Classroom Techniques ........
Developing Web-based Interdisciplinary Modules to Teach Solid Waste/Residue Management in the Food Chain C.W. Shanklin*, H. Huang*, Kyung-Eun Lee*, C. Ok*, S. Seo*, S.A. Flores** *Dept. of Hotel, Restaurant, Institution Management and Dietetics, Kansas State Univ., Manhattan, Kans., USA **Education Consultant, Chalfont, Pa., USA
Introduction
ABSTRACT: A Web-based interdisciplinary instructional resource was developed to provide information that will increase food science educators’ knowledge of waste management in the food chain. The 4 modules are: legal implications for management of wastes/residues; identification, quantification, and characterization of wastes/residues; management of wastes/residues; and economic ramifications of wastes/ residues. Instructional materials are available for faculty and GTAs for use in teaching the 4 modules. Food science educators can use this Web-based instructional tool as an educational resource in their undergraduate classes to enhance students’ knowledge and ability to solve critical environmental problems in the food chain. See http://www.oznet.ksu. edu/swr/home/welcome.htm
© 2003 Institute of Food Technologists
Growing national and world populations are creating an increasing burden on all natural resources, particularly water, energy, and food (Bongaarts 1996; Brown 2001; Conway 1999; U.S. Bureau of the Census 2002a, b). The world population is expected to reach between 10 and 12 billion in the 21st century. Demand for food, forest, and livestock products is expected to double due to the projected population growth (Bennett 2000). Several other factors, including high levels of consumption, industrialization, inefficient technology, and government policy, are contributing to environmental decline (Population Reference Bureau 2002). Global concern regarding the impact of industry on the environment has intensified in recent years. Industries, including food processing and foodservice industries, are currently facing environmental challenges such as legal requirements, consumer demand for more environmental friendly practices, and financial constraints (Adelaja and others 2000; Mebratu 2001; Yturri 2002). All industries are being asked to evaluate current environmental management practices. Enghagen and Hott (1992) and Weaver and others (1997) found that hospitality students perceived environmental issues as a major ethical concern that they would be expected to address during their careers. Students perceived that they lacked the knowledge to make environmental decisions in the work place (Shanklin and others 1999). Educators need to provide students with the knowledge to make effective decisions concerning environmental issues in the food chain. The Institute of Food Technologists (2001) identified waste management as a required component within undergraduate food science curricula. Food science graduates should understand the requirement for waste management in food processing. Food science and foodservice programs include limited, if any, information on the management of wastes/residues in their current curricula. Educators who lack expertise in environmental issues may fail to provide adequate information in their courses. Wade (1997) found that foodservice faculty perceived themselves to have very limited expertise in environmental issues. Use of the Internet as an instructional tool
The Internet has become a useful tool for educators, researchers, and professionals in the food industry (Bassett 2000; Conley and Giese 2000; Gower and Cho 2001; Lindsay and McLaren 2000; Lovell 2000; Simon 2001). Researchers have described how educators are using the Internet to enhance courses within the food chain and the educational benefit of this tool (Daniel 1999; Groves 2001; Javenkoski and Schmidt 2000; McNulty and others 2000; Singh and Courtois 1999). In the food industry, the Internet is being used as a management tool in all aspects of the business, such as marketing, product development, and procurement (Bassett 2000; Conley and Giese 2000). The Internet was the media of choice for the instructional resource described in this paper. Development of this resource was funded by a U.S. Dept. of Agriculture (USDA) Higher Education Challenge Grant. Several technical resources are available that address management of wastes/residues; however, we did not find any instructional resources designed especially for Vol. 2, 2003—JOURNAL OF FOOD SCIENCE EDUCATION
47
JFSE: Journal of Food Science Education undergraduate food science courses. Since food science courses cross many disciplines (general agriculture, grain science, animal science, foodservice, and so on) and programs (food science, dietetics, hotel and restaurant management, and so on), resources about waste/residue management should be easily adaptable to different disciplines and undergraduate levels. The purposes of this project were to develop Web-based interdisciplinary modules and instructional materials to provide resources that will increase faculty’s and graduate teaching assistants’ (GTA) knowledge of waste management and waste management practices in the food chain and to enhance instruction in food science and foodservice courses related to these concepts. The ultimate goal is to prepare students to make sound decisions regarding environmental issues when they assume managerial positions within the food processing and foodservice industries.
