Target Behavior: Healthy Eating, Physical Activity and Reducing Screen Time
Intervention Type: Direct Education
Intervention Reach and Adoption
Setting: Child care (Learn), School (Learn)
Target Audience: Preschool (<5 years), Elementary School, Middle School, High School
Evidence-based Approach: Practice-tested
|Readiness and Capacity – Short Term (ST)||Changes – Medium Term (MT)||Effectiveness and Maintenance – Long Term (LT)||Population Results (R)|
|Environmental Settings||ST5, ST6, ST7||LT9|
|Sectors of Influence|
- ST5a, ST7a: When looking at the specific questions that asked about topic specific self-efficacy and confidence (15 questions), intervention teachers reported significantly higher self-efficacy scores from pretest to posttest compared to control teachers t(61) = 3.040, p = .003.
- ST6a: A paired t-test was used to determine if a school’s mean NTSES pretest score was significantly different from their mean posttest score. Mean scores increased between 10 and 16 points from pretest to posttest, with all schools showing statistically significant differences. An increase in mean teacher motivation was seen for all topics, pre- to post workshop, ranging from .67 to .81.
- LT9a, LT9c: Average teacher hours across intervention and control schools were similar due to the programming model, in which all students received one lesson per month. The control group’s nutrition education hours per student were a combination of teacher-led education and lessons delivered by SNAP-Ed staff, while the hours per student in the intervention schools were delivered entirely by the teacher. The results demonstrate that a train the trainer model can be effective in providing the same amount of direct education to students as a SNAP-Ed led model, while leaving time for SNAP-Ed staff to participate in PSE projects.
- LT9b: The SNAP-Ed cost of the HBHM model was significantly less than the model used in the baseline or control schools. Three different nutrition education models were compared to determine the average cost per direct education hour and conclude which program was most cost effective. The HBHM teaching model had the lowest average cost per direct education hour by almost $14.00.
Heidi Gorniok, RDN
Associate Director, Nutrition Programming