Jump to main content.

Development of Outreach Education Materials and Programming for Pesticide Use Reduction and Safety Practices

John E. Ayers
Kerry Hoffman-Richards
Penn State University
Office of Pesticide Education
114 Buckhout Laboratory
University Park, PA 16802-4506
814-863-0263
814-863-8175 (fax)

Executive Summary

The primary purpose of this grant is to develop, produce and disseminate outreach educational materials and to train consumers and youth regarding pesticide use reduction and safety practices, when the use of pesticides are necessary. A survey of diverse consumers and youth will be conducted to determine outreach education needs in the area of pesticide use reduction and safety. The educational materials developed will include, but will not be limited to multi-media materials for consumers and school students.

Completion of this project will not only help to fulfill the needs for materials to educate consumers, but also will help teachers meet the new Pennsylvania Department of Education state educational standards in the area of IPM for school students. They may also serve as a resource of educational materials for other outreach educational campaigns such as the national Read the Label First campaign, and as handout materials for outreach activities such as the Bugmobile, the Philadelphia Flower Show and Safety Day Camps.

Current and previous projects of this nature that have been developed and implemented illustrate the ability of the Office of Pesticide Education to successfully complete this project. In addition, the networks that have already been built through previous collaborations will facilitate the successful completion of this project. The need for this project has been clearly illustrated over the past year through numerous requests for materials previously developed by the Penn State Pesticide Education program. For example, in cooperation with a program being delivered by the regional EPA office in Atlanta, 4,000 "D.B. Pest Activity Bughouse" book for elementary-aged students were distributed; the New York Agromedicine Program requested permission to duplicate the activity books; as well as other requests for these materials from many states throughout the country. Funding of this grant would facilitate wider distribution of these materials, and greater availability through alternative media such as the Internet.

Objectives

  1. Develop outreach educational materials to educate consumers and youth regarding practices to reduce pesticide use and follow safe practices when applying pesticides if necessary.
  2. Survey a diversity of consumers and youth to determine the greatest educational needs for outreach education information, and the most appropriate medias to deliver those materials.
  3. Revise existing pesticide safety/IPM educational material based on information provided from the qualitative and quantitative review of the materials. For example, doing pre and post testing when materials are used in schools can determine changes in user knowledge and attitudes and determine the potential for the adoption of practices by consumers, educators and their students.
  4. Provide inservice training to facilitate integration of the materials into existing programs, for example, Master Gardners, 4-H, and school programs.
  5. Disseminate materials through existing educational networks, such as Penn State Publications Distribution Center and other available outlets, such as the Internet.

Justification

The Pesticide Environmental Stewardship Program (PESP) is guided by the principle that although regulation can reduce pesticide risk, even more risk can be reduced by the informed actions of the pesticide user. Appropriate consumer and youth education will facilitate informed decisions regarding pest control, alternatives to pesticide use, safe use when pesticides are necessary and pesticide residues on foods. This type of education is imperative, not only to protect human health and safety, but also to preserve the environment. Researchers have noted the importance of educating the non-agricultural public, whose opinions influence the marketplace and new federal and state regulations. In addition, researchers (Travis & Rajotte, 1995) urge the implementation of educational programs that help consumers understand how Integrated Pest Management (IPM) can help lead to safer food and a cleaner environment. Justification for each objective is as follows:

