The objectives of the study were: (1) To evolve a kit of Graphic as well as of Projected Aids to teach selected units of Foods and Nutrition to school children of Standard seven. (2) To study the effectiveness of Graphic Aids and Projected Aids in terms of students Achievement. (3) To study the difference of Graphic and Projected Aids in terms of students’ Achievement and Retention. (4) To study the difference of Graphic and Projected Aids in terms of students’ Achievement and Retention in relation to multiple effects of Area, Sex, Intelligence and Socio-economic Status. (5) To study the effectiveness of Graphic as well as of Projected Aids as expressed by Opinions of the participating students. (6) To study the difference in the effectiveness of Graphic as well as of Projected Aids as expressed by Opinions of the participating students.

Two Gujarati medium schools, one Urban and one Rural were selected with the Purposive Sampling Method. Two classes of Standard 7 from each school and 50 pupils from each class were selected randomly.

The IQ test (J.H.Shah), SES scale (K. G. Desai), Reaction scales and a Criterion test developed by the investigator were used. The criterion test was administered as pre-test, post-test and Retention test. 

Employing Experimental Design carried out the present investigation in each school, one class was provided the experimental treatment with Graphic Aids and the other with Projected Aids. The content of Foods and Nutrition was developed and the respective Aids were prepared / selected with the established norms and principles. The Graphic Aids contained Charts, Posters, Flashcards, Pictures and Graphs. The Projected Aids contained Slides and Transparencies. The Chalkboard / Roller Board and Printed Material were common to both. 

The data were analysed with t-test, two way and three way ANOVA and Chi square

The major findings were: (1) Graphic as well as Projected Aids were effective to teach the content of Foods and Nutrition in Standard VII, yet Graphic Aids appeared to be more effective than Projected Aids in terms of Achievement and Retention. (2) The urban pupils were more benefited with both the Aids for Achievement and Retention. (3) There was no difference in the effectiveness of Graphic and Projected Aids for Achievement and Retention in relation to Sex. (4) Intelligence influenced Achievement but not Retention. (5) SES influenced Achievement as well as Retention. (6) The interaction effect of Treatment, Intelligence and SES was significant in terms of Achievement and Retention. The other interactions were insignificant. (7) Graphic as well as Projected Aids were equally effective as per Opinions of the pupils.