Sun, May 5, 2024
[Archive]
Volume 9, Issue 1 (Feb 2024)
JNFS 2024, 9(1): 59-68 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Dehghani M, Omidvar N, Doustmohammadian A, Tork Z, Arvand A. Food and Nutrition Literacy through Formal Education in Iran: A Content Analysis of School Textbooks. JNFS 2024; 9 (1) :59-68
URL: http://jnfs.ssu.ac.ir/article-1-756-en.html
URL: http://jnfs.ssu.ac.ir/article-1-756-en.html
Food and Nutrition Literacy through Formal Education in Iran: A Content Analysis of School Textbooks
Department of Community Nutrition, Faculty of Nutrition and Food Technology; and National Nutrition and Food Technology Research Institute; Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Full-Text [PDF 781 kb]
(108 Downloads)
| Abstract (HTML) (642 Views)
Introduction
a: N(%)
.JPG)
Full-Text: (33 Views)
Food and Nutrition Literacy through Formal Education in Iran: A Content Analysis of School Textbooks
Marzieh Dehghani; PhD 1, Nasrin Omidvar; PhD *2, Azam Doustmohammadian; PhD 3, Zeinab Tork; BSc 1 & Ayoub Arvand; BSc 1
1 Method of educational program and curriculum, Faculty of Psychology and Education, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran; 2 Department of Community Nutrition, Faculty of Nutrition and Food Technology; and National Nutrition and Food Technology Research Institute; Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran; 3 Gastrointestinal and Liver Diseases Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
| ARTICLE INFO | ABSTRACT | |
| ORIGINAL ARTICLE | Background: Formal education in any society should foster all aspects of students' growth. However, studying the curriculum of the country academic period indicates null food and nutrition. Nutrition, as an essential factor in the health of students, can play an effective role in their academic progress. This study aimed to analyze the content of school textbooks concerning food and nutrition literacy (FNLIT) concept and its components in Iran. Methods: This study is a content analysis of school textbooks during 2020-2021 academic year. All school textbooks published in 2020 for elementary (grades 1st to 6th), junior high school (grades 7th to 9th), as well as high schools (grades 10th to 12th) were included. Content analysis of the textbooks was conducted based on Krippendorf framework using FNLIT component checklist. The reliability assessment using Holsti method was 85.29% for elementary school textbooks and 84.78% for junior high school and high school textbooks. Results: The cognitive domain of FNLIT had the highest frequency (92%) within the text, images, and practice questions of the elementary school textbooks, followed by very few references regarding the skill domain (7%). The value-attitude domain was largely unnoticed (1%). In junior high school textbooks, the total number of FNLIT components was 439, of which the cognitive domain of 308 (70.16%) had the highest frequency, followed by the skill domain with 96 units (21.86%), while only 35 units were identified regarding the value-attitude domain (7.97%). In high school textbooks, 342 units of analysis were identified, 82.16% of which were related to cognition, 14.03% value-attitude domain, and only 3.80% were related to the skill domain. Conclusion: Meager attention is given to FNLIT and its components in school textbooks in Iran, especially concerning skill and value-attitude domains. Keywords: Content analysis; Literacy; Schools; Textbooks; Iran |
|
| Article history: Received: 27 Oct 2022 Revised: 23 Nov 2022 Accepted:28 Nov 2022 |
||
| *Corresponding author: omidvar.nasrin@gmail.com Department of Community Nutrition, Faculty of Nutrition and Food Technology, National Nutrition and Food Technology Research Institute, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. Fax: +982122360660 Tel: +982122360658 |
Introduction
Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) have lead to more than 60% of the disease burden and 70% of death by 2020 (Spronk et al., 2014). Unhealthy eating has been recogned as one of the most important risk factors associated with NCDs (Sheikholeslam et al., 2004). Eating is a complex behavior affecting multiple factors, from individual and social to environmental determinants.
Lack of awareness and skills related to food selection, preparation, and consumption can increase the risk of diseases. Making healthy food choices in different contexts, settings, and situations, so-called food and nutrition literacy (FNLIT), is considered essential to healthy eating (Vidgen and Gallegos, 2014).
Childhood and adolescence are critical periods in shaping dietary habits that will continue through adulthood (Chung, 2017, Ronto et al., 2016). Studies have shown that food/nutrition literacy is a key factor in shaping eating patterns of children and adolescents (Laska et al., 2012, Zoellner et al., 2011). School curriculums and textbooks are important sources of learning in this age group. Improvement of educational programs and related materials is critical in promoting community health and nutrition (Ronto et al., 2017). However, studies on the content analysis of school textbooks with regard to health literacy and, in particular FNLIT are scarce (D'Onofrio and Singer, 1983, Subba Rao et al., 2012). Rafieeian analyzed contents of science textbooks of elementary schools in Iran to address food groups (Rafiean, 2014). They found that among 471 surveyed units, the main attention was given to cereals and bread
group, and other food groups, specifically milk and dairy group, were ignored(Rafiean, 2014)(Rafiean, 2014)(Rafiean, 2014).
Considering the role of textbooks in formal education and due to the centralized education system in Iran, their content in terms of nutrition literacy is of great importance. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the content of school textbooks and curriculums in Iran with regard to FNLIT components. It is hoped that the results will provide insightful feedback for education planners and school textbook authors to re-evaluate educational content related to food and nutrition skills.
