Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Remote school gardens: exploring a cost‐effective and novel way to engage Australian Indigenous students in nutrition and health

Remote school gardens: exploring a cost‐effective and novel way to engage Australian Indigenous... mortality suffered by Australia’s Objective: This pilot study aimed to determine the feasibility of a novel, low-cost program to AA boriginal people is attributable get remote schools started in gardening and nutrition activities, for a lower cost than existing to poor diet quality, including low fruit and models, and without on-the-ground horticultural support. vegetable intake. Low fruit and vegetable intake is a risk factor in the development Methods: A multi-site, mixed methods case study was undertaken, in which four remote of obesity, and increases the risk of stroke, schools were shipped gardening materials and a nutrition and cooking resource, and provided ischaemic heart disease, and cancers of the with horticultural support by phone and email. A support register and teacher surveys were 2,4,5 lung, stomach, bowel and oesophagus. used for four months of evaluation. In remote Northern Territory (NT) Aboriginal Results: The study demonstrated that the program is feasible, and may be associated with an communities, fruit and vegetable costs are increase from baseline in student’s time spent cooking, gardening and on related classroom higher than urban centres, and consumption activities. patterns are well below recommended Conclusions: The program was delivered economically without the need for on-the-ground 7,8 Australian intakes. staff, in a manner that was acceptable to teachers. International research indicates that a child’s Implications: This model may have application in remote schools throughout Australia, future fruit and vegetable intake is influenced where there is a need to alter health impacting behaviours in high-risk populations. Lengthier by their current access to fruit and vegetables, program evaluation times and further resource development may be worth investigating in as well as through changes to their current the future. vegetable preference. In Australia, school Key words: Aboriginal, nutrition, education, horticulture gardening and nutrition programs have been shown to improve students’ identification of, willingness to taste, and preference for some school gardening can increase vegetable the sequelae of poor fruit and vegetable vegetables. These programs have also been consumption and willingness to taste intake are so great, and fruit and vegetable shown to improve students’ confidence in vegetables in students. consumption rates are so low. preparing fruit and vegetable snacks, as well as increasing the perceived consumption of In the remote Australian Aboriginal setting, There are currently two dominant remote fruit and vegetables at home. school gardening and nutrition programs Australian school gardening and nutrition have been shown to increase Aboriginal models, run by the EON Foundation (EON) The international evidence corresponds students’ knowledge and skills in nutrition and the Stephanie Alexander Kitchen with this, showing that school gardening and gardening, and to enhance the teaching Foundation (SAKGF). The EON model and nutrition programs can improve and learning of basic nutrition skills. For requires dedicated, trained horticultural staff nutrition knowledge, as well as vegetable 12 13-15 these reasons, these kinds of gardening and who visit schools for ongoing on-the-ground identification, preference, willingness to 12 14,15 nutrition programs must be made accessible support and training. The SAKGF model taste, and asking behaviours in students. in remote Aboriginal Australia, where requires teachers to travel to larger centres Even without associated nutrition education, 1. Menzies School of Health Research, Northern Territory 2. Northern Territory Department of Health 3. WA Country Health Service, Western Australia 4. School of Population Health, University of South Australia Correspondence to: Dr Andrew Hume, Menzies School of Health Research – Nutrition, John Matthews Building, Royal Darwin Hospital Campus, Darwin, Northern Territory 0810; e-mail: drandrewhume@mail.com Submitted: September 2013; Revision requested: December 2013; Accepted: February 2014 The authors have stated they have no conflict of interest. Aust NZ J Public Health. 2014; 38:235-40; doi: 10.1111/1753-6405.12236 2014 vol . 38 no . 3 Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 235 © 2014 The Authors. ANZJPH © 2014 Public Health Association of Australia Hume et al. Article to be trained in gardening and cooking. PH nutritionists, using Eat Smart, Play Smart School recruitment Although they are both comprehensive as a key reference. Classroom activities Remote Top End NT primary schools were programs that have achieved long-term for the resource were selected on the basis identified through existing networks of the results, both models require significant of perceived cultural appropriateness, Department of Health NT Public Health 19,20 ongoing funding, involve expensive practicality for remote teachers, perceived Nutritionists (PH nutritionists) to be involved travel to and from communities by staff, and enjoyment of activities, and the adaptability in the program. For inclusion, schools needed transportation of large amounts of gardening of each activity to a range of ages and to be classified as remote or very remote, 19,20 26 materials into remote communities. curriculum requirements. have no existing garden, and have the As a result, many small remote Australian Horticultural support was provided by a support of the principal and of one teacher schools are missing out on garden and Northern Territory Department of Resources with minimal horticultural experience or nutrition programs, and the chance to alter Horticulture Division horticulturalist, who qualifications willing to take the program on health-affecting behaviours in some of the made themselves available during business with their class. highest risk populations in the country. hours to answer teachers’ gardening Community and school leaders were A cheaper, more accessible alternative is questions by phone or email. approached for permission to contact needed to get small remote schools started in teachers at each school, who were then gardening and nutrition programs. Program delays approached to be involved in the program. The program was delayed until the later Five schools were identified and recruited part of the school year. This meant the to the study. One school subsequently Aims implementation and the evaluation period withdrew, citing a lack of capacity to engage The study aimed to determine the feasibility was reduced from six to four months. in the program due to high staff turnover. of a novel, low-cost program to get remote schools started in gardening and nutrition Materials, curriculum and support Program evaluation activities, and to assess: Over the four-month program evaluation Schools were shipped packages containing 1. The number of students involved, and the period, the horticulturalist completed a gardening materials and instructions time they spent cooking nutritious foods, support register and three separate surveys (gardening materials), and a nutrition gardening, and on garden-related and were emailed to participating teachers. and cooking resource for classroom use nutrition-related classroom activities (classroom resource). They were then The support register consisted of a Microsoft provided with remote horticultural support 2. The monetary and time cost of the Excel spread sheet, with a column dedicated by phone and email. program to each phone or email interaction between the horticulturalist and a participating The gardening materials were selected in 3. The program’s operation without in-person teacher. Each row listed the date and time of consultation with staff from the Northern horticultural support the interaction, whether it was a phone call Territory Department of Resources 4. The acceptability of the program to or an email, what the call or email was about, Horticulture Division, and the Charles Darwin participating teachers the conclusion or resolution reached and the University Horticulture division. Materials 5. Gardening success. total time taken for the interaction. The results consisted of small portable garden beds, The perceived benefits, barriers and enablers of the support register are outlined in Table 1. soil, seeds, mulch, automated irrigation to program success from the perspective of equipment, granular fertiliser and watering A teacher survey was emailed to each of the participating teachers were also assessed. cans. The garden beds were selected by participating teachers at the beginning of the horticultural staff for their light weight, evaluation period, at two months and at four portability, and ability to retain soil moisture months. Each survey took around half an hour Methods within water reservoirs. Simple irrigation to complete. The teacher surveys consisted Background to the area equipment and battery-operated watering of multiple questions, the