Page 35 |
Previous | 35 of 121 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
|
This page
All
|
EARTH WRITE
Table 4: PERCENTAGE OF RESPONDENTS RESIDING IN HEALTH
REGIONS
Page 24
Health Region % of Respondents
Westview
Aspen
Lakeland
Crossroads
Capital Health
Keeweetinok Lakes
East Central
Headwaters
26
23
21
11
8
4
3
_ 2
Total 100
SOURCE: Original Data; N= 420
Ninety- one percentof the respondents suggested that they were non- active participants
in farm activities, 7% were semi- active while 2% were active in farming activities. We defined
active when the respondent's response included phases such as " I help, I do this with my
Dad/ Mum or other family member" or " when my friend/ Dad/ Mum/ Sister/ Brother was doing "
A further discussion of this response is included in the " Child's Safety World."
The first item that they mentioned in their essay, letter, poster or other entry indicated
which area of farm safety concerned them the most. The respondents indicated that machinery,
65%, followed by animals, 14%, were things to watch out for on a farm. ( Figure 11)
Using the same criteria, we were then able to determine what the children believed was
the most likely cause of a farm accident. Fifty- two percent of the children believed that machinery
caused farm accidents while 11% believed animals were involved ( Figure 12).
The responses also provided insight into the effect of a farm accident. Eighteen percent
of the children believed that an accident would result in an amputation either by an auger or a
power take- off, while 17% believed an accident would result in being runover by a piece of
equipment. Twelve percent cited animal effects of an accident such as being chased, pinned,
bitten or trampled ( Figure 13).
We then analysed the contest entries by grade. This produced insight into the effect of
the message the children were receiving. Grade five students were more likely to be more aware
of the type of farm accident that occurs than were the grade six students. Thirty- seven percent
of the Grade 5 students cited machinery as a primary concern while 15% of grade six students
reported machinery. Animals were cited by 8% of the grade five students as contributing to farm
accidents compared with 6% of grade six children. We also analysed generic causes of farm
Object Description
| Rating | |
| Title | Project Report "A Safe Farm, is a Great Place to Grow" |
| Subject | Farm Safety; Agriculture |
| Description | Farm Safety Project Report |
| Language | en |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Type | text |
| Source | Alberta Women's Institutes |
| Identifier | awi0811096 |
| Date | 1999 |
| Collection | Alberta Women's Institutes - Collective Memory |
| Repository | AU Digital Library |
| Copyright | For Private Study and Research Use Only |
Description
| Title | Page 35 |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Source | AWI Collection |
| Collection | Alberta Women's Institutes - Collective Memory |
| Repository | AU Digital Library |
| Copyright | For Private Study and Research Use Only |
| Transcript | EARTH WRITE Table 4: PERCENTAGE OF RESPONDENTS RESIDING IN HEALTH REGIONS Page 24 Health Region % of Respondents Westview Aspen Lakeland Crossroads Capital Health Keeweetinok Lakes East Central Headwaters 26 23 21 11 8 4 3 _ 2 Total 100 SOURCE: Original Data; N= 420 Ninety- one percentof the respondents suggested that they were non- active participants in farm activities, 7% were semi- active while 2% were active in farming activities. We defined active when the respondent's response included phases such as " I help, I do this with my Dad/ Mum or other family member" or " when my friend/ Dad/ Mum/ Sister/ Brother was doing " A further discussion of this response is included in the " Child's Safety World." The first item that they mentioned in their essay, letter, poster or other entry indicated which area of farm safety concerned them the most. The respondents indicated that machinery, 65%, followed by animals, 14%, were things to watch out for on a farm. ( Figure 11) Using the same criteria, we were then able to determine what the children believed was the most likely cause of a farm accident. Fifty- two percent of the children believed that machinery caused farm accidents while 11% believed animals were involved ( Figure 12). The responses also provided insight into the effect of a farm accident. Eighteen percent of the children believed that an accident would result in an amputation either by an auger or a power take- off, while 17% believed an accident would result in being runover by a piece of equipment. Twelve percent cited animal effects of an accident such as being chased, pinned, bitten or trampled ( Figure 13). We then analysed the contest entries by grade. This produced insight into the effect of the message the children were receiving. Grade five students were more likely to be more aware of the type of farm accident that occurs than were the grade six students. Thirty- seven percent of the Grade 5 students cited machinery as a primary concern while 15% of grade six students reported machinery. Animals were cited by 8% of the grade five students as contributing to farm accidents compared with 6% of grade six children. We also analysed generic causes of farm |
Tags
Comments
Post a Comment for Page 35
