Deepening Insights: Reflective Systematic Review of Food Safety

Our group's research objective is aimed to summarize the application of food safety on SMEs street vendors in Indonesia. We chose this research objective because we think that food safety is important to be apply in street vendors. In Indonesia, street vendors play a significant role in providing food. The evaluation seeks to enhance food safety among SME street sellers and propose targeted interventions by analysing the existing level of food safety.  Based on our group's dynamic about food safety among street vendors, we have learned that food safety is essential for street vendorsto ensure public health and preserve the trust of their customers. Inadequate practises regarding food safety can result in diseases caused by foodborne pathogens as well as damage to the street vendor's reputation. The results will help protect customers from foodborne diseases and encourage the sustainable expansion of Indonesia's street food business vendors.
 
From writing an outline of a systematic review, there are several things we can learn namely, choosing the right journal to use, knowing the steps in writing a systematic review, and how to write a systematic review in groups. In addition, other things that can be learned from writing this systematic review are the importance of food safety in food, how food safety applies in SME street vendors, and what should be done so that everyone cares about food safety. The reason everyone should read the systematic review from our group is that the topic we chose is not too heavy, because food safety is important in everyday life. In order for all audiences to be interested in reading our systematic review until the end, we provide data on how many diseases are caused by food that does not pay attention to food safety and display several images related to food safety and its impact if not done in processing food.
 
Our group was able to find critical and creative journal articles about food safety in the Indonesian MSME sector in the context of this course assignment on Google Scholar, Science Direct, and also GARUDA. However, for the majority of data retrieval, we use Google Scholar because for us this platform is more familiar in use and how to search for the right journals, for example in the application of the desired year range. The feeling we felt in the dynamics of working on this part of the assignment was a little confused because we didn't know where to start, and the lack of consultation with Ms Beth so that our thinking did not develop and stuck there so that our creative thinking did not come out. Our group conducted research and data collection, worked together with the group to conduct this research, analyse and evaluate the data, and solve problems. Then there are obstacles in group work that we felt during the systematic review work was a lot of miss communication. This can happen because there are five heads in this group with different opinions and thoughts, so sometimes there is friction on this task.
 
In our group, we did not specifically share a different work apart with each other. The reading task is done together using a group chat as a communication channel. The group first discussed about the criteria for the journal article that can be used for the systematic review and related to the research objective. And then, each of the group members read all the findings we can find by ourselves. The information related to the criteria found in each journal article was not immediately shared to the group because there will be a separated session for this exchange of information.The information exchange is done to avoid repeated journal article used for the assignment and discussing whether each journal article is eligible for use. I feel that the dynamics of the group are great since the group members are on a very good terms in daily life. While on some moments it is frustrating when doing this work, such as when it feels like there is no progress. Either way once the work is done, it is satisfying and relieving.  Therefore, each of the group members are not disinclined and can be more open with each other when expressing our opinions.
 
The way we divide each task given in this course is from ASG 2 to ASG 4 because it has several parts or components that must be done and relatively many when compared to ASG 1, so to make it faster, what we do is divide the assigned parts equally, then we make lists of task parts and then the lists will be randomized through a feature in the line application called ladder shuffle. Then from this feature it will immediately appear, for example Ade Maya gets the list of task parts at number 3, Charissa on the list of task parts at number 4, and so on. We form the division of the task section list as much as possible with the same work weight for each member of our group. By using ladder shuffle, it makes the division fairer, because there is no first-come-first-served choice, but everything is divided randomly without any settings. The division of tasks in ASG 3 excel, namely the abstraction table, is somewhat different because we determine the criteria in online discussions and then after determining what the criteria are, for the analysis per journal according to the journals that have been read to work on ASG 3 in word. However, for the division of ASG 1 because in this task we made an RO and a roadmap, in this task we did not divide the tasks, but we discussed online through Google meet to determine what RO we would use and what kind of roadmap we would draw from the RO that we had determined.
 
After that, the feeling we felt in the dynamics of group work was that at first, at the beginning of ASG 1, we still had a burning or passionate spirit but after the ASG 1 score appeared and the results were not satisfactory, it made us a group a little frustrated because we did not know why our scores could get a fairly low score, but from this incident we learned that we had to consult everything first, namely to our lecturer, Ms Beth, in order to ensure that the steps we took and we did were on the right path and in accordance with the wishes of the lecturer. Then in ASG 2 and 3 because we had learned from our mistakes, we consulted but it turned out that there were still mistakes in doing the task because we still did not know where this task was going so that in this ASG our group performance tended to be hopeless and frustrating. However, after working on ASG 3, namely the abstraction table where we ventured to consult again with Ms Beth, because we realized that if we did not consult with Ms Beth, we would not find a bright spot to continue this task. Sure enough after consulting a lot of insights that our group got after approximately 1 hour of consultation, we were able to continue working on the abstraction table and not long from the consultation our ASG 3 was completed and continued to the ASG 4 stage and because there were still few groups that completed ASG 3, our confidence in working in groups increased and had increased motivation to work on ASG 4.
 
The things we have learned during the ASG 1 to ASG 4 work are of course knowing the purpose of implementing food safety itself in SMEs. Then from reading many journals about this, it makes an overview of how SMEs are in Indonesia, where there are still many things that must be considered in SMEs to maintain food safety and we also learn what impacts occur if SMEs in Indonesia do not implement food safety. Furthermore, for our experience in making a systematic review of journals for the first time, it can be said that it was difficult, and there was not too much description of what it should be like because at first, we were afraid to consult. But from this incident, we learned not to be afraid to ask questions, and face all problems such as many revisions. Making this assignment also made us read journals in more detail and also made us look for better journals. Next is the learning we get in group communication, where we have been together in working on this project for one semester which is certainly a lot of things that are passed. First of all, we learned to find a middle point when there was a debate of differences of opinion, then we also learned to divide the tasks as fairly as possible so that the group atmosphere was well created, then made us know what the nature of each member was like so that we became closer to each other because of ongoing discussions, we also learned how to convey opinions in a good way without offending other group members and also of course we learned to follow the instructions properly given by Mrs. Beth as the lecturer in this course.