Materials and Methods
Study design and sampling
This descriptive study was based on the content analysis method. All textbooks published during 2020-2021 academic year for elementary (grade 1st to 6th), junior high school (grade 7th to 9th), as well as high schools (grades 10th to 12th) in Iran were included and analyzed. The analysis unit was all pages of 41 books of elementary school (4878 pages), 33 books of junior high school (4499 pages), and 94 books of high school (11931 pages), including texts, pictures, and practice questions, as well as the lesson-plan handbooks for the teachers.
Development and validity of the checklist: A checklist was developed based on previous studies (Ashoori et al., 2020, Doustmohammadian et al., 2017), which included components of FNLIT. The validity of the checklist was confirmed by an expert panel, including five experts from the fields of nutrition and curriculum design. The reliability of the checklist was also assessed based on the agreement rate between two coders, calculated by Holsti equation (Mao, 2017):
CR = 2 M N 1 + N 2 
where CR represents the percentage of agreement between two coders, M is the number of two coders' consensus decisions, and N1 and N2 are the number of coders’ decisions, respectively. The reliability assessment was 84.88% for elementary school textbooks and 84.78% for junior high school and high school textbooks. Therefore, the reliability of the checklist was satisfactory.
Content analysis procedure: Content analysis was performed through the following steps based on the content analysis framework presented by Krippendorf (Krippendorff, 2004):
Lack of awareness and skills related to food selection, preparation, and consumption can increase the risk of diseases. Making healthy food choices in different contexts, settings, and situations, so-called food and nutrition literacy (FNLIT), is considered essential to healthy eating (Vidgen and Gallegos, 2014).
Childhood and adolescence are critical periods in shaping dietary habits that will continue through adulthood (Chung, 2017, Ronto et al., 2016). Studies have shown that food/nutrition literacy is a key factor in shaping eating patterns of children and adolescents (Laska et al., 2012, Zoellner et al., 2011). School curriculums and textbooks are important sources of learning in this age group. Improvement of educational programs and related materials is critical in promoting community health and nutrition (Ronto et al., 2017). However, studies on the content analysis of school textbooks with regard to health literacy and, in particular FNLIT are scarce (D'Onofrio and Singer, 1983, Subba Rao et al., 2012). Rafieeian analyzed contents of science textbooks of elementary schools in Iran to address food groups (Rafiean, 2014). They found that among 471 surveyed units, the main attention was given to cereals and bread
group, and other food groups, specifically milk and dairy group, were ignored(Rafiean, 2014)(Rafiean, 2014)(Rafiean, 2014).
Considering the role of textbooks in formal education and due to the centralized education system in Iran, their content in terms of nutrition literacy is of great importance. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the content of school textbooks and curriculums in Iran with regard to FNLIT components. It is hoped that the results will provide insightful feedback for education planners and school textbook authors to re-evaluate educational content related to food and nutrition skills.
Materials and Methods
Study design and sampling
This descriptive study was based on the content analysis method. All textbooks published during 2020-2021 academic year for elementary (grade 1st to 6th), junior high school (grade 7th to 9th), as well as high schools (grades 10th to 12th) in Iran were included and analyzed. The analysis unit was all pages of 41 books of elementary school (4878 pages), 33 books of junior high school (4499 pages), and 94 books of high school (11931 pages), including texts, pictures, and practice questions, as well as the lesson-plan handbooks for the teachers.
Development and validity of the checklist: A checklist was developed based on previous studies (Ashoori et al., 2020, Doustmohammadian et al., 2017), which included components of FNLIT. The validity of the checklist was confirmed by an expert panel, including five experts from the fields of nutrition and curriculum design. The reliability of the checklist was also assessed based on the agreement rate between two coders, calculated by Holsti equation (Mao, 2017):
where CR represents the percentage of agreement between two coders, M is the number of two coders' consensus decisions, and N1 and N2 are the number of coders’ decisions, respectively. The reliability assessment was 84.88% for elementary school textbooks and 84.78% for junior high school and high school textbooks. Therefore, the reliability of the checklist was satisfactory.
Content analysis procedure: Content analysis was performed through the following steps based on the content analysis framework presented by Krippendorf (Krippendorff, 2004):
- First, texts, images, and practice questions from each school textbook related to the components of FNLIT were extracted and inserted into the chart.
- Second, the frequency of each component was counted.
- Third, according to the data, the number of elements of FNLIT in the textbooks was compared.
The content of textbooks was analyzed using FNLIT components (Doustmohammadian et al., 2017), presented in Table 1.
.JPG)
Ethical conciderations: The ethical committee of the National Nutrition and Food Technology Research Institute, Shahid Beheshti, University of Medical Sciences approved the study protocol (No: IR.SBMU.NNFTRI.REC.1398.018).
Results
In all the reviewed textbooks, from elementary to junior high school and high school, the cognitive domain was the most frequently addressed (92%) FNLIT component, compared to the skill domain (7%) and value domain (1%) (Table 2). The total number of FNLIT components identified in junior high school textbooks was 439, cognitive domain of which had the highest frequency (308 units, 70.16%). It was followed by the skill domain (96 units, 21.86%) and value domain (35 units, 7.97%), respectively (Table 3). In high school textbooks, cognitive aspects also had the highest frequency (281 units, 82.16%), while it was followed by value-attitude domain (48 units, 14.03%), and skill domain had the lowest frequency (13 units, 3.80%) (Table 4).