  1. Development of these materials will help educate consumers and youth to take an active role in reducing the use of pesticides by putting the pesticide use reduction and pesticide safety concepts they will learn into practice. For example, reading the label prior to purchasing the pesticide and safely using the pesticide according to the label directions will potentially reduce unnecessary exposure and adverse environmental impacts in the event that pesticides are used.
  2. The survey will provide valuable insight regarding which areas relative to pesticide reduction and safe practices are in greatest need of outreach education. Using this information to focus on three to five major areas, most people will learn one or more new concepts that they may not have be aware of prior to using the educational materials developed.
  3. Once changes in user knowledge and attitudes are determined, revisions can be made to materials that will strengthen areas that showed lower increases in knowledge and least likelihood of practice adoption. These changes will help ensure that the objectives of the project will be met.
  4. Providing inservice training will help facilitate adoption of the materials into existing programs. If Master Gardeners, school teachers and others, receive training to become more comfortable with the material, research has shown that they are more likely to utilize the materials provided. The need for this can be best illustrated by the fact that our Office has already received requests for this type of teacher training. The ability to meet these requests will be constrained by the availability of funding.
  5. Distribution of the materials developed through this project will reach a wide audience through established outreach activities. Examples of outreach activities that are currently projects of the Office of Pesticide Education would include: a promotional exhibit at the Philadelphia Flower Show, exhibits at Penn State's Ag Progress Days and the Pennsylvania Farm Show, and working with school students at Arbor Day Event programs and Farm-City Day Camp workshops. Reaching a wide diversity of audiences will increase awareness and help to encourage pesticide reduction and safe pesticide use practices around the home stressed in the educational materials. Initial development expenses for the creation of these materials are a one-time cost that will be covered through this project. Therefore, the cost to produce the materials by other education institutions and state and local pest management education programs will be limited to the cost of duplication. Furthermore, many of the materials will be available electronically and can be distributed via the Internet or low cost CD production.

Additional justification of need and support for this type of project can be found in the Literature Review. In addition, this project closely follows many of the same objectives and goals that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has expressed a desire to meet and accomplish with projects such as the Read The Label First campaign and the Consumer Labeling Initiative.

Literature Review

In 1962 Rachael Carson's book, Silent Spring, brought the issue of pesticide use to the forefront of consumer and environmentalist concerns. In 1992, the EPA released the findings of the National Home and Garden Pesticide Use Survey that provided data regarding non-agricultural use of pesticides in and around urban and rural homes (EPA, 1992). The survey included on-site visits to over 2,000 households in 29 states. The findings of this survey show widespread homeowner use of pesticides. Approximately 76 percent of the households treated their homes themselves for insects and related pests, while an additional 20 percent hired a professional commercial applicator to treat for household pests. An estimated 85 percent of all households surveyed had at least one pesticide in storage around the home; and more than a quarter of the households had more than six products in storage. In households that have children under the age of five living in the home, about 47 percent had at least one pesticide stored, in an unsecured manner, less than four feet off the ground. This statistic rises to 75 percent in households where a child less than five years of age are not in residence.

Recent misuse of methyl parathion for the treatment of residences and businesses in urban areas is the most dramatic example of the need for education. Methyl parathion is an insecticide used effectively by agricultural producers for years. If applied according to label directions it can be used safely. It is not labeled for home use. However, hundreds of unsuspecting consumers, uneducated in regard to safe use of pesticides and alternative methods of pest control, allowed their households, and businesses, to be treated with this agricultural chemical. The cleanup from these incidents cost over $20 million (Agency for Toxic Substances Disease Registry, ATSDR, 1997). Other incidents have occurred in Detroit, Michigan, and in Mississippi with cleanup cost over $50 million. As part of their research, EPA staff compiled records of 22 accidental deaths since the mid-1960s caused by illegal home use of methyl parathion or ethyl parathion. Some of the victims were children who died after drinking pesticides from unmarked containers (Natural Life, 1997; Pesticide Action Network, 1997). Veterinarians also reported deaths of household pets as a result of methyl parathion exposure (EPA, 1997).

Need for pesticide safety/IPM materials: A desire to develop informed consumers can also be linked to the national concern about public understanding of science or science literacy (Shortland, 1988). Shortland proposes that a scientifically literate individual is educated to cope with science, and is given a respect for both the expertise and human fallibility's of scientists. Therefore, that individual is better able to make informed judgments about the personal, political and social relevance of scientific information and its impact on society.

