Commonwealth Forests

Chapter 5 Training at professional and technical levels

TECHNICAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING IN FORESTRY

Technical education in forestry used to refer to the training of forest officers below the professional level. Before about 1970 it aimed to produce a grade of staff often referred to as “foresters” or sometimes “forest rangers” throughout the Commonwealth, whose task was to support the university-trained staff. The forestry schools, which had a high esprit de corps, were nearly always part of the Forestry Department. Typically the students had a good basic education and were well-motivated; on successful completion of the course they passed directly from forest school to the forest service, the sole employer. Foresters were almost exclusively male and their training called on them to be self-reliant since their work was in isolated places although they were also closely integrated into the local community.

Since the 1970s a number of changes have occurred in technical and professional training. Forest management no longer exists in isolation but interacts with other disciplines and forms of land use outside the forest, as well as with society.  More, and more complex skills, are required, often related to the use of computers but including also matters such as health and safety regulations, the laws of access, the requirements for certification and so on. Women joined the profession, not only at university-level but also in the formerly all-male bastions of the forestry schools. At first such developments occurred in the developed economies but soon all Commonwealth countries were adapting to the new pressures, hastened perhaps by post-independence needs and developments. As outlined in Technical vs Professional in the section on professional education above, the distinction has become blurred.  One change has been to upgrade the forest schools into colleges, which in many cases became linked with Polytechnics and Universities and hence are able to offer degrees as well as diplomas.  Thus the artificial distinction between diploma-based and degree-based programmes has largely disappeared.

There are currently four challenges to the technical education of forestry in the Commonwealth:

1. Firstly, re-consideration of the role of the (former) foresters.  Is a forester primarily a technical expert concerned with afforestation and/or harvesting, or perhaps arboriculture/urban forestry (a view prevalent in UK even in forestry circles); or are they primarily land managers concerned with sustainability and having to interact with a wide range of land users?   The latter seems desirable, since otherwise many political, financial, and social issues that affect forests and forestry will be determined by others. Technical education seems to imply the first, yet there are equally valid skills and competencies that need to be acquired for the second.

2. Secondly, the curriculum - which will depend to a great extent on the answer to the first challenge. Education, which is knowledge-based, and Training, which provides skills and competence, cover a spectrum of activities.  How does the Institution get the correct balance through its curriculum. The courses, and ethos, provided by Technical Forestry Schools/Institutions probably should be predominantly Training, i.e. competence based, but many appear not to be. The curriculum, for example, is defined by subjects (mensuration, utilisation) and by exams; rather than by competence (operation plan for planting/harvesting a given site) and competence assessments.  A major disadvantage of subject based curricula is that increased diversity and complexity leads to more subjects being added and the students work load increased, as outlined below.  Competence based courses are related to the job an employee is recruited for, thus changes can be accommodated by splitting courses rather than purely adding to a single one.   Competence based courses also allow for a hierarchal solution to different work situations. It is important that Institutions provide courses at different levels (how many will depend upon the circumstances) and encourage students to progress from one to another. Although there are advantages in a single long course, alternatives that provide a mix of short courses, distance learning, computer-based  activities, video conferencing etc do exist and should be utilised.

3. Arising from the curriculum is the third challenge, posed when the institution is no longer under the direct control of the Forestry Department.   Being part of a larger education unit has advantages but how does the Forestry School fight for funds and recognition, and maintain direct links with the Forestry Service?   Should there be a Forestry Education and Training Board established, however small, or advisory boards for each Institution?

4. Closely linked both to the curriculum and the institution is the fourth challenge, that of complexity. Curricula have become more complex due to a number of factors - the broadening of the forestry profession, technological changes (e.g. harvesters), increased use of computers, legal requirements etc. Institutions need not only to develop the curriculum to meet these changes, and find qualified staff to teach it, but also consider how these changes impact on their student profiles and intake procedures - more people-orientated rather than machine for example, greater numbers of women.  Also of concern here is the employment expectations of students and employers.  Unfortunately a vicious circle can be created; greater complexity >> longer courses >> higher qualifications >> more responsibilities >> higher salary expectations >> but fewer staff because of budget limitations.  Does the School increase the length of the course but reduce the numbers or accept that only a few will get the sort of job they have trained for, the remainder will have to accept either a more lowly job or a long period of temporary or contract employment.

These challenges are common to all Commonwealth countries, so there must be a great opportunity for them to exchange experience and learn from one another. It must be remembered that technical based institutions, and their staff and students, can benefit from networking programmes as well as professional ones.