National FFA Career Development Events Revision Highlights - Details 2012-2016 Train-the-Trainer Workshop Friday, April 29, 2011

National FFA

Career Development Events Career Development Events Revision Highlights - DetailsRevision Highlights - Details

2012-20162012-2016

Train-the-Trainer WorkshopTrain-the-Trainer Workshop

Friday, April 29, 2011Friday, April 29, 2011

General CDE Revisions

• CDE handbook introduction chapter:– Event requirements chart – page iv

– Online declaration deadline on June 1 – page v

– Online certification deadline on September 15 – page v

– Online add/delete deadline on the Tuesday before convention at noon (Eastern) – page v

– Once original online certification has been completed (September 15), no member may be added without first deleting a member – page vi

– Special needs requests due on September 15 – page viii

• Agriculture, Food and Natural Resources (AFNR) Career Cluster Content Standards – all CDEs aligned with standards (see chart at the end of each handbook chapter)

General CDE Revisions (cont.)

• Team activity – evaluated all event team activities; increased overall impact on total score and added process/teamwork score, where appropriate– Rationale for change: emphasis on teamwork is added because it is an

important skill for participants to master success in many career paths

• Four new events to use all four scores for total team score – added dairy cattle, milk quality and products (formerly dairy foods), forestry and livestock– Rationale for change: opportunity for increased participation;

scholarships awarded to all winning team members and with all team members’ scores counting it is guaranteed that all members merit the scholarship.

• Most resource lists were edited to include more recent publications, websites, etc.

Agricultural Communications

• Number of team members will be decreased from five to three – Event Rules – page 1– Rationale for change: by making the event more accessible to replicate on the

local and state level that there will be more participation in the event overall; decreased demands for computer labs, judges, software and training participants at all levels of competition; both industry representatives and educators offered feedback that helped direct the reduction of participants.

• Changed the “communications proposal” to a “media plan” (media plan includes: cover page, table of contents, executive summary, introduction/overview, audience, strategic plan, timeline, evaluation, budget, conclusion and references)– Event Format – Team Activities – page 2– Rationale for change: based on professional input and reflects industry trends

Agricultural Communications (cont.)

• Media plan submitted electronically as PDF – Event Format – Team Activities – page 2 & 3– Rationale for change: based on professional input and reflects industry trends;

saves paper and resources

• Practicums will be based on the main three areas of communication industry including:– Event Format – Practicums – page 4 & 5– Designers (magazine page layout, web page layout, electronic publication

layout, flier/poster)– Electronic media specialist (digital news broadcast, blog, social media, video)– Writers (press release, news story, feature story)– Rationale for change: new format allows event to keep up with current media

practices; more flexibility to choose specific activity within each area of communication


• Actual activities in practicum areas will be rotated each year and teams will be informed of the specific activities by November after national FFA convention for the next year’s event – Event Format – Practicums – page 5 – Rationale for change: releasing the specific practicum activities in November will

allow states to incorporate activity into qualifying event and help teams better prepare for high-quality outcomes

• Normalized scores are used to eliminate the inconsistency between practicum scores (i.e. electronic media judges could score much tougher than writing judges).– Scoring – page 6

• Included more detailed descriptors in all scorecards – Scorecard – page 8-13– Rationale for change: better training tool for local/state level; less subjectivity in

judging


• Total possible event points – 775 points– Media plan score – 200 points (same as 2006-11)

– Media plan presentation score – 125 points (-25 points from 2006-11)

– Communications quiz (25 points X 3 members) – 75 team points (-50 points from 2006-11)

– Editing exercise (25 points X 3 members) – 75 team points (-50 points from 2006-11)

– Writer practicum – 100 points (same as 2006-11)

– Electronic media practicum – 100 points (same as 2006-11)

– Design practicum – 100 points (same as 2006-11)

Agricultural Issues Forum

• Portfolio deadline moved from September 15 to August 15 (taking effect in 2011)

• State title of portfolio in the form of a question (not doing so results in loss of points)

• Portfolios will only be accepted with one staple or spiral binding (no binders, folders, sheet protectors, etc.)

Agricultural Issues Forum (cont.)

