J. V

et. A

nim

.Sci

. 201

3. 4

4 : 4

6 - 5

0RESEARCH ARTICLE

46 Training needs of dairy farm instructors in fodder...

Received - 16.10.12Accepted - 18.02.13

Abstract

The study was carried out on thetraining needs of Dairy Farm Instructors (DFIs)of the Dairy Development Department ofKerala. The data were collected from a sampleof 75 DFIs by means of structuredquestionnaires. Knowledge and skill needswere assessed in the subject matter area offodder production and management.Knowledge (78.99) and skill (78.99) needs offodder production ranked first followed byknowledge (77.55) and skill (76.44) needs offodder preservation. Under fodder production,knowledge (82.66) and skill (80.88) needs offodder disease management and fertilizerapplication ranked first. The most preferredtype of training was institutional learning(58.67%). Practice in demonstration (76.00%)was the most preferred method of training.Experts from outside the parent organizationwere the most preferred trainers (58.64%).The most preferred durations for short termand long term training programmes were oneto seven days (76%) and fifteen days to onemonth (48%) respectively.

Key words: Training needs, Dairy FarmInstructors, Dairy Development Department,Dairy extension, Training strategy.

One of the major constraints to dairyproduction in Kerala is the shortage of qualityfodder. The marginal and small farmers who

TRAINING NEEDS OF DAIRY FARMINSTRUCTORS IN FODDER PRODUCTIONAND MANAGEMENT *

N. Vimal Raj Kumar1, R.S.Jiji2

andP.J.Rajkamal3

Department of Veterinary &Animal Husbandry Extension,College of Veterinary and Animal Sciences,Mannuthy-680 651, Thrissur, Kerala, India

are the predominant cattle owners of the statehave either limited or no land at all for fodderproduction. The lack of fodder and high cost ofcattle feed result in increased cost of milkproduction. Realizing this precarious situation,the State Dairy Development Department (DDD)gives thrust to the implementation of fodderpromotion schemes. The Dairy Farm Instructors(DFIs) of the department being the educatorsand change agents at the block level need to beupdated with advances in fodder production andpreservation technologies through regular in-service training programmes.

The present study was thereforedesigned to identify the perceived trainingneeds of the Dairy Farm Instructors in thesubject matter area of fodder production andmanagement and also to explore the trainingstrategy preferred by the respondents.

Materials and Methods

At the time of data collection, 120DFIs were actually in position with the DDDand structured questionnaires were either sentto them by post or distributed in person duringthe district level monthly meetings. Out ofthem, 75 DFIs returned the filled inquestionnaires within the stipulated period ofone month. Hence the sample of the studycomprised of 75 DFIs.

Determination of training need

In the present study, training need

* Part of M. V. Sc. thesis submitted by the first author to the Kerala Agricultural University, Thrissur1. Assistant Professor, Department of Veterinary and Animal Husbandry Extension, Madras Veterinary College, Veppery,Chennai, Tamilnadu – 6000072. Associate Professor3. Professor and Head

J. V

et. A

nim

.Sci

. 201

3. 4

4 : 4

6 - 5

0

47

RESEARCH ARTICLE

N.Vimal Raj Kumar, et al.

was operationalised as the perceived trainingneeds of the DFIs, obtained in a checklist ofitems in the subject matter area of fodderproduction and management under whichselected items to assess the knowledge needsof the respondents and those to assess theskill needs were given separately. Therespondents were asked to rate both theknowledge and skill need items separately ona three point continuum viz., required,somewhat required and not required withscores of three, two and one respectively.

The Training Need Index (TNI) for each itemwas calculated using the formula, Sum ofscores obtained for an

TNI of an item = item by all the respondents———————— X 100Maximum possible score for the item

The items were ranked based on thetraining need indices.

Training strategy preferredThe respondents were asked to

mention the type, method, trainers, durationand venue of training they preferred the mostfrom among the given categories, for thesubject matter area of fodder production andmanagement and preference ranking wasdone accordingly.

Results and Discussion

1. Perceived Training needs

Table 1 illustrates the perceivedtraining needs of the DFIs with regard toknowledge and skills in the subject matter areasof fodder production and fodder preservation.

For both knowledge and skill needs, fodderproduction stood first followed by fodderpreservation. Under the domain of fodderproduction, fodder disease management andfertilizer application received top priority for bothknowledge and skill needs. With regard to thedomain of fodder preservation, hay makingreceived precedence.

