Towards professionalism in agricultural extension: The professional registration of Extensionists in South Africa – A dream or a reality? The role of the South African Society of Extensionists in South Africa – A dream or a reality? The role of the South African Society of Agricultural Extension (SASAE)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
More and more organizations/institutions delivering a service to clients call their service a “professional” service executed by “professionals”. The concepts profession, professional and professionalism are being described as well as the role that the South African Society for Agricultural Extension (SASAE) has played to ensure that Agricultural Extension is recognized as a profession. A brief description is given of the Extension and Advisory service in Canada regulated by the Agrologist Act, 1994. The analysis of five professions in South Africa and the process of registration indicated the following: Four of the professions are regulated by an Act, a Council and a Code of Conduct. Only one Profession namely the Association of Veterinary and Crop Associations of South Africa operates under an Operational Code of Conduct and is not regulated by an Act. Two of the Professions have included a program of Professional Development (CPD) for their members, to ensure that they retain and continuously develop their skills and knowledge. Extensionists in S A can currently only register (by own choice) with the South African Council for Natural Science Professions (SACNASP) and although more than 3000 extensionists are currently providing an extension and advisory service to farmers, only 11% Keywords : Agricultural Extension, professionalism, profession and professional registration. South African Journal of Agricultural Extension Vol. 36 (1) 2007: pp. 144-169
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".