Team Nutrition (Program : U.S.) (author) and United States Food and Nutrition Service (author)
Format:
government document
Language:
Eng;iish
Publication Date:
2013
Published:
USA: USDA, Food and Nutrition Service
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 152 Document Number: D10136
Notes:
1 online resource (107 pages) : illustrations (some color), A supplemental curriculum for grades 5-6., Via United States Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Library. From the Historical Dietary Guidance Digital Collection
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Document Number: D09042
Notes:
Pages 36-44 in Tema Milstein, Mairi Pileggi, and Eric Morgan (editors), Environmental communication pedagogy and practice. Routledge: Abingdon, Oxon, England. 277 pages.
Brown, J. Lynne (author), Epp, Donald J. (author), Fisher, Ann (author), King, Robert (author), Maretzki, Audrey N. (author), and Department of Agricultural Economics, Penn State University
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
1994
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 97 Document Number: C08020
James F. Evans Collection, This article describes the development and preliminary evaluation of model materials designed as one step in helping consumers understand how scientists assess food risks, how that information is used in food safety policy decisions, and what individuals can do to protect themselves from residual risks. Focus groups provided feedback on draft materials, and experts reviewed the simplified descriptions of specific food risks to assure consistency with current scientific knowledge. We used pilot tests to examine (1) whether initial factual questions would prompt more learning, and (2) the relative effectiveness of two formats: a paper version similar to typical government pamphlets and an interactive computer version. People learned about food safety from either version. There was little evidence that the "prompting" questions led to more learning, nor did subjects learn more from the computer version. Results suggest that the materials made respondents more comfortable about their own ability to choose and prepare safe food and increased their confidence in actions taken by government and industry. (original)
