International Journal of Food Studies IJFS October 2012 Volume 1 pages 114–125

Challenges in Food Scientist Training in a global setting

ANDREAS HOHLa, GERHARD SCHLEININGa*, CHARLOTTEHOCHGATTERERa, WOLFGANG KNEIFELa, VELITCHKA GOTCHEVAb,

ANGEL ANGELOVb, SIAN ASTLEYc, and MARIA SAARELAd

a University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Vienna, Department of Food Science and Technology,Muthgasse 18, A-1190 Vienna, Austria

b Department of Biotechnology, University of Food Technologies, Plovdiv, Bulgariac Institute of Food Research, Norwich, UK

d Department of Biotechnology, VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, Espoo, Finland*Corresponding author

gerhard.schleining@boku.ac.atTel: +43 1 47654 6294Fax: +43 1 47654 6293

Received: 20 January 2012; Published online: 18 October 2012Invited paper from the 2nd International ISEKI Food Conference 2011

Abstract

Education and training were an integral part of the MoniQA Network of Excellence. Embedded inthe “Spreading of excellence programme”, Work Package 9 (Joint education programmes and trainingtools) was responsible for establishing a joint training programme for food safety and quality withinand beyond the network. So-called ‘MoniQA Food Scientist Training’ (MoniQA FST) was offered toprovide technical knowledge on different levels and research management skills as well. Training needsfor different regions as well as for different target groups (scientists, industry personnel, authorities) hadto be considered as well as developing strong collaboration links between network partners and relatedprojects. Beside face-to-face workshops e-learning modules have been developed and web seminars wereorganized. In order to achieve high quality training, a quality assurance concept has been implemented.It turned out that these types of training are of high value in terms of bringing together scientists fromdifferent regions and cultures of the globe, involving highly qualified trainers as basis for a sustainablenetwork in the future.

Keywords: training, continuous professional development, food safety

Copyright ©2012 ISEKI-Food Association (IFA) 10.7455/ijfs/1.2.2012.a2

114 Hohl et.al.

Nomenclature

AOCS American oil chemists’ societyBOKU University of natural resources and life sciences, ViennaBRC British retail consortiumBSE Bovine spongiform encephalopathyENQ A European network for quality assurance in higher educationeFST E-learning based food scientist trainingEU European unionFP 6 Sixth framework programmeFP 7 Seventh framework programmeFST Food scientist trainingGMO Genetically modified organismHACCP Hazard analysis and critical control pointsIAM Inter agency meetingIFS International food standardIPR Intellectual property rightsISO International organization for standardizationMoniQA Monitoring and quality assuranceNoE Network of excellenceQA Quality assurancePDF Portable document formatWP Work Package

1 Introduction

The MoniQA (Monitoring and quality assur-ance) Network of Excellence (NoE) entitled “To-wards the harmonization of analytical methodsfor monitoring food quality and safety in thefood supply chain” was funded by the EuropeanCommission within the Sixth Framework pro-gramme Topic T5.4.5.1: Quality and safety con-trol strategies for food (NoE). The overall aim ofthe project was to harmonize food quality andsafety monitoring and control strategies in thefood supply chain on a global scale. The interna-tional scope of MoniQA was also reflected by thecore consortium which brings together 33 organi-zations from Europe, Africa, Middle East, Asiaand New Zealand. In total, about 150 researchersfrom 20 countries collaborate within the MoniQANoE. Financial support by the European com-mission amounts to e12.3 million. The projectwas carried out between February 2007 and Jan-uary 2012. As a Network of Excellence, MoniQAseeks to achieve durable existence also beyondthe time of EU funding in form of a non-profitassociation (MoniQA, 2007a).The joint programme of activities of the MoniQA

NoE was organized in 10 work packages whichwere clustered into 4 major programmes (Inte-gration, Joint Research, Spreading of excellence,Management). With respect to the large scopeof the project, its international attitudes and theaim to establish a durable network, integration ofand cooperation with related stakeholders playedan important role. Figure 1 provides an overviewon the internal project structure and stakeholderrelations (MoniQA, 2007a).The programme “Integration Activities” aimedto overcome the worldwide fragmentation in foodquality and safety research. Involved work pack-ages 1-3 sought to create expertise clusters, vir-tual laboratories and a durable research net-work by coordinated and joint use of person-nel, know-how and infrastructure. MoniQA de-veloped an internal bursary scheme and a mo-bility programme in order to overcome financialobstacles and legal barriers, fostering scientificexchange among different nations and also con-tinents. The mobility and bursary programmeswere accessible for scientists working for govern-mental and private research institutes as well asfor staff employed in industry. These efforts also