Materials and Methods Development of educational resources
Four modules were developed to provide food science educators with information about the management of wastes/residues in the food processing and foodservice industries (Figure 1). The 4 modules were:legal implications for the management of wastes/ residues; identification, quantification, and characterization of wastes/residues; management of wastes/residues; and economic ramifications of wastes/residues. Articles obtained from an indepth review of literature, documents from government agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and resources from trade and professional associations were reviewed to identify the content of the modules. Experts in waste management, food scientists, industry representatives, extension specialists, and
educators reviewed and evaluated the modules to determine the currency and accuracy of the information. A minimum of 2 content specialists were selected to review each module. The content specialists were selected based on recommendations of colleagues who were familiar with these individuals’ expertise through professional interactions or publications, and the modules were modified based on the feedback received. Instructional materials were developed to facilitate educators’ integration of the concepts of the modules into their classes. The instructional materials contain a brief description of the module, learning objectives, lecture outlines, suggestions for class discussion and activities, Internet exercises, review questions (problems), case studies, a test bank, and PowerPoint slides with speaking notes. The lessons, activities, assignments, and projects can be adapted for different academic levels and disciplines. Five case studies were developed to assist faculty in providing examples, to incorporate experiential and active learning into their classes, and to increase students’ understanding of waste management methods and economic evaluation of waste management practices. The facilities described in the case studies were:a metropolitan school district foodservice operation, a meat processing company, Wood Recycle and Composting Center, The Free State Brewing Company, and Java Espresso and Bakery. The facilities were visited and interviews were conducted with the managers or other designated company representatives to obtain information about the quantity and type of wastes/residues generated and current waste management practices. Content of the case studies was reviewed by the manager at each site for accuracy and revisions were made if requested. The manager signed a release form giving us permission to use the information and photographs in the case study. The contents of the 4 modules and instructional materials were
Figure 1—Development of modules and instructional materials 48
JOURNAL OF FOOD SCIENCE EDUCATION—Vol. 2, 2003
Available on-line at: www.ift.org
Web modules for teaching waste management . . . Table 1—Descriptions of modules Modules Module 1: Legal Implications for the Management of Waste
Module 2: Identification, Quantification, and Characterization of Residues/Wastes
Content
Descriptions of Section
Clean Water Act Occupational Safety and Health Act Clean Air Act Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Safety Drinking Water Act Emergency Planning and Community Right-to Know Act Toxic Substances Control Act Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act
The goal, enforcement agency, description of regulations, definition and identification of terms, and requirements for each law are reviewed and summarized.
General Characterization of Wastes and Residues from the Food Chain Identification
This section presents an introduction to wastes and residues from the food chain and some waste statistics by industry The section provides the information on process flow design and waste characterization /assessment methods. It also describes the location of residues and waste streams and waste residue terminology. The methods for quantifying waste are presented including conversion tables. The section describes the major characterization parameters used with wastes/residues and the measurement methods most commonly used. The physical, chemical, and microbiological properties of food are included.
Quantification Characterization
Module 3: Management of Wastes/Residues
Integrated Waste Management
Waste Management Methods
Other Considerations Influencing the Management of Wastes/Residues
Module 4: Economics of Wastes/Residues in Food Processing and Foodservice Facilities
Basics of Economic Assessment
Cost of Disposal of Wastes/Residues Cost Components of Alternative Methods
The definition and components of the EPA hierarchy is described in the first section. The current status of waste management practices in the U.S. is presented. Waste management methods most frequently used by food processors and foodservice operations are discussed in this section. Methods include source reduction and reuse, gleaning and food recovery, animal feeding, recycling, composting, fermentation, intermediate disposal methods (such as the use of pulpers and garbage disposals), landfills, incineration, and land application. Other considerations influencing the management of wastes/residues are addressed in this section, including the status of packaging and packaging guidelines, ecopurchasing, and energy and water requirements. The first section is designed to increase understanding of economic assessment of waste management for a food processor or a foodservice facility. The fundamentals of a limited economic analysis and the most common procedures are described. The cost elements of disposing of wastes and residues are described in this section. This section identifies cost components of different waste management methods. Several alternatives are included in this section, such as food recovery, animal feed, composting, pulper, garbage disposal, landfills, and land application.
converted into a World Wide Web (WWW) format using FrontPage®. The instructional materials are password-protected. The Web-based modules and instructional materials were published on the K-State Research and Extension server. To make the resources accessible to people with disability through the WWW, we followed the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG 1.0) developed by the World Wide Web Consortium’s Web Accessibility Initiative.
friendliness, and Website quality. The results were used to revise the contents and finalize the instructional resources. The 2nd questionnaire, an on-line user evaluation form, was developed to provide continuous feedback from users, which will be used to update the modules and instructional materials.
