Benchmarking meat science curriculum and resources in higher education in the United States

A benchmarking survey was created to quantify the number of meat science faculty, course offerings, student enrollment, participation in intercollegiate meat judging, graduate student programs, meat science lab capabilities, and perceived support of meat science programs from institutional colleagues, institutional leadership, and external stakeholders. The survey was shared with individuals from 187 higher education institutions (including fifty 1862 land-grant institutions, fifteen 1890 land-grant institutions, and 122 other institutions). Thirty-four surveys were completed (including surveys from twenty-six 1862 land-grant institutions, one 1890 land-grant institution, and 7 other institutions). Data were analyzed in SAS (v9.4; SAS Inst. Inc.) using the MEANS procedure to determine measures of central tendency (mean, median, and mode), measures of variation (minimum, maximum, and standard deviation), and the FREQ procedure to determine frequency distributions. Overall, the results of this survey provide an initial benchmark highlighting the number of meat science faculty, the extent of educational programming, the number of students reached, meat science lab capabilities, and perceived support of meat science programs. Of the 34 institutions that responded to the survey, the average meat science program consisted of nearly 4 meat science faculty instructing approximately 165 undergraduate students in meat science courses on an annual basis and providing graduate-level supervision of approximately 7 master’s level graduate students (assuming 2-year programs) and approximately 5 PhD graduate students (assuming 4-year programs) on an annual basis. This work was conducted in university meat lab facilities with an average date of construction in 1991 with approximately 2 full-time employees and approximately 11 part-time student employees on an annual basis. The information herein provided a realistic benchmark for institutions to use for prioritization in a changing academic landscape.