Some instrumental applications of food items were also identified. They included cases where foods were used to better understand the subject matter. For example, the use of butter or milk to teach the concept of liter and/or volume in elementary school, cakes or pizza to lead a division in junior high school math, or images of potatoes, chicken, and rice to define the genes and number of chromosomes in organisms in the 8th-grade science textbook. The frequency of instrumental application of food in textbooks was relatively high in almost all grades. The total frequency of instrumental application of FNLIT components in three cognitive, skill, and value domains in elementary school textbooks was 1001, 327 in high school, and 234 in junior high school (Figure 1).
While analyzing the content of elementary and high school textbooks, metadata (instrumental) findings were also studied. Although these components were not directly related to cognition and the main significance of nutrition in textbooks, they were used as tools for a better comprehension of lesson subjects. The frequency of instrumental application of food was high in textbooks of both elementary and junior high schools. For example, in elementary school textbooks, doogh (yogurt drink) or milk were used to teach the concept of liquid volume (liter) and capacity, and in high school textbooks, cake and pizza were used to teach fractions. In Farsi Language textbook of the seventh grade, the sentence "my friend ate an apple" was used for teaching sentence structure in Persian grammar. In addition, in experimental sciences textbook of the eighth grade, there were images of potatoes, chicken, and rice as tools for teaching genetics and the number of chromosomes in various organisms. Figure 1 represents the overall percentage of instrumental application of FNLIT in three areas, including cognition, skill, and nutritional value. The elementary, junior high school, and high school textbooks contained 1001, 327, and 234 examples, respectively.
Results
In all the reviewed textbooks, from elementary to junior high school and high school, the cognitive domain was the most frequently addressed (92%) FNLIT component, compared to the skill domain (7%) and value domain (1%) (Table 2). The total number of FNLIT components identified in junior high school textbooks was 439, cognitive domain of which had the highest frequency (308 units, 70.16%). It was followed by the skill domain (96 units, 21.86%) and value domain (35 units, 7.97%), respectively (Table 3). In high school textbooks, cognitive aspects also had the highest frequency (281 units, 82.16%), while it was followed by value-attitude domain (48 units, 14.03%), and skill domain had the lowest frequency (13 units, 3.80%) (Table 4).
Some instrumental applications of food items were also identified. They included cases where foods were used to better understand the subject matter. For example, the use of butter or milk to teach the concept of liter and/or volume in elementary school, cakes or pizza to lead a division in junior high school math, or images of potatoes, chicken, and rice to define the genes and number of chromosomes in organisms in the 8th-grade science textbook. The frequency of instrumental application of food in textbooks was relatively high in almost all grades. The total frequency of instrumental application of FNLIT components in three cognitive, skill, and value domains in elementary school textbooks was 1001, 327 in high school, and 234 in junior high school (Figure 1).
While analyzing the content of elementary and high school textbooks, metadata (instrumental) findings were also studied. Although these components were not directly related to cognition and the main significance of nutrition in textbooks, they were used as tools for a better comprehension of lesson subjects. The frequency of instrumental application of food was high in textbooks of both elementary and junior high schools. For example, in elementary school textbooks, doogh (yogurt drink) or milk were used to teach the concept of liquid volume (liter) and capacity, and in high school textbooks, cake and pizza were used to teach fractions. In Farsi Language textbook of the seventh grade, the sentence "my friend ate an apple" was used for teaching sentence structure in Persian grammar. In addition, in experimental sciences textbook of the eighth grade, there were images of potatoes, chicken, and rice as tools for teaching genetics and the number of chromosomes in various organisms. Figure 1 represents the overall percentage of instrumental application of FNLIT in three areas, including cognition, skill, and nutritional value. The elementary, junior high school, and high school textbooks contained 1001, 327, and 234 examples, respectively.
| Table 2. Frequencies and percentages of FNLIT components in texts school textbooks. | |||||||||
| Textbooks/Grade | Cognitive domain | Skill domain | Value domain | Total | % | ||||
| Health-based knowledge | Food knowledge and its preparation | Functional | Interactive | Critical | Food-related value issues | ||||
| Elementay | Grade 1st | 5 (2.2)a | 10(4.4) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 15 | 6.6 |
| Grade 2nd | 15(6.6) | 20(8.8) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 1(0.4) | 36 | 9.15 | |
| Grade 3rd | 5(2.2) | 15(6.6) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 20 | 8.8 | |
| Grade 4th | 5(2.2) | 18(7.9) | 5(2.2) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 28 | 5.5 | |
| Grade 5th | 7(3.0) | 23(10.1) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 30 | 13.2 | |
