Journal of Food Science Education最新文献

In October 2017, at a gathering of Flavor Industry professionals, I, along with a number of colleagues, expressed concern that the general public seems unaware that natural and artificial flavors, formulated with approved ingredients under conditions of intended use, are safe. Although the safety of flavors is assured by a large and effective safety program called the FEMA GRAS Program,1 administered by an independent panel of globally recognized experts, it is very likely that the general public is not aware of its existence. We speculated that this lack of awareness is due to several reasons. For one, the Flavor Industry does not sell its products directly to consumers. In addition, most people take for granted that flavors are safe. However, there certainly is a highly vocal but small percentage of the population that is circumspect about all food additives, including flavors.

Because flavors are used in processed foods in the same minute quantities as found in nature, they have never been at the forefront of safety concerns. For example, a single strawberry contains naturally-occurring flavor chemicals at parts per million levels and so does strawberry-flavored ice cream, often with the same flavor chemicals found in nature, thus replicating what consumers recognize as the flavor of a perfect strawberry picked at the peak of its maturity.

Due to the low use levels of flavor chemicals added to food, and their natural occurrence in food, in general, flavors are not considered a safety concern by authoritative regulatory bodies, such as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). However, consumers are often confronted with all kinds of inaccurate information about flavors that can be alarming and confusing.

Since most people are not chemists and were probably happy to end their formal chemistry education in high school, it is difficult to frame the complex topic of flavor safety in layman's terms. Merely saying that flavors are safe does not provide sufficient counterbalance to the information found on the Internet or espoused by vocal bloggers.

Shortly after the conversation with my colleagues, I decided to create a presentation on the History of the Safety of Flavor Ingredients and present it to students studying Food Science. This decision led to a three-month project for which I prepared by reading every reference I could find on this topic, some dating back to the 1950s. I composed a lengthy paper, but soon realized that it was too long to present in a 50-min class. There is no doubt in my mind that it is harder to write a short presentation than a long one! After many edits, I have honed it down to a 45-min interactive presentation that includes a helpful glossary of nomenclature used in the Flavor Industry. We also evaluate the aroma of samples of lemon oil, spearmint oil, citral and laevo carvone, as well as two identical raspberry flavors, one formulated with all-natural ingredients the other all-synthetic. The s

In Fall 2019, I get to start doing something I've wanted to do for a long time – teach a course to students solely focused on learning how to learn. The class is entitled “Learning How to Learn Boot Camp,” [a.k.a. LHtL Boot Camp]! I will be co-teaching this course with Dr. Debra S. Korte, Teaching Assistant Professor in the Agricultural Education Program. Debra and I have worked together on a number of scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) research projects and now we have the opportunity to work together to develop and teach the LHtL Boot Camp course!

For some time now, I have incorporated a number of learning how to learn strategies in the introductory food science and human nutrition course (FSHN 101) I teach, with an overall goal of helping first semester freshman get their college careers off to a running start. I plan to keep doing this, as many students over the years have told me how helpful these learning how to learn strategies have been for them, in my course as well as in the other courses they are taking. But I feel like there is so much more that needs to be done and so many more students that need to learn how to learn! Thus, we are very eager to make the LHtL Boot Camp course a reality, because we believe this course has the potential to transform students into life-long learners, if the students will put what they are learning about learning into practice. The “if” part of this statement is actually very, very important and is the focus of the middle part of this editorial.

In this editorial, I would like to share with you some of the influencers that have come together to make launching this course a reality, the critical importance of noncognitive skills1 when it comes to students putting what they are learning about learning into practice, and some starter recommendations of what all teachers can do to help their students more effectively and efficiently learn the course content they are teaching them.

As I have shared in some of my JFSE editorials, my view of educating students has slowly but radically changed over the more than 30 years that I have been a teacher. For many of those years, I believed the weight of both teaching and student learning rested squarely on my shoulders (Schmidt, 2014). In my mind, I was responsible for both teaching AND learning. Then something happened; an encounter that changed my thinking forever. While discussing teaching over coffee one day, a visiting professor from a developing country shared an observation with me: “Students in the U.S. have everything they need to learn, yet they don't seem eager to learn; while students in my country have minimal resources, yet they have a very strong desire to learn. Why is this?”, he asked. Though I have interacted with many U.S. students that were eager to learn, I knew there was a strong element of truth in his statement that I could not deny. We finished our conversation and w

For several decades, cognitive psychologists have been studying how we learn, and from this work it becomes possible to identify ways to help students learn in the classroom effectively. Importantly, this work does not just inform how to memorize facts, but also how to learn complex material in a way that allows students to apply what they are learning in future situations. The laboratory to classroom model used by many researchers to apply cognitive psychology to real educational situations, such as classroom learning and students’ independent studying, is described first. Then the focus turns to important issues within education, such as students’ ability to transfer knowledge to new situations and understand complex material. Finally, three learning strategies are discussed (concrete examples, elaborative interrogation, and retrieval practice) that instructors can implement to help students to both acquire knowledge and apply it to new situations, integrating examples from food science and nutrition.