IJFS October 2012 Volume 1 pages 114–125

Food Scientist Training 115

Figure 1: Structure of the MoniQA NoE (MoniQA, 2007a)

underpinned MoniQA’s ambition to seek harmo-nized strategies also among the different groupsof stakeholders (MoniQA, 2007a, 2007b).Recent food crises like the BSE or Dioxin crisis,the GMO debate, use of new technologies (Nan-otechnology) in food production and a globalizedfood market have upset EU citizens regardingthe quality and safety of domestic and importedfoods. As stated by the European commissionin its White Paper on Food Safety (EC, 2000),“the European Union needs to re-establish pub-lic confidence in its food supply, its food science,its food law and its food control”. Adaptationsin EU law (Hygiene Package) which are manda-tory to all food operators were made in order toachieve better hygiene and traceability through-out the food chain and to clearly define the re-sponsibilities of food business operators (Hill B.2010). In order to comply with this tightenedlegal framework, the demand for sophisticateddetection methods and techniques is rising. Al-though a large variety of adequate methods andapplications are available in principle, a lot ofthem are not accepted due to insecurities andlack of information in terms of method perfor-mance. Hence different national and interna-tional standardization organizations set up qual-itative and quantitative validation protocols toprove that the method under investigation shows

performance characteristics as good or better asthose of the referring standard method. However,discrepancies among validation protocols lead toconcerns regarding the significance of results ob-tained. MoniQA’s Joint Research Programmepays special attention to that bottleneck by firstcritically analysing the current situation (needsof methods, lack of methods, high throughputmethods, etc.) and subsequently by working outstrategies for common harmonization, validationand implementation of new/advanced detectionsystems (MoniQA, 2007a, 2007c).Training in the area of food safety, offered withinand beyond the consortium, was an integralpart of the network and considered as one ofthe key activities to facilitate knowledge shar-ing and learning culture within the network andto achieve harmonized levels of knowledge andskills. Embedded in the “Spreading of Excel-lence” programme, WP 9 – “Joint EducationProgrammes and Training Tools” was respon-sible to overcome gaps in knowledge by offer-ing a set of closely related international trainingcourses within and beyond the network.

2 Materials and Methods

In order to provide technical knowledge on differ-ent levels and research management skills for dif-

IJFS October 2012 Volume 1 pages 114–125

116 Hohl et.al.

ferent regions and for different target groups (sci-entists, industry personnel, authorities) methodslike face-to-face workshops, e-learning and webseminars have been used. In order to achieve highquality training, a quality assurance concept hasbeen implemented.

2.1 Collecting information

The work on MoniQA’s training concept startedwith a detailed analysis of the project internalstatus quo which was achieved by several ap-proaches in parallel. Most notably, a list of al-ready existing training courses at partner orga-nizations was established by means of an onlinequestionnaire. Every project partner receivedan invitation to submit information on avail-able courses, content, supporting teaching mate-rial, teaching language, duration, teaching meth-ods, teaching facilities and examination modedirectly online. All entered information wasautomatically transferred into a beforehand setup database for further processing and analysis(MoniQA, 2008a).Besides the survey on existing courses, 2 otherMoniQA internal databases have been used toset up the training concept. A database com-bining information of every partner organiza-tion on its applied methods, available equipment,and research facilities was used to find appro-priate training sites (MoniQA, 2009a). And fi-nally, the MoniQA expert database which sum-marized skills, interests and training needs ofevery MoniQA expert was a useful source toidentify possible training topics and appropriatetrainers.MoniQA worked towards a durable internationaltraining programme. Hence, besides the internaltraining survey, a proper assessment on the exter-nal training situation with regard to food safetywas necessary not only to avoid overlaps with al-ready existing training, but also to identify possi-ble collaborators who eventually could cover ex-pertise which might not be available within theconsortium. For this purpose, data was collectedby means of a two-part excel based questionnairein every country participating in the MoniQANoE. The first part asked for any kind of organ-isations offering training related to food safety

and quality in the surveyed country. The sec-ond part was meant to list relevant courses ofall organizations defined under part one and togather basic information on content and terms ofteaching (MoniQA, 2009b).

