Food Safety Education Needs of High-School Students: Leftovers, Lunches, and Microwaves

BACKGROUND

We explored priority areas of food safety education needed by high-school students within Ontario, Canada.

METHODS

We analyzed transcripts from semistructured interviews with 20 experts in food safety, food safety education in youth, and high-school education in Ontario. Inductive thematic analysis was used to identify priority food safety education needs.

RESULTS

We identified 4 priority action areas for food safety education targeting students: how to safely do the things they typically do with food; how to keep themselves and their kitchens clean and safe; how microorganisms grow and how they can result in foodborne disease; and how to keep food out of the "danger zone" 4°C to 60°C (40° F to 140° F). The results indicate that students need specific education around the use of microwaves, consumption of convenience meals, preparing and handling foods at school events, and safe transportation of food for lunches, school trips, and sporting events.

CONCLUSIONS

High-school students need food safety education specific to their usual interactions with food, including the foods, tools, and settings students regularly encounter. Delivery of food safety education should emphasize sequences of safe food-handling behaviors for specific food interactions, such as reheating a meal in the microwave, rather than traditional food safety concepts, such as temperature abuse.

Observation of High School Students' Food Handling Behaviors: Do They Improve following a Food Safety Education Intervention?

Youth are a key audience for food safety education. They often engage in risky food handling behaviors, prepare food for others, and have limited experience and knowledge of safe food handling practices. Our goal was to investigate the effectiveness of an existing food handler training program for improving safe food handling behaviors among high school students in Ontario, Canada. However, because no schools agreed to provide control groups, we evaluated whether behaviors changed following delivery of the intervention program and whether changes were sustained over the school term. We measured 32 food safety behaviors, before the intervention and at 2-week and 3-month follow-up evaluations by in-person observations of students ( n = 119) enrolled in grade 10 and 12 Food and Nutrition classes ( n = 8) and who individually prepared recipes. We examined within-student changes in behaviors across the three time points, using mixed effects regression models to model trends in the total food handling score (of a possible 32 behaviors) and subscores for "clean" (17 behaviors), "separate" (14 behaviors), and "cook" (1 behavior), adjusting for student characteristics. At baseline, students ( n = 108) averaged 49.1% (15.7 of 32 behaviors; standard deviation = 5.8) correct food handling behaviors, and only 5.5% (6) of the 108 students used a food thermometer to check the doneness of the chicken (the "cook" behavior). All four behavior score types increased significantly ∼2 weeks postintervention and remained unchanged ∼3 months later. Student characteristics (e.g., having taken a prior food handling course) were not significant predictors of the total number of correctly performed food handling behaviors or of the "clean" or "separate" behaviors, working or volunteering in a food service establishment was the only characteristic significantly associated with food thermometer use (i.e., "cook"). Despite the significant increase in correct behaviors, students continued to use risky practices postintervention, suggesting that the risk of foodborne disease remained.