Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The FRESH (Food Resources and Education for Student Health) peer nutrition education program engages undergraduate and graduate students in experiential learning to improve the campus food and nutrition environment and promote healthy behaviours among university students.
TARGET POPULATION: University students in general, and graduate and undergraduate food and nutrition students as program designers and peer educators, respectively.
SETTING: Large university campus in southwestern Ontario.
INTERVENTION: A peer nutrition education program, utilizing multiple population strategies and intersectoral partnerships, was created by and for university students with faculty and food service personnel as mentors. The population health strategies employed were building awareness and program branding; developing personal skills through peer nutrition education and hands-on cooking demonstrations; and creating supportive environments through incentive programs for fruit and dairy as well as point-of-purchase menu labelling.
OUTCOMES: The program has reached students, staff and faculty through over 60 interactive FRESH displays and education sessions. Website and social media have also had a significant reach with over 4,000 website visits and 277 Facebook “likes”. FRESH has also improved the food environment for over 5,000 students in residence, e.g., 1,931 FRESH Fruit/Dairy Cards have been returned for free fruit/milk cartons. Graduate students in Foods and Nutrition continue to participate every year (cumulative n=60) in ongoing program development. Peer educators have developed enhanced leadership, public speaking and group facilitation skills, and the ability to creatively apply what they have learned in the classroom to new contexts.
CONCLUSION: Increased nutrition knowledge and an improved food environment could, over the long term, support improved university student health.
Key Words: Nutritional sciences/education, students, universities, health promotion, peer group
Résumé
OBJECTIFS : Le programme FRESH (Food Resources and Education for Student Health) d’éducation alimentaire par les pairs propose à des étudiants de premier cycle et de cycles supérieurs un apprentissage expérientiel pour améliorer l’alimentation et l’environnement nutritionnel sur le campus et promouvoir des comportements sains dans la population étudiante universitaire.
POPULATION CIBLE : Les étudiants d’université en général, et les étudiants de premier cycle et des cycles supérieurs des programmes d’alimentation et de nutrition, ainsi qu’en tant qu’éducateurs auprès des pairs et que concepteurs du programme, respectivement.
LIEU: Un vaste campus universitaire dans le sud-ouest de l’Ontario.
INTERVENTION : Un programme d’éducation alimentaire par les pairs, utilisant un éventail de stratégies populationnelles et de partenariats intersectoriels, a été créé par et pour des étudiants d’université, mentorés par le corps professoral et le personnel des services alimentaires. Les stratégies de santé des populations employées ont été la sensibilisation et le design global du programme; le perfectionnement des compétences personnelles par l’éducation alimentaire par les pairs et par des démonstrations culinaires pratiques; et la création de milieux favorables au moyen de programmes d’incitation à consommer des fruits et des laitages, ainsi que l’étiquetage nutritionnel des menus sur le lieu de vente.
RÉSULTATS : Le programme FRESH a joint les étudiants, le personnel et le corps professoral par l’entremise de plus de 60 présentoirs interactifs et séances de sensibilisation. Le site Web et les médias sociaux ont aussi eu un auditoire important: plus de 4 000 visites du site Web et 277 « J’aime » sur Facebook. Le programme a par ailleurs amélioré l’environnement alimentaire de plus de 5 000 étudiants en résidence; entre autres, 1 931 fiches de fruits et de laitages FRESH ont été échangées pour des fruits frais ou des berlingots de lait. Les étudiants diplômés des programmes d’alimentation et de nutrition (cumulativement n=60) continuent de participer chaque année au développement du programme. Les éducateurs auprès des pairs perfectionnent leurs techniques de leadership, d’art oratoire et de facilitation sociale et leur capacité d’appliquer avec créativité dans de nouveaux contextes ce qu’ils apprennent en classe.
CONCLUSION: Des connaissances nutritionnelles accrues et un environnement alimentaire amélioré pourraient, à long terme, favoriser la santé des étudiants d’université.
Mots Clés: sciences/enseignement de la nutrition, étudiants, université, promotion de la santé, groupe de pairs
Footnotes
Acknowledgements: We thank all MScFN graduate students involved in program development and undergraduate student peer educators in the FRESH Club.
Conflict of Interest: None to declare.
Contributor Information
June I. Matthews, Phone: 519-432-8353, Email: jmatth22@uwo.ca.
Paula D. N. Dworatzek, Email: pdworatz@uwo.ca.