2.2 Face to Face Workshops

MoniQA Food Scientist Training courses(MoniQA FST) were organized as face to facetraining sessions, often combining theoreticaltraining with practical exercises. In accordancewith the defined training needs and hence withthe training concept, research managementskills trainings were offered along with selectedtechnical training courses. The usual duration ofMoniQA FST courses was between 1 and 5 days.Participants were asked for their anonymousfeedback in terms of content, quality of teachingmaterial, trainers and overall organization ofthe training. A certificate was awarded to everyparticipant at the end of the workshop.The centrally planned annual updated trainingplan envisaged to offer around 10 MoniQA FSTsevery year, equally distributed in Europe andAsia. Attached to selected MoniQA FSTs, atleast 4 research management training courseswere held every year. All workshops have beenorganized in a combined effort of the overalltraining coordinator (BOKU) and the localhost. The local organizer was responsible todeliver a draft budget, an agenda and had toorganize on site accommodation and conferenceand laboratory facilities needed during the work-shop. Once the budget and the agenda met therequirements of MoniQA, the training admin-istrator gave permission to the local organizerto implement the workshop and disseminationwas started on the national and internationallevel. Registration and recovery of workshopfees was administered centrally by the train-ing administrator. Only in exceptional cases,cash payment on site was possible. At someoccasions, MoniQA FSTs have been organizedin cooperation with related EU projects likeHealthGrain (http://www.healthgrain.org/)or MycoRed (http://www.mycored.eu/)or with organizations like AOCS/IAM(http://www.aocs.org/Methods/content.cfm

IJFS October 2012 Volume 1 pages 114–125

Food Scientist Training 117

?ItemNumber=2050). In such cases, the finan-cial load was shared between the two organizersand dissemination was done using the distri-bution channels of both networks. In return,experts from both organizations benefited fromfree registration.

2.3 E-learning

One benefit of the MoniQA NoE was the globalpool of experts, enabling the consortium to de-liver training in a great variety of topics allaround the world. However, such an internation-alized training approach required a great dealin time and money for trainers and trainees.In order to address these difficulties, MoniQAstarted to implement e-Learning. The opensource teaching platform “Moodle” was selecteddue to its relative high use in academic institu-tions. MoniQA’s adapted e-Learning platformfeatured password protected access and was splitinto an introductory section and an actual train-ing section.The introductory section was meant to assistinexperienced trainers and trainees by a set ofguidelines, course templates and forums. As asupportive measurement face to face workshopson the proper use of “Moodle” were offered onetime in Europe (Vienna, Austria) and two timesin Asia (Hanoi, Vietnam and Chengdu, China).The ulterior motive of these training courses wasto overcome knowledge wise barriers and to kickstart the e-Learning programme by explainingthe principles of e-Learning and by highlightingand explaining possibilities and functional princi-ples of the Moodle system in form of case studies(MoniQA, 2010a).The second part of the platform, the training sec-tion, contains all MoniQA e-Learning courses.MoniQA e-Learning courses are open to every-one, although MoniQA associated partners andexternal organizations have to pay a small fee.Each course featured self study material, selftests and forums. The overall maintenance ofthe platform, technical support and registrationsare handled centrally by the e-learning coordina-tor (BOKU). Content, tasks and communicationwith students during the course was within theresponsibility of the MoniQA partner organiza-

tion that created the course. IPR on the trainingcontent and materials stayed with the course cre-ator (MoniQA, 2010a).Trainees participating in any of these eFSTs have2 months to complete the course, starting fromthe day of enrolment. During the course, stu-dents were able to access the training materialanytime and anywhere via web browsers. Everycourse has 1 person for content-related problemsand one person for technical problems who couldbe contacted by the participants via forums oremail. Once the trainees accomplished all tasksset by the trainer, they were awarded a certifi-cate.

2.4 Web Seminars

In order to run web seminars, several systemshave been tested. The selected web seminarlicence (CITRIX, UK, www.gotomeeting.co.uk)enabled the consortium to offer web seminarsto 100 participants at a time. Technically, aMoniQA web seminar was conducted by audiostreaming, video streaming and desktop sharing.Questions to the speaker were addressed via au-dio connection (the use of a headset was recom-mended) or written in a chat box. At the end ofa web seminar online feedback from participantswas collected anonymous by an online evaluation.The presenter of a web seminar only had to pre-pare a power point presentation and to performa test run with the system a few days before theweb seminar. Registration, dissemination andtechnical support was within the responsibility ofthe training administrator. Potential presenterswere asked to submit an application form withinformation about the topic, the presenter, dateand time, etc. in order to schedule and advertisethe web seminar mainly by email and newslet-ters.A workflow was elaborated as an agenda for car-rying out the web seminar. An administratorintroduced the agenda and explained how partic-ipants can ask questions. After introducing thetopic and the presenter, the control was given tothe presenter. The presenter opened his presen-tation on her/his computer and shared the screenwith the participants. Further discussions wereenabled by raising a virtual hand, asking for the

IJFS October 2012 Volume 1 pages 114–125

118 Hohl et.al.

microphone, which could be switched on and offfor each attendee.