• Presentation scorecard – same point allocation, added descriptors– Scorecard – page 7– Rationale for change: better training tool for

local/state level; less subjectivity in judging

• Total possible event points – 150 points/round– Portfolio – 25 points (same as 2006-11)– Presentation – 125 points (same as 2006-11)

Agricultural Sales

• New event will be composed of three parts (Event format – page 1):– Team Activity

– Individual Sales Activity

– Individual Written Exam

• Product(s) used in team activity and individual sales activity will be chosen by committee and released before convention in the team orientation packet and FFA website. Participants will not be selecting their own product for the individual sales call activity.– Event format – page 2

– Rationale for change: without the extreme disparity in participants’ products, judges will be more familiar with the product which allows for more interaction during the presentation and less subjectivity in scoring

Agricultural Sales (cont.)

• Team activity consists of composing a pre-call plan for a variety of customer types and present findings to judges.

– Event format – page 2; Scorecard – page 4 – Each participant is allowed to bring a one-inch binder containing product information to

team activity.– No laptops, flip charts, dry erase boards or other presentation equipment will be used.

• Information and product(s) from the team activity will be used in the individual sales activity.

– Event format – page 3 – Participants will directly sell to the product(s) to the judge(s) who will fit one of the

customer profiles identified in the team activity. – Not all individual sales calls will result in a closed sale.– Rationale for change: team activity and individual sales call provide participants with

real-world situations to adapt sales call based on different types of clients

Agricultural Sales (cont.)

• Emphasis on rapport building and probing questions in individual sales activity.– Individual Sales Activity scorecard (new) – page 5

– Rationale for change: participants should increase emphasis on relationship building because not every call will result in a sale; based on industry feedback

• Total possible event points – 1,150 points– Individual written exam (100 points x 4 members) – 400 points (same as

2006-11)

– Team activity – 150 points (new in 2012)

– Individual sales call (150 points x 4 members) – 600 points (new in 2012)

Agricultural Technology and Mechanical Systems

• Changed name from Agricultural Mechanics to Agricultural Technology and Mechanical Systems– Rationale for change: new event name more accurately represents

the whole industry

• Omitted industry/marketing system practicum and added electrical systems practicum– Information and performance skills – page 3; Competencies – page 4

& 8 – Rationale for change: industry/marketing skills are already used within

other practicums (i.e. interpreting instruction manuals); electrical wiring includes more practical, hands-on application for participants

Agricultural Technology and Mechanical Systems (cont.)

• Revised team activity rubric to include teamwork/process scores– Event rules and format – page 3; Team activity process rubric –

page 17

– Rationale for change: encourages true cooperation between team members during team activity

• Total possible event points – 1,000 points – Written examination (50 points x 3 members) – 150 points (-150

points from 2006-11)

– Individual activities (5 @ 30 points x 3 members) – 450 points (same as 2006-11)

– Team activity – 400 points (+150 points from 2006-11)

Agronomy

• Updated regional crop list – Event format – page 3– Rationale for change: ensure crop list is relevant; based on industry feedback

• Incorporated a yearly rotation in the grain grading practicum.– Event format – page 5 – Rationale for change: based on industry input and includes more diverse

crops

• Grain grading scorecard will be crop specific and released before convention in team orientation packet. – Scorecard – page 19– Rationale for change: by incorporating crop specific scorecard, participants

are given real-world grading experiences.

Agronomy (cont.)

• Updated weeds, crops and machinery identification lists– Lists – page 9-13– Rationale for change: industry input on proper terminology

• Total possible event points – 5,000 points – Examination (100 points x 4 members) – 400 points (same as 2006-11) – Identification (150 points x 4 members) – 600 points (same as 2006-11)– Soils (100 points x 4 members) – 400 points (same as 2006-11)– Commodity (250 points x 4 members) – 1,000 points (same as 2006-11)– Diagnostic (100 points x 4 members) – 400 points (same as 2006-11)– Pest Management (100 points x 4 members) – 400 points (same as 2006-11)– Insect Identification (100 points x 4 members) – 400 points (same as 2006-11)– Equipment & Machinery Identification (100 points x 4 members) – 400 points (same as

2006-11) – Team activity – 1,000 points (same as 2006-11)

Creed Speaking

• Incorporated a consistent, detailed communication rubric for speaking events– Scorecard – page 4

– Rationale for change: better training tool for local/state level; less subjectivity in judging

• No major event changes

• Total possible event points – 1,000 points (same as 2006-11)– Oral communication – 200 points

– Non-verbal communication – 400 points

– Question/Answer – 400 points

Dairy Cattle Management and Evaluation

• Changed name from Dairy Cattle Evaluation to Dairy Cattle Management and Evaluation– Rationale for change: new name integrates dairy

management team activity and application skills related to career opportunities in the management of dairy operations.