results of which are timers were provided to enable automatic The Top End of the Northern Territory covers outlined in Table 1. watering on weekends and holidays. Plants about 450,000 square kilometres, and has a Teacher survey responses were emailed to the were chosen to be fast-growing, climate- population density of 0.1 people per square first author (AH) and entered into a Microsoft suitable varieties that could be grown in kilometre. There are about 60 remote Excel spread sheet. Quantitative responses small containers and used in a classroom schools in the area and a total population were checked for possible errors, and teachers or school kitchen easily, and included basil, of 39,300, with 24,500 (62%) identifying as contacted by phone or email to clarify if there beans, coriander, cucumber, eggplant, radish, Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander. The was ambiguity, which occurred twice. For rocket, tomatoes and zucchini. No chemical region contains tropical, grassland, and each time-related program parameter in each pesticides, herbicides or fungicides were equatorial climate zones. school, the single before-program time was supplied. compared to the average of the three times Study design After a review of nutrition teaching materials reported during the program. These time currently used in Northern Territory schools, A multi-site, mixed methods case study was differences were averaged across the schools a classroom resource for nutrition and undertaken during 2011. to give a final mean, and a range calculated. cooking activities was developed by the Qualitative responses were recorded and 236 Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 2014 vol . 38 no . 3 © 2014 The Authors. ANZJPH © 2014 Public Health Association of Australia Healthy Eating Remote school gardens: exploring new approaches Table 1: Program evaluation. Program parameter Evaluation Average pre-program time per Average post-program time Average time change per week (range) Method week per week 1. Student time spent cooking, gardening and on garden and nutrition related classroom activities a. Student time cooking nutritious foods Teacher surveys 0.3 hours 1.0 hours 0.8 (0.5-1.5) hours b. Student time gardening Teacher surveys 2.5 hours 4.5 hours 2.0 (0.5-3.0) hours c. Student time in gardening related classroom activities Teacher surveys 0.5 hours 2.0 hours 1.5 (0.0-3.0) hours d. Student time in nutrition related classroom activities Teacher surveys 1.0 hours 1.6 hours 0.4 (0.5-1.0) hours Program parameter Notes 2. Monetary and time costs a. Cost of gardening materials and delivery Teacher surveys The average total purchase and delivery cost for each garden package was less than $600 per school (range: $520-$630). None of the schools spent any additional money on materials for the program, although two schools sought external funding to expand into larger gardening activities as a result of the gardening pilot. b. Time spent in classroom resource development, Classroom resource development and gardening materials selection time was not documented. This time and gardening materials selection was provided free of charge as part of existing job roles, and would not recur if the program were to be implemented in more schools using the same resource and materials. 3. Operation without in-person horticultural support a. Number of horticultural support phone calls and Horticultural There were 11 phone calls and 22 emails between the teachers and the horticulturalist, with a total time spent emails and time spent support register by the horticulturalist of 1.5 hours. The support interactions were all related to the logistics of package delivery to schools using couriers, and checking that the packages had arrived. b. Problems and benefits of remote horticultural Teacher surveys Teachers reported satisfaction with the remote support they were offered. support 4. Acceptability to teachers a. Teachers’ prior horticultural experience Teacher surveys None of the teachers had any formal horticultural qualifications. Two had limited home gardening experience, and one had run a school garden 20 years ago. b. Gardening materials delivery Teacher surveys One school did not receive their gardening materials on time, because they were left unattended upon delivery in the community, and went missing. They were later retrieved. This problem was compounded by the fact that two courier companies were involved in the delivery, making communication between sender and receiver difficult. All other schools received their materials on time and without problems. c. Gardening materials set up Teacher surveys All teachers reported that the gardening materials were easy to set up and could be assembled by a single teacher. The average total set-up time was 2 hours (range: 1.5-2.5 hours). d. Problems and benefits in delivery and set up of Teacher surveys The only problem with delivery raised by teachers was that it took a long time for gardening materials to be gardening materials sent to remote communities: If we require something, it takes quite a long time for it to arrive (in the remote community). Teacher Otherwise they were satisfied with the materials and setup. The pots are an easy compromise-– no digging required. It (setup) was very straightforward-– clear instructions. Teacher. e. Time spent maintaining garden beds Teacher surveys Teachers spent on average 1.5 hours per week (range: 1.0 to 3.0 hours) maintaining garden beds. f. Teacher time spent preparing for lessons using Teacher surveys During the evaluation period teachers spent on average 1.0 hours (range 0.0 – 3.0 hours) per week preparing supplied classroom resource and other materials for lessons with the supplied classroom resource, and the same amount of time using other materials (range 0.0-3.0 hours). g. Perceived benefits of and problems with the Teacher surveys Some teachers found the classroom resource a useful planning and time-saving tool: classroom resource (The resource) saves me the time and trouble of doing it myself. Teacher While others had problems with it. One teacher considered the classroom resource to be less useful when plants were not fully grown. Another was happy to run garden and nutrition classes informally without using a resource. A third wanted more science included in the resources, and asked that the resource be linked with the Australian school curriculum: Perhaps specifically link it (the resource) to the appropriate areas of the Australian Curriculum. Teacher 5. Gardening success a. Successful and non-successful plant types Teacher At the end of the evaluation period, each school had an average of 5 plant types still growing (range: 3.0-7.0), surveys 4.25 types ready to use in the classroom (range: 2.0-6.0), and 1 plant type that had died (range: 0-2.0). Basil, beans, coriander, cucumber, eggplant, marigolds, radish, rocket, tomatoes and zucchini were all grown in schools. The most successful were basil, beans, cucumber, eggplant marigolds, radish and rocket.E ggplant, coriander and beans were the only plant types recorded as dying. Many plants were still growing at the end of the evaluation period. b. Problems with garden beds, and solutions found Teacher Some teachers had problems with pests, and reported using physical methods to destroy them: by teachers surveys Small grasshoppers have appeared and are eating the bean plants. Teacher. One school reported relocating their portable garden beds inside metal cages to minimise the risk of vandalism. Actual vandalism was not reported by anyone. 2014 vol . 38 no . 3 Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 237 © 2014 The Authors. ANZJPH © 2014 Public Health Association of Australia Hume et al. Article a unique identifier assigned to all quotes None of the teachers had any horticultural Two schools used the success of the taken from a given teacher. These responses qualifications, and all reported easy and program as an impetus to expand into larger were analysed to determine consistent or prompt setup of the gardening package gardening activities. contrasting responses between teachers, without the need for outside help. There Selected quotes taken from teacher surveys and to ensure that all viewpoints were were concerns raised about the time taken are summarised below: represented in the results without replication. for materials to be shipped to communities, “The simplicity of the project is perfect for but teachers were otherwise satisfied with an introduction to gardening for students Ethics and data de-identification the process. Teachers spent an average of (and teachers). Easy to set up and maintain, 1.5 hours per week outside of class time The Northern Territory Department of Health and if it goes well, there is always the maintaining the garden beds once they were potential to expand it into a bigger project.” and Menzies School of Health Research installed. (Teacher 1) Human Research Ethics Committee provided ethics approval for the study, approval Some teachers were happy with the “Children … are generally more willing to number HREC-2012-1790. Approval for classroom resource provided, and others have a go at tasting something interesting