2.5 Bursary Scheme

The MoniQA Exchange and Mobility Pro-gramme was developed in order to overcome oneof the major drawbacks in international train-ing – money. It was expected that exchangeof staff within the consortium and attendanceof MoniQA partners in MoniQA FSTs will sub-stantially influence the extent of knowledge ex-change within the consortium. Funding person-nel exchange and financial support for attendingconferences are benefits often available for seniorstaff only. MoniQA on the opposite provided fi-nancial support also to junior staff and PhD stu-dents.Funding was eligible for attending MoniQA con-ferences, MoniQA training, personnel exchangeamong partner organizations and in certaincases, attendance at external conferences hasbeen supported. Applications for bursaries, in-cluding a short statement why the applicant per-sonally but also the involved organizations willbenefit, had to be submitted to the Mobility andExchange coordinator who awarded the bursarieson a competitive basis. Two types of bursarieswere available. The full bursary covered all costs,whereas travel bursaries only covered travel ex-penses and course fees. In terms of full bursaries,the whole amount was only paid off if the ben-eficiary submitted a training report (MoniQA,2009c).

2.6 Quality Assurance for training

The developed Quality Assurance (QA) concepthas principally taken into consideration the Eu-ropean context and demands, and is based on theinternationally developing processes and experi-ence in this area. Therefore, the developmentof the QA concept is based mainly on the Eu-ropean practice, which has taken into accountthe key international experiences and initiatives,and more specifically, the standards and guide-lines developed by ENQA, which are also in linewith the principles of quality management of ISO9001 (2008). The main basic principles of this

concept are customer focus, leadership, involve-ment of people, process approach and continualimprovement. The ENQA standards and the cri-teria for quality assessment of MoniQA trainingare listed in Table 1 (ISO 9001, 2008; ENQA,2009; MoniQA, 2012a).

3 Results and Discussion

Training needs for different regions as well asfor different target groups (scientists, indus-try personnel, authorities) had to be consid-ered as well as developing strong collabora-tion links between network partners and re-lated projects. So-called ‘MoniQA Food ScientistTraining’ (MoniQA FST) was offered, which pro-vides technical knowledge on different levels andresearch management skills as well. Beside face-to-face workshops e-learning modules have beendeveloped and web seminars were organized. Inorder to achieve high quality training, a qualityassurance concept has been implemented.

3.1 Training needs

In accordance with the overall aims of MoniQA,the training concept was expected to overcomelegal, time-wise, linguistic and financial barriersand to consider training needs and gaps of differ-ent regions and different target groups. MoniQAaimed at delivering tailor made training to sev-eral different target groups (industry, research),at different levels (senior staff, junior staff) whichreflects local needs as well as personnel needs andwhich finally is easily accessible. An overview onidentified training needs is given in Table 2.Hence, the selected approach was a module basedtraining concept, made up of several short termcourses (1-5 days), E-learning and web semi-nars, which was flexible enough to consider abovementioned aspects and also enabled the consor-tium to offer training related to recent events(food crises, new legislation, etc.) within a rel-ative short time. Knowledge gaps within thenetwork were addressed by first defining exist-ing knowledge and training needs at each part-ner institution and then selecting topics, train-ers and destinations for training courses. Sup-ported by the mobility and bursary schemes and

IJFS October 2012 Volume 1 pages 114–125

Food Scientist Training 119

Table 1: ENQA standards and the criteria for Quality Assurance of MoniQA training (ENQA, 2009;MoniQA, 2012a)

ENQA StandardMoniQA principle Contents MoniQA criteria1.Policy and proce-dures for quality as-surance

Policy and associated procedures forthe assurance of the quality of MoniQAFST (workshops, courses)

The consortium organises and carries outtraining in accordance to its goals and ob-jectives.

Interactions consortium members. The consortium supports training activi-ties of its member organisations.MoniQA disseminates training opportuni-ties and implements novelty research re-sults in its courses.MoniQA QA group develops an internalsystem for evaluation, maintenance andimprovement of FST quality.

Strategy and policy for the continu-ous enhancement of quality. The strat-egy, policy and procedures should havea formal status and be publicly avail-able. They should also include a rolefor trainees and other stakeholders.

