Progress 09/01/06 to 08/31/10
Outputs
Termination Report/Technical: Twenty three students enrolled for the Science of Foods for Health course, (4-Ohio State, 5-Iowa State and 14-Texas A&M University). A majority of the students were seeking undergraduate or graduate degrees in food science, horticulture, human nutrition, food technology and other disciplines. Twenty leading researchers gave lectures covering the topics of science education and policy, health and disease, chemistry and biochemistry and pre-/post harvest factors. The lectures and interaction with students were in-person, via video conference and web-interaction. Student projects centered on three discussion areas: crop and/or phytochemicals based; two broad topics from four aspects and non-technical presentation. The students participated in three hands on training sessions held at each of the land grant institutions. Texas A&M had a two day train the trainer program with high school teachers that taught health, nutrition or science. The training sessions included non-technical presentations by the enrolled students as well as a copy of the power point slides to use in their respective classes. Ohio State student participated via video conference during the TAMU program. Iowa State's train the trainer was held during FSHN Day and had 16 high school teachers and 17 Jr. High OPTAG students learning about fruits and vegetables and making smoothies. PRODUCTS: Products of the course include: (a) 18 content PowerPoint presentations, (b) 18 class session videos, and (c) six student presentations. The products of this project evaluation include: (a) Framing the Problem lesson, (b) Learning and Educational Strategies lesson, (c) recruitment brochure, (d) student knowledge pretest, (e) midterm evaluation questions, (f) end-of-course guided discussion questions, (g) faculty post questionnaire, (h) high school teacher pretest, and (i) high school teacher post-test. OUTCOMES: A new interdisciplinary course on Foods for Health was designed, implemented and evaluated. The course engaged 18 faculty in the development and testing of a new curriculum in the Science of Foods for Health. Faculty increased their teaching capacity through the collaborative project. Eighteen content lessons were developed and recorded to engage faculty in development of a curriculum in SFFH for undergraduate students majoring in a relevant field of agricultural science. Twenty-six undergraduate and graduate students increased content knowledge, improved their skills in integrating complex information from multiple scientific disciplines, and synthesized the knowledge through a technical scientific paper and a non-technical presentation. Several strategies were used to improve recruitment and retention of undergraduate students in agricultural sciences. First, undergraduate students were taught by 18 different experts and received hands-on training with scientists in laboratories. Second, high school teachers received professional development on how to integrate the science of foods for health into the high school curriculum. Third, undergraduate students developed relationships with graduate students through their learning experiences in the course. Graduate students served as role models in helping undergraduate students see the possibilities of continuing further study in the science of foods for health. DISSEMINATION ACTIVITIES: The non-technical presentations were given to the high school teachers during train the trainer sessions. Two media articles were published in print and web access by Ohio State University's Center for Clinical and Translational Science and TAMU College of Agriculture and Life Sciences. A poster presentation was made to participants at the annual conference of the Cancer Prevention & Research Institute of Texas. FUTURE INITIATIVES: Plans are being discussed to develop degree program in the area of "Foods for Health" using ongoing multidisciplinary courses and newly developed courses.
Impacts
The project helped to build a partnership among four land grant universities with multidisciplinary team of researchers and educators. This team helped provide training of high school teachers in two states through undergraduate students who completed Science of Foods for Health Course. The impact of this project is seamless including presentations at the Cancer Research Conference in Austin and two presentations in educational related audience.
Publications
- Patil, B.S. Vikram, A., Knbloc, N. and Megan, P. 2010. Educating Cancer Prevention through an Interdisciplinary Foods for Health Course Organized by a Collaborative Multi-state Land-Grant University Teaching Partnership. Presented at the First Annual Conference Cancer Pevention Research Institute of Texas, Austin, TX, November 17-19, 2010.