research to be undertaken by participating were not. They reported using the supplied or something they have never tasted schools was also given by the Department of classroom resource for lesson preparation before.” (Teacher 3) Education. Given the small number of schools about half the time, and sought their own “I could see that this would be a great involved, all data was de-identified to protect materials the rest of the time. Some teachers thing to put into homes, very simple and anonymity. wanted greater integration of the resource could be a way that a group of students with the national curriculum, and inclusion set them up for each of the families. The of more science material. Others adapted the idea is simple and could be the impetus to Results classroom resource to their own purposes. start families growing things at home. The only additional thing would be some sort The program was delivered into four remote Cooking success of protection from the birds and young Top End Northern Territory schools, and ran children.” (Teacher 3) for four months. The time students spent cooking nutritious foods in the classroom increased in all “Visitors to the school are very impressed Four teachers and one horticulturalist were schools. Garden-grown produce was used with the range of foods we are able to grow.” involved in the program evaluation. The where possible with other fresh produce (Teacher 4) horticultural support register was completed substituted as required. for 100% of the phone or email interactions “… the garden is working really well, the between teachers and the horticulturalist. (students) are really engaged in this project Gardening success and (teacher) has the students out daily There was also a 100% completion rate for all checking the veggie gardens. We have 12 of the teacher surveys. For each program Multiple plant types were grown with got the best place for them in the air-con parameter evaluated, the evaluation method success in all schools. Many plants types were cages, no birds or children can interfere with and results are presented in Table 1. growing and ready to use in the classroom the plants. The teacher has incorporated at the end of the evaluation period. Teachers the gardening project into his classroom Number of students, classroom times, reported some problems with pests, and curriculum and I am impressed with how there was perceived risk of vandalism in one and costs the students are engaging with the project, school, although no vandalism occurred. Forty-eight children, ranging in age from we are also using them to plant other plants eight to 14 years, were involved in the and trees around the school. ” (Principal) Benefits, enablers and barriers program. “Cooking food they have grown themselves Teachers reported a variety of perceived Increases in all time parameters measured will make this work.” (Teacher 2) benefits, barriers, and enablers to the success in all schools were observed, except for of the program, as assessed via teacher gardening-related class time in one school, surveys. Conclusions which remained at zero both before and during the program. This school showed an Perceived benefits to the program included This study has demonstrated that a novel, increase in nutrition-related class time of one the potential for program expansion at school low-cost, remote school gardening and hour, however. and into homes, the range of plants grown, nutrition program is feasible, and may be and student engagement. The average total purchase and delivery cost associated with an increase from baseline in Perceived barriers to success of the program for each garden package was less than $600 student’s time spent cooking and gardening, included possible weekend vandalism and per school, without any additional costs and on their classroom time spent on the late start to the program. incurred. gardening-related and nutrition-related Perceived enablers of the success of the activities. Program operation and acceptability program included program simplicity and It has also demonstrated that such a program flexibility, the ability to secure garden beds to The program operated effectively without can be delivered cheaply and run without reduce vandalism, and student enthusiasm the need for horticulturalists to visit schools. the need for on-the-ground staff, in a manner and motivation to participate. Teachers reported satisfaction with the email that is acceptable to teachers, and can and phone support provided. 238 Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 2014 vol . 38 no . 3 © 2014 The Authors. ANZJPH © 2014 Public Health Association of Australia Healthy Eating Remote school gardens: exploring new approaches successfully result in a range of plants grown The success in growing plants suggests that This may underestimate the total cost of re- for students’ use. the equipment and seed selection were implementing the program, if materials were prudent. The fact that many plants were to be re-selected, or the classroom resource The increases in time spent gardening and still growing and not ready to use at the altered or rewritten. cooking by children reflect success in one end of the evaluation period is probably a of the program’s major aims. The results for The costs associated with horticultural result of the program delays. Some plants time spent in the classroom on nutrition support were also excluded but, given had also died, which may reflect increasing and gardening-related topics are equally the small periods involved, this is unlikely end-of-year temperatures, again because the encouraging. The reported gardening and to be significant, unless the program was program was delayed. Starting the program cooking times compare favourably with implemented on a very large scale. earlier in the year would alleviate some of those reported in the Stephanie Alexander Using remote support meant there was 27 these problems, along with an expanded Kitchen Garden literature, and suggest that no way to verify and triangulate findings evaluation of what crops were easy to grow in this respect this model is as effective as reported by teachers, which may have and were useful to teachers in the classroom. other, more-expensive gardening models. biased the results they provided. However, Longer-term evaluation would be needed to The reasons teachers spent time maintaining this seems unlikely, given the range of both determine if this success was ongoing. garden beds are unknown. This could be negative and positive feedback provided by further evaluated with a view to reducing The total cost to each school was far below teachers. maintenance time, which was identified as a that reported for the current alternative The limited number of schools involved in 19,20 barrier to uptake of school gardening in the school garden programs. the pilot may restrict the ability to generalise 28,29 literature. The time used for remote support was these findings elsewhere, although the Pests were the biggest problem mentioned surprisingly small, given the horticultural schools involved are similar to remote schools regarding garden bed maintenance. No inexperience of the teachers and their throughout tropical Northern Australia. pesticides or advice regarding pest control remoteness. were provided in the gardening instructions. The only issue raised was that of package Implications In future, organic pesticides and instructions transport times. This problem is not isolated may be useful. to this program or these materials, and is The fact that two participating schools The perceived potential for program a difficulty faced by anyone sending or applied for funding to expand into larger expansion is consistent with the aims of receiving materials into remote communities. gardens as a result of this program suggests the program: to get remote schools started that once small remote schools have tried The loss of garden packages in transit in school gardening. The idea of program small-scale gardening they may be more may be reduced by closer liaison between expansion into homes presented by a teacher likely to take on larger projects. deliverers and teachers receiving packages, was unexpected, but may be worth pursuing, to ensure they are present to receive goods The selection of ‘inexperienced’ teachers and fits in with the international evidence immediately on delivery, and by reducing the means that the findings here are likely to that school gardening can pique interest in number of couriers involved so that packages be useful in other remote schools without home gardening. In future, the classroom are easier to track. dedicated horticultural or gardening support. resource could include suggestions about Further, the straightforward and quick set The partial use of the provided classroom ways this could be explored. up reported for the garden packages shows resource suggests that more resource that relatively inexperienced people can development and integration may be needed Study limitations and strengths be successful in starting this kind of school to reduce teachers’ class preparation time, The study did not include a control group of garden without outside help. which