Comparing the effectiveness of delivery style in produce safety training for growers

Author:

Enderton Arlene1ORCID,Johnsen Ellen2,Shaw Angela3,Deering Amanda4,Omolo Morrine5

Affiliation:

1. Farm, Food and Enterprise Development Iowa State University Extension and Outreach Ames Iowa USA

2. Department of Food Science and Human Nutrition Iowa State University Ames Iowa USA

3. Department of Animal and Food Sciences Texas Tech University Lubbock Texas USA

4. Department of Food Science Purdue University West Lafayette Indiana USA

5. JonnyPops LLC. Elk River Minnesota USA

Abstract

The Produce Safety Alliance grower training has been offered since 2016. Prior to the pandemic, the course was offered exclusively in‐person. During the pandemic, trainers were allowed to offer the course remotely. The effectiveness of in‐person and remote delivery options was compared utilizing four methods: course evaluations completed at the training; a pre‐ and post‐training knowledge assessment; a 1‐year follow‐up survey; and focus groups with course trainers. All methods, except the focus groups, were used as evaluation tools starting before and continuing during the pandemic. On the course evaluations, remote delivery and in‐person participants rated their satisfaction with the training and their confidence in their ability to make changes at the same high rate. The knowledge assessment found remote delivery participants scored higher on the posttest than in‐person participants when controlling for pretest score (p < 0.001); the effect size was between low and medium (ηp= 0.025). On the follow‐up survey, remote delivery participants reported making changes to food safety practices or infrastructure at a higher rate than in‐person participants (68% vs. 53%, respectively, Χ2 (1, N = 700) = 6.372, = 0.012, Cramer's V = 0.012 (very low)). There were demographic differences in educational level, job description, and number of years farming between the two populations. The focus group revealed advantages and disadvantages of both delivery methods, including internet availability, engagement activity, and course logistics and planning. Because no practical differences in outcome were measured between delivery methods and each had unique strengths, researchers recommend that educators should utilize both methods in the future.Practical Application1. When deciding between offering in‐person or synchronous virtual training, trainers can feel confident that both delivery methods result in positive experiences from participants, learning, and behavior change. 2. PSA trainers may choose to offer the training remotely to increase accessibility for people who live in areas where there may not be enough growers to warrant holding an in‐person training nearby, but should also consider that reliable high‐speed internet access may not be available to all. 3. Remote delivery trainings can be smoother by hosting remote delivery participants at local extension or other partner offices where high‐speed internet is available.

Publisher

Wiley

Reference23 articles.

1. Bihn E. Wall G. Acuña‐Maldonado L. Fisk C. Humiston M. Pahl D. Stoeckel D. Way R. &Woods K.(2019).Produce Safety Alliance National Curriculum. Version 1.2Produce Safety Alliance Cornell University.

2. Evaluation and application of andragogical assumptions to the adult online learning environment;Blondy L. C.;Journal of Interactive Online Learning,2007

3. Remote PSA grower training delivery policy: Lessons learned and recommendations for future courses;Bugingo C.;Produce Safety Alliance,2023

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3