| Grade 6th | 46(20.3) | 37(16.3) | 12(5.3) | 0(0) | 2(0.8) | 0(0) | 97 | 42.9 | |
| Total | 83(36.7) | 94(47.7) | 14(7.1) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 2(1) | 197 | 100 | |
| Junior high schoolr-secondary | Grade 7th | 66 (46.1) | 27(18.8) | 25(17.4) | 7(4.8) | 4(2.7) | 14(9.7) | 143 | 59.0 |
| Grade 8th | 19(32.7) | 21(36.2) | 8(13.7) | 0(0) | 3(5.1) | 7(12.0) | 58 | 23.9 | |
| Grade 9th | 14(34.1) | 9(21.9) | 4(9.7) | 1(2.4) | 4(9.7) | 9(21.9) | 41 | 16.9 | |
| Total | 99(40.9) | 57(23.5) | 37(15.2) | 8(3.3) | 11(4.5) | 30(12.3) | 242 | 100 | |
| High school | Grade 10th | ||||||||
| Litrature/humanities | 13(61.9) | 4(19.0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 1(4.7) | 3(14.2) | 21 | 28.0 | |
| Experimental sciences | 14(51.8) | 7(25.9) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 1(3.7) | 5(18.5) | 27 | 36.0 | |
| Math/physi | 14(51.8) | 7(25.9) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 6(22.2) | 27 | 36.0 | |
| Grade 11th | |||||||||
| Litrature/humanities | 5(55.5) | 2(22.2) | 1(11.1) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 1(11.1) | 9 | 12.1 | |
| Experimental sciences | 19(57.5) | 9(27.2) | 1(3.0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 4(12.1) | 33 | 44.5 | |
| Math/physi | 17(53.1) | 11(34.3) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 4(12.5) | 32 | 16.6 | |
| Grade 12th | 0(0) | 0(0) | |||||||
| Litrature/humanities | 7(58.3) | 3(25.0) | 1(8.3) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 1(8.3) | 12 | 20.6 | |
| Experimental sciences | 17(70.8) | 5(20.8) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 2(8.3) | 24 | 36.3 | |
| Math/physi | 13(59.0) | 6(27.2) | 1(4.5) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 2(9.0) | 22 | 37.9 | |
| Health book | 43(89.5) | 1(2.0) | 0(0) | 1(2.0) | 0(0) | 3(6.2) | 48 | 45.2 | |
| Total | 162(63.5) | 55(21.5) | 4(1.5) | 1(0.3) | 2(0.7) | 31(12.1) | 255 | 100 | |
a: N (%)
| Table 3. Frequencies and percentages of FNLIT components in images of school textbooks. | |||||||||
| Textbooks/Grade | Cognitive domain | Skill domain | Value domain | Total | % | ||||
| Health-based knowledge | Food knowledge and its preparation | Functional | Interactive | Critical | Food-related value issues | ||||
| Elementay | Grade 1st | 9(3.7)a | 28(11.6) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 37 | 15.3 |
| Grade 2nd | 25(10.3) | 25(10.3) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 50 | 20.7 | |
| Grade 3th | 32(13.2) | 18(7.4) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 50 | 20.7 | |
| Grade 4th | 12(4.9) | 1294.9) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 24 | 9.9 | |
| Grade 5th | 0(0) | 13(5.3) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 13 | 5.3 | |
| Grade 6th | 24(9.9) | 24(9.9) | 15(6.2) | 0(0) | 4(1.6) | 0(0) | 67 | 27.8 | |
| Sum (%) | 102(42.3) | 120(49.7) | 15(6.2) | 0(0) | 4(1.6) | 0(0) | 241 | 100 | |
| Junior high school | Grade 7th | 65(69.1) | 7(7.4) | 17(18.0) | 0(0) | 3(3.1) | 2(2.1) | 94 | 61.8 |
| Grade 8th | 9(25.7) | 17(48.5) | 3(8.5) | 1(2.8) | 2(5.7) | 3(8.5) | 35 | 23.0 | |
| Grade 9th | 16(69.5) | 39(13.0) | 2(8.6) | 0(0) | 29(8.6) | 0(0) | 23 | 15.1 | |
| Total | 90(59.2) | 27(17.7) | 22(14.4) | 1(0.6) | 7(4.6) | 5(3.2) | 152 | 100 | |
| High school | Grade 10th | ||||||||
| Litrature/humanities | 0(0) | 1(100) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 1 | 14.2 | |
| Experimental sciences | 1(33.3) | 2(66.6) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 3 | 42.8 | |
| Math/physi | 2(66.6) | 1(33.3) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 3 | 42.8 | |
| Grade 11th | |||||||||
| Litrature/humanities | 3(100) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 3 | 5.4 | |
| Experimental sciences | 10(40.0) | 11(44.0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 4(16.0) | 25 | 45.4 | |
| Math/physi | 11(40.7) | 12(44.4) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 4(14.8) | 27 | 49.0 | |
| Grade 12th | |||||||||
| Litrature/humanities | 1(33.3) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 2(66.6) | 3 | 9.3 | |
| Experimental sciences | 4(28.5) | 6(42.8) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 4(28.5) | 14 | 43.7 | |
| Math/physi | 5(33.3) | 7(46.6) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 3(20.0) | 15 | 46.8 | |
| Health book | 35(97.2) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 1(2.7) | 36 | 52.9 | |
| Total | 72(55.3) | 40(30.7) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 18(13.8) | 130 | 100 | |
| a: N (%) | |||||||||
| Table 4. Sum of frequencies and percentages of FNLIT components in practice questions of school textbooks. | |||||||||
| Textbook/Grade | Cognitive domain | Skill domain | Value domain | Total | % | ||||
| Health-based knowledge |
Food knowledge and its preparation |
Functional | Interactive | Critical | Food-related value issues |
||||
| Elementay | Grade 1st | 13(5.6)a | 13(5.6) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 26 | 13.1 |
| Grade 2nd | 25(12.6) | 22(11.1) | 2(1.0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 2(1.0) | 51 | 25.8 | |
| Grade 3rd | 23(11.6) | 11(5.5) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 34 | 17.2 | |
| Grade 4th | 7(3.5) | 3(1.5) | 1(0.5) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 11 | 5.5 | |
| Grade 5th | 2(1) | 17(8.6) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 19 | 9.6 | |
| Grade 6th | 17(8.6) | 28(14.2) | 11(5.5) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 56 | 28.4 | |
| Total (%) | 87(44.1) | 94(47.7) | 14(7.1) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 2(1) | 197 | 100 | |