is consistent with other research in schools and was a pilot study only. As such, 28,29 this area. The age range of the children This model may have application in remote no inferences can be made about the causes involved in this program was broad, which schools throughout Australia, where there is behind program success, and there may be may explain the below-optimal use of a need to alter health impacting behaviours unknown factors outside the program itself the resource. Ultimately, an all-inclusive in high-risk Aboriginal populations. Lengthier that affected its success. An important next classroom resource is probably unrealistic, program evaluation times to consider step, based on the observed success of this and it is likely that teachers will continue to program effectiveness in the long-term, and pilot, would be to verify the findings through adapt what they need for class activities from classroom resource development to improve a larger study. different sources. integration of the classroom resource The late start to the program reduced the into the school curriculum, may be worth The reported benefit of nutrition education evaluation period, and also pushed the investigating in the future. and student’s tasting of new vegetables fit in program into hotter, suboptimal growing 10,11,18 with the Australian literature. conditions, which may have had an impact The perceived improvements in student Acknowledgements on many of the findings. Despite this, positive engagement associated with gardening align program outcomes were achieved. We acknowledge the Aboriginal communities with the Australian literature, as does the The evaluation did not include the cost of the and traditional owners who gave permission ability to integrate gardening into different time taken in materials selection or classroom for the research to occur, and the schools, curriculum areas to facilitate classroom resource development, because future use of teachers and students involved. The support learning. the program would not require this to recur. of Anne Goodman and the Northern Territory 2014 vol . 38 no . 3 Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 239 © 2014 The Authors. ANZJPH © 2014 Public Health Association of Australia Hume et al. Article 9. Bere EK, Klepp I. Changes in accessibility and 21. Currie G, Senbergs Z. Indigenous communities: Department of Education and Training, the preferences predict children’s future fruit and vegetable Transport disadvantage and Aboriginal communities. Northern Territory Department of Health, intake Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2005;2:15-23. In: Currie G, Stanley J, Stanley J, editor. No Way to Remote Public Health Nutrition Team, 10. Morgan PJ, et al. The impact of nutrition education Go: Transport and Social Disadvantage in Australian with and without a school garden on knowledge, Communities. Melbourne (AUST): Monash University Megan Connelly and the Northern Territory vegetable intake and preferences and quality of school Press; 2007. Department of Resources, the Menzies School life among primary-school students. Public Health Nutr. 22. Australian Bureau of Statistics. Population Estimates by 2010;13(11):1931-40. Local Government Area, 2001 to 2011. Canberra (AUST): of Health Research Nutrition Team, Jason 11. Somerset S, Markwell K. Impact of a school-based food ABS; 2012. Davey and the Charles Darwin University garden on attitudes and identification skills regarding 23. Department of Education Human Resource Services. vegetables and fruit: A 12-month intervention trial. Teaching Jobs-– Remote Schools and Regions [Internet]. Horticultural Department, the Heart Public Health Nutr. 2009;12(2):214-21. Darwin (AUST): Government of Northern Territory; Foundation of Australia, Anthea Fawcett and 12. Morris JL, Neustadter A, Zidenberg-Cherr S. First-grade 2012 [cited 2013 Dec 10]. Available from: http://www. the Remote Indigenous Gardening Network, gardeners more likely to taste vegetables. Calif Agric. teaching.nt.gov.au/remote/index.cfm?attributes. 2001;55(1):43–6. fuseaction=the-remote-schools-and-regions Tom Wycherley and Fran Squires is also 13. Morris JL, Zidenberg-Cherr S. Garden-enhanced 24. Bureau of Meteorology. Australian Climate Zones gratefully acknowledged. nutrition curriculum improves fourth-grade school [Internet]. Melbourne (AUST): 2012 [cited 2012 Nov children’s knowledge of nutrition and preferences for 22]. Available from: http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/ some vegetables. J Am Diet Assoc. 2002;102(1):91-3. environ/other/IDCJCM0001_aus_clim_zones.shtml 14. Heim S, et al. Can a Community-based intervention 25. Department of Health. Accessibility/Remoteness References improve the home food environment? Parental Index of Australia 2011 [Internet]. Canberra (AUST): perspectives of the influence of the delicious and Commonwealth of Australia; 2011 [cited 2011 Jan 1. Australian Bureau of Statistics. Experimental Life Tables nutritious garden. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2011;43(2):130-4. 14]. Available from: http://www9.health.gov.au/aria/ for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians: 2005- 15. Heim S, Stang J, Ireland M. A Garden pilot project ariainpt.cfm 2007. Canberra (AUST): ABS; 2009. enhances fruit and vegetable consumption among 26. Heart Foundation of Australia. Eat Smart Play Smart. 2. Vos T, Barker B, Begg S, Stanley L, Lopez AD. Burden children. J Am Diet Assoc. 2009;109(7):1220-6. A Manual for Out of School Hours Care, 2004-2008. of disease and injury in Aboriginal and Torres Strait 16. Langellotto GA, Gupta A. Gardening increases vegetable Melbourne (AUST): Heart Foundation Victoria; 2008. Islander peoples: The Indigenous health gap. Int J consumption in school-aged children: A meta-analytical 27. Block K, Johnson B, Gibbs L, Staiger P, Townsend M, Epidemiol. 2009;38(2):470-7. synthesis. Horttechnology. 2012;22:430-45. Macfarlane S, et al. Evaluation of the Stephanie Alexander 3. Tohill BC. Dietary intake of fruit and vegetables and 17. Ratcliffe MM, et al. The effects of school garden Kitchen Garden Program: Final Report. Melbourne management of body weight. Proceedings of the Joint experiences on middle school-aged students’ (AUST): McCaughey Centre; 2009. FAO/WHO Workshop on Fruit and Vegetables for Health; knowledge, attitudes, and behaviours associated 28. Somerset S, Bossard A. Variations in prevalence 2004 Sep 1-3; Kobe, Japan. Geneva: World Health with vegetable consumption. Health Promot Pract. and conduct of school food gardens in tropical and Organisation; 2005 2011;12(1):36-43. subtropical regions of north-eastern Australia. Public 4. Crowe F, et al. Fruit and vegetable intake and 18. Viola A. Evaluation of the Outreach School Garden Health Nutr. 2009;12(9):1485-93. mortality from ischaemic heart disease: Results Project: Building the capacity of two Indigenous 29. Graham H, et al. Use of School Gardens in Academic from the European Prospective Investigation into remote school communities to integrate nutrition Instruction. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2005;37(3):147-51. Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC)-Heart study. Eur Heart J. into the core school curriculum. Health Promot J Austr. 30. Ozer EJ. The effects of school gardens on students 2011;32(10):1235-43. 2006;17(3):233-9. and schools: Conceptualization and considerations for 5. Lock K, Pomerleau J, Causer L, Altmann DR, McKee 19. EON Foundation. Annual Report [Internet]. Subiaco maximizing healthy development. Health Educ Behav. M. The global burden of disease attributable to low (AUST): EON; 2012 [cited 2013 Dec 20]. Available from: 2007;34:846–56. consumption of fruit and vegetables: Implications for http://eon.org.au/media/FlippingBook/EON%20 31. Pascoe J, Wyatt-Smith C. Curriculum literacies and the the global strategy on diet. Bull World Health Organ. Annual%20Report%202012/catalogue.html school garden. Lit Learn Middle Years. 2013;21(1):34-47. 2005;83(2):100-8. 20. Stephanie Alexander Kitchen Foundation. Join the 32. Alexander J, North MW, Hendren DK. Master gardener 6. Northern Territory Government. Market Basket Survey. Program [Internet]. Abbotsford (AUST ): SAKGF; classroom garden project: An evaluation of the benefits Darwin (AUST): Government of the Northern Territory; 2012 [cited 2012 Dec]. Available from: http://www. to children. Child Environ. 1995;12(2):256-63. kitchengardenfoundation.org.au/training-events/ 7. Australian Bureau of Statistics. National Aboriginal and training-for-schools Torres Strait Islander Health Survey. Canberra (AUST): ABS; 2006. 8. Brimblecombe JK, Ferguson MM, Liberato SC, O’Dea K. Characteristics of the community-level diet of Aboriginal people in remote northern Australia. Med J Aust. 2013;198(7):380-4. 240 Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 2014 vol . 38 no . 3 © 2014 The Authors. ANZJPH © 2014 Public Health Association of Australia http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health Wiley

Remote school gardens: exploring a cost‐effective and novel way to engage Australian Indigenous students in nutrition and health