Evaluation of modules and instructional materials
Descriptions of the 4 modules
Two questionnaires were developed to evaluate the effectiveness of the modules and instructional materials. The 1st questionnaire was used to obtain feedback from educators prior to publishing the resources on the Web. Faculty who teach food science and foodservice management courses evaluated the resources for currency of information, instructional value, clarity, technological
The 4 modules were developed and published on http:// www.oznet.ksu.edu/swr/home/welcome.htm. Module 1 presents an overview of the key laws and regulations that influence waste management practices in the food processing and foodservice industries. The laws summarized are the: Clean Water Act, Occupational Safety and Health Act, Clean Air Act, Resource Conserva-
Available on-line at: www.ift.org
Results and Discussion
Vol. 2, 2003—JOURNAL OF FOOD SCIENCE EDUCATION
49
JFSE: Journal of Food Science Education Table 2—Summary of instructional materials Contents Module description Learning objectives Lecture outlines Class discussion and activities Internet exercises Review questions (problems) and answer keys Cases studies
Test banks PowerPoint slides with speaking notes
Descriptions A brief description of the module Brief statements describing what students will be able to do after working through this module. The .PDF files are available for faculty and GTAs to use. Suggestions for class discussion and activities that faculty and GTAs can use in class to facilitate interaction and discussion within courses are included. The .PDF files are available to use. Internet exercises are provided that can be given to students as assignments. The .PDF files are available for faculty and GTAs to use. Review questions (problems) are included that can be given to the students as class assignments. Answer keys are provided as references for faculty and GTAs. Both questions and keys are available as MS Word text files and as PDFs. Five case studies are discussed. Each case study includes:descriptions of the operation, waste/ residues generated, waste management practices, resources used, operating procedures for maintaining compliance with regulations and other relevant information, and problems and challenges. Each module contains a test bank that includes:multiple choice, short answer, and application/ essay questions. They are available as both MS Word text files and as PDFs. PowerPoint slides are available in two forms:as regular PowerPoint files that can be shown with a data projector and as files that can be made into overhead transparencies.
tion and Recovery Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act, Toxic Substances Control Act, and Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act. Table 1 presents the content of each module. References, Websites, and other resources also are provided to assist educators desiring more detailed information about the different laws and regulations. The application of these laws and regulations in the food processing and foodservice industries are discussed, including the responsibilities of owners and managers to comply with Federal and state regulations. Module 2 presents an overview of methods to quantify and characterize wastes/residues from food processing and foodservice operations. Definitions, formulas, and conversion charts are presented. Module 3 presents an overview of the different components of the EPA’s hierarchy for managing solid waste. The waste management methods most frequently used by the food processing and foodservice operations are described. Definitions, considerations, and implementations of each method are addressed. Module 4 presents information on the economics of wastes/residues, including basics of economic assessment, costs of waste/residue disposal, and cost components for different waste management methods. Examples are provided to illustrate concepts in different methods. A case scenario also is included to illustrate the economic evaluation of waste management methods. Instructional materials