| Junior high school | Grade 7th | 23(67.6) | 5(14.7) | 3(8.8) | 2(5.8) | 1(2.9) | 0(0) | 34 | 75.5 |
| Grade 8th | 2(33.3) | 2(33.3) | 2(33.3) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 6 | 13.3 | |
| Grade 9th | 1(20.0) | 2(40.0) | 2(40.0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 5 | 11.1 | |
| Total (%) | 26(57.7) | 9(20.0) | 7(15.5) | 2(4.4) | 1(2.2) | 0(0) | 45 | 100 | |
| High school | Grade 10th | ||||||||
| Litrature/humanities | 2(66.6) | 1(33.3) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 3 | 16.6 | |
| Experimental sciences | 1(16.6) | 2(33.3) | 1(16.6) | 1(16.6) | 0(0) | 1(16.6) | 6 | 33.3 | |
| Math/physi | 2(22.2) | 1(11.1) | 2(22.2) | 2(22.2) | 1(11.1) | 1(11.1) | 9 | 50 | |
| Grade 11th | |||||||||
| Litrature/humanities | 3(60.0) | 1(20.0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 1(20.0) | 5 | 16.6 | |
| Experimental sciences | 2(50.0) | 2(50.0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 4 | 16.6 | |
| Math/physi | 2(50.0) | 2(50.0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 4 | 16.6 | |
| Grade 12th | |||||||||
| Litrature/humanities | 2(50.0) | 1(25.0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 1(25.0) | 4 | 36.3 | |
| Experimental sciences | 2(5.0) | 2(50.0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 4 | 36.3 | |
| Math/physi | 2(66.6) | 1(33.3) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 0(0) | 3 | 27.2 | |
| Health book | 6(54.5) | 1(9.0) | 1(9.0) | 0(0) | 1(9.0) | 2(18.1) | 11 | 50.0 | |
| Total | 24(45.2) | 14(26.4) | 4(7.5) | 3(5.6) | 2(5.6) | 6(11.3) | 53 | 100 | |
a: N(%)
Discussion
Content analysis of school textbooks in Iran showed that the share of FNLIT dimensions is relatively small and mostly limited to the cognitive domain. The extent to which each of the FNLIT dimensions and their components is taken into consideration differs across textbooks. Besides, there is no progressive approach to building up the students’ knowledge and skills regarding FNLIT. Among the FNLIT domains, there was a higher emphasis on cognitive domain, while the skill domain was very little addressed in elementary and high school textbooks. The value/attitude domain was almost ignored. Although nutrition knowledge is a key component of food literacy/nutrition literacy (Spronk et al., 2014) and has been identified as an essential component for behavior change, knowledge alone is generally not sufficient to produce sustained behavior change in complex behaviors (Worsley, 2002).
Textbooks of Iranian elementary schools (grades 1st to 6th) had paid little attention to some functional skills of FNLIT, including “food preparation” and the application of “food labeling and traffic lights” in the “work and technology”, “science” and “social studies” subjects. These findings are in line with the previous content analysis of elementary school textbooks in the country, which reported food preparation as the main subject related to food skills education in school textbooks (Rao et al., 2011, Salehi Omran and Abedini Baltork, 2011).
Furthermore, concerning the content of junior high school and high school textbooks, the cognitive domain of FNLIT was the dominant component being included, while there were not many in terms of skill and attitude domains. These findings are consistent with the results of the studies conducted by Rafiian (Nutbeam and Kickbusch, 2000), D'Onofrio (D'Onofrio and Singer, 1983), Salehi (Salehi Omran and Abedini Baltork, 2011), and Izadi (Izadi et al., 2010). In the current study, similar to Omidvar (Omidvar et al., 2016) , the instrumental application of FNLIT in the text and images of textbooks of Iranian formal education system, especially in the cognitive domain, was remarkable.
According to the existing evidence, to properly develop FNLIT in children, it is necessary to pay attention to all aspects of functional, interactive, and critical dimensions (Nutbeam and Kickbusch, 2000). Based on the evidence, the ultimate goal of FNLIT is to educate and develop students' skills and make them committed and responsible citizens as adults with regard to food and nutrition (Dyg, 2014). One of the major emphasis and orientation of the FNLIT components is to make fundamental changes in the three aspects of functional, interactive, and critical literacy level of the students (Goldstein, 2014). Textbooks are practically used as the essential instruments and medium of instruction to convey concepts, meanings, and values to students in all educational systems, specifically in centralized educational structures. In fact, the content of textbooks is regarded as an important curriculum element and a means of meeting its goals. Moreover, in most educational institutes and particularly in elementary and high schools, the materials and subjects included in textbooks are mainly theoretical and often impractical to affect students' food preferences and choices (Doustmohammadian et al., 2019).
In recent years, considering the high prevalence of unhealthy eating behaviors among children and adolescents and their negative consequences on their health (Cristina Lindsay et al., 2017), FNLIT has become a priority in framing and developing educational interventions and programs to improve children’s eating (Truman et al., 2017). It is required to include the FNLIT components in the content of textbooks, since formal education can play an important role in shaping students' food-related knowledge and skills. Therefore, it is suggested that authors of textbooks pay attention to this issue in future educational planning.