|
Progress 09/01/08 to 08/31/09
Outputs
This year the syllabus was completed, student recruiting flyers and posters and an instructional website was created for use by the students and participating faculty. The URL for the web site is http://agonline.tamu.edu/sffh2009. The speakers were finalized to include faculty from the participating universities (Texas A&M, Ohio State and Iowa State) and researchers from Cornell University; Harvard School of Public Health, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg; and University of Arkansas. The formal evaluation and course will be taught during the Fall 2009 semester. Students' hands-on training is planned once the class is over. Evaluation team from Purdue was involved in conducting pre and post evaluation. Instructional guides, development of questionnaires, and formative evaluation methods were conducted during this year to provide feedback to effectively develop the new interdisciplinary course. To assist experts asked to teach lessons, the graduate research assistant collected information and developed instructional tools, including lecture guidelines for teaching with discussions and teaching with case studies. Rubrics were created for presentation, team interaction, and team self-evaluation to aid instructors with creating course assignments. A paper was also presented at the American Education Research Association Conference. Lead PI has several conference calls with the Co-PI's and other collaborators to streamline the process of lectures. Three types of lecture styles were suggested for the speakers as an alternative to use depending on the topic. Formative evaluation methods were used and feedback regarding the development of the course was provided to the lead PI. The syllabus was created by the lead PI and it was evaluated to ensure clarity for students. Instructional guidelines were also evaluated and expanded upon to provide guidance to lecturers. A recruitment poster was also evaluated for effectiveness. PRODUCTS: The products of this course are: (a) lecture guidelines for teaching with discussion, (b) lecture guidelines for teaching with case studies, (c) presentation evaluation rubric, (d) team report rubric, (e) team interaction evaluation, and (f) paper presentation at the AERA conference. OUTCOMES: In year three, progress was made by creating materials that will be used in creating instruction for the course. The resources will help professors develop interactive and engaging lessons. Activities and products of year three will also help further the evaluation process and course development in year four. DISSEMINATION ACTIVITIES: The information was disseminated through the course website, and printed information sheets and posters which was critical in recruiting students. Posters and small brochures were all three partner institutions and external faculty who are providing guest lectures such as Harvard School of Public Health, Cornell University and University of Manitoba, University of Arkansas etc FUTURE INITIATIVES: In year four, the course will be taught in Fall 2009, hands-on training and train-the trainer session will be conducted. Evaluation team will take steps to further develop materials for the course and evaluation including Student knowledge test will be evaluated Student questionnaires will be implemented Data will be collected and analyzed Evaluation summary will be written regarding students' knowledge and motivation in the course
Impacts
The final impact of this project will be based on the student and faculty evaluations completed at the end of the course.
Publications
- Knobloch, N. A. and Patil, B. (2009). Professors Epistemological and Expectancy Beliefs to Collaborate on Creating a New Interdisciplinary Course. Paper presented for the 2009 annual meeting of the American Education Research Conference, San Diego, CA.
|
Progress 09/01/07 to 08/31/08
Outputs
After the workshop, PI contacted collaborators and assembled the topics for course curriculum. Efforts are also being made to identify speakers with specific expertise on foods for health and some speakers may include other than investigators listed in the proposal. To prepare for the formative evaluation of the course development and curriculum plans, information was compiled and developed instructional tools, including a syllabus guide, syllabus template, and module template. Resources to help the professors who will develop the course modules and write test questions were explored. State standards from Texas, Ohio, and Iowa were also compiled and will be used to help align curriculum resources during the train-the-trainer aspect of the course. Two posters were also shared at the National Project Directors conference, and a abstract proposal was submitted to the American Education Research Association Conference. PRODUCTS: The products of this project evaluation include: (a) submitted and accepted two abstracts for the NACTA conference; (b) two oral presentations at the NACTA conference; (c) submitted proposal to AERA journal; (d) syllabus guide; (e) syllabus template; and (f) module template. OUTCOMES: In year two, progress was made by creating materials that will be used in developing the course. The resources will help professors develop online instructional modules using the template and references. Activities and products of year two will also help further the evaluation process and course development in year three. DISSEMINATION ACTIVITIES: The course will be designed and delivered in collaboration, as the three universities engage each professor's strengths and expertise in the fields of horticulture, food science, nutrition, and biochemistry. FUTURE INITIATIVES: In Year 3, the evaluation team will take steps to further develop materials for the course and evaluation including: Provide feedback regarding course modules; Student knowledge test will be evaluated; Student questionnaires will be developed; Data will be collected and analyzed; Evaluation summary will be written regarding students' knowledge and motivation in the course.
Impacts
We are expecting the impact of this project will be assessed after course is taught and completion of formative and summative evaluation.