Instructional materials were developed to provide resources that faculty and GTAs can use to teach the 4 modules (Table 2). Five case studies are provided to illustrate the type of wastes/residues and waste management methods in different sectors of the food chain including a school foodservice operation, a meat processing company, a restaurant, a coffee shop and bakery, and a recycling composting operation. Teaching ideas, including discussion questions, are provided to facilitate the use of the cases within courses. All instructional materials, including the instructors’ manuals and case studies, are protected with a password that is available only to educators. Educators can access the Web sites by obtaining a user ID and a password from the director of the project management team. Evaluation
Expert panel review. Nine experts reviewed the contents of the 50
JOURNAL OF FOOD SCIENCE EDUCATION—Vol. 2, 2003
4 modules for currency and accuracy. In general, the reviewers agreed that the information was accurate and current; however, some reviewers suggested using more current references in the characterization methods and the microbial sections of Module 2. The content experts indicated that the modules would be useful to educators desiring to incorporate additional information about waste management in their courses. Based on the reviewers’ suggestions, Module 2 was modified to increase accuracy and currency. The reviewers also suggested some alternative ways to present the materials included in the modules, such as the use of worksheets to present some of the cost analysis materials in Module 4. Inclusion of reference lists, especially CFR citations in Module 1, was also suggested. Educator review. Sixteen educators from food science, foodservice, and hospitality programs reviewed and evaluated the effectiveness of the modules and instructional materials prior to publishing the resources on the Web. Based on their expertise, some of them reviewed more than 1 module. Several other educators were contacted and asked to evaluate the modules, but due to the significant time required to review the materials, we were unable to recruit additional volunteers. The results of the evaluation are presented in Table 3. Overall, the educators rated the quality of the content of both the modules and instructional materials from very good to excellent (1.3 to 2.0 and 1.1 to 1.8 respectively, on a 6-point scale from 1 [excellent] to 6 [very poor]). They also indicated that the modules provided current and useful information. Case studies and PowerPoint slides received the highest rating among the instructional materials (1.4 to 2.0). The educators noted that the other resources in the instructor’s manuals had very good quality and instructional values (1.4 to 2.5). Some additional information to incorporate into the modules was suggested. Two regulations, Toxic Substances Control Act and Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act, were included in Module 1 based on an educator’s comment. Current references regarding hepatitis A and fungi were added to Module 2. Additional examples of source reduction and reuse practices in foodservice operations were added to increase the applicability of Module 3. Other revisions based on educators’ feedback include addition of a glossary of terms and a summary table of the regulations. A waste/residue management glossary was created and linked in the Introduction section of each module. A table containing overall regulations was created to summarize key components of the various Acts described in the modules. Available on-line at: www.ift.org
Web modules for teaching waste management . . . Table 3—Educators’ evaluation of modules and instructional materials Module 1 (N = 5) Statement