The consortium publicly presents its mis-sion, policy and strategy.

2.Approval, moni-toring and periodicreview of trainingcourses

MoniQA should have formal mecha-nisms for the approval, periodic reviewand monitoring of workshops and train-ing courses offered.

MoniQA QA group elaborates and ob-serves procedures for development, ap-proval, monitoring and improving of FST.

3.Assessment oftrainees

Trainees should be assessed using pub-lished procedures which are appliedconsistently.

The QA group develops and publishesprocedures for the assessment of trainee’sknowledge and skills acquired fromMoniQA training.

4.Quality assuranceof teaching staff

MoniQA should have ways of ensuringthat staff involved in the FST is quali-fied and competent to do so.

The consortium ensures the professionallevel, qualification and development of itstrainers.The consortium collaborates with non-MoniQA organizations when necessary.

5.Learning re-sources and traineesupport

MoniQA should ensure that the re-sources available for the training activ-ities are adequate and appropriate foreach course offered.

Each training organisation manages anddevelops the infrastructure, technical andinformation resources necessary for carry-ing out the suggested course(s).The training organisations may collaboratewith other universities and organisations.MoniQA attracts trainees and aids theirprofessional realizationThe consortium disseminates training op-portunities.

6.Information sys-tems

MoniQA should collect, analyse anduse relevant information for the effec-tive management of its FST.

The QA group has elaborated adequateorganization for management of MoniQAFST.

7.Public informa-tion

MoniQA should regularly publish upto date information, both quantita-tive and qualitative, about the trainingcourses offered.

The consortium actively promotes trainingopportunities offered and disseminates rel-evant information.

IJFS October 2012 Volume 1 pages 114–125

120 Hohl et.al.

Table 2: Training needs in three MoniQA relevant regions. +..No/minor needs, ++..needs, +++..majorneeds.

Region: China, Vietnam, EU members Egypt, TurkeyIndonesia

Type of trainingFace to face + + +e-learning +++ ++ +++Web seminars +++ +++ +++Short term courses +++ +++ +++International courses in English +++ ++ +++

Target GroupsCourses for industry +++ ++ ++Courses for academia ++ ++ ++

ContentResearch management skills +++ +++ +++Food quality / Food safety +++ + ++Food chemistry ++ ++ ++Food microbiology/molecular biology ++ ++ ++Food technology + + +

in combination with E-learning and web semi-nars, the MoniQA training programme success-fully overcame training barriers and facilitatedknowledge transfer among the continents and dif-ferent stakeholders.It is generally accepted that many European re-searchers are still lagging behind in soft skills,which are generally under-emphasized in mostof the curricula. Research Management includesscientific communication skills such as scientificwriting, designing and presenting posters andflyers, presentation skills, proposal preparation,management of research projects, research bud-get planning and administration. Therefore itwas decided to offer research management train-ing courses within the network to improve thegeneral skills set of the researchers. It is alsoplanned to extend the portfolio of research man-agement skills and to consider IPR, EU policymaking and socio-economic aspects.

3.2 What is available within theNoE

All courses were first grouped according to theirsubject and then those not really related to thescope of MoniQA (Food Safety, Food Quality)have been ruled out. Content-wise, most aspectsof food safety and some quality aspects were cov-ered. The majority of courses were focused onfood technology and food chemistry, but coursesin hygiene, microbiology, economy, legislation,molecular biology and nutrition were also carriedout (Figure 2).In depth analysis of the remaining courses madeit evident that only a low number of the courseswould comply with the needs of the envisagedtraining concept. First of all, most of the courseswere University courses and ran as long termcourses, lasting several weeks to months with-out any support of E-learning or digital teach-ing materials. On the other hand, only 13% ofthe courses were offered completely in Englishlanguage, 28% as a combination of English andnational language and the majority of courses(46%) were available in national language only.

IJFS October 2012 Volume 1 pages 114–125

Food Scientist Training 121

The most common teaching method is face toface, followed by practical trainings, seminarsand group works (MoniQA, 2008b). E-Learningplays just a minor role so far, but would be ofgreat interest for offering education on an inter-national level in the future. Figure 3 depicts thedifferent teaching methods and to what extentthey are used by consortium partner.

Figure 2: Areas and numbers of training coursesavailable within the MoniQA NoE (MoniQA,2008b). CH..Chemistry, EC..Economy, HY..Hygiene,LE..Legislation, MI..Microbiology, MO..Molecular biol-ogy, NU..Nutrition, TE..Technology, OT..Other.