Although the practice of IPM is not a new concept, curriculum and educational materials for consumers and youth in this area are limited. A search was undertaken by the researcher to determine the availability of materials that could be used as resources by instructors. Few available resources were found such as, chapters in textbooks, short fact sheets, and other resources, but few consumer oriented educational materials are available. The literature, however, cites many examples suggesting the need for these educational materials.

As a major focus of a Masters and Doctoral program in Agricultural Education, Kerry Hoffman Richards developed and evaluated both a Pesticide Safety curriculum (Hoffman, 1992) and an Integrated Pest Management curriculum (Hoffman-Richards, 2000) respectively. A more complete review of literature can be found as a part of these dissertations. At the request of the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture, the pesticide safety curriculum served as the resource materials for the 1992 Pennsylvania Envirothon "current issue station." The Envirothon is a science-based competition that teaches students about environmental issues. The current issue topic is selected based on what is perceived as a pressing environmental concern. Evaluations completed by secondary science and agricultural science instructors participating in the program were favorable. However, the overwhelming suggestion for improvement was to include information regarding alternatives to pesticide use for pest control (Envirothon Committee, personal communication). In essence, these suggestions were stressing the desire for an IPM curriculum. The IPM materials were developed and utilized for the "current issue" station for the 1997 National Envirothon.

Several recent developments in Pennsylvania, that appear to be reflective of a national trend, illustrate the need for this project. Most importantly, the Pennsylvania Department of Education (PDE) recently adopted Environment and Ecology Academic Standards, which include IPM learning objectives. The IPM learning objectives include many pesticide safety related concepts, such as identification of signal words, identification of types of pesticide formulations, reducing the use of pesticides and safe use of pesticides when necessary. The inclusion of the IPM objectives were based in part on survey results (Minner, 1998) which indicate that, of all identified areas of study, agricultural diversity and IPM were taught with the least frequency.

The goal of the Environment and Ecology standards is to examine the world with respect to the economic, cultural, political, and social structure as well as natural processes and systems. As students master these standards, they will become aware of the role they play in the community in reaching decisions related to the environment (PDE, 1999a). Integrated Pest Management is one of nine core areas of the Environment and Ecology standards. The IPM standards spell out what a student should know and be able to do by the completion of specific grade levels. Students' attainment of the concepts outlined in the standards will be measured by the Pennsylvania System of School Assessment (PSSA) tests. Although local school districts are not mandated to strictly follow the standards, PSSA tests will be designed around the academic standards. As a result, if students are to perform well on the PSSA exam, instruction regarding concepts outlined in the new standards must be provided for students.

In July of 1998 PDE's Office and Environment and Ecology, Bureau of Curriculum and Academic Services released the final report of a teacher survey regarding the Environment and Ecology standards. The objective of the study was to determine which of the components of the Pennsylvania Department of Education's proposed academic standards for Environment and Ecology were currently being taught to public school students in grades four, seven, ten and twelve. A statistical analysis of the survey results determined that Integrated Pest Management ranked second as the standard area least frequently taught. There is also evidence of a trend toward these concepts being taught in suburban rather than urban schools. In addition, the survey results indicated that these concepts are more likely to be introduced in seventh, tenth and twelfth grades and not in fourth grade. Of the ten IPM concepts included in the study, the survey indicated that none are taught in the majority of schools in the study. At a minimum, over 70 percent of the schools/teachers indicated that the concepts were either not taught or only introduced and not completely covered.

The literature review documents the need for the development of pesticide safety/IPM instructional materials at the elementary grade levels. The demand for environmental education materials is just beginning. In a world of increased awareness and interest in environmental issues, such as pesticide concerns, there is a pressing need for instructional materials. It is no longer enough to educate only the pesticide applicator whose livelihood depends in part on the safe use of pesticides. Now, we must also educate the consumer. Education will allow these young people as future consumers to make their decisions regarding pesticides based upon balanced knowledge. In addition, measuring changes in student's attitudes as a result of receiving instruction may determine if student's perceptions have changed. Materials can also be adapted to become more age-appropriate for higher level learners. In addition, past practices indicate through antidotal evidence, that knowledge gained by students is frequently passed on to parents.