Part I: Evaluation of Modules The information in the module covered all key concepts essential to teach the content areas The information in the module is easy to understand The information in the module is current The module will be a useful resource for my courses The layout of the information is logical The overall quality of the module b Part II: Evaluation of Instructional Materials The content is presented in a logical sequence The content is easy to understand The resources in the instructor’s manual will be useful when teaching the contents of modules Overall quality and instructional value of resources b Class discussion and activities Internet exercises Review questions (problems) Case studies Test banks PowerPoint slides Talking notes of the PowerPoint slides Transparencies The lecture outline will be useful in organizing the concepts within course(s) The internet exercises, class discussion and activities (including student projects), and case studies will facilitate my ability to incorporate active learning within classes The resources can be used to enhance students’ critical thinking skills The items in the test bank provide a foundation to develop quizzes and examinations The graphics used in the PowerPoint slides are appropriate and enhance the visual quality The overall usefulnessb The overall qualityb Part III: Evaluation of Technology The Internet is appropriate for disseminating to faculty The website was easy to navigate The links and buttons workedc The links and buttons are appropriately named The overall technological friendlinessb The overall quality of the technologyb
Module 2 (N = 7)
Module 3 (N = 7)
Module 4 (N = 8)
Mean ± SD Range Mean ± SD Range Mean ± SD Range Mean ± SD Range 1.6 ± 0.89
1-3
1.3 ± 0.49
1-2
1.1 ± 0.38
1-2
1.3 ± 0.46
1-2
1.6 1.2 1.4 1.4 2.0
0.89 0.45 0.89 0.55 1.0
1-3 1-2 1-3 1-2 1-3
1.3 1.7 1.9 1.4 2.0
0.76 1.11 0.69 0.53 0.82
1-3 1-4 1-3 1-2 1-3
1.0 1.0 1.3 1.1 1.3
0.00 0.00 0.49 0.38 0.49
1-1 1-1 1-2 1-2 1-2
1.5 1.1 1.4 1.1 1.4
0.53 0.35 0.52 0.35 0.52
1-2 1-2 1-2 1-2 1-2
1.4 ± 0.55 1.0 ± 0.00 1.6 ± 0.89
1-2 1-1 1-3
1.2 ± 0.41 1.3 ± 0.52 1.7 ± 1.03
1-2 1-2 1-3
1.3 ± 0.49 1.1 ± 0.38 1.0 ± 0.00
1-2 1-2 1-1
1.3 ± 0.46 1.1 ± 0.35 1.3 ± 0.46
1-2 1-2 1-2
2.0 ± 0.71 1.8 ± 0.45 2.0 ± 0.71 1.6 ± 0.89 2.5 ± 1.00 1.6 ± 0.89 2.0 ± 0.82 2.0 ± 0.82 1.4 ± 0.55
1-3 1-2 1-3 1-3 2-4 1-3 1-3 1-3 1-2
1.8 2.5 2.3 1.8 2.2 1.8 2.0 2.0 2.0
0.41 0.55 0.52 0.75 0.84 0.75 0.71 0.71 0.89
1-2 2-3 2-3 1-3 1-3 1-3 1-3 1-3 1-3
1.6 1.4 1.6 2.0 1.5 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.4
0.89 0.55 0.55 0.00 0.58 0.55 0.58 0.58 0.79
1-3 1-2 1-2 2-2 1-2 1-2 1-2 1-2 1-3
1.7 1.9 1.6 1.4 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.6
0.95 1.07 0.79 0.53 0.82 0.79 0.55 0.55 0.92
1-3 1-4 1-3 1-2 1-3 1-3 1-2 1-2 1-3
1.4 ± 0.55
1-2
1.3 ± 0.52
1-2
1.1 ± 0.38
1-2
1.5 ± 0.53
1-2
1.6 ± 0.89
1-3
1.7 ± 1.21
1-4
1.3 ± 0.49
1-2
1.5 ± 0.76
1-3
1.8 ± 0.84
1-3
1.7 ± 1.21
1-4
1.1 ± 0.38
1-2
1.1 ± 0.35
1-2
1.2 ± 0.45
1-2
1.2 ± 0.41
1-2
1.0 ± 0.00
1-1
1.3 ± 0.46
1-2
1.4 ± 0.55 1.2 ± 0.45
1-2 1-2
1.5 ± 0.55 1.8 ± 0.75
1-2 1-3
1.1 ± 0.38 1.1 ± 0.38
1-2 1-2
1.4 ± 0.52 1.4 ± 0.52
1-2 1-2
1.4 1.4 1.4 1.0 1.4 1.2
1-2 1-2 1-2 1-1 1-2 1-2
1.7 1.9 1.6 1.1 1.7 1.9
1-4 1-4 1-2 1-2 1-3 1-3
1.1 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.3
1-2 1-1 1-2 1-2 1-2 1-2
1.3 1.1 1.4 1.3 1.4 1.1
1-3 1-2 1-2 1-2 1-2 1-2
± ± ± ± ±
± ± ± ± ± ±
0.55 0.55 0.55 0.00 0.55 0.45
± ± ± ± ±
± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±
± ± ± ± ± ±
1.11 1.07 0.53 0.38 0.76 0.90
± ± ± ± ±
± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±
± ± ± ± ± ±
0.38 0.00 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.49
± ± ± ± ±
± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±
± ± ± ± ± ±
0.71 0.35 0.52 0.46 0.52 0.38
Scale. 1-Strongly Agree; 2-Somewhat Agree; 3-Neither Agree nor Disagree; 4-Somewhat Disagree; 5-Strongly Disagree b Scale. 1-Excellent; 2-Very Good; 3-Good; 4-Fair; 5-Poor; 6-Very Poor c Scale. 1-All of the time; 2-Most of the time; 3-Occasionally; 4-Seldom; 5-Never
Conclusions and Implications The modules, case studies, and other instructional materials provide faculty, GTAs, and ultimately students with an opportunity to enhance their knowledge of waste management and environmental issues in the food chain. The WWW modules are the first ones available that are specifically designed to enhance educators’ knowledge of waste management in the food chain. Food science educators can use the Web-based instructional tool as an educational resource in their undergraduate classes to enhance students’ knowledge of environmental issues and increase their ability to solve critical environmental problems in the food chain.
