Visual Representations in Economic Education From an Interdisciplinary Perspective

Visual representations such as graphs and charts are important tools to make data and models more understandable. In our daily life, we are confronted with graphs that visualize information, such as election results or the development of stock prices. Across disciplines, graphs and charts are also used in research and teaching to explain domain concepts, for example when the relationship between price, demand and supply is modeled in economics or when biologists analyze how prey and predator populations influence each other over time. The ability to understand these visual representations is therefore not only necessary in daily life but also part of domain expertise. Although graphs and charts are omnipresent in the 21st century, prior research has demonstrated that all students cannot be assumed to intuitively understand these visualizations. In contrast, large-scale and in-depth studies have identified various difficulties of learners, for example when they are unable to read and interpret data graphs or cannot connect visual representations to the underlying domain principle. Different research communities have thus modeled and analyzed the ability of learners to work with visual representations (mostly in the science domains) and investigated the effect of instructional support, which helps learners to understand graphical representations and relate them to their context. Bringing together these different research disciplines, this dissertation investigates, in three separate studies, how learners can read data graphs; how visual representations are used in secondary economic education; and lastly, how learners can be supported in integrating graphs and text. In the first study, eighth graders’ ability to read graphs was investigated. Focusing on graphs related to sustainable development, which students could encounter in their everyday life, the study measured how well they could read single data points and trends or perform small extrapolations. The instrument was used with 198 students from four different schools, all with the highest school track (Gymnasium). To test whether tasks with increasing complexity (from points to extrapolations) would also be more difficult for learners, the data was analyzed with item response theory. Furthermore, the relationship between graph reading and learner characteristics such as academic performance, motivation, interest and domain knowledge was examined. The results revealed that eighth graders were able to read data graphs rather well, and no systematic relationship was found between what an item asked for and the item difficulty. The ability to read graphs correlated with academic language performance, academic math performance, as well as content knowledge and prior engagement with sustainable development. In the second study, a textbook analysis was combined with teacher interviews to investigate the use of graphical representations in learning material and instruction. To gain an overview of the graphical representations in textbooks, they were categorized according to their form (graph/chart) and the extent to which they visualize a domain principle. In 10 semi-structured interviews, teachers were asked how and why they use graphical representations, what they expect of their students and what typical mistakes their students make when they work with visual representations. The teacher interviews revealed that graphs and charts are used regularly in teaching, not only to visualize economic models but also to display data related to economic variables (e.g., development of growth domestic product [GDP]) and to train students in critically analyzing graphical representations. The following are among the challenges for learners: math- and data-related issues (e.g., when learners are unable to differentiate between absolute and relative numbers) and a lack of integration of representation and domain (e.g., when learners cannot identify the relevant information for a domain question or are unable to connect graphical information to other external representations such as texts). Finally, through a quasi-experimental design, the third study tested how learners can be supported in learning with text and graphs. For this purpose, students received learning material from two domains in one of three conditions: Either the correspondences between text and graph were already highlighted or they were asked to highlight the relevant connections themselves while studying the material (active signals) or, lastly, without alterations to design or learner-task (control). After the study phase, the learning outcome was tested with recall and comprehension questions. Overall, students who studied already signaled material performed equally well compared to the control group. On average, students in the active-signal group achieved significantly fewer points in the biology posttest compared to the control group. When learners had high prior knowledge, however, they could profit from actively integrating both representations. Furthermore, in economics, the relationship between prior knowledge and learning outcome was partially mediated via the quality of learner-generated signals; that is, learners with high prior knowledge were better in connecting graphs and text, which in turn was associated with higher learning outcomes. In this dissertation, the findings of these three studies are summarized and discussed against the background of the research context in different disciplines (economic education, science education and educational psychology). At the end, implications for future research and educational policy and practice are derived

Diagramme im Unterrichtsgespräch am Beispiel der Besprechung einer Klassenarbeit im Geographieunterricht

Die vorliegende Fallanalyse nimmt primär die eigentliche Nutzung von Dia­grammen in den Blick, indem vor dem Hintergrund eines weit verbreiteten Analyse­rahmens (Curcio, 1987) reflektiert wird, wie die SuS im Rahmen der vorliegenden Geographiestunde die Diagramme analysieren (sollen). Da ein Diagramm immer ein Medium darstellt, ist mit der Diagrammverwendung auch die Frage des Medienein­satzes verbunden. Darüber hinaus sind Diagramme in der Regel in ein Unterrichts­gespräch einbettet, so dass auch dieses als Kontext des Diagrammeinsatzes im vorlie­genden Beitrag betrachtet wird

Proposal of 0.5 mg of protein/100 g of processed food as threshold for voluntary declaration of food allergen traces in processed food-A first step in an initiative to better inform patients and avoid fatal allergic reactions : A GA(2)LEN position paper

