We developed a master food volunteer (MFV) continuing education program (CEP) for MFVs assisting Extension agents with a diabetes self-management program. Our development process included two phases of pilot testing. First, seasoned MFVs tested and provided formative feedback on the first iteration of the MFV CEP modules. After revising the modules in response to their feedback, we evaluated program effectiveness by comparing pretraining/posttraining score change between MFVs who had completed the training (intervention group) and those who had not (comparison group). All test scores increased for intervention group members, whereas half declined for comparison group members. Our process of developing enhanced education to address program-specific volunteer capacity building has broad applicability

Chase, Melissa

Hosig, Kathy

Jiles, Kristina A.

Wenzel, Sophie

English

Clemson University: TigerPrints

Journal of Extension Volume 57 Number 2 Article 16 4-1-2019 Developing a Master Food Volunteer Continuing Education Program: A Model for Volunteer Capacity Building Kristina A. Jiles Virginia PolytechnicInstitute and StateUniversity Melissa Chase Virginia PolytechnicInstitute and StateUniversity Kathy Hosig Virginia PolytechnicInstitute and StateUniversity Sophie Wenzel Virginia PolytechnicInstitute and StateUniversity Recommended Citation Jiles, K. A., Chase, M., Hosig, K., & Wenzel, S. (2019). Developing a Master Food Volunteer Continuing Education Program: A Model for Volunteer Capacity Building. Journal of Extension, 57(2). Retrieved from https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/joe/vol57/iss2/16 This Research in Brief is brought to you for free and open access by TigerPrints. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Extension by an authorized editor of TigerPrints. For more information, please contact kokeefe@clemson.edu. April 2019Volume 57Number 2Article # 2RIB10Research In BriefDeveloping a Master Food Volunteer Continuing EducationProgram: A Model for Volunteer Capacity BuildingAbstractWe developed a master food volunteer (MFV) continuing education program (CEP) for MFVs assisting Extensionagents with a diabetes self-management program. Our development process included two phases of pilottesting. First, seasoned MFVs tested and provided formative feedback on the first iteration of the MFV CEPmodules. After revising the modules in response to their feedback, we evaluated program effectiveness bycomparing pretraining/posttraining score change between MFVs who had completed the training (interventiongroup) and those who had not (comparison group). All test scores increased for intervention group members,whereas half declined for comparison group members. Our process of developing enhanced education toaddress program-specific volunteer capacity building has broad applicability.Keywords: Balanced Living with Diabetes, master food volunteer program, diabetes education, continuingeducation     IntroductionAdult onset diabetes is an increasingly prevalent and significant public health issue (Centers for DiseaseControl and Prevention, n.d.). Research has indicated that 9% of Virginians have diabetes and that thehighest rates of diabetes are in rural communities (Virginia Department of Health, Division of Prevention andHealth Promotion, 2011). Indeed, rural communities in Virginia disproportionately suffer from morbidity,mortality, and social and financial costs associated with this disease (Gamm, Hutchison, Bellamy, & Dabney,2002; Gamm, Hutchison, Dabney, & Dorsey, 2003; Health Care Cost Institute, 2015). Balanced Living withKristina A. JilesDoctoral CandidateDepartment of HumanNutrition, Foods, andExercisekrist14@vt.eduMelissa ChaseConsumer Food SafetyProgram ManagerState Coordinator,Master Food VolunteerProgramDepartment of FoodScience andTechnologymechase@vt.eduKathy HosigAssociate ProfessorDirector, Virginia TechCenter for PublicHealth Practice andResearchDepartment ofPopulation HealthScienceskhosig@vt.eduSophie WenzelAssociate Director,Virginia Tech Centerfor Public HealthPractice and ResearchDepartment ofPopulation HealthSciencesswenzel@vt.eduEleanor SchlenkerProfessor EmeritaDepartment of HumanNutrition, Foods, andExerciseschlenkr@vt.eduCarlin RafieAssistant ProfessorDepartment of HumanNutrition, Foods, andExercisecrafie@vt.eduVirginia PolytechnicInstitute and StateUniversityBlacksburg, VirginiaDiabetes (BLD), a community-based diabetes self-management program, targets underserved populationsand is used across Virginia. BLD is guided by social cognitive theory and centers on use of an active learningapproach to influence behavior change that helps participants maintain healthful weights and improve bloodsugar control.Virginia Cooperative Extension recently implemented BLD in 16 rural counties/cities and expanded itsexisting master food volunteer (MFV) program to support BLD implementation. The purpose of the MFVprogram, which Kansas State University Research and Extension developed in 2002, is to increasecommunity