	Introduce Engineering properties of soil, like soil mechanics, hydrology, testing soil for construction of septic taks in classes	1
10	Soils courses that are currently listed are adequate for traditional soil science training, but lacks diversity in Environmental topics, industry	1

Research/Graduate: Strategies	On-Campus	Off-Campus	Unkown	Grand Totals
Interdisciplinary collaboration within units on campus and others for Research and Curriculum	11	13	10	34
Change the perception of the Soils program by enhancing research and grad. program through collaboration through stakeholders	7	14	12	33
Interaction of soils & crop production & the environment -- maintain graduate education in this area	9	7	5	21
Develop applications in existing courses in Urban soils/environment	4	7	3	14
Viable program for graduate students	5	3	5	13
Development of an organic and more environmental thrusts	5	2	5	12
The assessment of performance through the use of different measures	3	2	6	11
Graduate student career development	2	4	4	10
Southeast Missouri has a clay mineralogy which could be offered with distance learning	3	0	0	3
Danforth Center - Center for Root Biology needs to have soils participation	1	2	0	3

Professional: Strategies	On-Campus	Off-Campus	Unkown	Grand Totals
Ed. programs for soils that address public issues; outreach to groups solving problems but who may not realize that they need soil science expertice	13	16	12	41
Outreach to decision and policy processes, including local governments	10	12	10	32
Demonstrations of integrated holistic approach to agricultural and natural resource issues	9	10	8	27
Education on soils as a natural resource independent of agricultural production	5	6	5	16
Training for agency personnel	5	1	9	15
Training for land use: real estate people, land managers, etc.	3	3	7	13
Broad public education	2	5	1	8

1. What parts of the workshop were most helpful in achieving the overall objectives of the program?
   Morning session was most useful, provided for discussion and individual input
   Good mix of stakeholders and UMC/Agency people (diverse soils community)
   Dialoge - discussing the breadth of issues with a very good group of people interested in MU soils
   Don Purdy's opening statement needed to be said
   Prioritization was appropriate
   Opening remarks by the Dean
   Breakouts for U,G,P in afternoon
   The process was good to list issues related to the soils program
   Concerns that practical application can help drive the education and research needs
   The 2nd objective was achieved (input from stakeholders)
   The intention of the workshop
   The chance to be involved
   Realization that other stakeholders have similar concerns

2. What parts were least helpful in achieving the overall objectives of the program?
   Directions were sometimes confusing particularly in the afternoon session. Prioritizing was really not done well
   Not enough time to achieve objectives
   Administrative bureaucratic statements
   Too much individualism
   Too restrictive in choices, process too exclusive although realized must narrow choices
   Many items were vague gripe items
   Discussion opportunities less than in the morning session
   Room was poor for group discussion (acoustics)
   Lack of parameters and information including long-term CAFNR objectives
   The ideas had to be generated but maybe time could be allotted to finalize or summarize in small groups
   Group size too large in afternoon
   Defense of status quo
   Non-soil scientists thinking they are soil scientists
   Sidebars should have been explained beforehand
   Summary on screen could have been done so all could see
   Too much food - diet is shot

3. To what extent were the overall objectives accomplished?
   (Not at all = 1, Very good = 11)
   48 responses of which 41 entered a numerical evaluation
   3,5,6,9,10,3,7,10,7,4,6,9,6,7,7,9,5,7,8,8,6,5,5,8,89,6,8,10,9,9,2,11,9,8,9,7,8,6,8,6
   Average evaluation = 7.1 Range 2-11

4. What suggestions do you have for improving this kind of workshop in the future?
   More time for open discussions - brainstorming and interaction
   Group may have been larger than needed to focus on micro issues, to diffuse
   Allow the participants to set the objectives and choose as many action items as necessary
   More specific language should be encouraged in developing discussion points
   Sort by G,U,O before handing out
   Implement the suggestions
   To see changes happen
   Have more people present working in commercial agriculture
   More representation from the private sector
   More representation from outside groups that is more involved in actual production/stewardship
   Facilitators didn't keep the group focused on the questions asked Focus more on off-campus clientele for this meeting to bring campus feedback as a second step, i.e. campus listens today not participate
   Have a column on the list that links an action to each item
   Use of technology (GIS) should be emphasized as well as non-traditional interpretive needs
   The overall objective of the workshop is survival of the program not reflected in the objectives stated
   Ranking items of dissimilar nature led to comparing "apples to oranges"
   Needs assessment tool a bit too long - shorten
   Trust recommendatiojns will be addressed during subsequent meetings

5. Additional comments or suggestions
   Comments
   The big question, will anything really change?
   Reaching objective 1 will depend on what faculty and administrators do with the input
   Hopeful that this will actually generate a viable working program in soils
   Big problems, short time, difficult decisions
   We are 1/2 of 1% there
   Dean Payne seemed insincere in his response
   The workshop may have been in vain considering the Dean's comment that funding will probably drive the direction of the program/department
   Very little will happen if no funds are allocated to this effort
   I'm not convinced the Dean truly feels that the Soils Dept. is important and essential
   Wished for deliberations related to the thinking behind elimination of departmental status
   Is the administration aware of MU soils faculty who are well respected nationally
   The challenges are many, and this fledgling program will need support from all involved
   MU does not have a viable competitive soils department & that is shameful!!
   This workshop probably should have happened prior to disbanding and fragmenting soil science at MU
   Optimistically, perhaps informatoin is underway & perceptions statewide can be changed
   If soil science is to be valued by society at large itmust be utilized by the private sector
   The issue is larger that the School or College. It needs to be elevated to higher levels in regard to MU's mission and priorities. Determining priorities by vacancy is not a good approach
   Overall, worthwhile. Time will only tell where it will go
   If the comments priority and others are folded into a working document then teh workshop will have been sucessful
   Must build trust
   Suggestions
   Have a follow-up session to develop a framework for the program and to identify actions
   Expand participants - see next four suggestions
   Bring in some "outside stakeholders" - county planing and zoning, homebuilders, commodity groups and more students
   Add consultants and engineering firms (MoDoT?) to stakeholder's group
   Expand the group of people involved to include more biologists, ecologists, foresters and fisheries and wildlife experts
   Include all soils faculty in the discussions (including those who have left SNR)
   Keep the stakeholders informed of discussions including the SNR Advisory Council
   Allow the group to provide feedback and clarification to the draft that will be mailed
   Present a summary of the current conditions to off-campus stakeholders, e.g. student enrollment, where graduates are employed, etc
   Follow through on how to keep the group working to develop specific goals
   Need more information and dialogue with administration
   List responses by number of votes
   Have initial information collected by mail to open the initial discussion. Then meet for 1/2 day to review
   Move off-campus
   If repeated, split into two 1/2 day sessions to allow preparation for the 2nd part
   Be willing to take bold actions - be thinking redirection
   Focus on soil as a public resource - earth science