Approach and Methods

A survey of consumers will be conducted through a diversity of venues, which will include, but will not be limited to the Philadelphia Flower Show, garden centers, county fairs, urban garden sites, and teacher association meetings. The survey questionnaire will be designed to determine areas of greatest need for outreach education in the area of pesticide use, safety and reduction. In addition, the survey will query participants to determine which methods provide the best vehicle for delivery of materials once they are developed.

A computer tutorial and activity have previously been developed through The Pennsylvania State University (PSU) Office of Pesticide Education. When it is necessary to rely on an outside contractor, these materials have been developed under a contractual cooperative agreement with Pinnacle Graphics. When appropriate, this same company will be contracted to revise existing materials, and incorporate new areas of emphasis as determined by the survey.

Extension Master Gardner volunteers, public school instructors, 4-H Extension, and other content specialists will be asked to qualitatively review the materials for content and where necessary age-appropriateness. In addition, special attention will be given to target qualitative and quantitative review of these materials in inner-city schools. Based on the results of these evaluations the materials will be revised, duplicated and made available for distribution. At the completion of the project these materials will be made reproducible and available at a reasonable cost for others who would like to incorporate them into educational programs. In addition, when possible, they will be added to the PSU Office of Pesticide Education website to compliment the computer tutorial that is currently available at http://www.pested.psu.edu/. Inservices will be conducted through existing programs such as Master Gardener Training, Pennsylvania's Ag-In-The-Classroom, and intermediate unit educational programming. The Office of Pesticide Education has already developed a working relationship with many of these existing networks.

Impact Assessment

The goal of this project is to develop educational materials to teach consumer and young people so that they can make informed decisions in regard to pesticide use. The initial survey conducted to determine the areas of greatest need for outreach educational materials will also provide the opportunity to determine where these materials will have the greatest impact. For example, as indicated by the survey conducted for the Pennsylvania Department of Education (PDE) few teachers have experience teaching these concepts. Therefore, inservice programming will be critical to familiarize instructors with IPM/Pesticide Safety concepts. Numerous requests for these computer tutorial and activity books have resulted in positive feedback from those who have utilized the materials. In fact, most recently, in cooperation with a program being delivered by the regional EPA office in Atlanta, 4,000 "D.B. Pest Activity Bughouse" books for elementary-aged students were distributed. In addition, in the fall of 2000, Donald Priest, a contractor in the pesticide unit with EPA Region 10 has requested permission to duplicate the activity book for distribution in their IPM in schools outreach efforts. The New York Agromedicine Program has also requested permission to duplicate the "D.B. Pest Activity Bughouse" book. Requests have come for these materials from many states throughout the country. These continued requests for current materials clearly indicate the increasing need for outreach educational materials. Continued funding, such as monies available through this grant, will allow these materials to be readily available.

Summary Statement: The need for IPM/Pesticide Safety educational materials has been illustrated through EPA initiatives such as Read The Label First and the Consumer Labeling Initiative. Funding of this proposal would allow for the development and revision of educational materials that would address these EPA initiatives and other nationwide educational outreach activities.

At a minimum, this proposal would satisfy the grant criteria in the following ways:

Literature Cited

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (1997). National Alert: Illegal use of methyl parathion insecticide, http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/alerts/961213.html

Carson, R., & Darling, L. (1962). Silent Spring. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin, Riverside Press

Environmental Protection Agency. (1990). Strategic plan for establishing the EPA environmental education program (Draft). Washington, DC: Author.

Environmental Protection Agency. (1995). Citizen's guide to pest control and pesticide safety. Cincinnati, OH: Prevention, and Toxic Substances (7501C), EPA 730-K-95-001.