This is the first study to evaluate all school textbooks in terms of attention to FNLIT components. One of the most significant contributions of this study was creating and developing a checklist to analyze FNLIT, the reliability of which was assessed based on the agreement rate between two coders and calculated by the Holsti equation. The reliability of the checklist was satisfactory; nevertheless, it could be considered in further studies.
The study had some limitations, including the lack of specialized software for performing qualitative content analysis of textbooks. The techniques of data collection could also alter the information in subtle ways. The another was limited to the lack of similar background and previous research in this area.
Conclusion
This study showed that textbooks of primary and secondary education in Iran did not pay proper and objective attention to the dimensions of FNLIT. Among the components of FNLIT, cognitive domain was more included, while skill and value-attitude domains were almost ignored in text, images, and practice questions of school textbooks. The study findings have general applicability and can provide useful insights for policymakers and textbook authors in improving the quality of higher education. Based on the results, there is a need to revise the content of these textbooks to ensure proper and systematic coverage of FNLIT domains.
Acknowledgement
This research was conducted by a grant from research council of National Nutrition and Food Technology Research Institute (NNFTRI), Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences.
Funding
This work was supported by the research council of National Nutrition and Food Technology Research Institute (NNFTRI), Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences under Grant [number IR.SBMU.NNFTRI.REC.1398.018].
Conflict of interests
The author(s) declare no potential conflict of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Authors' contributions
Omidvar N and Dehghani M designed research; Arvand A and Tork Z conducted research; Doustmohammadian A, Arvand A and Tork Z analyzed data; and Doustmohammadian A and Dehghani M wrote the paper. Omidvar N had primary responsibility for final content. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
References
Ashoori M, Omidvar N, Eini-Zinab H, Shakibazadeh E & Doustmohamadian A 2020. Development and validation of food and nutrition literacy assessment tool for iranian high-school graduates and youth. International journal of preventive medicine. 11: 185.
Chung LMY 2017. Food Literacy of Adolescents as a Predictor of Their Healthy Eating and Dietary Quality. Journal of child and adolescent behavior. 5 (3): 1-2.
Cristina Lindsay A, Sitthisongkram S, Greaney ML, Wallington SF & Ruengdej P 2017. Non-responsive feeding practices, unhealthy eating behaviors, and risk of child overweight and obesity in southeast asia: a systematic review. International journal of environmental research and public health. 14 (4): 436.
D'Onofrio CN & Singer R 1983. Unplanned nutrition education in the schools: sugar in elementary reading texts. Journal of school health. 53 (9): 521-526.
Doustmohammadian A, et al. 2019. Food and nutrition literacy (FNLIT) and its predictors in primary schoolchildren in Iran. Health promotion international. 34 (5): 1002-1013.
Doustmohammadian A, et al. 2017. Developing and validating a scale to measure Food and Nutrition Literacy (FNLIT) in elementary school children in Iran. PloS one. 12 (6): e0179196.
Dyg PM 2014. Fostering Food Literacy and Food Citizenship through Farm-School Cooperation and beyond. Citeseer.
Goldstein S 2014. Advancing youth education on food and food systems to increase food literacy. York University, : Ontario, Canada.
Izadi S, Salehi O, Fathi Vajargah K & Abedini Blatter M 2010. Content Analysis of Elementary School Textbooks Based on Health Education Components. Quartery journal of educational innovation. 9 (33): 139-162.
Krippendorff K 2004. Reliability in content analysis: Some common misconceptions and recommendations. Human communication research. 30 (3): 411-433.
Laska MN, Larson NI, Neumark-Sztainer D & Story M 2012. Does involvement in food preparation track from adolescence to young adulthood and is it associated with better dietary quality? Findings from a 10-year longitudinal study. Public health nutrition. 15 (7): 1150-1158.
Mao Y 2017. Intercoder reliability techniques: Holsti method. The SAGE encyclopedia of communication research methods. 2: 740-743.
Nutbeam D & Kickbusch I 2000. Advancing health literacy: a global challenge for the 21st century. Health promotion international. 15 (3): 183-184.
Omidvar N, Amini M, Zahedi-Rad M & Khatam A 2016. Content analysis of school textbooks in a view of improving nutritional knowledge and skills of primary school children. In The 2th international and the 14th Iranian nutrition congress 4-7 September, Tehran, Iran, .
Rafiean M 2014. Content analysis of scienses books in term of addressing nutrition literacy. In Tehran: Shahid Rajaee Teacher Training University.
Rao GS, Vijayapushapm T, Venkaiah K & Pavarala V 2011. Quantitative and qualitative analysis of nutrition and food safety information in school science textbooks of India. Health education journal. 71 (6): 725-735.
Ronto R, Ball L, Pendergast D & Harris N 2016. Adolescents' perspectives on food literacy and its impact on their dietary behaviours. Appetite. 107: 549-557.
Ronto R, Ball L, Pendergast D & Harris N 2017. Environmental factors of food literacy in Australian high schools: views of home economics teachers. International journal of consumer studies. 41 (1): 19-27.
Salehi Omran E & Abedini Baltork M 2011. Content analysis of health information components in school textbooks. Health information management. 8 (4).
Sheikholeslam R, Mohamad A, Mohammad K & Vaseghi S 2004. Non communicable disease risk factors in Iran. Asia Pacific journal of clinical nutrition. 13.
