Face-to-Face versus Online Agricultural Courses: An Analysis of Preferences, Challenges, and Non-Adaptability

  • Izzah Abd Hamid Department of Crop Science, Faculty of Agricultural and Forestry Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia Bintulu Sarawak Campus, 97008 Bintulu, Sarawak, Malaysia.
  • Wan Asrina Wan Yahaya Department of Crop Science, Faculty of Agricultural and Forestry Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia Bintulu Sarawak Campus, 97008 Bintulu, Sarawak, Malaysia. http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2680-3816
Keywords: Agriculture courses, Face-to-face, Farming activities, Hand-on session, Online platform

Abstract

Short-term agricultural courses equip participants with marketable knowledge through an amalgamation of theoretical lectures and hands-on workshops. As time has progressed, many courses have transitioned heavily away from traditional classroom settings and into digital mediums. A survey was conducted at Convocation Expo during the Agricultural Clinic session at the UPM Bintulu Sarawak Campus. About 156 surveys were evaluated, and the results showed that, despite the potential challenges and lack of adaptability, our participants preferred online agriculture courses over face-to-face learning. Many respondents (34.88%) agreed they would not sign up for an online farming course because they didn't believe in the outcomes (34.88%), the fees were too high (30.23%), the learning platform was inefficient (16.28%), and there was a lack of relevance to current agricultural practices (16.28%). Moreover, the lack of hands-on sessions (61.54%), a preoccupation with marketing strategies (11.54%), and a lack of familiarity with the internet's functionalities (11.54%) were all cited as reasons for the inadaptability and impracticality of online learning. Nearly half (47.44%) of respondents indicated a preference for free face-to-face training, but just 37.18% would be willing to do so (provided the fee was less than RM100). The proliferation of online classes across several platforms has made education more accessible than ever before, so long as the recorded sessions are archived online. However, without the appropriate information or the referral to professional experts, their agricultural operations would continue to be plagued by technical difficulties.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Awang, M. D. (2015). Amalan dan strategi pemerkasaan sektor pertanian masyarakat melayu Sri Aman, Sarawak. International Journal of Social Policy and Society, 11, 109-121.

Chhachhar, A. R., Qureshi, B., Khushk, G. M., & Ahmed, S. (2014). Impact of information and communication technologies in agriculture development. Journal of Basic and Applied scientific research, 4, 281-288.

Evans, O. (2018). Digital agriculture: mobile phones, internet and agricultural development in Africa. Actual Problems of Economics, 7-8: 76-90.

Hafifi, M. H. M., & Din, R. (2021). Penggunaan video sebagai medium pembelajaran kendiri untuk meningkatkan produktiviti belia tani. Journal of Personalized Learning, 4, 43-56.

Izzah, A. H., & Wan Asrina, W. Y. (2019). Levels of involvement and understanding in agriculture: The case of Bintulu, Sarawak, Malaysia. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Research, 5, 201-206.

Jaiswal, S., Asper, L., Long, J., Lee, A., Harrison, K., and Golebiowski, B. (2019). Ocular and visual discomfort associated with smartphones, tablets and computers: what we do and do not know. Clinical and Experimental Optometry, 102, 463-477.

Joshi, O., Chapagain, B., Kharel, G., Poudyal, N. C., Murray, B. D., & Mehmood, S. R. (2020). Benefits and challenges of online instruction in agriculture and natural resource education. Interactive Learning Environments, 30, 1402-1413.

Lee, C. C., Chiang, H. S., & Hsiao, M. H. (2021). Effects of screen size and visual presentation on visual fatigue based on regional brain wave activity. The Journal of Supercomputing, 77, 4831-4851.

Muthuprasad, T., Aiswarya, S., Aditya, K. S., & Jha, G. K. (2021). Students’ perception and preference for online education in India during COVID-19 pandemic. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 3, 1-11.

Prayoga, K. (2017). Pemanfaatan sosial media dalam penyuluhan pertanian dan perikanan di Indonesia. Agriekonomika, 6, 32-43.

Safitri, E., & Arif, E. (2021). Penggunaan media sosial dalam penyuluhan pertanian di Kecamatan Tiumang Kabupaten Dharmasraya. Jurnal Niara, 13, 92-101.

Sakai, S., Choy, Y. K., Kishimoto Yamada, K., Takano, K. T., Ichikawa, M., Samejima, H., Kato, Y., Soda, R., Ushio, M., & Saizen, I. (2016). Social and ecological factors associated with the use of non-timber forest products by people in rural Borneo. Biological Conservation, 204, 340-349.

Sri, N., & Swastika, D. K. S. (2011). Peran kelompok tani dalam penerapan teknologi pertanian. Forum Penelitian Agro Ekonomi, 29: 115-128.

Suratini, S., Muljono, P., & Wibowo, C. T. (2021). Pemanfaatan media sosial untuk mendukung kegiatan penyuluhan pertanian di Kabupaten Minahasa Provinsi Sulawesi Utara. Jurnal Penyuluhan, 17, 12-24.

Published
2023-05-31
How to Cite
Abd Hamid, I. and Wan Yahaya, W. A. (2023) “Face-to-Face versus Online Agricultural Courses: An Analysis of Preferences, Challenges, and Non-Adaptability”, Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (MJSSH), 8(5), p. e002328. doi: 10.47405/mjssh.v8i5.2328.
Section
Articles