Environmental Protection Agency. (1997). Illegal Indoor Use of Methyl Parathion, Fact Sheet, http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/citizens/methyl.htm.

Food and Drug Administration. (1999). Residue Monitoring 1998, Center For Food Safety and Applied Nutrition. Washington DC: Food and Drug Administration.

Hoffman, K. M. (1992). A pesticide safety curriculum for high school science and agricultural science students. Unpublished Masters Paper. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University.

Hoffman - Richards, K. M. (2000). Development and evaluation of an instructional unit in integrated pest management: Evaluation of student knowledge and attitudes as a result of instruction. Doctoral Dissertation. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University.

Matthiessen, P. (1999). Environmentalist Rachael Carson. Time Magazine, pp. 187-189.

Minner, D. D. (1998). Environmental education curriculum questionnaire. State College, PA: Author.

Minner, D. D. (1998). Standards for environmental and ecology: Final report to the Office of environment and ecology bureau of curriculum and academic services. Harrisburg, PA: Pennsylvania Department of Education.

Natural Life. (1997). Lethal agricultural pesticide used to kill household bugs. Press Release, http://www.life.ca/nl/54/spray.html

Pennsylvania Department of Education. (1999a). Background on academic standards. Harrisburg, PA: Author. www.pde.psu.edu/standard/background.html.

Pennsylvania Department of Education. (1999b). The advisory commission's report on academic standards: Foundations for our children's future. Harrisburg, PA: Author. www.pde.psu.edu/standards/report.html

Rajotte, E. G., & Garling, L. (1999). IPM in Pennsylvania schools: Opportunities for extension. University Park, PA: Authors

Shortland, M. (1988). Advocating science: Literacy and public understanding. Impact of Science on Society, 38(4), 305-306.

Travis, J. W., & Rajotte, E. G. (1995). Implementing IPM through new technologies and the non-agricultural community. Journal of Agricultural Entomology, 12(4), 219-227.

Trends in the United States. (1994). Consumer attitudes and the supermarket. Washington, DC: The Food Marketing Institute.

Van Crowder, L (1997). A participatory approach to curriculum development. Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO): www.fao.org/sd/exdirect/exan0017.htm

Timetable

Work schedule and associated objectives for development, evaluation, and revision of pesticide safety/IPM materials for elementary grade level students.
Begin Project October 2001
Survey Development Fall 2002
Master Gardner volunteer/specialist evaluation of materials Fall 2002 Spring 2003
Random selection of pilot Schools and inner-city schools January 2003
Conduct survey January 2003 – Fall 2003
Pilot test in schools 2003 – 2004 school year
Development and Revision of Materials Ongoing
In-Service training Ongoing
Contract with Pinnacle Graphics for material development and evaluation As necessary – ongoing
Philadelphia Flower Show display of project March 2002/March 2003
Disseminate to other states Ongoing
Final report writing September 2004

Major Participants

Co - Principal Investigators:

Dr. John Ayers
Director of the Office of Pesticide Education
Penn State University, Office of Pesticide Education

Dr. Kerry Richards
Pesticide Education Coordinator
Penn State University, Office of Pesticide Education
Duties: Project Management and Implementation

Additional Resource Personnel:

Rick Johnson
Urban Pesticide Specialist
Penn State University, Office of Pesticide Education
Duties: Project facilitation through urban outreach

Kathy Kelley
Assistant Professor of Consumer Horticulture
Penn State University, Department of Horticulture
Duties: Survey Development and Analysis

Pinnacle Graphics/Design
Art Production Services
Duties: Artwork and materials development as necessary

A panel of educators, extension agents, Master Gardener Volunteers, and content specialists will also assist in providing direction for this project.

Project Budget

Project Period: October 1, 2002 - September 30, 2004

Funding Request
Funding Requested Other Funding Total Funding
$39,646
$23,090
$62,736

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.