References
- 1.Nelson MC, Story M, Larson NI, Neumark-Szatainer D, Lytle LA. Emerging adulthood and college-aged youth: An overlooked age for weight-related behavior change. Obesity. 2008;16:2205–11. doi: 10.1038/oby.2008.365. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Edmonds MJ, Ferreira KJ, Nikiforuk EA, Finnie AK, Leavey SH, Duncan AM, et al. Body weight and percent body fat increase during the transition from high school to university in females. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2008;108(6):1033–37. doi: 10.1016/j.jada.2008.03.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Levitsky DA, Halbmaier CA, Mrdjenovic G. The freshman weight gain: A model for the study of the epidemic of obesity. Int J Obes. 2004;28:1435–42. doi: 10.1038/sj.ijo.0802776. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Garcia AC, Sykes L, Matthews J, Martin N, Leipert B. Perceived facilitators of and barriers to healthful eating among university students. Can J Diet Pract Res. 2010;71(2):e28–e33. doi: 10.3148/71.2.2010.69. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.American College Health Association ACHA. American College Health Association–National College Health Assessment II: Canadian Reference Group Data Report Spring 2013. Hanover, MD: ACHA; 2013. [Google Scholar]
- 6.White S, Park YS, Israel T, Cordero ED. Longitudinal evaluation of peer health education on a college campus: Impact on health behaviors. J Am Coll Health. 2009;57(5):497–504. doi: 10.3200/JACH.57.5.497-506. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Evans AE, Sawyer-Morse MK. J Am Diet Assoc. 2002. The Right Bite program: A theory-based nutrition intervention at a minority college campus; pp. S89–S93. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Desmarais S, Hazelden O, Schnarr L, Whiteside B. The Peer Helper Program at the University of Guelph: Analysis of Skills Objectives. Toronto, ON: Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario (HEQCO); 2013. [Google Scholar]
- 9.Contento I, Balch GI, Bronner YL, Lytle LA, Maloney SK, Olson CM, Swadener SS. The effectiveness of nutrition education and implications for nutrition education policy, programs, and research: Executive Summary. J Nutr Educ. 1995;27(6):279–83. doi: 10.1016/S0022-3182(12)80086-0. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Hamilton N, Bhatti T. Population Health Promotion: An Integrated Model of Population Health and Health Promotion. Ottawa, ON: Health Canada, Health Promotion Development Division; 1996. [Google Scholar]
- 11.Bronfenbrenner U. The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and Design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1979. [Google Scholar]
- 12.Public Health Agency of Canada. What determines health? 2013. [Google Scholar]
- 13.World Health Organization WHO. Commission on the Social Determinants of Health. Closing the Gap in a Generation: Health Equity Through Action on the Social Determinants of Health. Geneva: WHO; 2008. [Google Scholar]
- 14.World Health Organization. Ottawa Charter on Health Promotion. Geneva: WHO; 1986. [Google Scholar]
- 15.Drasic L. Perspectives on community based food security projects: A discussion paper. 2013. [Google Scholar]
- 16.Fano TJ, Tyminski SM, Flynn MAT. Evaluation of a collective kitchens program: Using the Population Health Promotion Model. Can J Diet Pract Res. 2004;65(2):72–80. doi: 10.3148/65.2.2004.72. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Saskatchewan Health. Using a Population Health Promotion Approach: Lessons Learned from the Population Health Promotion Demonstration Sites for the Primary Prevention of Type 2 Diabetes. 2003. [Google Scholar]
- 18.Garcia AC, Henry CJ, Zok A. Peer education in nutrition for students: Part 1. Program development and process evaluation. Foodservice Res Int. 2000;12:163–74. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-4506.2000.tb00012.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Pelletier DL, Porter CM, Aarons GA, Wuehler SE, Neufeld LM. Expanding the frontiers of population nutrition research: New questions, new methods, and new approaches. Adv Nutr. 2013;4:92–114. doi: 10.3945/an.112.003160. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Health Communication Unit, Public Health Ontario,the National Collaborating Centre for MethodsTools. Online Health Program Planner (OHPP) 2013. [Google Scholar]
- 21.Matthews J, Dworatzek PDN. ‘Millennial’ graduate students’ use of technology and problem-based learning to enhance higher-level cognition in health promotion program planning. Am J Health Sci. 2012;3(3):195–200. [Google Scholar]
- 22.Ontario Public Health Association, Nutrition Resource Centre. Eat Smart® Choices Calculator. 2013. [Google Scholar]
- 23.Cahill L, Corey PN, El-Sohemy A. Vitamin C deficiency in a population of young Canadian adults. Am J Epidemiol. 2009;170(4):464–71. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwp156. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Middlesex-London Health Unit. Food Handler Certification Program. 2013. [Google Scholar]
- 25.Steinberg L. Risk taking in adolescence: New perspectives from brain and behavioral science. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2007;16(2):55–59. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8721.2007.00475.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Association of UniversitiesColleges in Canada. Undergraduate student enrolment surpasses million mark. 2013. [Google Scholar]
- 27.L’Abbe M, Schermel A, Minaker L, Kelly B, Lee A, Vandevijvere S, et al. for INFORMAS. Monitoring foods and beverages provided and sold in public sector settings. Obes Rev. 2013;14(Suppl1):96–107. doi: 10.1111/obr.12079. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Stefanou C, Stolk JD, Prince M, Chen JC, Lord SM. Self-regulation and autonomy in problem- and project-based learning environments. Active Learning in High Education. 2013;14:109–22. doi: 10.1177/1469787413481132. [DOI] [Google Scholar]