volunteerism and expertise in foods and nutrition, enhance nutrition programming, and buildsupport bases in communities. In Virginia, where the program has been used since 2009, Extension agentsprovide MFVs with 30 hr of required classroom training focused on nutrition, meal planning, cookingtechniques, food safety, and healthful lifestyles, and trained MFVs reciprocate with at least of 30 hr ofvolunteer service during the subsequent year.For the expanded role MFVs would play in assisting family and consumer sciences Extension agents with BLD,enhanced training was needed. Through contacting the coordinators of programs analogous to the MFVprogram and conducting an extensive literature search, we found that few programs delivered throughCooperative Extension provided intensive continuing education training to MFVs (K. Blakeslee, personalcommunication, November 7, 2016; L. Bobroff, personal communication, December 6, 2016; P. Butler,personal communication, November 30, 2016; A. Crocker, personal communication, November 30, 2016; A.Simonne, personal communication, December 6, 2016; S. Snider, personal communication, November 8,2016). Therefore, we developed an online continuing education program (CEP) to prepare MFVs to assist withthe diabetes self-management program, specifically with the food demonstration component aligned withlesson content. Here we report on our process, which included two phases of pilot testing. Our pilot studywas approved by the Virginia Tech Institutional Review Board.Description of the MFV CEPThe MFV CEP is a self-study program composed of five online training modules (Table 1). It takesapproximately 90 min to complete the five modules. The first three modules provide an introduction todiabetes, an overview of BLD, and discussion of the role of MFVs in BLD. The last two modules provideguidance on conducting food demonstrations in support of BLD and information on food safety. Each moduleconcludes with a brief quiz that tests the learner's knowledge of the subject matter, and feedback is providedfor questions answered incorrectly.Table 1.Components of the Online Master Food Volunteer Continuing Education ProgramLesson Learning objectivesIntroduction to BLD Part 1 1. Define diabetes2. Describe diabetes management and monitoringIntroduction to BLD Part 2 1. Discuss diet and exercise for diabetes controlResearch In Brief Developing a Master Food Volunteer Continuing Education Program JOE 57(2)©2019 Extension Journal Inc. 12. Introduce BLDIntroduction to BLD Part 3 1. Introduce BLD (cont.)2. Review the Idaho Plate MethodFood Demonstration 1. Introduce recipes used with BLD2. Describe recipe preparation and food demonstration3. Outline recipe preparation tips specific to BLDFood Safety 1. Review basic food safety considerations2. Summarize the safe food handling principles of clean, separate, cook, and chillNote. BLD = Balanced Living with Diabetes.Development ProcessTo begin the process of developing the MFV CEP, we created an outline of the modules to be included in theprogram and the information to be contained in each module. We based the content for the modules oninformation and materials from BLD and the MFV training program, along with additional information asrequired. We intentionally designed the content of each module with learner burden in mind, placingattention on literacy level and estimated time for completion. Each module takes an average of 15 min tocomplete, depending on the knowledge of the learner. We created a Microsoft PowerPoint presentation foreach module and used Tech Smith Camtasia Studio software to embed voice recordings in each presentation.The MFV CEP training modules are housed on the MFV training program site within the university onlinecourse management system.We developed the final version of the MFV CEP through two phases of pilot testing (Figure 1). For this aspectof the development process, we designed a pretraining/posttraining survey (25 total questions) to testknowledge gain related to diabetes, BLD, food demonstration best practices, and food safety. The survey alsois referred to herein by the terms pretest and posttest.Figure 1.Testing Phases of the Master Food Volunteer (MFV) Continuing Education Program (CEP) DevelopmentProcessResearch In Brief Developing a Master Food Volunteer Continuing Education Program JOE 57(2)©2019 Extension Journal Inc. 2In Phase I, we recruited MFVs with 1 or more years of volunteer experience to pilot test the MFV CEP andprovide formative feedback. MFVs were asked to take the pretest, complete the five training modules andcorresponding quizzes within a period of no more than 2 weeks, and then take the posttest. We conductedsemistructured telephone interviews with the MFVs upon their completion of the training to obtain qualitativedata regarding their experiences with the modules. The interview questions addressed length and clarity ofthe modules, appropriateness and completeness of the content, self-efficacy for assisting with BLD aftercompleting the