The 2011 passage of the Food Safety Modernization Act requires managers to teach and verify that employees have learned and are engaged in science-based food safety behaviors. Instructors using embedded assessments such as clickers can receive immediate feedback on how well learners understand what is being taught, allowing instructors to provide immediate, additional clarification and motivation. The objectives of this study were to: design and implement embedded assessment learning activities for each lecture objective in a combined undergraduate/graduate-level, food chemistry course; measure students’ performance on three online examinations; and compare students’ performance on objectives reinforced by embedded assessment techniques against those objectives receiving traditional emphasis. For Exam 1, embedded assessment questions averaged 80.0% and traditional emphasis questions averaged 76.4%; for Exam 2, embedded assessment questions averaged 84.6% and traditional emphasis questions averaged 80.6%; and for Exam 3, embedded assessment questions averaged 85.9% and traditional emphasis questions averaged 73.7%. Pooling scores over all exams gave a grand mean of 83.6% for embedded assessment questions and 77.2% for traditional questions. As hypothesized, the average scores on questions reinforced by embedded assessment were considerably higher, 8.3% overall, with significantly (P < 0.05) higher scores. During lectures, students commented on the embedded assessments that then led to further discussion of any unclear points. When the class did poorly, operationalized as less than 80% correct, they petitioned to get a “do over” on the embedded assessment question after a clarifying discussion. Because the students became managers of their own learning, through embedded assessments, it is hoped that they will become more proficient instructors.

Problem-based learning using authentic material from the web was used to teach metabolism in a biochemistry course. In place of traditional lectures, students’ analyzed health or nutrition articles from newspapers and magazines, which were debatable from a scientific point of view, following the principles of problem-based learning. A mixed method was used to assess the students’ perception, use of sources of information and web services while performing the task, and changes in self-directed learning. Students’ perception was particularly positive. The majority stated that the methodology helped them to apply knowledge to real life and that they learned about the topic analyzed by their group. The perception that problem-based learning promotes the ability to solve problems, critical thinking, and collaborative work is noteworthy. Tutors considered that teams identified the problem and concluded correctly, noticing students’ enthusiasm and motivation. The methodology also promoted scientific reading. More importantly, a significant improvement in self-directed learning of the 2014 cohort was detected. This intervention suggests that this methodology is a valuable alternative to motive and promote self-learning; representing an opportunity to shift the focus of instruction from the teacher to the student. The design of the activity and materials are described in detail. Also, limitations and solutions are discussed.

High school students are a critical audience for food safety. Students may enter the foodservice industry or become primary meal preparers for their families. The positive deviance food safety curriculum was developed based on the messages from the Fight BAC! Campaign. The curriculum is designed for high school students to overcome barriers to safe food handling practices. This study evaluated the effectiveness of the positive deviance approach to change food safety knowledge and behaviors among high school students. Students (n = 218) from two high schools participated in this study. The positive deviance method uses group discussions lead by the teacher who reinforces and praises behaviors, which reflect recommended food handling practices. Measurements included pre- and postsurveys, preobservations and postobservation cooking classes, take-home tasks, and in-class activities. Results indicated that the curriculum significantly increased students’ food safety knowledge. Specifically, the percentage of students believing that color was a good indicator of meat doneness dropped from 52% to 17% after exposure to the curriculum. When observed, the students’ compliance with recommended behaviors increased. Prior to instruction, most ground beef burgers students cooked did not reach 160°F, while after the intervention, almost all of the burgers reached 160°F or higher. The curriculum will benefit from a revision that emphasizes areas such as how to use, calibrate, and to clean food thermometers.

Creating Significant Learning Experiences: An Integrated Approach to Designing College Courses. By L. Dee Fink. 2013. Jossey-Bass: Wiley. ISBN: 978-1-118-12425-3

What makes a book about education good? For me, it's when I continually catch myself staring into space after reading something in the book that causes me to image how I can use the information to improve my teaching or courses, or makes me reflect on what I've been doing as an instructor and how I can be more effective in helping students learn. This book prompted a number of “staring sessions,” and I'm really excited about using what I learned from it.