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/remote-school-gardens-exploring-a-cost-effective-and-novel-way-to-Ivf79jJ1zK

References (43)

Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
© 2014 Public Health Association of Australia
ISSN
1326-0200
eISSN
1753-6405
DOI
10.1111/1753-6405.12236
pmid
24890481
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

mortality suffered by Australia’s Objective: This pilot study aimed to determine the feasibility of a novel, low-cost program to AA boriginal people is attributable get remote schools started in gardening and nutrition activities, for a lower cost than existing to poor diet quality, including low fruit and models, and without on-the-ground horticultural support. vegetable intake. Low fruit and vegetable intake is a risk factor in the development Methods: A multi-site, mixed methods case study was undertaken, in which four remote of obesity, and increases the risk of stroke, schools were shipped gardening materials and a nutrition and cooking resource, and provided ischaemic heart disease, and cancers of the with horticultural support by phone and email. A support register and teacher surveys were 2,4,5 lung, stomach, bowel and oesophagus. used for four months of evaluation. In remote Northern Territory (NT) Aboriginal Results: The study demonstrated that the program is feasible, and may be associated with an communities, fruit and vegetable costs are increase from baseline in student’s time spent cooking, gardening and on related classroom higher than urban centres, and consumption activities. patterns are well below recommended Conclusions: The program was delivered economically without the need for on-the-ground 7,8 Australian intakes. staff, in a manner that was acceptable to teachers. International research indicates that a child’s Implications: This model may have application in remote schools throughout Australia, future fruit and vegetable intake is influenced where there is a need to alter health impacting behaviours in high-risk populations. Lengthier by their current access to fruit and vegetables, program evaluation times and further resource development may be worth investigating in as well as through changes to their current the future. vegetable preference. In Australia, school Key words: Aboriginal, nutrition, education, horticulture gardening and nutrition programs have been shown to improve students’ identification of, willingness to taste, and preference for some school gardening can increase vegetable the sequelae of poor fruit and vegetable vegetables. These programs have also been consumption and willingness to taste intake are so great, and fruit and vegetable shown to improve students’ confidence in vegetables in students. consumption rates are so low. preparing fruit and vegetable snacks, as well as increasing the perceived consumption of In the remote Australian Aboriginal setting, There are currently two dominant remote fruit and vegetables at home. school gardening and nutrition programs Australian school gardening and nutrition have been shown to increase Aboriginal models, run by the EON Foundation (EON) The international evidence corresponds students’ knowledge and skills in nutrition and the Stephanie Alexander Kitchen with this, showing that school gardening and gardening, and to enhance the teaching Foundation (SAKGF). The EON model and nutrition programs can improve and learning of basic nutrition skills. For requires dedicated, trained horticultural staff nutrition knowledge, as well as vegetable 12 13-15 these reasons, these kinds of gardening and who visit schools for ongoing on-the-ground identification, preference, willingness to 12 14,15 nutrition programs must be made accessible support and training. The SAKGF model taste, and asking behaviours in students. in remote Aboriginal Australia, where requires teachers to travel to larger centres Even without associated nutrition education, 1. Menzies School of Health Research, Northern Territory 2. Northern Territory Department of Health 3. WA Country Health Service, Western Australia 4. School of Population Health, University of South Australia Correspondence to: Dr Andrew Hume, Menzies School of Health Research – Nutrition, John Matthews Building, Royal Darwin Hospital Campus, Darwin, Northern Territory 0810; e-mail: drandrewhume@mail.com Submitted: September 2013; Revision requested: December 2013; Accepted: February 2014 The authors have stated they have no conflict of interest. Aust NZ J Public Health. 2014; 38:235-40; doi: 10.1111/1753-6405.12236 2014 vol . 38 no . 3 Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 235 © 2014 The Authors. ANZJPH © 2014 Public Health Association of Australia Hume et al. Article to be trained in gardening and cooking. PH nutritionists, using Eat Smart, Play Smart School recruitment Although they are both comprehensive as a key reference. Classroom activities Remote Top End NT primary schools were programs that have achieved long-term for the resource were selected on the basis identified through existing networks of the results, both models require significant of perceived cultural appropriateness, Department of Health NT Public Health 19,20 ongoing funding, involve expensive practicality for remote teachers, perceived Nutritionists (PH nutritionists) to be involved travel to and from communities by staff, and enjoyment of activities, and the adaptability in the program. For inclusion, schools needed transportation of large amounts of gardening of each activity to a range of ages and to be classified as remote or very remote, 19,20 26 materials into remote communities. curriculum requirements. have no existing garden, and have the As a result, many small remote Australian Horticultural support was provided by a support of the principal and of one teacher schools are missing out on garden and Northern Territory Department of Resources with minimal horticultural experience or nutrition programs, and the chance to alter Horticulture Division horticulturalist, who qualifications willing to take the program on health-affecting behaviours in some of the made themselves available during business with their class. highest risk populations in the country. hours to answer teachers’ gardening Community and school leaders were A cheaper, more accessible alternative is questions by phone or email. approached for permission to contact needed to get small remote schools started in teachers at each school, who were then gardening and nutrition programs. Program delays approached to be involved in the program. The program was delayed until the later Five schools were identified and recruited part of the school year. This meant the to the study. One school subsequently Aims implementation and the evaluation period withdrew, citing a lack of capacity to engage The study aimed to determine the feasibility was reduced from six to four months. in the program due to high staff turnover. of a novel, low-cost program to get remote schools started in gardening and nutrition Materials, curriculum and support Program evaluation activities, and to assess: Over the four-month program evaluation Schools were shipped packages containing 1. The number of students involved, and the period, the horticulturalist completed a gardening materials and instructions time they spent cooking nutritious foods, support register and three separate surveys (gardening materials), and a nutrition gardening, and on garden-related and were emailed to participating teachers. and cooking resource for classroom use nutrition-related classroom activities (classroom resource). They were then The support register consisted of a Microsoft provided with remote horticultural support 2. The monetary and time cost of the Excel spread sheet, with a column dedicated by phone and email. program to each phone or email interaction between the horticulturalist and a participating The gardening materials were selected in 3. The program’s operation without in-person teacher. Each row listed the date and time of consultation with staff from the Northern horticultural support the interaction, whether it was a phone call Territory Department of Resources 4. The acceptability of the program to or an email, what the call or email was about, Horticulture Division, and the Charles Darwin participating teachers the conclusion or resolution reached and the University Horticulture division. Materials 5. Gardening success. total time taken for the interaction. The results consisted of small portable garden beds, The perceived benefits, barriers and enablers of the support register are outlined in Table 1. soil, seeds, mulch, automated irrigation to program success from the perspective of equipment, granular fertiliser and watering A teacher survey was emailed to each of the participating teachers were also assessed. cans. The garden beds were selected by participating teachers at the beginning of the horticultural staff for their light weight, evaluation period, at two months and at four portability, and ability to retain soil moisture months. Each survey took around half an hour Methods within water reservoirs. Simple irrigation to complete. The teacher surveys consisted Background to the area