NUTR 101 Houston Community College Nutrition Food Safety Worksheet

  • Post category:Nursing
  • Reading time:8 mins read
  • Post author:

NUTR 101 Houston Community College Nutrition Food Safety Worksheet

Nursing homework help

TEAM MEMBERS: _______________________________________________ NUTR101 Intro to Nutrition Active Learning – Food Safety & Recalls1 (1 point) Overview: Your task today is to examine “real world” food safety issues. We will do this by considering materials from the websites of the United States Food and Drug Administration (US FDA) and their social media outreach @FDArecalls Twitter account. I have made printouts of these documents so that all groups start with the same collection. You are welcome to look at credible online supports, use graphing software, or hand draw diagrams. Use separate pages to draft your answers, then record the group’s answers on one handout, with attachments and turn in to Sara. Some Resources: https://www.fda.gov/Food/RecallsOutbreaksEmergencies/Outbreaks/default.htm https://www.fda.gov/Food/RecallsOutbreaksEmergencies/Outbreaks/default.htm?utm_ca mpaign=Outbreak_Tuna_04162019&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Eloqua https://twitter.com/FDArecalls Task #1: Develop working definitions for food borne illness, food recall, and food safety. Record answers here. Food borne illness: Food recall: Food safety: 1 Assignment developed by Sara Bachman Ducey, M.S., M.P.H., certified nutrition specialist, Professor of Nutrition and Food at Montgomery College, Rockville, Maryland, USA. Assignment may be used as is, or adapted with credit. Review the “Recalls, Market Withdrawals, & Safety Alerts” document that Sara has shared with you today. Task #2: Record the various types of “Reason/ Problem” and then count how many of each type occurred in the recalls from 2/01/19 to 11/15/2019. For example, one type category could be “undeclared ingredient.” Create a table of reasons and counts, here. Note: You may not need all rows. Recall Reason “Reason for / Problem” Counts of this reason/problem type Your team will determine the categories; that is part of this exercise. Task #3 Using the data and categories from Task #2, draw a histogram (bar chart) or a pie chart that expresses the percentages of each recall category during the time under consideration… Task #4: Select two recalls from the handout. Choose them from two different categories of “recall reasons.” Have a group discussion, supported by credible information (text or approved web sites), to develop a list of populations most at risk from this problem. Food Safety Recall Reason/ Problem List populations that you can identify as being most at risk for this issue (e.g. age or life cycle stage, gender, health status, allergy, immune compromise, or other) List those populations least at risk Task #5: Based on task #4, create a drawing or diagram to express how risks vary by population. This is creative; play with it. Use another sheet of paper, if need be. Task #6: Look at the Tweets that were sent by USFDA on their “@FDArecalls” account between October 2 and November 15, 2019, and then address these questions: “How do the Tweets match the data that you observed from the recalls lists?” “Does the USFDA emphasize some types/categories of recalls more so than others? “What patterns, if any, do you see in the Tweets?” Note: this account covers all recalls, not just food. Discussion/ Reflection: “What questions do you have, now, about food and drug safety?” ”How can an individual, or a small group, contribute to food safety communication?” Please offer other thoughts and “a-ha’s.” Paper for Note-taking and Practice Diagrams Paper for Note-taking and Practice Diagrams

  Excellent Good Fair Poor
Main Posting 45 (45%) – 50 (50%)

Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

 

Supported by at least three current, credible sources.

 

Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

40 (40%) – 44 (44%)

Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

 

At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.

 

Supported by at least three credible sources.

 

Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

35 (35%) – 39 (39%)

Responds to some of the discussion question(s).

 

One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.

 

Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

 

Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

 

Post is cited with two credible sources.

 

Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

 

Contains some APA formatting errors.

0 (0%) – 34 (34%)

Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.

 

Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.

 

Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

 

Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

 

Contains only one or no credible sources.

 

Not written clearly or concisely.

 

Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

 

Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Main Post: Timeliness 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)

Posts main post by day 3.

0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Does not post by day 3.

First Response 17 (17%) – 18 (18%)

Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.

 

Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.

 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.

 

Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

 

Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

15 (15%) – 16 (16%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

 

Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.

 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

13 (13%) – 14 (14%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

 

Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.

 

Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

 

Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

0 (0%) – 12 (12%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

 

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.

 

Responses to faculty questions are missing.

 

No credible sources are cited.

Second Response 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)

Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.

 

Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.

 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.

 

Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

 

Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

14 (14%) – 15 (15%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

 

Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.

 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

12 (12%) – 13 (13%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

 

Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.

 

Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

 

Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

0 (0%) – 11 (11%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

 

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.

 

Responses to faculty questions are missing.

 

No credible sources are cited.

Participation 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.

0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.

Total Points: 100