This study describes the use of the Nutrition Education DESIGN Procedure for developing the In Defence of Food Curriculum, a health education curriculum serving as the companion guide to the In Defence of Food documentary film based on the book with the same title.
Design:
The DESIGN Procedure is a systematic stepwise framework that produces behaviourally focused, theory-driven health education programmes and evaluation plans.
Methods:
DESIGN begins with an audience assessment and literature review that guides the selection of desired behaviours and psycho-social theory. For the In Defence of Food Curriculum, the desired behaviour changes were increased intake of whole/minimally processed plant-based foods and decreased intake of highly processed foods. A theoretical framework combining social cognitive and social determination theories guided programme development and evaluation plans. Education theory guided translating this framework into a ready-to-deliver curriculum. DESIGN aims to ensure alignment of theory determinants/mediators, behaviour change strategies, objectives, instructional activities and evaluation measures for systematically addressing desired behaviour changes. Over the course of 10 lessons, young people participate in interactive activities that explore the benefits of healthy eating, while appreciating how the ubiquity of heavily marketed and highly processed foods make healthy eating challenging. The evaluation plan guides measurement of target behaviours and the theory-based determinants/mediators.
Results:
This case study describes the development of the In Defence of Food curriculum using the DESIGN Procedure and demonstrates how a comprehensive and structured method for health education curriculum development and evaluation planning can be applied.
Conclusion:
The DESIGN Procedure has relevance for researchers, practitioners and programme planners.
AbramsEBurgermasterMKochP, et al. (2014) Food, health & choices (FHC): Importance of formative evaluation to create a well-delivered and well-received intervention. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior4: S137.
2.
AycinenaACJenningsK-AGaffneyAO, et al. (2017) ¡Cocinar Para Su Salud! Development of a culturally based nutrition education curriculum for Hispanic breast cancer survivors using a theory-driven procedural model. Health Education & Behavior44: 13–22.
3.
BanduraA (1986) Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
4.
BanduraA (2004) Health promotion by social cognitive means. Health Education & Behavior31: 143–164.
5.
BaranowskiTJagoR (2005) Understanding the mechanisms of change in children’s physical activity programs. Exercise and Sport Sciences Reviews33: 163–168.
6.
BaranowskiTCerinEBaranowskiJ (2009) Steps in the design, development and formative evaluation of obesity prevention-related behavior change trials. The International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity6: 6–16.
7.
BaranowskiTCullenKWNicklasT, et al. (2003) Are current health behavioral change models helpful in guiding prevention of weight gain efforts?Obesity Research11: 23S–43S.
8.
BartholomewLKParcelGSKokG, et al. (2011) Planning Health Promotion Programs: An Intervention Mapping Approach. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
9.
BerkLEWinslerA (1995) Scaffolding Children’s Learning: Vygotsky and Early Childhood Education: NAEYC Research into Practice Series. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
BiggsJ (1996) Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education32: 347–364.
12.
BurgermasterMGrayHLTiptonE, et al. (2016) Testing an integrated model of program implementation: The food, health & choices school-based childhood obesity prevention intervention process evaluation. Prevention Science18: 71–82.
13.
CacioppoJTPettyREKaoCF, et al. (1986) Central and peripheral routes to persuasion: An individual difference perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology51: 1032–1043.
14.
ChenHT (2010) The bottom-up approach to integrative validity: A new perspective for program evaluation. Evaluation and Program Planning33: 205–214.
15.
ContentoI (2012) Improving the diets and eating patterns of children and adolescents: How can nutrition education help?Adolescent Medicine: State of the Art Reviews23: 471–492.
16.
ContentoI (2016) Nutrition Education: Linking Research, Theory, and Practice. Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
17.
ContentoIKochPLeeH, et al. (2010) Adolescents demonstrate improvement in obesity risk behaviors after completion of choice, control & change, a curriculum addressing personal agency and autonomous motivation. Journal of the American Dietetic Association110: 1830–1839.
18.
CornwellTBMcAlisterARPolmear-SwendrisN (2014) Children’s knowledge of packaged and fast food brands and their BMI: Why the relationship matters for policy makers. Appetite81: 277–283.
19.
DeciELRyanRM (2000) The ‘what’ and ‘why’ of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry11: 227–268.
20.
DiepCSChenT-ADaviesVF, et al. (2014) Influence of behavioral theory on fruit and vegetable intervention effectiveness among children: A meta-analysis. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior46: 506–546.
21.
Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (2015) Scientific Report of the 2015 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee. Washington, DC: USDA and US Department of Health and Human Services.
22.
EvansCEChristianMSCleghornCL, et al. (2012) Systematic review and meta-analysis of school-based interventions to improve daily fruit and vegetable intake in children aged 5 to 12 y. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition96: 889–901.
23.
GagneRMWagerWWGolasKC, et al. (2005) Principles of instructional design. Performance Improvement44: 44–46.
24.
GortmakerSLPetersonKWiechaJ, et al. (1999) Reducing obesity via a school-based interdisciplinary intervention among youth: Planet Health. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine153: 409–418.
25.
GrayHLKochPAContentoIR, et al. (2016) Validity and reliability of behavior and theory-based psychosocial determinants measures, using audience response system technology in urban upper-elementary schoolchildren. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior48: 437–452.
26.
GreenLWKreuterMW (2005) Health Program Planning: An Educational and Ecological Approach. New York: McGraw-Hill.
27.
GreenleeHGaffneyAOAycinenaAC, et al. (2015) ¡Cocinar Para Su Salud!: Randomized controlled trial of a culturally based dietary intervention among Hispanic breast cancer survivors. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics115: S42–S56. e43.