The fodder production programmesimplemented by the Department of DairyDevelopment envisage training to farmers infodder production and management as apriority area. Lack of scientific knowledge offodder cultivation was viewed as the majorconstraint by 40 per cent of rural respondentsas per a study carried out among the livestockfarmers of Belgaum district of Karnataka byPushpa (2006). In a study conducted in theMahabubnagar and Anantapur districts ofAndhra Pradesh and Tumkur district ofKarnataka, Misra et al (2007) found thatthrough exposure visits and farmer-to-farmerinteraction, many farmers realized thatintegration of livestock and fodder productionwithin their limited land and water resourcesprovided a better livelihood option in dry lands.

As the training sessions for farmers infodder production are dealt by the Dairy FarmInstructors, they need to be equipped withadvanced knowledge and skills in this realm.Training need analysis among the DFIs in termsof both knowledge and skill requirements revealhigher preference for fodder production thanpreservation. Further, under fodder production,disease management and fertilizer applicationwas assigned the topmost priority as against the

Table.1. Training needs of Dairy Farm Instructors in the domain of fodder production andmanagement

J. V

et. A

nim

.Sci

. 201

3. 4

4 : 4

6 - 5

0RESEARCH ARTICLE

48 Training needs of dairy farm instructors in fodder...

basic cultivation practices that received the leastpriority. Probably, the respondents were confidentof their knowledge and skills pertaining to thebasic cultivation practices. Higher preference fordisease management and fertilizer applicationtraining might be attributed to the devastatingimpact of fodder diseases, pest incidences andenvironmentally harmful pesticides and fertilizerson smallholder dairy production. The trainingneed in the subject matter area of fodderproduction and management for extensionpersonnel is in accordance with that of Saini andSandhu (1993).

2. Preferred training strategy

a) Type of training, method andtrainers

It is obvious from Table 2 thatinstitutional learning was the most preferredtype of training followed by integrated learning.The most preferred training method waspractice in demonstration followed by studytour, workshop, lecture and seminar. Expertsfrom outside the parent organization but withinthe state were preferred the most as trainers.

The preference of the respondents forinstitutional training might be attributed to theopportunities for interactive and face to facelearning. This finding is in agreement with thatof Sakthivel (2001) but in contrast with that ofPatil and Kokate (2011).

It could be noted that practice indemonstration was the most preferred methodof training by the respondents. This might bedue to their appreciation of the demonstrationtechnique as an effective tool in skill teaching.This finding is in accordance with that of

Sudeepkumar and Subramanian (1993). Themethod of study tour ranked second. Therespondents might have perceived theopportunities to visit professional institutes,research stations, farms and dairy plantselsewhere that would widen their practicallearning experience. The preference for studytours by trainees was also reported bySudeepkumar and Subramanian (1993) andMathiyalagan and Subramanian (1998).Workshop as a method of training wasassigned the third rank. Perhaps, workshopmight have been perceived as a better meansto exchange ideas, experiences and skills thatwould in turn help the participants to produce aproduct, prepare a document, report orprogramme for future action. In a descriptivestudy probing into the in-service training needsof extension agents in West Iran, Alibaygi andZarafshani (2008) observed that cooperativelearning techniques were the most preferredtraining methods (50%), followed by workshops(25.55%), group discussions (15.45%), andlectures (9%). It was interesting to note thatrole play was the least preferred method oftraining. This might be because the respondentsmight have perceived role play as embarrassingsince they were required to act roles.

Regarding preference for trainers,most of the respondents liked to invite trainersfrom outside the parent organization but withinthe state. The respondents might haveprobably felt that interacting with experiencedpersons from outside the parent organizationwould be beneficial. This finding is inagreement with that of Naik (1982) andSakthivel (2001).

Table. 2. Type of training, method and trainers preferred in the domain of fodder production andmanagement

J. V

et. A

nim

.Sci

. 201

3. 4

4 : 4

6 - 5

0

49

RESEARCH ARTICLE

N.Vimal Raj Kumar, et al.

b) Duration of Training

Data in Table 3 shows that more thanthree fourth of the respondents were in favourof short term residential training programmesof 1-7 days duration for which the respondentwould probably have to stay away from his/her home. Almost half of the respondents werein favour of long term residential trainingprogramme of 15 days to one month durationfor which they would have to stay away fromhome sometimes.

Duration is an important criterion forthe success of any training programme. It isessential that the duration of training isadequate to deliver the content of training. Itshould be convenient to the trainees as well.The finding that most of the respondentspreferred a duration of one to seven days fora short-term training programme and fifteendays to one month for a long-term trainingprogramme deserves consideration whiledeciding upon the duration of training. Thisfinding is in accordance with those of Bhagat(1989), Sudeepkumar and Subramanian(1993) and Khan et al (2011).

c) Venue of Training

Table 4 shows that the most preferredvenue for training in fodder production andmanagement was Kerala AgriculturalUniversity followed by identified centres ofDairy Development Department (DDD), KeralaCooperative Milk Marketing Federation(MILMA), Kerala Livestock DevelopmentBoard (KLDB) and premier institutes outsideKerala such as Tamil Nadu AgriculturalUniversity (TNAU) and Indian AgriculturalResearch Institute (IARI). None preferred anyinstitute other than these.