Spronk I, Kullen C, Burdon C & O'Connor H 2014. Relationship between nutrition knowledge and dietary intake. British journal of nutrition. 111 (10): 1713-1726.
Subba Rao G, Vijayapushapm T, Venkaiah K & Pavarala V 2012. Quantitative and qualitative analysis of nutrition and food safety information in school science textbooks of India. Health education journal. 71 (6): 725-735.
Truman E, et al. 2017. Promoting children’s health: Toward a consensus statement on food literacy. Canadian journal of public health. 108 (2): e211-e213.
Vidgen HA & Gallegos D 2014. Defining food literacy and its components. Appetite. 76: 50-59.
Worsley A 2002. Nutrition knowledge and food consumption: can nutrition knowledge change food behaviour? Asia Pacific journal of clinical nutrition. 11 .S579-S585.
Zoellner J, et al. 2011. Health literacy is associated with healthy eating index scores and sugar-sweetened beverage intake: findings from the rural Lower Mississippi Delta. Journal of the American Dietetic Association. 111 (7): 1012-1020.
Content analysis of school textbooks in Iran showed that the share of FNLIT dimensions is relatively small and mostly limited to the cognitive domain. The extent to which each of the FNLIT dimensions and their components is taken into consideration differs across textbooks. Besides, there is no progressive approach to building up the students’ knowledge and skills regarding FNLIT. Among the FNLIT domains, there was a higher emphasis on cognitive domain, while the skill domain was very little addressed in elementary and high school textbooks. The value/attitude domain was almost ignored. Although nutrition knowledge is a key component of food literacy/nutrition literacy (Spronk et al., 2014) and has been identified as an essential component for behavior change, knowledge alone is generally not sufficient to produce sustained behavior change in complex behaviors (Worsley, 2002).
Textbooks of Iranian elementary schools (grades 1st to 6th) had paid little attention to some functional skills of FNLIT, including “food preparation” and the application of “food labeling and traffic lights” in the “work and technology”, “science” and “social studies” subjects. These findings are in line with the previous content analysis of elementary school textbooks in the country, which reported food preparation as the main subject related to food skills education in school textbooks (Rao et al., 2011, Salehi Omran and Abedini Baltork, 2011).
Furthermore, concerning the content of junior high school and high school textbooks, the cognitive domain of FNLIT was the dominant component being included, while there were not many in terms of skill and attitude domains. These findings are consistent with the results of the studies conducted by Rafiian (Nutbeam and Kickbusch, 2000), D'Onofrio (D'Onofrio and Singer, 1983), Salehi (Salehi Omran and Abedini Baltork, 2011), and Izadi (Izadi et al., 2010). In the current study, similar to Omidvar (Omidvar et al., 2016) , the instrumental application of FNLIT in the text and images of textbooks of Iranian formal education system, especially in the cognitive domain, was remarkable.
According to the existing evidence, to properly develop FNLIT in children, it is necessary to pay attention to all aspects of functional, interactive, and critical dimensions (Nutbeam and Kickbusch, 2000). Based on the evidence, the ultimate goal of FNLIT is to educate and develop students' skills and make them committed and responsible citizens as adults with regard to food and nutrition (Dyg, 2014). One of the major emphasis and orientation of the FNLIT components is to make fundamental changes in the three aspects of functional, interactive, and critical literacy level of the students (Goldstein, 2014). Textbooks are practically used as the essential instruments and medium of instruction to convey concepts, meanings, and values to students in all educational systems, specifically in centralized educational structures. In fact, the content of textbooks is regarded as an important curriculum element and a means of meeting its goals. Moreover, in most educational institutes and particularly in elementary and high schools, the materials and subjects included in textbooks are mainly theoretical and often impractical to affect students' food preferences and choices (Doustmohammadian et al., 2019).
In recent years, considering the high prevalence of unhealthy eating behaviors among children and adolescents and their negative consequences on their health (Cristina Lindsay et al., 2017), FNLIT has become a priority in framing and developing educational interventions and programs to improve children’s eating (Truman et al., 2017). It is required to include the FNLIT components in the content of textbooks, since formal education can play an important role in shaping students' food-related knowledge and skills. Therefore, it is suggested that authors of textbooks pay attention to this issue in future educational planning.
This is the first study to evaluate all school textbooks in terms of attention to FNLIT components. One of the most significant contributions of this study was creating and developing a checklist to analyze FNLIT, the reliability of which was assessed based on the agreement rate between two coders and calculated by the Holsti equation. The reliability of the checklist was satisfactory; nevertheless, it could be considered in further studies.
The study had some limitations, including the lack of specialized software for performing qualitative content analysis of textbooks. The techniques of data collection could also alter the information in subtle ways. The another was limited to the lack of similar background and previous research in this area.
Conclusion
This study showed that textbooks of primary and secondary education in Iran did not pay proper and objective attention to the dimensions of FNLIT. Among the components of FNLIT, cognitive domain was more included, while skill and value-attitude domains were almost ignored in text, images, and practice questions of school textbooks. The study findings have general applicability and can provide useful insights for policymakers and textbook authors in improving the quality of higher education. Based on the results, there is a need to revise the content of these textbooks to ensure proper and systematic coverage of FNLIT domains.
Acknowledgement
This research was conducted by a grant from research council of National Nutrition and Food Technology Research Institute (NNFTRI), Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences.
Funding
This work was supported by the research council of National Nutrition and Food Technology Research Institute (NNFTRI), Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences under Grant [number IR.SBMU.NNFTRI.REC.1398.018].