Figure 3: Extent of teaching methods used by thepartners of the MoniQA NoE (MoniQA, 2008b)FTF..Face to face, GW..Group work, SE..Seminars,PC..Practical class, EL..e-learning.

3.3 What training is offeredbeyond the NoE

Collected information was analyzed and fed intothe database containing already information oninternal training. Valid data was available fromAustria, Belgium, Bulgaria, China, Egypt, Ger-many, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Spain, Turkey andVietnam. With the exception of Vietnam, inall countries most of the external training wasabout food safety in the broadest sense. Espe-cially principles and implementation of HACCPand quality standards such as ISO, IFS and BRCwere among the most common topics. A con-siderable number of courses were also offered inthe areas of food chemistry, food microbiologyand food technology. In line with findings drawnfrom the survey on internal courses, the numberof research management skill courses was againvery low – only 2% of all courses. Relative andabsolute comparison of the teaching languageswas not appropriate, as the number of submit-ted courses varied among the different countries.But it was evident that most of the courses wereoffered in the national language. The vast major-ity of the evaluated courses were offered as shortterm courses, lasting between 1 and 5 days.Upon completion, the combined database on in-ternal and external training offered informationon a little more than 300 internal and 800 ex-ternal courses plus the providing organizations.Figure 4 shows the used training resources withinand beyond MoniQA.

3.4 Development of a trainingconcept

After analyzing the training needs (3.1) and whatis available within (3.2) and beyond the network(3.3), the following topics have been selected forface to face workshops and e-learning courses:food microbiology, food chemistry, food authen-ticity, molecular biology, food safety, HACCP,hygienic design, cleaning and cleaning validation,quality assurance, project management and sci-entific communication.For course organizers and content providers stan-dard operation procedures (SOPs), applicationforms, templates to calculate the budget and for

IJFS October 2012 Volume 1 pages 114–125

122 Hohl et.al.

Figure 4: Used training resources within and beyond MoniQA.

power point presentations as well as for an e-learning course have been developed and madeavailable for download. In addition, guidelineson how to use the e-learning platform have beenmade available.

3.5 Face to Face Workshops

The first MoniQA FST was offered in Novem-ber 2007. Till July 2011, 39 MoniQA FSTshave been offered in 12 countries (Austria, Bul-garia, China, Czech Republic, Hungary, In-donesia, Italy, Malaysia, New Zealand, Turkey,United Kingdom and Vietnam) and deliveredknowledge to an audience composed of 26 differ-ent nationalities in total. At 12 workshop oc-casions research management training was at-tached. Content-wise, priority was given tochemical contaminants (heavy metals, polychlo-rinated biphenyls, pesticides), microbiologicalmethods (rapid alternative methods, PCR), al-lergens (Analysis, risk assessment) and Mycotox-ins (safe food trade, Fusarium toxins in cereal,Mycotoxins in fruits), food authenticity, refer-ence materials and method validation. Furthertopics covered within the training programme

were dealing with socio economic impacts of foodregulations, hygienic design, cleaning, cleaningvalidation, shelf life determination, food index-ing, HACCP and risk management. In termsof research management training, the focus wason communication, project development, projectmanagement and e-Learning.

3.6 E-learning

At the end of the project, the MoniQA e-Learning programme comprised five fully func-tional e-Learning courses developed by Austrian,Italian and Indonesian organizations. Languagebarriers have been addressed by multilingual ap-proaches. For example, one course is availablein seven languages (English, Italian, Bulgarian,Hungarian, Turkish, Arabic, and Vietnamese).For the design of a course and also to reach po-tential users, it turned out that the proper for-mulation of learning outcomes – what the partic-ipants will know and are able to do after comple-tion of a course – was extremely important andhelpful.During the development of a course the availabil-ity of many experts from the network for eval-

IJFS October 2012 Volume 1 pages 114–125

Food Scientist Training 123

uation and for contributions could assure high-quality content. E-content was mainly providedas pdf files, generated from powerpoints, in orderto avoid incompatibilities. With pdf as formatthe participants do not need to have a licence forthe different programmes with which the mate-rial was created. As E-tivities, discussion forumswere mainly used to assign tasks and collect re-ports. For self assessment and the final examquizzes were used (Salmon, G. 2002).During an internal evaluation phase, technicalproblems occurred due to limited bandwidths inAsian countries and due to different browser set-tings. Several browsers have been checked as towhat extent they cause troubles with differentMoodle features.E-learning could also be used to support Faceto Face Workshops by providing study material,to prepare the workshop and to support fur-ther discussions and activities of the participantsand to involve people from other countries. Thecourses can also be used for blended learning,which means that interactive parts are moder-ated by trainers within predefined timeslots andcombined with face-to-face workshops.

