2000
DOI: 10.1001/archpedi.154.3.227
|Get access via publisher |Summarize |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts

An Evaluation of a Safety Education Program for Kindergarten and Elementary School Children

Abstract: Exposure to the Safety City program did not achieve the desired changes in safety knowledge among participants. This is most likely owing to the fact that Safety City attempts to convey a large amount of relatively complex information to young children in a brief period. We conclude that programs such as Safety City are not sufficient to teach children these behaviors. This report also emphasizes the importance of building an evaluation component into educational programs.

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
29
6
3
2

Citation Types

0
26
1
0

Year Published

2000
2000
2026
2026

Publication Types

Select...
37
1

Relationship

0
38

Authors

Journals

citations

Cited by 37 publications

(27 citation statements)
references

References 11 publications

0
26
1
0
Order By: Relevance
How this paper cites the one you are viewing
“…Likewise, some previous research carried out with an 11-12-year-old sample showed a significant improvement in calling the emergency number [21]. On the other hand, our results are not supported by some previous studies involving 5-and 6-year-old children [17] and 10-12-year-old pupils [20] since these investigations did not show significant differences in skills and knowledge among those who received training and those without training, thus not being consistent with our results.…”
Section: Discussion
contrasting
confidence: 99%
How this paper cites the one you are viewing
“…Likewise, some previous research carried out with an 11-12-year-old sample showed a significant improvement in calling the emergency number [21]. On the other hand, our results are not supported by some previous studies involving 5-and 6-year-old children [17] and 10-12-year-old pupils [20] since these investigations did not show significant differences in skills and knowledge among those who received training and those without training, thus not being consistent with our results.…”
Section: Discussion
contrasting
confidence: 99%
How this paper cites the one you are viewing
“…These findings are encouraging and suggest that, despite the learning of calling skills not being as effective as in more advanced stages, it is advisable to commence teaching of this content in the kindergarten cycle. In light of these findings and those of previous studies [ 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 ], it seems reasonable to posit that at least half of children between the ages of 3 and 6 would be able to activate the survival chain with adapted training. Therefore, although the assimilation of skills does not appear to be feasible at this stage, the training could prove to be lifesaving and, in turn, facilitate the acquisition of competencies at subsequent stages, making it a prudent course of action [ 1 , 5 ].…”
Section: Discussion
mentioning
confidence: 54%
How this paper cites the one you are viewing
“…10,11,14,20,24,25,29 In the only study with children of 5 and 6 years old, a difference in knowledge 29 In two studies, with children of 6-7 years and 10-12 years old, the knowledge of the emergency number (measured at 5 or 6 months after training) improved significantly after training, for example from 16% to 77% in the children of 6-7 years old. 10,14 However, this was not the case in one study with children at the age of 11-12 years.…”
Section: Emergency Call
mentioning
confidence: 84%