Background Food anaphylaxis is commonly elicited by unintentional ingestion of foods containing the allergen above the tolerance threshold level of the individual. While labeling the 14 main allergens used as ingredients in food products is mandatory in the EU, there is no legal definition of declaring potential contaminants. Precautionary allergen labeling such as "may contain traces of" is often used. However, this is unsatisfactory for consumers as they get no information if the contamination is below their personal threshold. In discussions with the food industry and technologists, it was suggested to use a voluntary declaration indicating that all declared contaminants are below a threshold of 0.5 mg protein per 100 g of food. This concentration is known to be below the threshold of most patients, and it can be technically guaranteed in most food production. However, it was also important to assess that in case of accidental ingestion of contaminants below this threshold by highly allergic patients, no fatal anaphylactic reaction could occur. Therefore, we performed a systematic review to assess whether a fatal reaction to 5mg of protein or less has been reported, assuming that a maximum portion size of 1kg of a processed food exceeds any meal and thus gives a sufficient safety margin. Methods MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched until 24 January 2021 for provocation studies and case reports in which one of the 14 major food allergens was reported to elicit fatal or life-threatening anaphylactic reactions and assessed if these occurred below the ingestion of 5mg of protein. A Delphi process was performed to obtain an expert consensus on the results. Results In the 210 studies included, in our search, no reports of fatal anaphylactic reactions reported below 5 mg protein ingested were identified. However, in provocation studies and case reports, severe reactions below 5 mg were reported for the following allergens: eggs, fish, lupin, milk, nuts, peanuts, soy, and sesame seeds. Conclusion Based on the literature studied for this review, it can be stated that cross-contamination of the 14 major food allergens below 0.5 mg/100 g is likely not to endanger most food allergic patients when a standard portion of food is consumed. We propose to use the statement "this product contains the named allergens in the list of ingredients, it may contain traces of other contaminations (to be named, e.g. nut) at concentrations less than 0.5 mg per 100 g of this product" for a voluntary declaration on processed food packages. This level of avoidance of cross-contaminations can be achieved technically for most processed foods, and the statement would be a clear and helpful message to the consumers. However, it is clearly acknowledged that a voluntary declaration is only a first step to a legally binding solution. For this, further research on threshold levels is encouraged.Peer reviewe

Proposal of 0.5 mg of protein/100 g of processed food as threshold for voluntary declaration of food allergen traces in processed food—A first step in an initiative to better inform patients and avoid fatal allergic reactions: A GA²LEN position paper

Background: Food anaphylaxis is commonly elicited by unintentional ingestion of foods containing the allergen above the tolerance threshold level of the individual. While labeling the 14 main allergens used as ingredients in food products is mandatory in the EU, there is no legal definition of declaring potential contaminants. Precautionary allergen labeling such as "may contain traces of" is often used. However, this is unsatisfactory for consumers as they get no information if the contamination is below their personal threshold. In discussions with the food industry and technologists, it was suggested to use a voluntary declaration indicating that all declared contaminants are below a threshold of 0.5 mg protein per 100 g of food. This concentration is known to be below the threshold of most patients, and it can be technically guaranteed in most food production. However, it was also important to assess that in case of accidental ingestion of contaminants below this threshold by highly allergic patients, no fatal anaphylactic reaction could occur. Therefore, we performed a systematic review to assess whether a fatal reaction to 5mg of protein or less has been reported, assuming that a maximum portion size of 1kg of a processed food exceeds any meal and thus gives a sufficient safety margin. Methods: MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched until 24 January 2021 for provocation studies and case reports in which one of the 14 major food allergens was reported to elicit fatal or life-threatening anaphylactic reactions and assessed if these occurred below the ingestion of 5mg of protein. A Delphi process was performed to obtain an expert consensus on the results. Results: In the 210 studies included, in our search, no reports of fatal anaphylactic reactions reported below 5 mg protein ingested were identified. However, in provocation studies and case reports, severe reactions below 5 mg were reported for the following allergens: eggs, fish, lupin, milk, nuts, peanuts, soy, and sesame seeds. Conclusion: Based on the literature studied for this review, it can be stated that cross-contamination of the 14 major food allergens below 0.5 mg/100 g is likely not to endanger most food allergic patients when a standard portion of food is consumed. We propose to use the statement "this product contains the named allergens in the list of ingredients, it may contain traces of other contaminations (to be named, e.g. nut) at concentrations less than 0.5 mg per 100 g of this product" for a voluntary declaration on processed food packages. This level of avoidance of cross-contaminations can be achieved technically for most processed foods, and the statement would be a clear and helpful message to the consumers. However, it is clearly acknowledged that a voluntary declaration is only a first step to a legally binding solution. For this, further research on threshold levels is encouraged

Proposal of 0.5 mg of protein/100 g of processed food as threshold for voluntary declaration of food allergen traces in processed food—A first step in an initiative to better inform patients and avoid fatal allergic reactions: A GA²LEN position paper