HurleyKMOberlanderSEMerryBC, et al. (2009) The healthy eating index and youth healthy eating index are unique, nonredundant measures of diet quality among low-income, African American adolescents. Journal of Nutrition139: 359–364.
30.
KellerKLKuilemaLGLeeN, et al. (2012) The impact of food branding on children’s eating behavior and obesity. Physiology & Behavior106: 379–386.
31.
KinzieMB (2005) Instructional design strategies for health behavior change. Patient Education and Counseling56: 3–15.
KokGGottliebNHPetersGJ, et al. (2016) A taxomomy of behavior change methods: An Intervention Mapping approach. Health Psychology Review10: 297–312.
34.
Krebs-SmithSMGuentherPMSubarAF, et al. (2010) Americans do not meet federal dietary recommendations. Journal of Nutrition140: 1832–1838.
35.
LeeHContentoIKochP (2013) Using a systematic conceptual model for a process evaluation of a middle school obesity risk-reduction nutrition curriculum intervention: Choice, control & change. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior45: 126–136.
36.
LienNLytleLAKleppK-I (2001) Stability in consumption of fruit, vegetables, and sugary foods in a cohort from age 14 to age 21. Preventive Medicine33: 217–226.
37.
LuesseHBContentoI (2019) Context considerations for developing the IDOF afterschool nutrition education curriculum. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior51: 370–378.
38.
LuesseHBLuesseJELawsonJ, et al. (2019) In Defense of Food Curriculum: A mixed methods outcome evaluation in afterschool. Health Education & Behavior. Epub ahead of print 4March. DOI: 10.1177/1090198119831750.
39.
McTigheJTomlinsonCA (2006) Integrating Differentiated Instruction and Understanding by Design: Connecting Content and Kids. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
40.
MerrillMD (2009) First principles of instruction. Instructional-design Theories and Models: Building a Common Knowledge Base3: 41–56.
41.
MichieSAbrahamC (2004) Interventions to change health behaviours: Evidence-based or evidence-inspired?Psychology & Health19: 29–49.
42.
MichieSAshfordSSniehottaFF, et al. (2011a) A refined taxonomy of behaviour change techniques to help people change their physical activity and healthy eating behaviours: The CALO-RE taxonomy. Psychology & Health26: 1479–1498.
43.
MichieSVan StralenMMWestR (2011b) The behaviour change wheel: A new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions. Implementation Science6: 42–51.
44.
MitraDL (2004) The significance of students: Can increasing ‘student voice’ in schools lead to gains in youth development?Teachers College Record106: 651–688.
45.
MorenoLARodriguezGFletaJ, et al. (2010) Trends of dietary habits in adolescents. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition50: 106–112. DOI:10.1080/10408390903467480.
46.
MoubaracJ-CMartinsAPBClaroRM, et al. (2013) Consumption of ultra-processed foods and likely impact on human health: Evidence from Canada. Public Health Nutrition16: 2240–2248.
47.
PaulRLuesseHBBurtKG, et al. (2018) #eatingoodtonight social media based education campaign for young adults. Nutrition Today53: 288–292.
48.
PeaRD (2004) The social and technological dimensions of scaffolding and related theoretical concepts for learning, education, and human activity. Journal of the Learning Sciences13: 423–451.
49.
PedersenSLiuM (2003) Teachers’ beliefs about issues in the implementation of a student-centered learning environment. Educational Technology Research and Development51: 57–76.
50.
PollanM (2008) In Defense of Food: An Eater’s Manifesto. New York: Penguin Books.
51.
PotiJMendezMNgS, et al. (2015) Is the degree of food processing and convenience linked with the nutritional quality of foods purchased by US households?American Journal of Clinical Nutrition101: 1251–1262.
52.
PrinsRGvan EmpelenPBeenackersMA, et al. (2010) Systematic development of the YouRAction program, a computer-tailored physical activity promotion intervention for Dutch adolescents, targeting personal motivations and environmental opportunities. BMC Public Health10: 474–486.
53.
ReedyJKrebs-SmithSM (2010) Dietary sources of energy, solid fats, and added sugars among children and adolescents in the United States. Journal of the American Dietetic Association110: 1477–1484.
54.
RosenheckR (2008) Fast food consumption and increased caloric intake: A systematic review of a trajectory towards weight gain and obesity risk. Obesity Reviews9: 535–547.
55.
SantrockJ (2016) Adolescence. New York: McGraw-Hill.
56.
ScrinisG (2008) On the ideology of nutritionism. Gastronomica8: 39–48.
57.
SinghASChinAPawM, et al. (2009) Dutch obesity intervention in teenagers: Effectiveness of a school-based program on body composition and behavior. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine163: 309–317.
58.
SinghASPawMJCAKremersSPJ, et al. (2006) Design of the Dutch obesity intervention in teenagers (NRG-DOiT): Systematic development, implementation and evaluation of a school-based intervention aimed at the prevention of excessive weight gain in adolescents. BMC Public Health6: 304–318.
59.
Van EmpelenPKokGSchaalmaHP, et al. (2003) An AIDS risk reduction program for Dutch drug users: An intervention mapping approach to planning. Health Promotion Practice4: 402–412.
60.
VygotskyL (1978) Interaction between learning and development. Readings on the Development of Children23: 34–41.
61.
WangYCaiLWuY, et al. (2015) What childhood obesity prevention programmes work? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Obesity Reviews16: 547–565.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