modules, and ease of site navigation. Two members of our research team reviewed theinterview transcripts, extracted information related to each area of inquiry, and compiled a summary ofthemes related to each area. We used results of this formative evaluation to revise the training modules priorto Phase II.In Phase II, we recruited MFVs who recently (within the preceding 6 months) had completed the MFV trainingprogram. The intervention group consisted of MFVs who were working with Extension agents conducting BLDand planned to assist with the program. The comparison group comprised MFVs who were working withExtension agents not conducting BLD and, therefore, would not have the opportunity to assist with BLD.MFVs in the intervention group completed the pretest, viewed the revised training modules and tookcorresponding quizzes, and completed the posttest. MFVs in the comparison group completed the pretest andposttest without viewing the training modules, with 7 to 14 days between the surveys. We conducteddescriptive analyses and one-way analysis of variance (p < .05) using IBM SPSS Statistics 24.0 to evaluatedifferences in knowledge change between the intervention and comparison groups.FindingsEight MFVs provided informed consent to participate in Phase I, of whom only five participated. One of thefive participants failed to complete the pretest prior to viewing the modules. Of the remaining fourparticipants, all showed an increase in score from before to after the training, with an average increase of17.7% (mean pretest score = 77.1%, mean posttest score = 94.8%). All participants indicated that thecontent was clear and understandable. Key suggestions from the semistructured interviews were as follows:(a) increase content related to diabetes and the role of blood glucose in the disease; (b) include morespecific information about how the Idaho Plate Method is used to control carbohydrate intake; (c) improveclarity related to safe food temperatures and food quantity for tasting during BLD; and (d) make the coursesystem easier to navigate. We incorporated these modifications prior to Phase II.Ten MFVs provided informed consent for Phase II of the project. Four planned to assist Extensions agentsResearch In Brief Developing a Master Food Volunteer Continuing Education Program JOE 57(2)©2019 Extension Journal Inc. 3with the BLD program. We assigned these four to the intervention group and the remaining six to thecomparison group. Scores on the module lesson quizzes ranged from 8 to 10 (10-point maximum), indicatingthat participants had a good grasp of the information presented (Table 2). There was an increase in meanscore from the pretest to the posttest for the intervention group (2.25 ± 0.96) and no change in mean scorefor the comparison group (0.00 ± 2.53) (Table 3). The mean score change was not significantly differentbetween the intervention and comparison groups (1.67, p = .133). Scores for all four intervention groupparticipants increased from pretest to posttest. In contrast, scores for half of the comparison groupparticipants (three out of six) decreased from pretest to posttest.Table 2.Phase II Module QuizScores for InterventionParticipantsModule scoresaParticipant 1 2 3 4 51 10 10 10 10 102 10 10 10 10 103 10 10 10 8 104 8 8 10 10 10Mean score 9.5 9.5 10 9.5 10aTotal possible score = 10.Table 3.Phase II Pretraining and Posttraining Survey ResultsGroup Pretraining survey score Posttraining survey score Score changeaInterventionParticipant 1 17 20 +3Participant 2 21 22 +1Participant 3 19 21 +2Participant 4 17 20 +3Mean 18.5 20.75 +2.25ComparisonParticipant 1 19 20 +1Participant 2 22 20 -2Participant 3 14 18 +4Participant 4 21 18 -3Participant 5 19 18 -1Research In Brief Developing a Master Food Volunteer Continuing Education Program JOE 57(2)©2019 Extension Journal Inc. 4Participant 6 19 20 +1Mean 19 19 0Note. Possible total score = 25.aNo significant difference in mean score change.DiscussionWe developed a continuing education module for MFVs to prepare them to support family and consumersciences Extension agents with a community-based diabetes self-management program. The MFV CEPprovides foundational knowledge of diabetes, an orientation to the BLD curriculum, information on bestpractices for food demonstrations, and a review of principles of food safety. We used a two-phase pilottesting approach in developing the MFV CEP—first gathering formative information in Phase I that we used toimprove the content and functionality of the MFV CEP and then testing the effectiveness of the MFV CEP forincreasing knowledge in Phase II. The process worked well, resulting in an improved MFV CEP. Although thesmall sample size of our pilot study limits statistical power and generalizability, our findings indicate that thefinal version of the MFV CEP improved participants' knowledge of diabetes, the role of diet and physicalactivity in blood sugar control, best practices for recipe demonstrations, and food safety. During the projectperiod, 35 new MFVs were trained, of