• All four scores will count for total team score.– Event rules – page 1

– Previously in this event, teams were allowed to bring 3 or 4 participants and only the top three scores counted toward the final team score.

Dairy Cattle Management and Evaluation (cont.)

• Team activity – NEW– Event format – page 2– Dairy farm management scenario with problem identification and

solution recommendations given by participants in a presentation to judges.

• Rationale for change: incorporates vital knowledge application skills as well as communication and teamwork

– Presentation content and communication are evaluated• Scorecards – page 5, 6

– Team activity topic rotation (Event format – page 2)• 2012 & 2016: Genetics/Reproduction

• 2013: Feeds/Nutrition

• 2014: Housing/Facilities

• 2015: Health/Diseases


• Incorporated linear evaluation, pedigree and sire selection practicums into team activity.– Rationale for change: integrated further application of these topics in

the team activity

• Written test will have 50 questions: forty questions about dairy management and industry and ten questions utilize dairy herd record evaluation (Sample record evaluation sheet – page 7)– Event format – page 2

– Rationale for change: increased emphasis on herd record evaluation as an individual activity instead of the team activity

• Updated event-specific scan form to align with revisions.


• Total possible event points – 3,000 points– General Knowledge Exam (150 points x 4 members) – 600

points (same as 2006-11)– Evaluation (300 points x 4 members) – 1,200 points (same as

2006-11)– Oral Reasons (150 points x 4 members) – 600 points (same as

2006-11)– Dairy Management Team Activity – 600 points (+450 from 2006-

11)

Dairy Cattle Handlers Activity

• No activity revisions• Total points possible – 100 points (same as 2006-11)

Environmental Natural Resources

• Teams will be evaluated on their ability to work together in team activity. – Event format – page 2; Scorecards – page 10-14– Rationale for change: encourages true cooperation between team members during

team activity

• Changed annual practicums to consist of a writing exercise and identification (omitted global issues interview).– Event format – page 3; Identification list – page 8; Writing exercise scorecard – page

15

• Increased emphasis on writing exercise in the team activity as well as individual practicums.– Rationale for change: acknowledges that writing/communication is a vital skill no

matter what career path participants pursue

Environmental Natural Resources (cont.)

• Soil analysis (replaced soil nutrient test) and soil profile practicums revised to include analysis of lab results and interpretation guides.– Event format – page 4; Scorecards – 17-19– Rationale for change: more focus on application of individual skills

• Revised all scorecards to include more description and detailed rubrics. – Rationale for change: better training tool for local/state level; less subjectivity in

judging

• Total possible event points – 3,800 points– Written exam (100 points x 4 members) – 400 points (same as 2006-11)– Writing exercise (100 points x 4 members) – 400 points (new in 2012)– Identification (400 points x 4 members) – 400 points (new in 2012)– Rotational practicums (4 @ 100 points x 4 members) – 1,600 points (same as 2006-

11)– Team activity – 1,000 points (same as 2006-11)

Extemporaneous Public Speaking

• Incorporated a consistent communication rubric for all speaking events– Scorecard – page 4, 5 – Rationale for change: better training tool for local/state

level; less subjectivity in judging

• No major event changes• Total possible event points – 1,000 points (same

as 2006-11)– Oral communication – 600 points– Non-verbal communication – 400 points

Farm Business Management

• Incorporate more diverse farms (i.e. orchards, vineyards) in the event problem– Rationale for change: ensure event problem is relevant to all participants,

not just certain regions

• Included team activity observers’ scoresheet to handbook.– Scorecard – page 8– Rationale for handbook addition: training tool for local/state level

• No major event changes.• Total possible event points – 1,200 points

– Written exam (300 points x 3 members) – 900 points (same as 2006-11)– Team activity – 300 points (same as 2006-11)

Floriculture

• Added equipment identification list.– Identification list – page 12 – Rationale for change: important for participants to know proper names of florist

equipment; career preparation

• Incorporating computers into event as a whole instead of having just one specific “computer skills” practicum as a rotating option.– Rationale for change: acknowledges that computer skills are vital no matter what career

path participants pursue

• Incorporated “Potting of Plant Cuttings,” “Asexual Propagation of Plants” and “Pinching Plants” from individual practicums to the “Growing Procedures” rotational practicum. – Event format – page 5– Rationale for change: combine activities with similar knowledge and skills into one

practicum; select which activity is done each year based on high-quality plant resources available

Floriculture (cont.)