Conflict of interests
The author(s) declare no potential conflict of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Authors' contributions
Omidvar N and Dehghani M designed research; Arvand A and Tork Z conducted research; Doustmohammadian A, Arvand A and Tork Z analyzed data; and Doustmohammadian A and Dehghani M wrote the paper. Omidvar N had primary responsibility for final content. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
References
Ashoori M, Omidvar N, Eini-Zinab H, Shakibazadeh E & Doustmohamadian A 2020. Development and validation of food and nutrition literacy assessment tool for iranian high-school graduates and youth. International journal of preventive medicine. 11: 185.
Chung LMY 2017. Food Literacy of Adolescents as a Predictor of Their Healthy Eating and Dietary Quality. Journal of child and adolescent behavior. 5 (3): 1-2.
Cristina Lindsay A, Sitthisongkram S, Greaney ML, Wallington SF & Ruengdej P 2017. Non-responsive feeding practices, unhealthy eating behaviors, and risk of child overweight and obesity in southeast asia: a systematic review. International journal of environmental research and public health. 14 (4): 436.
D'Onofrio CN & Singer R 1983. Unplanned nutrition education in the schools: sugar in elementary reading texts. Journal of school health. 53 (9): 521-526.
Doustmohammadian A, et al. 2019. Food and nutrition literacy (FNLIT) and its predictors in primary schoolchildren in Iran. Health promotion international. 34 (5): 1002-1013.
Doustmohammadian A, et al. 2017. Developing and validating a scale to measure Food and Nutrition Literacy (FNLIT) in elementary school children in Iran. PloS one. 12 (6): e0179196.
Dyg PM 2014. Fostering Food Literacy and Food Citizenship through Farm-School Cooperation and beyond. Citeseer.
Goldstein S 2014. Advancing youth education on food and food systems to increase food literacy. York University, : Ontario, Canada.
Izadi S, Salehi O, Fathi Vajargah K & Abedini Blatter M 2010. Content Analysis of Elementary School Textbooks Based on Health Education Components. Quartery journal of educational innovation. 9 (33): 139-162.
Krippendorff K 2004. Reliability in content analysis: Some common misconceptions and recommendations. Human communication research. 30 (3): 411-433.
Laska MN, Larson NI, Neumark-Sztainer D & Story M 2012. Does involvement in food preparation track from adolescence to young adulthood and is it associated with better dietary quality? Findings from a 10-year longitudinal study. Public health nutrition. 15 (7): 1150-1158.
Mao Y 2017. Intercoder reliability techniques: Holsti method. The SAGE encyclopedia of communication research methods. 2: 740-743.
Nutbeam D & Kickbusch I 2000. Advancing health literacy: a global challenge for the 21st century. Health promotion international. 15 (3): 183-184.
Omidvar N, Amini M, Zahedi-Rad M & Khatam A 2016. Content analysis of school textbooks in a view of improving nutritional knowledge and skills of primary school children. In The 2th international and the 14th Iranian nutrition congress 4-7 September, Tehran, Iran, .
Rafiean M 2014. Content analysis of scienses books in term of addressing nutrition literacy. In Tehran: Shahid Rajaee Teacher Training University.
Rao GS, Vijayapushapm T, Venkaiah K & Pavarala V 2011. Quantitative and qualitative analysis of nutrition and food safety information in school science textbooks of India. Health education journal. 71 (6): 725-735.
Ronto R, Ball L, Pendergast D & Harris N 2016. Adolescents' perspectives on food literacy and its impact on their dietary behaviours. Appetite. 107: 549-557.
Ronto R, Ball L, Pendergast D & Harris N 2017. Environmental factors of food literacy in Australian high schools: views of home economics teachers. International journal of consumer studies. 41 (1): 19-27.
Salehi Omran E & Abedini Baltork M 2011. Content analysis of health information components in school textbooks. Health information management. 8 (4).
Sheikholeslam R, Mohamad A, Mohammad K & Vaseghi S 2004. Non communicable disease risk factors in Iran. Asia Pacific journal of clinical nutrition. 13.
Spronk I, Kullen C, Burdon C & O'Connor H 2014. Relationship between nutrition knowledge and dietary intake. British journal of nutrition. 111 (10): 1713-1726.
Subba Rao G, Vijayapushapm T, Venkaiah K & Pavarala V 2012. Quantitative and qualitative analysis of nutrition and food safety information in school science textbooks of India. Health education journal. 71 (6): 725-735.
Truman E, et al. 2017. Promoting children’s health: Toward a consensus statement on food literacy. Canadian journal of public health. 108 (2): e211-e213.
Vidgen HA & Gallegos D 2014. Defining food literacy and its components. Appetite. 76: 50-59.
Worsley A 2002. Nutrition knowledge and food consumption: can nutrition knowledge change food behaviour? Asia Pacific journal of clinical nutrition. 11 .S579-S585.
Zoellner J, et al. 2011. Health literacy is associated with healthy eating index scores and sugar-sweetened beverage intake: findings from the rural Lower Mississippi Delta. Journal of the American Dietetic Association. 111 (7): 1012-1020.
Type of article: orginal article |
Subject:
public specific
Received: 2022/10/27 | Published: 2024/02/21 | ePublished: 2024/02/21
Received: 2022/10/27 | Published: 2024/02/21 | ePublished: 2024/02/21
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