3.7 Web Seminars

Web seminars were the most flexible tool withinthe training concept. They can be prepared ina relative short time and at low cost, still facili-tating live communication between presenter andattendees. Thus, web seminars have been usedwhenever training had to be developed within ashort time - for instance in the aftermath of asudden food crisis like the Austrian Listeria casein 2009/2010 (MoniQA, 2012b).

3.8 Quality Assurance

Standard operating procedures (SOP’s) andforms have been prepared to carry out and docu-ment the quality assurance of training. The man-agement structure and responsibilities as well asthe pricing policy have to be specified. It waswritten down how to make an annual plan, howto design and develop a course, how to adver-tise, how to carry out a course, how to assess theparticipants and how to improve the quality as-

surance itself.In a first step to implement above listed proce-dures, the responsibilities within the task forcehave been identified. The training coordinatorwas in charge of the overall coordination of ac-tivities and had to prepare the annual trainingplan, considering training needs and make surethat the finances comply with the budget allo-cated by the financial manager. According to theSOPs´, the training coordinator sent the annualdraft training plan to all task force members andsubsequently reviewed and incorporated partnerviews. The adapted annual plan was then dis-cussed with the financial management and thetotal annual budget reserved for training was al-located. In terms of new training courses, a plan-ning team supervised the course development.Dissemination was performed under the aegis ofthe training coordinator and the training dissem-ination manager with support from the organiz-ers on site. A common pricing policy was de-fined by the training coordinator in cooperationwith financial manager and all task force mem-bers (MoniQA, 2012a). After the training coor-dinator gave the final permission, the realizationteam, consisting of local organizer, coordinatorand dissemination manager, started with the im-plementation of the training.At the end of every MoniQA branded trainingcourse, the realization team had to perform anevaluation of the training based on participantfeedback. A summarized evaluation of all train-ing courses offered between February 2011 andJanuary 2012 is depicted in Table 3.

3.9 Problems encountered

The development of MoniQA training relied to alarge extent on the information gathered by theconsortium. Huge efforts have been made in thefirst round to set up the database on internal andexternal training and to establish rules dedicatedto maintain and update the data. However, theserules proved to be insufficient and impracticablefor the simple reason that man months were re-allocated to other tasks and hence partners hadonly limited resources left to maintain the data.Especially important for selecting meaningfultraining topics was the expert database which

IJFS October 2012 Volume 1 pages 114–125

124 Hohl et.al.

Table 3: Summarized feedback obtained by MoniQA training participants between February 2011 andJanuary 2012.

Very Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Very Totalsatisfied dissatisfied

Overall quality of the event 150 61 3 0 0 214Scope of information presented 139 70 5 0 0 214Usefulness of the information 138 68 8 0 0 214Overall quality of the presentations 134 74 6 0 0 214Supporting resource materials 131 69 13 1 0 214Time allocated for networking 126 69 19 0 0 214Amount of time dedicated to dis-cussions in groups

116 76 21 1 0 214

Meetings’ overall value in helpingyou improve your professional ef-fectiveness

129 68 17 0 0 214

The number of participants 121 70 21 2 0 214The workshop formula (e.g. twohalf days)

116 84 14 0 0 214

Did the workshop cover what youexpected it to cover?

126 74 12 1 0 213

Total 1426 783 139 5 0 2353

summarized needs of MoniQA experts. Again,the quality and integrity of information was notas good as expected because experts showed onlylittle ambition in completing the requested data.Another problem was the discrepancy betweensmall registration fees (resulting in lower finan-cial income) and great travel costs for some train-ing in Asia, when European experts were amongthe key speakers. Besides the financial aspect,finding appropriate trainers sometimes came togrief due to lack of time and interest of experts inpreparing for and traveling to training. Althoughmasked by the mobility scheme, the fact that es-pecially younger experts simply could not affordattending training abroad without support fromMoniQA could not be solved. International faceto face training is only available at certain costfor the participant.Sometimes one workshop attracted people fromseveral different countries. Although all of thembelonged to the same target group, huge differ-ences in terms of pre-knowledge was observableand hence some participants were always under-challenged, and others were over-challenged. Be-sides a lack in technological skills, sometimes lan-guage barriers hampered the success of training.Organizational problems were mainly budget re-lated due to unreasonable budgets and/or differ-ent opinions on registration fees. Minor problems

arose from technical (internet access) or cultural(prayer rooms, special dishes) issues.