• Total possible event points – 5,700 points – Identification of plant material (200 points x 4 members) – 800

points (same as 2006-11)– General knowledge exam (250 points x 4 members) – 1,000

points (same as 2006-11)– Problem solving (200 points x 4 members) – 800 points (same

as 2006-11)– Practicums (525 points x 4 members) – 2,100 points (same as

2006-11)– Team activity – 1,000 points (+800 points from 2006-11)

Food Science and Technology

• Customer inquiry activity will be replacing customer complaint letter activity. – Event format – page 3; Scorecard – page 9– Rationale for change: based on professional input and reflects industry trends

• Food safety/sanitation practicum to include more than just photos in the situations (e.g. videos, written scenarios, etc.)– Event format – page 3; Scorecard – page 10– Rationale for change: opportunity for participants to observe more real-world

safety/sanitation situations.

• “Difference testing” changed to “flavor identification” practicum; same activity, different name– Event format – page 4– Rationale for change: based on professional input and reflects industry trends

Food Science and Technology (cont.)

• Updated list of aromas (deleted peanut butter and almond)– Event format – page 4– Rationale for change: based on professional input and reflects

industry trends

• Included more detailed descriptors in the team product development scorecard – Scorecard – page 7, 8– Rationale for change: better training tool for local/state level; less

subjectivity in judging

Food Science and Technology (cont.)

• Total possible event points – 1,050 points– Written exam (50 points x 4 members) – 200 points (-1000

points from 2006-11) – Food safety and quality practicum (50 points x 4 members) –

200 points (-400 points from 2006-11)– Sensory evaluation (50 points x 4 members) – 200 points (-400

points from 2006-11)– Team activity – 400 points (+50 points from 2006-11)

• Handbook typo: scorecard on page 8 states team activity is worth 450 points instead of 400 points

Forestry

• All four scores will count for total team score. – Previously in this event, teams were allowed to bring 3 or 4 participants and

only the top three scores counted toward the final team score.

• Timber cruising changed from a rotational individual practicum to an annual individual activity– Event format – page 2– Rationale for change: incorporates important knowledge application skills on

a yearly basis instead of rotationally

• Equipment identification changed from an annual individual activity to a rotational individual practicum.– Event format – page 3– Rationale for change: increased focus on knowledge application skills rather

Forestry (cont.)

• Updated tree identification specimen list (added 14 specimens to list). – List – page 7– Rationale for change: based on professional input and reflects industry trends

• Updated equipment identification list (added 4 items to list).– List – page 7– Rationale for change: based on professional input and reflects industry trends

• Updated tree disorders identification list (added 2 items and deleted 4 items on list).– List – page 8– Rationale for change: based on professional input and reflects industry trends

Forestry (cont.)

• Total possible event points – 3,050 points– General knowledge exam (100 points x 4 members) – 400 points (+100


– Tree Identification (100 points x 4 members) – 400 points (+130 points from 2006-11)

– Issues interview (100 points x 4 members) – 400 points (+100 points from 2006-11)

– Timber cruising (100 points x 4 members) – 400 points (+100 points from 2006-11)

– Two forestry practicums (200 points x 4 members) – 800 points (+200 points from 2006-11)

– Team activity – 450 points (+200 point from 2006-11)

Horse Evaluation

• Identification classes changed from team activity to individual activity – Event format – page 2– Colors and markings included in breed identification class– Rationale for change: increased emphasis of individual identification

skills

• Team activity – NEW (Event format – page 2)– Part 1: Practical Application Activities – Part 2: Team Scenario and Presentation – Rationale for change: added knowledge application in addition to

communication and identification skills


Horse Evaluation (cont.)