equipment and battery-operated watering of multiple questions, the results of which are timers were provided to enable automatic The Top End of the Northern Territory covers outlined in Table 1. watering on weekends and holidays. Plants about 450,000 square kilometres, and has a Teacher survey responses were emailed to the were chosen to be fast-growing, climate- population density of 0.1 people per square first author (AH) and entered into a Microsoft suitable varieties that could be grown in kilometre. There are about 60 remote Excel spread sheet. Quantitative responses small containers and used in a classroom schools in the area and a total population were checked for possible errors, and teachers or school kitchen easily, and included basil, of 39,300, with 24,500 (62%) identifying as contacted by phone or email to clarify if there beans, coriander, cucumber, eggplant, radish, Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander. The was ambiguity, which occurred twice. For rocket, tomatoes and zucchini. No chemical region contains tropical, grassland, and each time-related program parameter in each pesticides, herbicides or fungicides were equatorial climate zones. school, the single before-program time was supplied. compared to the average of the three times Study design After a review of nutrition teaching materials reported during the program. These time currently used in Northern Territory schools, A multi-site, mixed methods case study was differences were averaged across the schools a classroom resource for nutrition and undertaken during 2011. to give a final mean, and a range calculated. cooking activities was developed by the Qualitative responses were recorded and 236 Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 2014 vol . 38 no . 3 © 2014 The Authors. ANZJPH © 2014 Public Health Association of Australia Healthy Eating Remote school gardens: exploring new approaches Table 1: Program evaluation. Program parameter Evaluation Average pre-program time per Average post-program time Average time change per week (range) Method week per week 1. Student time spent cooking, gardening and on garden and nutrition related classroom activities a. Student time cooking nutritious foods Teacher surveys 0.3 hours 1.0 hours 0.8 (0.5-1.5) hours b. Student time gardening Teacher surveys 2.5 hours 4.5 hours 2.0 (0.5-3.0) hours c. Student time in gardening related classroom activities Teacher surveys 0.5 hours 2.0 hours 1.5 (0.0-3.0) hours d. Student time in nutrition related classroom activities Teacher surveys 1.0 hours 1.6 hours 0.4 (0.5-1.0) hours Program parameter Notes 2. Monetary and time costs a. Cost of gardening materials and delivery Teacher surveys The average total purchase and delivery cost for each garden package was less than $600 per school (range: $520-$630). None of the schools spent any additional money on materials for the program, although two schools sought external funding to expand into larger gardening activities as a result of the gardening pilot. b. Time spent in classroom resource development, Classroom resource development and gardening materials selection time was not documented. This time and gardening materials selection was provided free of charge as part of existing job roles, and would not recur if the program were to be implemented in more schools using the same resource and materials. 3. Operation without in-person horticultural support a. Number of horticultural support phone calls and Horticultural There were 11 phone calls and 22 emails between the teachers and the horticulturalist, with a total time spent emails and time spent support register by the horticulturalist of 1.5 hours. The support interactions were all related to the logistics of package delivery to schools using couriers, and checking that the packages had arrived. b. Problems and benefits of remote horticultural Teacher surveys Teachers reported satisfaction with the remote support they were offered. support 4. Acceptability to teachers a. Teachers’ prior horticultural experience Teacher surveys None of the teachers had any formal horticultural qualifications. Two had limited home gardening experience, and one had run a school garden 20 years ago. b. Gardening materials delivery Teacher surveys One school did not receive their gardening materials on time, because they were left unattended upon delivery in the community, and went missing. They were later retrieved. This problem was compounded by the fact that two courier companies were involved in the delivery, making communication between sender and receiver difficult. All other schools received their materials on time and without problems. c. Gardening materials set up Teacher surveys All teachers reported that the gardening materials were easy to set up and could be assembled by a single teacher. The average total set-up time was 2 hours (range: 1.5-2.5 hours). d. Problems and benefits in delivery and set up of Teacher surveys The only problem with delivery raised by teachers was that it took a long time for gardening materials to be gardening materials sent to remote communities: If we require something, it takes quite a long time for it to arrive (in the remote community). Teacher Otherwise they were satisfied with the materials and setup. The pots are an easy compromise-– no digging required. It (setup) was very straightforward-– clear instructions. Teacher. e. Time spent maintaining garden beds Teacher surveys Teachers spent on average 1.5 hours per week (range: 1.0 to 3.0 hours) maintaining garden beds. f. Teacher time spent preparing for lessons using Teacher surveys During the evaluation period teachers spent on average 1.0 hours (range 0.0 – 3.0 hours) per week preparing supplied classroom resource and other materials for lessons with the supplied classroom resource, and the same amount of time using other materials (range 0.0-3.0 hours). g. Perceived benefits of and problems with the Teacher surveys Some teachers found the classroom resource a useful planning and time-saving tool: classroom resource (The resource) saves me the time and trouble of doing it myself. Teacher While others had problems with it. One teacher considered the classroom resource to be less useful when plants were not fully grown. Another was happy to run garden and nutrition classes informally without using a resource. A third wanted more science included in the resources, and asked that the resource be linked with the Australian school curriculum: Perhaps specifically link it (the resource) to the appropriate areas of the Australian Curriculum. Teacher 5. Gardening success a. Successful and non-successful plant types Teacher At the end of the evaluation period, each school had an average of 5 plant types still growing (range: 3.0-7.0), surveys 4.25 types ready to use in the classroom (range: 2.0-6.0), and 1 plant type that had died (range: 0-2.0). Basil, beans, coriander, cucumber, eggplant, marigolds, radish, rocket, tomatoes and zucchini were all grown in schools. The most successful were basil, beans, cucumber, eggplant marigolds, radish and rocket.E ggplant, coriander and beans were the only plant types recorded as dying. Many plants were still growing at the end of the evaluation period. b. Problems with garden beds, and solutions found Teacher Some teachers had problems with pests, and reported using physical methods to destroy them: by teachers surveys Small grasshoppers have appeared and are eating the bean plants. Teacher. One school reported relocating their portable garden beds inside metal cages to minimise the risk of vandalism. Actual vandalism was not reported by anyone. 2014 vol . 38 no . 3 Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 237 © 2014 The Authors. ANZJPH © 2014 Public Health Association of Australia Hume et al. Article a unique identifier assigned to all quotes None of the teachers had any horticultural Two schools used the success of the taken from a given teacher. These responses qualifications, and all reported easy and program as an impetus to expand into larger were analysed to determine consistent or prompt setup of the gardening package gardening activities. contrasting responses between teachers, without the need for outside help. There Selected quotes taken from teacher surveys and to ensure that all viewpoints were were concerns raised about the time taken are summarised below: represented in the results without replication. for materials to be shipped to communities, “The simplicity of the project is perfect for but teachers were otherwise satisfied with an introduction to gardening for students Ethics and data de-identification the process. Teachers spent an average of (and teachers). Easy to set up and maintain, 1.5 hours per week outside of class time The Northern Territory Department of Health and if it goes well, there is always the maintaining the garden beds once they were potential to expand it into a bigger project.” and Menzies School of Health Research installed. (Teacher 1) Human Research Ethics Committee provided ethics approval for the study, approval Some teachers were happy with the “Children … are generally more willing to number HREC-2012-1790. Approval for classroom resource