The physical facilities andenvironment of training institutes haveconsiderable influence on the learningexperience of trainees. The selection of avenue with all the required facilities such assuitable physical environment, teaching aidsand resource persons is essential for thesuccess of the training programme. The findingsreveal that most of the respondents preferredinstitutes within Kerala. Attending trainingprogrammes outside their home state may not

Table 3. Preferred training duration

Table. 4. Preferred venue of training

J. V

et. A

nim

.Sci

. 201

3. 4

4 : 4

6 - 5

0RESEARCH ARTICLE

50 Training needs of dairy farm instructors in fodder...

be convenient in view of domestic obligations.This finding is in agreement with those of Naik(1982), Bhaghat (1989) and Mani (1996).

Acknowledgements

The financial support in the form ofJunior Research Fellowship extended by theICAR for the conduct of this research work isprofoundly acknowledged herewith. Also, theauthors are thankful to the Dean, College ofVeterinary and Animal Sciences, Mannuthy,Thrissur, Kerala for the facilities provided.

References

Adhikari, S. 2003. Training needs of frontlineextension workers of mid-westerndevelopment region of Nepal. M. Sc.Thesis, Department of AgricultureExtension and Rural Sociology, IAAS,Rampur, Chitwan, Nepal. 80p.

Alibaygi, A. and Zarafshani, K. 2008. Trainingneeds of Iranian extension agentsabout sustainability: The use ofBorich’s need assessment model.AJAR., 3 : 681-687.

Bhagat, G. R. 1989. A study on training needsof Horticulture Inspectors in PunjabState.M.Sc (Ag.) thesis, PunjabAgricultural University, Ludhiana.125p.

Halim, A. and Islam, A. F. M. S. 1973. Attitudeof the Front Line Extension Workerstowards in-service training programme. Indian J. Extn. Edn., 9: 108-114.

Khan, M. Z., Haq, Z. U., Khan, N. U., Pervez,U. and Khan, M. A. 2011. Trainingneeds of Agricultural extension agentsin Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Sarhad J.Agric., 27: 133-137.

Mani, S. 1996. A study on training needs ofAOs under Tamil Nadu AgriculturalDevelopment Project (TNADP). M.Sc.(Ag.) thesis, Tamil Nadu AgriculturalUniversity, Coimbatore. 115p.

Mathiyalagan, P. and Subramanian, R. 1998.Perception of training strategy bypoultry farmers and extensionpersonnel. Cheiron., 27: 55-58.

Misra, A K., Rama Rao, C. A., Subrahmanyam,K.V., Vijay Sankar Babu, M.,Shivarudrappa, B. and Ramakrishna,

Y. S. 2007. Strategies for livestockdevelopment in rain fed agro-ecosystem of India. Livest Res forRural Dev.,19: Article #83 retrievedfrom http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd19/6/misr19083.htm.

Naik, S. 1982. A critical analysis of in-servicetraining needs of the AssistantAgricultural Officers of Karnataka.M.Sc. (Ag.) thesis, University ofAgricultural Science, Dharwad.116P.

Patil, S. S. and Kokate, K. D. Training NeedAssessment of Subject MatterSpecialists of Krishi Vigyan Kendras.Indian Res. J. Ext. Edu., 11: 18-22.

Pushpa, P. 2006. A study on livestockproduction systems of rural andperiurban livestock owners. M.Sc.(Ag.) thesis, University of AgriculturalScience, Dharwad.104p.

Reddy, A. A. and Reddy, K. J. 1966. Criteriafor the training needs of AgriculturalExtension Officers. Indian J. Extn.Edn., 2: 59-65.

Sakthivel, K. M. 2001. Analysis of the trainingneeds of Veterinary Surgeons ofKerala for continuing veterinaryeducation. M.V.Sc. thesis, KeralaAgricultural University, Thrissur.140P.

Sandhu, A. S. and Bilang, K. S. 1977. Trainingneeds of Agricultural Extension Officers.Indian J. Extn. Edn., 13: 71-73.

Sharma, D. and Shukla, A. N. 1986. Trainingneeds of Agricultural ExtensionOfficers of Punjab. Indian J. Extn.Edn., 22: 80.

Singh, B. N. and Singh, A. P. 1966. In-servicetraining needs of AgriculturalExtension Officers. Indian J. Extn.Edn., 2: 17-21.

Sudeepkumar, N. K. and Subramanian, R.1993. An analysis on the trainingneeds preference of dairy trainees.J. Extn. Edn., 4: 726-729.