• Total possible event points – 2,170 points– Breed identification class (20 points x 3 members) – 60 points

(new in 2012)– Tack and equipment identification class (20 points x 3 members)

– 60 points (new in 2012)– Two halter and one reason class (300 points x 3 members) –

900 points (same as 2006-11)– Two performance and one reason class (300 points x 3

members) – 900 points (same as 2006-11)– Team activity – 250 points (+150 points from 2006-11)

Job Interview

• Utilize electronic/online job application instead of paper forms.– Event format – page 2– Rationale for change: based on professional input and reflects industry

trends

• The telephone interview has been changed to an “initial telephone contact” where the participant will be contacted by the company’s human resources department to set up interview time, ask clarifying questions, etc.– Event format – page 2– Rationale for change: provides opportunity for informal communication

with judge

Job Interview (cont.)

• All scores from preliminary round will be carried over for participants advancing to the final round.

– Event format – page 3– Rationale for change: based on real-world interviews, first interview and resumes are used

as a reference in conducting second interview and final candidate selection

• Incorporated a scenario-based, impromptu networking activity (i.e. career fair, mixer) for top eight participants in final round

– Event format – page 3– Replacing final round follow-up letter– Rationale for change: reflects industry trends; adds opportunity for final participants to “think

on their feet” in front of judges

• Included more detailed descriptors in all event scorecards – Scorecards – pages 5-11– Rationale for change: better training tool for local/state level; less subjectivity in judging


• All scores from preliminary round will be carried over for participants advancing to the final round.

– Event format – page 3– Rationale for change: based on real-world interviews, first interview and resumes are used

as a reference in conducting second interview and final candidate selection

• Incorporated a scenario-based, impromptu networking activity (i.e. career fair, mixer) for top eight participants in final round

– Event format – page 3– Replacing final round follow-up letter– Rationale for change: reflects industry trends; adds opportunity for final participants to “think

on their feet” in front of judges

• Included more detailed descriptors in all event scorecards – Scorecards – pages 5-11– Rationale for change: better training tool for local/state level; less subjectivity in judging


• Total possible preliminary round points – 1,000 points– Cover letter – 100 points (same as 2006-11)

– Resume – 200 points (+50 points from 2006-11)

– Application – 100 points (+50 points from 2006-11)

– Initial telephone contact – 50 points (new for 2012)

– Personal interview – 500 points (+50 points from 2006-11)

– Preliminary follow up letter – 50 points (-50 points from 2006-11)

• Total possible final round points – 1,600 points– Preliminary round points – 1,000 points (same as 2006-11)

– Networking activity – 100 points (new in 2012)

– Final round personal interview – 500 points (+50 points from 2006-11)

Livestock Evaluation

• All four scores will count for total team score.– Previously in this event, teams were allowed to bring 3 or 4 participants and

only the top three scores counted toward the final team score.

• Team activity – NEW – Assessment and solutions on a live animal class (all team members work

together)– Market Scenario Activity – 2 team members work together (randomly selected

at event)– Genetic Scenario Activity – 2 team members work together (randomly

selected at event)– Scenario examples – page 5– Rationale for change: more focus on knowledge application skills


Livestock Evaluation (cont.)

• Total possible event points – 3,500 points– Eight evaluation classes (400 points x 4 members) – 1,600 points (+400


– Four reasons classes (200 points x 4 members)– 800 points (+200 points from 2006-11)

– Three individual keep/cull classes (150 points x 4 members) – 600 points (new in 2012)

– Written test (50 points x 4 members) – 200 points (-100 points from 2006-11)


Marketing Plan

• Creating an event guidebook for the marketing principles that are essential to the event and industry. – Will be available on CDE webpage by 2011 convention.

– Rationale for addition: this tool will consolidate different marketing resources into one easy-to-use guide for local teachers and states

• Additional 3-5 minutes (depending on round) of question and answer time about general marketing.– Event format – page 4

– Rationale: participants should have substantial knowledge about marketing principles and not just details about their own project

Marketing Plan (cont.)

• Separated written plan and presentation score cards; included more detailed descriptors in the scorecards – Scorecards – pages 6, 7 – Rationale for change: better training tool for local/state level; less


• Total possible event points – 300 points/round– Written plan – 100 points (+65 from 2006-11)– Presentation – 200 points (+135 points from 2006-11)

Meats Evaluation and Technology

• Individual activities:– Beef quality and yield grading

• Change from 6 carcasses to 3-5 carcasses• Answer to nearest 0.1 of the yield grade instead of answering to the

nearest one-third of a grade. Scoring will be pro-rated closely to the old system.