provided, and others have a go at tasting something interesting research to be undertaken by participating were not. They reported using the supplied or something they have never tasted schools was also given by the Department of classroom resource for lesson preparation before.” (Teacher 3) Education. Given the small number of schools about half the time, and sought their own “I could see that this would be a great involved, all data was de-identified to protect materials the rest of the time. Some teachers thing to put into homes, very simple and anonymity. wanted greater integration of the resource could be a way that a group of students with the national curriculum, and inclusion set them up for each of the families. The of more science material. Others adapted the idea is simple and could be the impetus to Results classroom resource to their own purposes. start families growing things at home. The only additional thing would be some sort The program was delivered into four remote Cooking success of protection from the birds and young Top End Northern Territory schools, and ran children.” (Teacher 3) for four months. The time students spent cooking nutritious foods in the classroom increased in all “Visitors to the school are very impressed Four teachers and one horticulturalist were schools. Garden-grown produce was used with the range of foods we are able to grow.” involved in the program evaluation. The where possible with other fresh produce (Teacher 4) horticultural support register was completed substituted as required. for 100% of the phone or email interactions “… the garden is working really well, the between teachers and the horticulturalist. (students) are really engaged in this project Gardening success and (teacher) has the students out daily There was also a 100% completion rate for all checking the veggie gardens. We have 12 of the teacher surveys. For each program Multiple plant types were grown with got the best place for them in the air-con parameter evaluated, the evaluation method success in all schools. Many plants types were cages, no birds or children can interfere with and results are presented in Table 1. growing and ready to use in the classroom the plants. The teacher has incorporated at the end of the evaluation period. Teachers the gardening project into his classroom Number of students, classroom times, reported some problems with pests, and curriculum and I am impressed with how there was perceived risk of vandalism in one and costs the students are engaging with the project, school, although no vandalism occurred. Forty-eight children, ranging in age from we are also using them to plant other plants eight to 14 years, were involved in the and trees around the school. ” (Principal) Benefits, enablers and barriers program. “Cooking food they have grown themselves Teachers reported a variety of perceived Increases in all time parameters measured will make this work.” (Teacher 2) benefits, barriers, and enablers to the success in all schools were observed, except for of the program, as assessed via teacher gardening-related class time in one school, surveys. Conclusions which remained at zero both before and during the program. This school showed an Perceived benefits to the program included This study has demonstrated that a novel, increase in nutrition-related class time of one the potential for program expansion at school low-cost, remote school gardening and hour, however. and into homes, the range of plants grown, nutrition program is feasible, and may be and student engagement. The average total purchase and delivery cost associated with an increase from baseline in Perceived barriers to success of the program for each garden package was less than $600 student’s time spent cooking and gardening, included possible weekend vandalism and per school, without any additional costs and on their classroom time spent on the late start to the program. incurred. gardening-related and nutrition-related Perceived enablers of the success of the activities. Program operation and acceptability program included program simplicity and It has also demonstrated that such a program flexibility, the ability to secure garden beds to The program operated effectively without can be delivered cheaply and run without reduce vandalism, and student enthusiasm the need for horticulturalists to visit schools. the need for on-the-ground staff, in a manner and motivation to participate. Teachers reported satisfaction with the email that is acceptable to teachers, and can and phone support provided. 238 Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 2014 vol . 38 no . 3 © 2014 The Authors. ANZJPH © 2014 Public Health Association of Australia Healthy Eating Remote school gardens: exploring new approaches successfully result in a range of plants grown The success in growing plants suggests that This may underestimate the total cost of re- for students’ use. the equipment and seed selection were implementing the program, if materials were prudent. The fact that many plants were to be re-selected, or the classroom resource The increases in time spent gardening and still growing and not ready to use at the altered or rewritten. cooking by children reflect success in one end of the evaluation period is probably a of the program’s major aims. The results for The costs associated with horticultural result of the program delays. Some plants time spent in the classroom on nutrition support were also excluded but, given had also died, which may reflect increasing and gardening-related topics are equally the small periods involved, this is unlikely end-of-year temperatures, again because the encouraging. The reported gardening and to be significant, unless the program was program was delayed. Starting the program cooking times compare favourably with implemented on a very large scale. earlier in the year would alleviate some of those reported in the Stephanie Alexander Using remote support meant there was 27 these problems, along with an expanded Kitchen Garden literature, and suggest that no way to verify and triangulate findings evaluation of what crops were easy to grow in this respect this model is as effective as reported by teachers, which may have and were useful to teachers in the classroom. other, more-expensive gardening models. biased the results they provided. However, Longer-term evaluation would be needed to The reasons teachers spent time maintaining this seems unlikely, given the range of both determine if this success was ongoing. garden beds are unknown. This could be negative and positive feedback provided by further evaluated with a view to reducing The total cost to each school was far below teachers. maintenance time, which was identified as a that reported for the current alternative The limited number of schools involved in 19,20 barrier to uptake of school gardening in the school garden programs. the pilot may restrict the ability to generalise 28,29 literature. The time used for remote support was these findings elsewhere, although the Pests were the biggest problem mentioned surprisingly small, given the horticultural schools involved are similar to remote schools regarding garden bed maintenance. No inexperience of the teachers and their throughout tropical Northern Australia. pesticides or advice regarding pest control remoteness. were provided in the gardening instructions. The only issue raised was that of package Implications In future, organic pesticides and instructions transport times. This problem is not isolated may be useful. to this program or these materials, and is The fact that two participating schools The perceived potential for program a difficulty faced by anyone sending or applied for funding to expand into larger expansion is consistent with the aims of receiving materials into remote communities. gardens as a result of this program suggests the program: to get remote schools started that once small remote schools have tried The loss of garden packages in transit in school gardening. The idea of program small-scale gardening they may be more may be reduced by closer liaison between expansion into homes presented by a teacher likely to take on larger projects. deliverers and teachers receiving packages, was unexpected, but may be worth pursuing, to ensure they are present to receive goods The selection of ‘inexperienced’ teachers and fits in with the international evidence immediately on delivery, and by reducing the means that the findings here are likely to that school gardening can pique interest in number of couriers involved so that packages be useful in other remote schools without home gardening. In future, the classroom are easier to track. dedicated horticultural or gardening support. resource could include suggestions about Further, the straightforward and quick set The partial use of the provided classroom ways this could be explored. up reported for the garden packages shows resource suggests that more resource that relatively inexperienced people can development and integration may be needed Study limitations and strengths be successful in starting this kind of school to reduce teachers’ class preparation time, The study