whom 15 completed the MFV CEP.The online self-study format of the MFV CEP allows for wide dissemination of the program to MFVs across thestate and responds to the need for Extension to adopt technology to reach new audiences (Diem, Hino,Martin, & Meisenbach, 2011). This aspect of the program may, however, present a challenge for MFVs withlimited Internet access. This was the case with some MFVs who agreed to participate in the project but wereunable to complete the program due to lack of Internet access. Providing the program in a non-web-basedform is a potential solution to this challenge. We have adapted the program so that Extension agents canprovide the module information and associated quizzes in printed format to interested MFVs who cannotaccess the program online. Two MFVs have successfully completed the MFV CEP in this format.Extension volunteer programs play a significant role in extending the capacity of county Extension agents toprovide information and programs to the communities they serve. A sense of achievement is a significantmotivator for individuals to become Extension volunteers, and volunteers want to learn new things (Wolford,Cox, & Culp, 2001). The MFV program engages individuals with an interest in food and food preparation inassisting with programs that promote healthful eating and lifestyles and safe and economical food planningand preparation. Increasingly, lifestyle education programs for the prevention and management of chronicdisease have become part of the programs conducted by Extension agents. This circumstance has createdthe need for additional training for volunteers supporting these programs that goes beyond their initialvolunteer training. The MFV CEP responds to this need and offers the opportunity for volunteers to learn newthings related to programs addressing diabetes.The process we used to develop the MFV CEP can serve as a prototype for creating continuing educationprograms for Extension volunteers on subject matter specific to other Extension programs. Futureappropriately powered studies are needed for further developing and defining essential steps in the process.Overall, however, our approach has potential to increase programming capacity, impact, and reach forExtension agents in multiple education programs and may increase the retention of volunteers by offeringResearch In Brief Developing a Master Food Volunteer Continuing Education Program JOE 57(2)©2019 Extension Journal Inc. 5ongoing opportunities for learning and impactful engagement in targeted programs.ReferencesCenters for Disease Control and Prevention. (n.d.). Diagnosed diabetes. Retrieved 2016 fromhttp://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/data/national.html#Diem, K. G., Hino, J., Martin, D., & Meisenbach, T. (2011) Is Extension ready to adopt technology fordelivering programs and reaching new audiences? Journal of Extension, 49(6), Article 6FEA1. Available at:https://www.joe.org/joe/2011december/a1.phpGamm, L., Hutchison, L., Bellamy, G., & Dabney, B. J. (2002). Rural healthy people 2010: Identifying ruralhealth priorities and models for practice. Journal of Rural Health, 18(1), 9–14.Gamm, L. D., Hutchison, L. L., Dabney, B. J., & Dorsey, A. M. (Eds.). (2003). Rural healthy people 2010: Acompanion document to healthy people 2010. College Station, TX: Texas A&M University System HealthScience Center, School of Rural Public Health, Southwest Rural Health Research Center.Health Care Cost Institute. (2015). Issue briefs. Retrieved from http://www.healthcostinstitute.org/issue-briefsVirginia Department of Health, Division of Prevention and Health Promotion. (2011). Diabetes in Virginia.Richmond, VA: Author. Retrieved 2016 from Virginia Department of Health website:http://www.vahealth.org/cdpc/diabetes/Wolford, M., Cox, K., & Culp, K., III. (2001). Effective motivators for master volunteer programdevelopment. Journal of Extension, 39(2), Article 2RIB4. Available at:https://www.joe.org/joe/2001april/rb4.phpCopyright © by Extension Journal, Inc. ISSN 1077-5315. Articles appearing in the Journal become theproperty of the Journal. Single copies of articles may be reproduced in electronic or print form for use ineducational or training activities. Inclusion of articles in other publications, electronic sources, or systematiclarge-scale distribution may be done only with prior electronic or written permission of the Journal EditorialOffice, joe-ed@joe.org.If you have difficulties viewing or printing this page, please contact JOE Technical SupportResearch In Brief Developing a Master Food Volunteer Continuing Education Program JOE 57(2)©2019 Extension Journal Inc. 6

Developing a Master Food Volunteer Continuing Education Program: A Model for Volunteer Capacity Building

https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1453&context=joe

Developing a Master Food Volunteer Continuing Education Program: A Model for Volunteer Capacity Building

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Clemson University: TigerPrints