Food Allergy Training Module for University Staff
Created bySHERIHAN GHOSN
18 views0 downloads

Food Allergy Training Module for University Staff

College/UniversityHealth1 days
This project tasks university students with creating a training module for university staff on managing food allergies and intolerances. Students will differentiate between allergies and intolerances, identify risk factors on campus, and recommend appropriate interventions. The final product is a staff training module that equips university personnel to support students with food allergies, ensuring their safety and well-being on campus.
Food AllergyFood IntoleranceRisk FactorsIntervention StrategiesTraining ModuleUniversity StaffCampus Safety
Want to create your own PBL Recipe?Use our AI-powered tools to design engaging project-based learning experiences for your students.
📝

Inquiry Framework

Question Framework

Driving Question

The overarching question that guides the entire project.How can university staff create a comprehensive and effective training module that equips them to differentiate between food allergies and food intolerances, respond appropriately to allergic reactions, mitigate risk factors, communicate effectively, and understand the legal/ethical considerations to ensure the safety and well-being of students with food allergies on campus?

Essential Questions

Supporting questions that break down major concepts.
  • What are the key differences between food allergies and food intolerances, and how can university staff distinguish between them?
  • What are the immediate and appropriate steps to take when a student experiences an allergic reaction on campus?
  • How can staff members identify and mitigate potential risk factors for allergic reactions in university dining halls and events?
  • What role does communication play in managing food allergies within the university environment, and how can staff effectively communicate with students and healthcare providers?
  • how to manage food intolerance ?

Standards & Learning Goals

Learning Goals

By the end of this project, students will be able to:
  • Participants will be able to differentiate between the signs and symptoms of food allergy and intolerance.
  • Participants will be able to identify the risk factors for food allergy and intolerance.
  • Participants will be able to recommend appropriate initial nutritional and pharmacological interventions for food allergy and intolerance prior to medical support.
  • Participants will know how to respond appropriately to an allergic reaction on campus, including immediate steps and communication protocols.
  • Participants will be able to describe legal and ethical considerations for supporting students with food allergies.

Teacher Specified

3
Primary
Differentiate between the signs and symptoms of food allergy and intoleranceReason: Directly addresses the core content of the training module.
4
Primary
Identify the risk factors for food allergy and intoleranceReason: Crucial for preventative measures in the university environment.
5
Primary
Recommend nutritional and pharmacological therapy for food allergy and intoleranceReason: Informs appropriate response and support strategies.

Entry Events

Events that will be used to introduce the project to students

The Case of the Mysterious Menu

Students receive a seemingly normal university menu, but with hidden clues and ambiguous ingredient lists that could trigger allergic reactions. Working in teams, they must decipher the menu, identify potential allergens, and propose safer alternatives, fostering critical thinking about labeling and cross-contamination.

Food Allergy Mythbusters

Present students with a series of common misconceptions and myths surrounding food allergies and intolerances. Through research, expert interviews, and critical analysis, students debunk these myths, building a foundation of accurate knowledge and challenging preconceived notions about food allergies.
📚

Portfolio Activities

Portfolio Activities

These activities progressively build towards your learning goals, with each submission contributing to the student's final portfolio.
Activity 1

Allergy vs. Intolerance: The Diagnostic Deep Dive

Students will investigate the physiological mechanisms, symptoms, and diagnostic criteria that differentiate food allergies from intolerances. They will create a comparative chart highlighting these differences.

Steps

Here is some basic scaffolding to help students complete the activity.
1. Research the immunological mechanisms behind food allergies.
2. Investigate the digestive processes involved in food intolerances.
3. Compare and contrast the typical symptoms of allergies versus intolerances.
4. Examine the diagnostic tests used for each condition (e.g., skin prick tests, elimination diets).
5. Create a detailed chart summarizing the key differences.

Final Product

What students will submit as the final product of the activityA comprehensive chart that differentiates food allergies and intolerances based on mechanisms, symptoms, and diagnostic approaches.

Alignment

How this activity aligns with the learning objectives & standardsAddresses standard 3: Differentiate between the signs and symptoms of food allergy and intolerance.
Activity 2

Risk Factor Radar: Identifying Campus Hotspots

Students will identify and analyze potential risk factors for allergic reactions in various university settings (dining halls, events, etc.). They will develop a risk assessment report with mitigation strategies.

Steps

Here is some basic scaffolding to help students complete the activity.
1. Brainstorm potential risk factors in university dining halls (cross-contamination, labeling issues).
2. Analyze event catering practices for potential allergen exposure.
3. Research the common allergens and their prevalence.
4. Conduct a mock risk assessment of a university event.
5. Propose mitigation strategies to reduce allergen exposure.

Final Product

What students will submit as the final product of the activityA risk assessment report outlining potential risk factors for food allergies on campus and proposing mitigation strategies.

Alignment

How this activity aligns with the learning objectives & standardsAddresses standard 4: Identify the risk factors for food allergy and intolerance.
Activity 3

Rx & Nutrition Navigator: Crafting Initial Response Plans

Students will research and recommend appropriate nutritional and pharmacological interventions for managing food allergy and intolerance symptoms, focusing on initial response prior to medical support.