Background Food anaphylaxis is commonly elicited by unintentional ingestion of foods containing the allergen above the tolerance threshold level of the individual. While labeling the 14 main allergens used as ingredients in food products is mandatory in the EU, there is no legal definition of declaring potential contaminants. Precautionary allergen labeling such as “may contain traces of” is often used. However, this is unsatisfactory for consumers as they get no information if the contamination is below their personal threshold. In discussions with the food industry and technologists, it was suggested to use a voluntary declaration indicating that all declared contaminants are below a threshold of 0.5 mg protein per 100 g of food. This concentration is known to be below the threshold of most patients, and it can be technically guaranteed in most food production. However, it was also important to assess that in case of accidental ingestion of contaminants below this threshold by highly allergic patients, no fatal anaphylactic reaction could occur. Therefore, we performed a systematic review to assess whether a fatal reaction to 5mg of protein or less has been reported, assuming that a maximum portion size of 1kg of a processed food exceeds any meal and thus gives a sufficient safety margin. Methods MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched until 24 January 2021 for provocation studies and case reports in which one of the 14 major food allergens was reported to elicit fatal or life-threatening anaphylactic reactions and assessed if these occurred below the ingestion of 5mg of protein. A Delphi process was performed to obtain an expert consensus on the results. Results In the 210 studies included, in our search, no reports of fatal anaphylactic reactions reported below 5 mg protein ingested were identified. However, in provocation studies and case reports, severe reactions below 5 mg were reported for the following allergens: eggs, fish, lupin, milk, nuts, peanuts, soy, and sesame seeds. Conclusion Based on the literature studied for this review, it can be stated that cross-contamination of the 14 major food allergens below 0.5 mg/100 g is likely not to endanger most food allergic patients when a standard portion of food is consumed. We propose to use the statement “this product contains the named allergens in the list of ingredients, it may contain traces of other contaminations (to be named, e.g. nut) at concentrations less than 0.5 mg per 100 g of this product” for a voluntary declaration on processed food packages. This level of avoidance of cross-contaminations can be achieved technically for most processed foods, and the statement would be a clear and helpful message to the consumers. However, it is clearly acknowledged that a voluntary declaration is only a first step to a legally binding solution. For this, further research on threshold levels is encouraged

Proposal of 0.5 mg of protein/100 g of processed food as threshold for voluntary declaration of food allergen traces in processed food-A first step in an initiative to better inform patients and avoid fatal allergic reactions: A GA(2)LEN position paper

BackgroundFood anaphylaxis is commonly elicited by unintentional ingestion of foods containing the allergen above the tolerance threshold level of the individual. While labeling the 14 main allergens used as ingredients in food products is mandatory in the EU, there is no legal definition of declaring potential contaminants. Precautionary allergen labeling such as “may contain traces of” is often used. However, this is unsatisfactory for consumers as they get no information if the contamination is below their personal threshold. In discussions with the food industry and technologists, it was suggested to use a voluntary declaration indicating that all declared contaminants are below a threshold of 0.5 mg protein per 100 g of food. This concentration is known to be below the threshold of most patients, and it can be technically guaranteed in most food production. However, it was also important to assess that in case of accidental ingestion of contaminants below this threshold by highly allergic patients, no fatal anaphylactic reaction could occur. Therefore, we performed a systematic review to assess whether a fatal reaction to 5mg of protein or less has been reported, assuming that a maximum portion size of 1kg of a processed food exceeds any meal and thus gives a sufficient safety margin.MethodsMEDLINE and EMBASE were searched until 24 January 2021 for provocation studies and case reports in which one of the 14 major food allergens was reported to elicit fatal or life-threatening anaphylactic reactions and assessed if these occurred below the ingestion of 5mg of protein. A Delphi process was performed to obtain an expert consensus on the results.ResultsIn the 210 studies included, in our search, no reports of fatal anaphylactic reactions reported below 5 mg protein ingested were identified. However, in provocation studies and case reports, severe reactions below 5 mg were reported for the following allergens: eggs, fish, lupin, milk, nuts, peanuts, soy, and sesame seeds.ConclusionBased on the literature studied for this review, it can be stated that cross-contamination of the 14 major food allergens below 0.5 mg/100 g is likely not to endanger most food allergic patients when a standard portion of food is consumed. We propose to use the statement “this product contains the named allergens in the list of ingredients, it may contain traces of other contaminations (to be named, e.g. nut) at concentrations less than 0.5 mg per 100 g of this product” for a voluntary declaration on processed food packages. This level of avoidance of cross-contaminations can be achieved technically for most processed foods, and the statement would be a clear and helpful message to the consumers. However, it is clearly acknowledged that a voluntary declaration is only a first step to a legally binding solution. For this, further research on threshold levels is encouraged.</div

Malte Ring's Quick Files

The Quick Files feature was discontinued and it’s files were migrated into this Project on March 11, 2022. The file URL’s will still resolve properly, and the Quick Files logs are available in the Project’s Recent Activity