• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文学位 >Comparison of the pretest/posttest vs post/then survey tool in the context of consumer food safety education.
【24h】

Comparison of the pretest/posttest vs post/then survey tool in the context of consumer food safety education.

机译：在消费者食品安全教育的背景下比较前测/后测与后测/后调查工具。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Faced with decreasing budgets, food safety educators must develop effective evaluation strategies in order to accurately prove intervention impacts to funding providers. While many educators use the pretest/posttest self-report tool to record consumers' knowledge changes, results can be skewed as consumers have a misperception of their knowledge levels in the pretest stage, over- or underestimating their knowledge. Subject to an altered frame of reference, or "response shift bias," after the intervention, consumers' knowledge is thus reflected inaccurately in the posttest. This can lead to conservative survey scores and inaccurate intervention impact(s).; An alternative, the post/then tool, retrospectively measures participants' resulting knowledge change asking the pretest and posttest questions after the intervention. This reduces response-shift bias and more accurately measures impact(s).; This study compared pretest/posttest and post/then mean scores within the context of food safety education for seniors. A pretest/post/then survey was also given to further estimate the accuracy of results. While the latter approach failed due to an inadequate number of participants, the post/then approach gave a more accurate portrayal of impacts and less conservative scores in eight of eight dimensions versus the discovery of meaningful scores in just five of eight dimensions in the pretest/posttest tool. These results can be used to provide justification for program existence and the maintenance of funding.
机译：面对预算减少，食品安全教育者必须制定有效的评估策略，以准确证明干预措施对资金提供者的影响。尽管许多教育工作者使用测验前/测验后自我报告工具记录消费者的知识变化，但是由于消费者在测验前对自己的知识水平有误解，高估或低估了他们的知识，因此结果可能会出现偏差。干预后，如果参照系发生变化，或“响应偏差”，则消费者的知识在后测中会被不正确地反映出来。这可能导致保守的调查评分和不正确的干预影响。另一种方法是“发布/之后”工具，该工具可以追溯性地衡量参与者在干预后提出的测试前和测试后问题的知识变化。这样可以减少响应偏移偏差，并更准确地评估影响。这项研究在老年人食品安全教育的背景下比较了测试前/测试后和测试后/然后平均得分。还进行了前测/后测/然后调查，以进一步估计结果的准确性。尽管后一种方法由于参与者数量不足而失败，但是“后/后”方法更准确地刻画了影响，并且八个维度中的八个维度的保守性得分较低，而在预测试/八个维度中，只有五个维度中的五个有意义的得分的发现后测工具。这些结果可用于为程序的存在和资金的维持提供依据。

著录项

  • 作者

    Wakenight, Trent Wilson.;

  • 作者单位

    Michigan State University.;

  • 授予单位 Michigan State University.;
  • 学科 Speech Communication.; Business Administration Marketing.; Education Health.; Education Tests and Measurements.
  • 学位 M.A.
  • 年度 2004
  • 页码 58 p.
  • 总页数 58
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 语言学;贸易经济;教育;教育;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号