 |
Presented in partnership with Nufarm Turf & Specialty
|
We’re No. 1!
 |
Turfgrass overseeding trials at the Arkansas Agricultural Research and Extension Center in Fayetteville. Photo by M. Richardson |
Nothing beats the feeling of knowing that your team or your school is No. 1. But what if your team is No. 2? Or what if you’re not ranked at all? Who decides the rankings anyway? And are their criteria valid?
These questions and more arose when rankings of undergraduate college turfgrass programs were published by a now defunct trade publication in 2007. In particular, many academics in the turfgrass community took exception to the survey and the rankings.
Rankings — and complaints about them — are not new to academia. Although U.S. News and World Reports has published its college rankings for the past 20 years, college and university officials have recently begun to question the validity of the rankings, saying that they are unfair and lead to increased competition among schools. In addition, several institutions have refused to participate in the survey that forms the basis of the rankings.
At the annual business meeting of the Turfgrass Science (C5) division of the Crop Science Society of America in November 2007, all of the approximately 135 members present, save one, voted to approve the following resolution:
“C5 does not support the ‘ranking’ of turf schools by popular press publications and agrees in principle not to participate in or support future rankings.”
Why did the C5 members vote for the resolution, and why do turfgrass academics in general have such strong opinions about rankings? For one thing, no one seems to have developed criteria that ultimately define the perfect turf program. Turfgrass programs come in all shapes and sizes: two- and four-year programs; junior colleges and large land-grant universities; large and small numbers of students; state-of-the-art and more humble research facilities.
Given these disparities, what determines the quality of a turfgrass program? Mike Richardson, a turfgrass professor at the University of Arkansas who has reviewed numerous turf programs in the U.S., suggests that larger programs with more money do not guarantee a better education. “The bottom line is, it’s not size (number of students, faculty, etc.) or resources (turf plots, grants, labs, etc.) that matter. It is the teacher who makes or breaks an educational experience. Good teachers who have an honest concern for student welfare can be found at the smallest programs as well as the largest.”
Most academics in turfgrass see no point in rankings that are designed to help undergraduate turf students select a particular school. The fact is that the majority of turfgrass students attend a program in their home state, where tuition and living costs will be least expensive. Most graduates also stay close to home when it comes to finding that first job.
The primary goals of the turf programs are to educate the students and help them find jobs in their chosen profession. Tom Cook, who describes his one-man program at Oregon State as “puny,” says, “I am proud of what I have accomplished at OSU. I am proud of what my students have achieved in the industry. … Whatever our ranking by any criteria you develop, it won’t reflect the true impact we have had in our region.”
Turfgrass Producers International recently elected two new members to its board of trustees. Fanus Cloete, director of Evergreen Turf Ltd. in Eikenhof, South Africa, and Gary Wilber, vice president and co-owner of Oakwood Sod Farm Inc., Delmar, Md., were both elected to three-year terms to the group’s board of trustees. The group also named Charles “Chip” Lain Jr., president of Pine Island (N.Y.) Nursery Inc., as its secretary-treasurer. Valent Professional Products announces a restructured sales staff with new territory managers Kerry Anderson, Quent Baria and Jim Santoro. They will serve the company’s turf markets in the Midwest and Atlantic regions. Mark Sybouts, a current territory manager, will now work with Midwest turfgrass customers as well as a result of the restructuring. Baria, CGCS, previously worked as superintendent for Towson GC&CC in Phoenix, Md.; Santoro, an Affiliate Company Representative member of GCSAA, came from Bayer’s Environmental Science division; and Anderson, a member of the Illinois Turfgrass Foundation Board, also previously worked for Bayer. |
RECENT issues
 |
 |
December |
November |