GEM NO. 60

An In-Service Nutrition Education Program for Elementary School Teachers

Bonnie Brown, Nutrition Grant Coordinator, Greenville Central School , Greenville, New York 12083

Moon Toe Park, State University of New York at Albany, Albany, New York 12234

We surveyed 24 elementary school teachers in a rural school district in east­ern New York State to determine whether there was a need to improve nutrition ed­ucation. Our findings showed that 29% of the teachers surveyed taught no nutri­tion and the mean amount of time spent by teachers was only 1. 7 weeks per year. Next, we applied for and received fund­ing to replicate a successful nutrition ed­ucation project, Project HAND (Health and Nutrition Development), which was developed by the Delaware-Chenango Board of Cooperative Educational Services in central New York State (see Note 1).

Program Description After receiving the district administra­tor's permission to conduct the nutrition education program, we invited teachers from an elementary school to participate. One teacher from each grade level partic­ipated in this year-long project. On all grade levels, class size varied from 17 to 25 students.

The in-service training program con­sisted of a) an initial workshop con­ducted in September, followed immedi­ately by a two-day planning session, and b) monthly two-hour workshops held af­ter school. In accordance with the stipu­lations of Project HAND, bur health team was composed of the following members: participating teachers, food-service per­sonnel. the school nurse, the prinCipal. a representative of the parents, and the school health coordinator. Our initial workshop fostered a spirit of teamwork and provided participants with nutrition information, a variety of teaching materi­als, and lists of resources (school, com­munity, state, and national) from which teaching materials were available. Dur­ing the planning sessions that followed, the team members outlined program goals for the year, planned strategies and activities to meet the goals, and ordered materials. The monthly two-hour work­shops, which were held after school. pro­vided an opportunity to 1) disseminate information; 2) develop lesson plans; 3) exchange ideas, report on activities con­ducted during the prior month, and dis­cuss problems that developed during the

implementation of the program; and 4) coordinate activities across grade levels. We used project funds to compensate all team members for attending workshops.

The in-service workshops did not spec­ify or advocate a particular teaching strat­egy or set of methods and materials for participating teachers to use to achieve the stated objectives of the curriculum. Consequently, teaching strategies varied from class to class . Individual teachers selected methods and materials, and time periods that were compatible with their teaching styles and with their students' learning styles. Some teachers chose to teach nutrition as a single unit, and oth­ers elected to introduce new foods and concepts throughout the year. However, all students received some instruction in cooking and sampled a variety of foods. We allotted each teacher funds to cover the cooking and the food sampling costs.

We used a variety of activities to stimu­late interest among parents and to en­courage their participation in the nutri­tion program. Early in the school year the health coordinator, the local project di­rector, and the director of the local coop­erative extension presented an overview of the nutrition program for the parent­teacher organization. During this session they also presented nutrition informa­tion in a slide/lecture format and distrib­uted nutrition information materials. throughout the year individual teachers sent nutrition information horne with students, invited parents to help with classroom projects, requested parents t6 supply their children with utensils for cooking projects, suggested snacks to be prepared at horne and brought to school to be shared with classmates, and invited parents to class luncheons and tasting parties.

Evaluation To determine the effectiveness of the pro­gram, we monitored changes in both stu­dent behavior and teacher instructional behavior . This was accomplished through pre- and post-intervention stu­dent testing, and pre- and postinterven­tion teacher surveys. The teacher surveys were designed to determine 1) the extent to which community resources were uti­lized, 2) the amount of classroom time spent on nutrition education, 3) the num­ber of supplemental materials used, and 4) the estimated amount of parent partici­pation in nutrition activities.

We pre- and posttested students of par­ticipating teachers to determine their level of nutrition knowledge. The pre­and posttests were developed and stan­dardized by the developers of Project

HAND, and the use of these tests was re­quired as part of the replication project.

Outcomes Comparison of pre- and postintervention teacher surveys indicated that participat­ing teachers greatly increased their use of community resources and more than doubled both the variety of supplemental materials used and the average amount of instructional hours devoted to nutrition education. Parent participation also in­creased from an estimated 4% to 50%. And comparisons of pre- and postinter­vention nutrition knowledge scores of students of participating teachers indi­cated significant (p :s .05) increases in students' scores in all grades except grade six.

Conclusion This program had three important facets: 1) it provided teachers with in-service training, 2) it prOVided them with funds for food purchases, and 3) it brought to­gether a team to facilitate school-based nutrition education through exchange of ideas and problem-solving techniques. Participating teachers accomplished the program goals of increasing the amount of class time they spent on nutrition edu­cation, increasing parent involvement in the program, and using a greater variety of teaching materials and community re­sources in their instruction.

Acknowledgments This study was made possible through funds provided by an Elementary and Secondary Education Act Title IV-C Grant from the state of New York, and through the cooperation of staff and ad­ministration of the Greenville Central School.

Note Project HAND was developed by Louise Cardose and Nancy Roberts of the Dela­ware-Chenango Board of Cooperative Ed­ucational Services, Chenango Center, R.D. 3, East River Road, Norwich, New York 13815.

Elementary school teachers at in-service workshop

JOURNAL OF NUTRITION EDUCATION 18:74D, 1986