Creating Significant Learning Experiences by L. Dee Fink was a book I picked up from the library at the Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning while trying to figure out how to improve my online distance education courses. I wanted to figure out how to better integrate the course project into the course content so that the project could be a more effective teaching and learning tool for course concepts. And this book explains how to create the kind of learning experience I want my students to have.

Creating Significant Learning Experiences defines a significant learning experience as one that engage students, makes them enthusiastic about the subject, promotes long-term learning, and helps students see the value of material in the world around them. That sounds like something every instructor wants for his or her students! The biggest challenge is designing those experiences. Significant learning experiences sit at the intersection of six categories of learning (Figure 1): foundational knowledge, application of knowledge, integration of concepts, the “human dimension” (students learn about themselves or others), caring (about something), and learning how to learn. Typically, course projects focus on the first two categories, with more complex projects also including integration of concepts. To hit all six categories successfully, significant learning experiences have to be designed into the course. In other words, the course itself needs to be a significant learning experience.

Fink proposed a three-part process, with 12 total steps, for designing courses that are significant learning experiences. In the first part of the process, the instructor builds primary concepts for the course. This includes developing course learning goals, assessments, activities, as well as integrating these course components into a cohesive whole. Integration is key to the success of the learning experience: everything needs to be in alignment for proper evaluation of learning. After checking the alignment of these fundamental course pieces, the course concepts are assembled into a coherent whole in next part of the process. This second part of course development involves designing a course structure and teaching strategy. Just as it was important to check alignment among learning goals, assessments, and

What is the difference between research problems and teaching problems? Based on my experience, research problems are often viewed as the “good” kind of problems to have; discussed with vigor and excitement by colleagues and students alike. On the other hand, teaching problems are viewed as the “bad” kind of problems to have; ones to be kept to yourself to ponder quietly. Why is this? I am not 100% sure, but it seems that when teachers have problems, they are quick to think the problems are their fault and, perhaps, that they are the only ones who have ever experienced such problems. But nothing could be further from the truth! Problems in the classroom are part of every teacher's life and learning to view and work through these problems is what makes teaching exciting, challenging, and very rewarding.

One challenge with instructional problems is the way we tend to perceive them – as annoyances, progress stoppers, somebody's fault, troublesome, time consuming, and so on. What if, instead, we reframed our teaching problems into teaching opportunities? Opportunities, unlike problems, are viewed quite positively, like doorways to a better future. This reframing is more than just putting on rose colored glasses and hoping our teaching problems go away. Rather, reframing1 is taking our focus off the problem and placing it on the possible solutions that lie just on the other side of the doorway. Reframing teaching problems into opportunities also makes it easier for us to talk to others about what is happening in our classroom. And it is this type of dialogue that fosters the development of and membership in a community of practice2 around teaching, similar to the research communities many academic faculty members are a part of based on their specific research interests. I am exceedingly grateful for my community of practice around teaching. There are numerous individuals that have informed and enriched what I do as a teacher (my pedagogy) over the years, sharing best practices and offering possible solutions for my small and large teaching opportunities!

In addition to a community of practice around teaching, there are additional resources that can help us with our “teaching opportunities.” The education and scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) literature is replete with research-based theories and practices that can provide us with insight and guidance. Also, many campuses have Teaching Centers with professionals who are well trained to help instructors with their teaching and learning needs and concerns.

There is one more resource that can help us, one that we might not readily think of – our students! By the time they start college, students have had 12 years of schooling under their belts. They have had good, not so good, and hopefully, at least a couple of masterful teachers. I have always been a big fan of listening to students as a source of input (Schmidt, 2004), but recently, I have added “studentsourc

Historically, high school chemistry has been the predominate venue for the introduction of food science curriculum to students. With the current decline in chemistry as a required course for graduation, the possibility of exposure to food science in high school could equally decline. The purpose of this research was to determine if high school students in a biology class without a chemistry background could comprehend eight basic food science principles equally as well as students in a chemistry class that were taught the same principles. This study assessed baseline knowledge of high school students, determined the effect of food science-based lessons on baseline knowledge and level of understanding, and determined the effect of food science-based lessons on students’ awareness of and interest in food science. Baseline knowledge and awareness of food science was low. Food science-based instruction resulted in higher posttest scores. Results indicated no differences in students’ knowledge base and level of understanding between biology and chemistry classes and supported the idea of further incorporating a food science curriculum into high school biology.