Steps

Here is some basic scaffolding to help students complete the activity.
1. Research the role of epinephrine auto-injectors in managing allergic reactions.
2. Investigate appropriate nutritional interventions for managing food intolerances (e.g., elimination diets, enzyme supplements).
3. Develop a decision tree for recommending initial interventions based on symptom severity.
4. Consider the legal and ethical implications of providing recommendations.
5. Create a guide for university staff on initial response strategies.

Final Product

What students will submit as the final product of the activityA staff guide outlining initial nutritional and pharmacological recommendations for managing food allergy and intolerance symptoms prior to professional medical support.

Alignment

How this activity aligns with the learning objectives & standardsAddresses standard 5: Recommend nutritional and pharmacological therapy for food allergy and intolerance.
🏆

Rubric & Reflection

Portfolio Rubric

Grading criteria for assessing the overall project portfolio

Food Allergy & Intolerance Training Module Rubric

Category 1

Content Accuracy & Differentiation

Focuses on the accuracy of information presented regarding the differences between food allergies and intolerances, including mechanisms, symptoms, and diagnostic approaches.
Criterion 1

Accuracy of Information

The extent to which the information presented is scientifically accurate and up-to-date.

Exemplary
4 Points

Presents flawlessly accurate, current, and comprehensive information on food allergies and intolerances, reflecting in-depth research and understanding.

Proficient
3 Points

Presents mostly accurate and current information with only minor inaccuracies or omissions.

Developing
2 Points

Presents information with some inaccuracies or significant omissions, indicating a need for further research.

Beginning
1 Points

Presents inaccurate, outdated, or significantly incomplete information, demonstrating a lack of understanding.

Criterion 2

Differentiation Clarity

The clarity and effectiveness of the module in differentiating between food allergies and intolerances.

Exemplary
4 Points

Provides an exceptionally clear and insightful comparison of food allergies and intolerances, highlighting nuanced differences in mechanisms, symptoms, and diagnosis.

Proficient
3 Points

Clearly differentiates between food allergies and intolerances, covering the key distinctions in mechanisms, symptoms, and diagnosis.

Developing
2 Points

Attempts to differentiate between food allergies and intolerances, but the explanation contains some confusion or lacks detail.

Beginning
1 Points

Fails to clearly differentiate between food allergies and intolerances, demonstrating a fundamental misunderstanding of the differences.

Category 2

Risk Factor Identification & Mitigation

Evaluates the identification of risk factors in university settings and the feasibility and effectiveness of proposed mitigation strategies.
Criterion 1

Risk Factor Identification

The thoroughness in identifying potential risk factors for allergic reactions in various university settings.

Exemplary
4 Points

Identifies a comprehensive range of risk factors across various university settings, demonstrating exceptional foresight and attention to detail.

Proficient
3 Points

Identifies most of the significant risk factors in common university settings.

Developing
2 Points

Identifies some risk factors, but overlooks key areas or demonstrates a limited understanding of potential hazards.

Beginning
1 Points

Fails to identify key risk factors or demonstrates a lack of awareness regarding potential hazards in university settings.

Criterion 2

Mitigation Strategies

The feasibility and effectiveness of the proposed mitigation strategies to reduce allergen exposure.

Exemplary
4 Points

Proposes highly effective and feasible mitigation strategies that are innovative, practical, and comprehensively address identified risk factors.

Proficient
3 Points

Proposes feasible and effective mitigation strategies that address most of the identified risk factors.

Developing
2 Points

Proposes some mitigation strategies, but they may be impractical, incomplete, or not fully address the identified risk factors.

Beginning
1 Points

Proposes ineffective or unrealistic mitigation strategies, or fails to offer solutions that adequately address the identified risk factors.

Category 3

Response & Intervention Planning

Assesses the appropriateness and clarity of recommended nutritional and pharmacological interventions, as well as the overall staff guide for initial response strategies.
Criterion 1

Appropriateness of Recommendations

The extent to which the recommended interventions are appropriate, safe, and aligned with current best practices.

Exemplary
4 Points

Recommends highly appropriate, safe, and innovative interventions that reflect a deep understanding of current best practices and legal/ethical considerations.

Proficient
3 Points

Recommends appropriate and safe interventions aligned with current best practices.

Developing
2 Points

Recommends interventions that are partially appropriate or safe, but may contain some inconsistencies or omissions.

Beginning
1 Points

Recommends inappropriate or unsafe interventions, demonstrating a lack of understanding of best practices and potential risks.

Criterion 2

Clarity of Staff Guide

The clarity, organization, and usability of the staff guide for initial response strategies.

Exemplary
4 Points

Presents an exceptionally clear, concise, and well-organized staff guide that is highly usable and effectively communicates initial response strategies.

Proficient
3 Points

Presents a clear and well-organized staff guide that effectively communicates initial response strategies.

Developing
2 Points

Presents a staff guide that is somewhat unclear or disorganized, making it difficult to easily understand and implement initial response strategies.

Beginning
1 Points

Presents a staff guide that is unclear, disorganized, and difficult to use, failing to effectively communicate initial response strategies.

Reflection Prompts

End-of-project reflection questions to get students to think about their learning
Question 1

How has your understanding of the differences between food allergies and food intolerances evolved throughout this module?

Text
Required
Question 2

To what extent do you feel prepared to identify and mitigate risk factors for allergic reactions on campus, and what areas still require further learning?

Scale
Required
Question 3

Which specific legal and ethical considerations regarding food allergies are now most apparent to you, and how will these inform your actions on campus?

Text
Required