– Four to six placing classes instead of six standard placing classes• Eliminated lamb carcasses as a placing class.• Possible new classes (within the 4-6 placing classes):

– Processed/cured ham or loin retail cut class– Keep/cull class (new in 2012) – Example – page 3– Value-based pricing beef placing class (new in 2012) – Example–pages 3-5

– Question classes (same as 2006-11)

Meats Evaluation and Technology (cont.)

• Individual activities (cont.)– Retail meat cuts identification (change from 40 to 30 cuts; add

cookery method; cuts list updated to reflect the current industry)• Retail cut codes sheet with cookery – page 20-23

– Meat formulation problem solving• Example – pages 11-19

– Written exam• Example – page 11

• Rationale for activity changes: based on professional input and reflects industry trends


• Team activity – NEW – Includes four scenario-based team practicums chosen from handbook

examples each year.

– Not every example will be used each year; an example could be used multiple times in one year.

– Examples – page 7-9

– Rationale for change: more focus on knowledge application skills



• Total possible (maximum) event points – 2,420 points– Written exam (80 points x 3 members)– 240 points (+5 points from

2006-11)

– Meat formulation problem (50 points x 3 members) – 150 points (same as 2006-11)

– Retail meat cut identification (180 points x 3 members) – 540 points (-180 points from 2006-11)

– Beef quality and yield grading – 144-240 points

– Placing classes – 600-900 points

– Ten questions (50 points x 3 members members) – 150 points (same as 2006-11)


Milk Quality and Products

• Name changed from Dairy Foods to Milk Quality and Products – Rationale for change: new event name emphasizes the focus on raw

milk and products

• All four scores will count for total team score.– Previously in this event, teams were allowed to bring 3 or 4 participants

and only the top three scores counted toward the final team score.

• Changed to positive scoring– Rationale for change: consistency with other national CDEs; ease of

scoring at all levels

• Event flow/timing changed to incorporate all revised and remaining activities.– Event format – Flow of event – page 2

Milk Quality and Products (cont.)

• Team activity – NEW – Includes performance and/or analysis of acceptability tests on raw milk– Teams will also conduct a verbal presentation reporting their results, impacts

and improvement methods.– Scoring includes accuracy of report, content of comments, presentation

(written/oral) and teamwork • Event format (and examples) – page 3; Scorecards – 8, 9

– Rationale for change: incorporates vital science skills as well as communication and teamwork

• Removed real vs. non-real activity and added fat content identification activity– Event format – page 4– Rationale for change: real-world tasting skills used for fat content activity;

based on industry input


• Added cheese property characterization to the cheese identification activity– Event format – Cheese Characteristics Matrix – page 5– Rationale for change: added knowledge application skills to an

activity that previously only required identification skills

• Eliminated milker part identification activity– Rationale for change: more focus on application of individual

skills



• Total possible event points – 2,400 points– Milk flavor identification and evaluation (110 points x 4 members) – 440 points (+80

points from 2006-11)– Fat identification (25 points x 4 members) – 100 points (new in 2012)– California mastitis test (65 points x 4 members) – 260 points (same as 2006-11)– Cheese type identification (15 points x 4 members) – 60 points (same as 2006-11)– Cheese characteristic identification (25 points x 4 members) – 100 points (new in

2012)– Problem solving (100 points x 4 members) – 400 points (+300 points from 2006-11) – Written exam (160 points x 4 members) – 640 points (+240 points from 2006-11)– Team activity – 400 points (+375 points from 2006-11)

Nursery/Landscape

• Phase 1 – Team activity is the same (scenario and presentation), but has different general themes:– Promotions, start up business plan, consulting, customer service,

service-learning or community involvement

– Event format – page 2

• Phase 2 – Team Skills Challenge – NEW– Includes more application/hands-on activities (Examples – page 3)

– Teams will accomplish Challenge tasks individually, in pairs or more, as determined by team members according to skills, experience and preference

– Scorecard – page 19

– Rationale for change: more focus on knowledge application

Nursery/Landscape (cont.)

• Eliminated landscape drawing activity and assessment/solution activity.– Rationale for change: Reading and interpreting a formal plan is

more applicable for the age group of members participating; also more activities were added to assess participants’ knowledge application

• Increased overall event activity focus on commercial, residential, public and recreational use of nursery and landscape principles (including interiorscapes and turf grass)– Rationale for change: based on professional input and reflects

industry trends

Nursery/Landscape (cont.)