References Adelaja AO, Mayga RM Jr., Schilling BJ, Tank KR. 2000. Understanding the challenges facing the food manufacturing industry. J Food Prod Mark 6(2):35-55. Bassett S. 2000. Internet – love to hate it? Int Food Ingredients 1:41-2. Bennett AJ. 2000. Environmental consequences of increasing production:
Available on-line at: www.ift.org
Some current perspectives. Agric Ecosyt Eviron 82(1/3):89-95. Bongaarts J. 1996. Population pressure and the food supply system in the development world. Popul Dev Rev 22(3):486-503. Brown LR. 2001. Running on empty. Forum Appl Res Public Policy. 16(1):6-8. Conway G. 1999. Agenda for a doubly green revolution. Food Technol 53(11):146. Conley LA, Giese J. 2000. How the Internet is changing food product development. Food Technol 54(2):38-40, 42-3. Daniel JI. 1999. Computer-aided instruction on the World Wide Web:the third generation. J Econ Educ 30(2):163-74. Enghagen L, Hott D. 1992. Students’ perceptions of ethical issues in the hospitality and tourism industry. Hospitality Res J 15(2):41-50. Gower K, Cho JY. 2001. Use of the Internet in the public relations curriculum. Journalism Mass Commun Educ 56(2):81-92. Groves JL. 2001. Web-based tools in the hotel and restaurant classroom. J Hospitality Tourism Educ 13(3/4):60-6. Institute of Food Technologists (IFT). 2001. Undergraduate Education Standards for Degrees in Food Science. Retrieved from http://www.ift.org/education/standards.shtml. Accessed July 25, 2002. Javenkoski JS, Schmidt SJ. 2000. Complementing traditional instruction with asynchronous learning networks. Food Technol 54(5):46-58. Lindsay W, McLaren, S. 2000. The Internet:an aid to student research or a source of frustration? J Educ Media 25(2):115-28.
Vol. 2, 2003—JOURNAL OF FOOD SCIENCE EDUCATION
51
JFSE: Journal of Food Science Education Lovell J. 2000. Using the Internet as a supplemental instructional tool for biology teachers. Am Biol Teach 62(3):171-6. McNulty JA, Halama J, Dauzvardis MF, Espiritu B. 2000. Evaluation of webbased computer-aided instruction in a basic science course. Acad Med 75(1):59-65. Mebratu D. 2001. Environmental competitiveness:“green” purchasing. Int Trade Forum 2:11-3. Population Reference Bureau. 2002. Human population:fundamentals of growth environmental relationships. Retrieved from http://www.prb.org/ Content/NavigationMenu/PRB/Educators/Human_Population/Environment4/Environmental_Relationships1.htm. Accessed July 26, 2002 Shanklin C, Flores R, Kim T, Wolfe K. 1999. Environmental issues course for dietetics students. J Am Diet Assoc Suppl 99(9):A-76. Simon EJ. 2001. Technology instead of a textbook. Am Biol Teach 63(2):8994. Singh RP, Courtois F. 1999. Conducting laboratory experiments via the Internet. Food Technol 53(9):54-8. Wade J. 1997. “Greening” the hospitality curriculum:the implications. J Hospitality Tourism Educ 9(2):16-20. Weaver P, Choi J, Kaufman T. 1997. Question wording and response bias:students’ perceptions of ethical issues in the hospitality and tourism
52
JOURNAL OF FOOD SCIENCE EDUCATION—Vol. 2, 2003
industry. J Hospitality Tourism Educ 9(2):21-6. U.S. Bureau of the Census. 2002a. Section 6:Geography and environment. In:2001 Statistical abstract of the United States. Retrieved from http:// www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/01statab/geo.pdf. Accessed September 13, 2002. U.S. Bureau of the Census. 2002b. Section 19:Energy and utilities. In:2001 Statistical abstract of the United States. Retrieved from http:// www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/01statab/energy.pdf. Accessed September 13, 2002. Yturri J. 2002. The food industry faces environmental challenges. Food Technol 56(11):100. MS 20030270 This project was supported by a U.S. Dept. of Agriculture Higher Education Challenge Grant. The authors express their appreciation to all experts and educators who reviewed and contributed to this study.
Authors Shanklin, Huang, Lee, Ok, and Seo are with the Dept. of Hotel, Restaurant, Institution Management and Dietetics, 104 Justin Hall, Kansas State Univ., Manhattan, KS 66506. Author Flores is an Education Consultant in Chalfont, Pa. Direct inquiries to Author Shanklin (E-mail:
[email protected]).
Available on-line at: www.ift.org