Publications
- Knobloch, N., & Patil, B. (2008). Faculty Teaching Conceptualizations and Motivation to Collaborate on Developing a New Interdisciplinary Science of Foods for Health Course. NACTA Journal, 52(2), 101. Oral presentation of abstract presented at 2008 National Association of Colleges and Teachers of Agriculture Conference, Logan, UT.
- Patil, B., & Knobloch, N. (2008). Creating a New Interdisciplinary Science of Foods for Health Course through a Collaborative Partnership of Multi-state Land Grant Universities. NACTA Journal, 52(2), 102. Oral presentation of abstract presented at 2008 National Association of Colleges and Teachers of Agriculture Conference, Logan, UT.
|
Progress 09/01/06 to 08/31/07
Outputs
Curriculum Development and Faculty Preparation and Enhancement: Program Director, co-Investigators, faculty from three land grant universities (Texas A&M University, Ohio State University, Iowa State University and University of Illinois) attended workshop during June 25-27, 2007, hosted by the Texas A&M University. The objective of the workshop was to develop a curriculum for the unique multi-disciplinary and multi-state course entitled Science of Foods for Health program (SFFH) and also to conduct a process evaluation of a tri-university collaborative course involving partner institutions. The course is not only to be built, but also delivered in collaboration as the three universities intend to build off one another's strengths and expertise in the fields of horticulture, food science, nutrition, and biochemistry, medical sciences. A two-day a workshop was attended by the faculty from different disciplines such as horticulture, breeding, biochemistry, chemistry,
nutrition, food science, behavioral science, physiology and medical science. General areas of expertise and background of each participant were identified at the beginning of the workshop which provided an opportunity for each participant to interact better to achieve the targeted goals. Contributions to the course topics were discussed from a group perspective based on collective expertise of workshop participants. Interdisciplinary faculty from four states, together, determined the core concepts to be covered in the pilot course. Additionally, course pre-requisites were also discussed. Since the course will be taught at each of the partnering science institutions, broad agreement for the necessary pre-requisites, as well as the learning goals, objectives, and outcomes for the course were discussed. As defined in the proposal, development and delivery timeline, an independent evaluation of the workshop was conducted by the co-PI from University of Illinois (now currently work at
Purdue University). The formative evaluation is to be ongoing and will serve to inform the key decision makers of the project how to make better decisions and adjust activities to more effectively implement the project's objectives. From this pilot survey and the literature, pre and post faculty questionnaires and an informal interview protocol were developed for the SFFH faculty development workshop. The faculty development/curriculum development workshop evaluation was aimed to measure: (1) workshop quality, (2) faculty motivation about collaboration and their perspectives of the project, and (3) faculty conceptualizations of teaching and learning methods they use in their instruction. The overall faculty opinion was that workshop was very well conducted, provided participants with rich learning experience regarding the process to develop a curriculum (85% agreed), 77% of the participants stated the workshop met their expectations, especially regarding their understanding about the
way the project will be conducted and completion of curriculum draft as well as 85% of them stated to have improved their knowledge about the process.
PRODUCTS: The products of this project include: a) Initiated collaborative team from land grant universities towards a common goal of healthy foods b) submitted and accepted abstract: NACTA; c) oral presentation: NACTA; d) pre-workshop SFFH faculty questionnaire; e) post-workshop SFFH faculty questionnaire; f) informal interview protocol (SFFH faculty)
OUTCOMES: Since the project is in early stage, workshop provided an opportunity to initiate collaborative educational modules.
DISSEMINATION ACTIVITIES: One abstract was submitted to National Association of Colleges and Teachers of Agriculture and accepted for dissemination as a 15 minute oral presentation.
FUTURE INITIATIVES: Identify the content experts Develop learning objectives Develop template for content module Develop assignments, guidelines and rubrics Develop Knowledge and self-assessment examples Develop ill-structured problem Develop objectives for internship Enrichment activity template Early informal feedback questions Develop internship reflection assignment Timeline for creating course with assigned responsibility
Impacts
The workshop increased the investigators motivation to achieve the objectives of the project and also to develop a more diversified program. The multidisciplinary team tentatively finalized order of topics of the proposed course by framing the problem and establishing opportunities, then focused on consumer preferences and educational strategies (people), followed by bioactivity (science) and followed by optimizing and research, recommendations, and policy (technology).
Publications
- No publications reported this period
|
|