• Total possible event points – 2,000 points– Written exam (150 points x 3 members) – 450 points (same as 2006-11)

– Identification (150 points x 3 members) – 450 points (same as 2006-11)

– Landscape estimating (100 points x 3 members) – 300 points (same as 2006-11)

– Verbal customer assistance (50 points x 3 members) –150 points (same as 2006-11)

– Written customer assistance (50 points x 3 members) – 150 points (same as 2006-11)

– Nursery Propagation/Potting (50 points x 3 members) – 150 points (same as 2006-11)

– Team Activity (50 points x 3 members + 100 points) – 250 points (same as 2006-11)

– Team Skills Challenge – 100 points (new in 2012)

Parliamentary Procedure

• Written exam will be changed to the Society of Agricultural Education Parliamentarians (SAEP) accreditation exam– Event format – page 2

– Part 1 of the exam will be five open book parliamentary procedure research questions using the current edition of Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised.

– Part 2 of the exam will be forty-five (45) multiple-choice questions taken from Dunbar’s Manual of Parliamentary Procedure Test Questions and Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised.

– All participants scoring a total exam score of at least 80% will be recognized as Accredited Parliamentarians by SAEP and receive a certificate at the award banquet.

– Rationale for change: allows more participants to have the opportunity to become Accredited Parliamentarians; serve in their chapters and communities

Parliamentary Procedure (cont.)

• Teams advancing to the semifinal and final rounds will complete a short parliamentary procedure scenario outlining a practical problem instead of the secretary’s minutes. Minutes will still be presented in the preliminary round.– Event format – page 5; Scorecard – page 13; Example – pages 14-16

– Rationale for change: more focus on knowledge application in semifinal and final rounds instead of record keeping

• Updated “Form 2 – Team Score Sheet”– Scorecard – page 11


Parliamentary Procedure (cont.)

• Included more detailed descriptors in the minutes scorecard – Scorecard – page 12


• Total possible event points – 1,000 points– Written exam – 150 points (+50 from 2006-11)

– Presentation – 670 points (-80 points from 2006-11)

– Oral questions – 135 points (+35 from 2006-11)

– Minutes (preliminary round) – 45 points (-5 points from 2006-11)

– Team problem solving activity (semifinal and final rounds) – 45 points (new for 2012)

Poultry Evaluation

• Class name changes (Event format – pages 3, 4)– Class 1: Market Broilers (formerly “eight meat-type cockerels or pullets for

broiler breeding selection”)– Class 2: Egg-type hens (formerly “evaluating hens for production”)– Class 5: Four RTC carcasses for placing (formerly “four carcasses for

grading”)– Class 8: Fifteen chicken eggs for exterior quality grading (formerly “ten

chicken eggs for exterior quality grading”)– Class 10: Boneless Further Processed Poultry Meat Products (formerly

“ten further-processed poultry meat products for evaluation”)– Class 11: Bone-In Further Processed Poultry Meat Products (new for 2012)– Class 12: Ten chicken carcass parts for identification (formerly Class 11)

Poultry Evaluation (cont.)

• Expanded classes 8 and 9 to include 15 eggs for exterior quality grading and evaluation criteria.– Event format – page 3, 4– Rationale for change: increased number eggs evaluated to be more consistent with

other classes in event regarding time and difficulty

• Split further processed poultry meat products into two classes – boneless and bone-in classes.– Event format – page 4– Rationale for change: based on professional input and reflects industry trends;

boneless and bone-in product defects should be evaluated separately

• Total possible event points – 2,450 points– Twelve classes (600 points x 3 members) – 1,800 points (same as 2006-11)– Written exam (150 points x 3 members) – 450 points (same as 2006-11)– Team activity – 200 points (same as 2006-11)

Prepared Public Speaking

• Incorporated a consistent communication rubric for all speaking events– Scorecard – page 5-8– Rationale for change: better training tool for local/state level; less


• No major event changes• Total possible event points – 1,000 points

– Manuscript – 200 points (-100 points from 2006-11)– Presentation – 800 points (+100 points from 2006-11)

Thank you!

Documents

National FFA Career Development Events Revision Highlights - Details 2012-2016 Train-the-Trainer Workshop Friday, April 29, 2011