did not include a control group of garden without outside help. which is consistent with other research in schools and was a pilot study only. As such, 28,29 this area. The age range of the children This model may have application in remote no inferences can be made about the causes involved in this program was broad, which schools throughout Australia, where there is behind program success, and there may be may explain the below-optimal use of a need to alter health impacting behaviours unknown factors outside the program itself the resource. Ultimately, an all-inclusive in high-risk Aboriginal populations. Lengthier that affected its success. An important next classroom resource is probably unrealistic, program evaluation times to consider step, based on the observed success of this and it is likely that teachers will continue to program effectiveness in the long-term, and pilot, would be to verify the findings through adapt what they need for class activities from classroom resource development to improve a larger study. different sources. integration of the classroom resource The late start to the program reduced the into the school curriculum, may be worth The reported benefit of nutrition education evaluation period, and also pushed the investigating in the future. and student’s tasting of new vegetables fit in program into hotter, suboptimal growing 10,11,18 with the Australian literature. conditions, which may have had an impact The perceived improvements in student Acknowledgements on many of the findings. Despite this, positive engagement associated with gardening align program outcomes were achieved. We acknowledge the Aboriginal communities with the Australian literature, as does the The evaluation did not include the cost of the and traditional owners who gave permission ability to integrate gardening into different time taken in materials selection or classroom for the research to occur, and the schools, curriculum areas to facilitate classroom resource development, because future use of teachers and students involved. The support learning. the program would not require this to recur. of Anne Goodman and the Northern Territory 2014 vol . 38 no . 3 Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 239 © 2014 The Authors. ANZJPH © 2014 Public Health Association of Australia Hume et al. Article 9. Bere EK, Klepp I. Changes in accessibility and 21. Currie G, Senbergs Z. Indigenous communities: Department of Education and Training, the preferences predict children’s future fruit and vegetable Transport disadvantage and Aboriginal communities. Northern Territory Department of Health, intake Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2005;2:15-23. In: Currie G, Stanley J, Stanley J, editor. No Way to Remote Public Health Nutrition Team, 10. Morgan PJ, et al. The impact of nutrition education Go: Transport and Social Disadvantage in Australian with and without a school garden on knowledge, Communities. Melbourne (AUST): Monash University Megan Connelly and the Northern Territory vegetable intake and preferences and quality of school Press; 2007. Department of Resources, the Menzies School life among primary-school students. Public Health Nutr. 22. Australian Bureau of Statistics. Population Estimates by 2010;13(11):1931-40. Local Government Area, 2001 to 2011. Canberra (AUST): of Health Research Nutrition Team, Jason 11. Somerset S, Markwell K. Impact of a school-based food ABS; 2012. Davey and the Charles Darwin University garden on attitudes and identification skills regarding 23. Department of Education Human Resource Services. vegetables and fruit: A 12-month intervention trial. Teaching Jobs-– Remote Schools and Regions [Internet]. Horticultural Department, the Heart Public Health Nutr. 2009;12(2):214-21. Darwin (AUST): Government of Northern Territory; Foundation of Australia, Anthea Fawcett and 12. Morris JL, Neustadter A, Zidenberg-Cherr S. First-grade 2012 [cited 2013 Dec 10]. Available from: http://www. the Remote Indigenous Gardening Network, gardeners more likely to taste vegetables. Calif Agric. teaching.nt.gov.au/remote/index.cfm?attributes. 2001;55(1):43–6. fuseaction=the-remote-schools-and-regions Tom Wycherley and Fran Squires is also 13. Morris JL, Zidenberg-Cherr S. Garden-enhanced 24. Bureau of Meteorology. Australian Climate Zones gratefully acknowledged. nutrition curriculum improves fourth-grade school [Internet]. Melbourne (AUST): 2012 [cited 2012 Nov children’s knowledge of nutrition and preferences for 22]. Available from: http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/ some vegetables. J Am Diet Assoc. 2002;102(1):91-3. environ/other/IDCJCM0001_aus_clim_zones.shtml 14. Heim S, et al. Can a Community-based intervention 25. Department of Health. Accessibility/Remoteness References improve the home food environment? Parental Index of Australia 2011 [Internet]. Canberra (AUST): perspectives of the influence of the delicious and Commonwealth of Australia; 2011 [cited 2011 Jan 1. Australian Bureau of Statistics. Experimental Life Tables nutritious garden. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2011;43(2):130-4. 14]. Available from: http://www9.health.gov.au/aria/ for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians: 2005- 15. Heim S, Stang J, Ireland M. A Garden pilot project ariainpt.cfm 2007. Canberra (AUST): ABS; 2009. enhances fruit and vegetable consumption among 26. Heart Foundation of Australia. Eat Smart Play Smart. 2. Vos T, Barker B, Begg S, Stanley L, Lopez AD. Burden children. J Am Diet Assoc. 2009;109(7):1220-6. A Manual for Out of School Hours Care, 2004-2008. of disease and injury in Aboriginal and Torres Strait 16. Langellotto GA, Gupta A. Gardening increases vegetable Melbourne (AUST): Heart Foundation Victoria; 2008. Islander peoples: The Indigenous health gap. Int J consumption in school-aged children: A meta-analytical 27. Block K, Johnson B, Gibbs L, Staiger P, Townsend M, Epidemiol. 2009;38(2):470-7. synthesis. Horttechnology. 2012;22:430-45. Macfarlane S, et al. Evaluation of the Stephanie Alexander 3. Tohill BC. Dietary intake of fruit and vegetables and 17. Ratcliffe MM, et al. The effects of school garden Kitchen Garden Program: Final Report. Melbourne management of body weight. Proceedings of the Joint experiences on middle school-aged students’ (AUST): McCaughey Centre; 2009. FAO/WHO Workshop on Fruit and Vegetables for Health; knowledge, attitudes, and behaviours associated 28. Somerset S, Bossard A. Variations in prevalence 2004 Sep 1-3; Kobe, Japan. Geneva: World Health with vegetable consumption. Health Promot Pract. and conduct of school food gardens in tropical and Organisation; 2005 2011;12(1):36-43. subtropical regions of north-eastern Australia. Public 4. Crowe F, et al. Fruit and vegetable intake and 18. Viola A. Evaluation of the Outreach School Garden Health Nutr. 2009;12(9):1485-93. mortality from ischaemic heart disease: Results Project: Building the capacity of two Indigenous 29. Graham H, et al. Use of School Gardens in Academic from the European Prospective Investigation into remote school communities to integrate nutrition Instruction. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2005;37(3):147-51. Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC)-Heart study. Eur Heart J. into the core school curriculum. Health Promot J Austr. 30. Ozer EJ. The effects of school gardens on students 2011;32(10):1235-43. 2006;17(3):233-9. and schools: Conceptualization and considerations for 5. Lock K, Pomerleau J, Causer L, Altmann DR, McKee 19. EON Foundation. Annual Report [Internet]. Subiaco maximizing healthy development. Health Educ Behav. M. The global burden of disease attributable to low (AUST): EON; 2012 [cited 2013 Dec 20]. Available from: 2007;34:846–56. consumption of fruit and vegetables: Implications for http://eon.org.au/media/FlippingBook/EON%20 31. Pascoe J, Wyatt-Smith C. Curriculum literacies and the the global strategy on diet. Bull World Health Organ. Annual%20Report%202012/catalogue.html school garden. Lit Learn Middle Years. 2013;21(1):34-47. 2005;83(2):100-8. 20. Stephanie Alexander Kitchen Foundation. Join the 32. Alexander J, North MW, Hendren DK. Master gardener 6. Northern Territory Government. Market Basket Survey. Program [Internet]. Abbotsford (AUST ): SAKGF; classroom garden project: An evaluation of the benefits Darwin (AUST): Government of the Northern Territory; 2012 [cited 2012 Dec]. Available from: http://www. to children. Child Environ. 1995;12(2):256-63. kitchengardenfoundation.org.au/training-events/ 7. Australian Bureau of Statistics. National Aboriginal and training-for-schools Torres Strait Islander Health Survey. Canberra (AUST): ABS; 2006. 8. Brimblecombe JK, Ferguson MM, Liberato SC, O’Dea K. Characteristics of the community-level diet of Aboriginal people in remote northern Australia. Med J Aust. 2013;198(7):380-4. 240 Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 2014 vol . 38 no . 3 © 2014 The Authors. ANZJPH © 2014 Public Health Association of Australia

Journal

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public HealthWiley

Published: Jun 1, 2014

Keywords: ; ; ;

There are no references for this article.