4 Conclusions

A global training network depends very much onthe local support and because of different needsand different cultures it is very important to havewritten procedures and to communicate this toall concerned people. Especially the specificationof learning outcomes was very important for thetrainers to develop courses and for the partici-pants to find the appropriate course. The choiceof appropriate technologies is also very impor-tant. For example the multilingual user inter-face of the e-learning platform was very helpful.The implementation of a Quality Assurance sys-tem was difficult in terms of convincing all thepartners to follow the rules and to complete theforms. But this will be very helpful to maintainthe quality in future.The training activities carried out were of highvalue in terms of bringing together scientists fromdifferent regions and cultures of the globe, in-volving highly qualified trainers as basis for asustainable network in the future. Difficulties infinancing travelling costs have been encountered,but this can be balanced by the use of e-learningand web seminars. The communication among

IJFS October 2012 Volume 1 pages 114–125

Food Scientist Training 125

people from different cultures and the use of theinternet and of different electronic systems posessome limitations, which sometimes need innova-tive solutions. As also other networks are car-rying out training, a future challenge is to joinforces, at least for activities like e-learning andweb seminars.In conclusion it can be stated, that the networkwas a driver for enhanced collaboration amongpartner organizations. Two partners for exam-ple, a University from Austria and a Universityfrom Vietnam, currently are in the preparatoryphase of a new joint curricula in food safety.After 5 years of MoniQA training, the overallopinion on the programme is considered positive.Hence, it is expected that organizations whichhave been involved in the training programmeare eager to contribute to any training in future.This increased ambition of several organizationsall around the world in training activities mightturn out as a durable impact.

Acknowledgements

FP6 project T5.4.5.1: Quality and safety controlstrategies for food (NOE) “MoniQA” (ContractN0, FOOD-CT-2006-036337)

References

EC. (2000). White paper on food safety. Ac-cessed: January, 2012, Retrieved from http:/ / ec . europa . eu / dgs / health consumer /library/pub/pub06 en.pdf

ENQA. (2009). Standards and Guidelines forQuality Assurance in the European HigherEducation Area - 3rd editionRetrieved:January 19, 2012, ISBN 978-952-5539-24-0(PDF). Retrieved from http://www.enqa.eu/pubs esg.lasso

Hill B. (2010). The EU ”Hygiene Package”: itsorigins and implications for project coun-tries and species. Accessed: January, 2012,Retrieved from http://seatglobal.eu/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/8.-EU-hygiene-package-Barry-Hill.pdf

ISO 9001. (2008). Quality management systems- Requirements. International Organizationfor Standardization. CH-1211 Geneva 20,Switzerland.

MoniQA. (2009c). Bursaries - Eligibility and ap-plications. January, 2012, Retrieved fromhttp://www.moniqa.eu/node/888

MoniQA. (2009a). Deliverable 1.4 - Databaseof research infrastructure supplement withnew features. Internal progress report. Un-published.

MoniQA. (2008a). Deliverable 9.1 - Inventory ofeducation/Training courses and offering in-stitutions. Internal progress report, Unpub-lished.

MoniQA. (2012b). Deliverable 9.18 - Report on e-learning activities. Internal progress report,Unpublished.

MoniQA. (2008b). Deliverable 9.2 - Analysisof available courses and gaps. Internalprogress report. Unpublished.

MoniQA. (2012a). Deliverable 9.21 - Quality as-surance system for training is tested andimplemented. Internal progress report, Un-published.

MoniQA. (2009b). Deliverable 9.5 - Inventory ofexternal training courses and offering insti-tutions. Internal progress report, Unpub-lished.

MoniQA. (2010a). Deliverable 9.7 - Two e-learning courses are ready for testing. In-ternal progress report. Unpublished.

MoniQA. (2007a). EU funded project MoniQA- Towards the harmonisation of analyticalmethods for monitoring food quality andsafety in the food supply chain. January,2007, Retrieved from http://www.moniqa.eu / sites / moniqa . eu / files / pagefiles /MoniQA presentation.pdf

MoniQA. (2007c). MoniQA activities - Jointresreach. January, 2007, Retrieved fromhttp://www.moniqa.eu/node/228

MoniQA. (2007b). MoniQA activities - Work-ing together. January, 2007, Retrieved fromhttp://www.moniqa.eu/node/38

Salmon, G. (2002). E-tivities: the key to activeonline learning. Sterling, VA : Stylus Pub-lishing Inc.

IJFS October 2012 Volume 1 pages 114–125