Search for: All records

Purpose This study aims to determine preference and concerns regarding tap vs bottled water and recommendations to increase tap water use in a US Midwest university. The authors propose interventions to increase tap water use based on survey results. Design/methodology/approach The authors conducted an online survey of the community of a regional comprehensive university in the St. Louis metro-east region (Illinois, USA). They analyzed 781 responses using mixed methods, and developed recommendations based on community-based social marketing principles. Findings Black respondents reported higher bottled water use than White respondents. Undergraduate students reported higher bottled water use than faculty or staff. Most respondents were concerned about cost and environmental impact for bottled water and taste and water quality for tap water. Chemical and safety concerns were specific and location-focused for tap water only. Concerns were similar to Safe Drinking Water Act mandated public information, such as prior reports of lead (Pb) in campus drinking water. Tap water taste concerns may relate to proximity to the water treatment plant, resulting in high residual chlorine levels. To increase tap water use in this community, the authors recommend persuasive information campaigns, improvements to infrastructure and distribution that increase tap water convenience, more transparent public reporting on tap water lead levels, management of residual chlorine levels, and establishment of institutional norms favoring tap water over bottled water. Originality/value The authors evaluate barriers to drinking tap water across multiple environmental and social systems. The methods used in this study combine mixed methods analysis and community-based social marketing. The findings integrate respondent demographics and concerns, local water quality, local and national contamination events, campus-specific sustainability initiatives and barriers, and national drinking water regulations. 

COVID-19 necessitated online teaching (OT) during the second half of the spring 2020 semester. The perceptions of science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) faculty of OT at a two-year (2-YI) and a four-year (4-YI) institution were examined during this sudden switchover. One group of educators had received flipped teaching (FT) training (FTEs, n = 23), whereas the other group was practicing traditional teaching (TTEs, n = 18). There were two cohorts of FTEs: cohort 1 were implementing FT for the third time in their classrooms, and cohort 2 had started for the first time. The survey results suggested that FTEs were more confident with OT than TTEs ( P < 0.05). It was interesting to note that 62.5% of the FTEs, whether they were from cohort 1 or cohort 2, chose an asynchronous approach, whereas 37.5% delivered synchronous OT during the sudden transition. It was found that FT experience helped cohort 1 adjust to OT compared with cohort 2. Overall, these results suggest that FTEs were confident and their resources for FT eased the transition to OT. NEW & NOTEWORTHY COVID-19 necessitated online teaching (OT). The perceptions of STEM faculty of OT at two-year and four-year institutions were examined. One group had received flipped teaching (FT) training (FTEs), whereas the others practiced traditional teaching (TTEs). Among two cohorts of FTEs, cohort 1 had been practicing FT but not cohort 2. FTEs were more confident with OT than TTEs. FT experience helped cohort 1 adjust to OT more than cohort 2. Overall, FT eased the transition to OT.