Journal List > J Nutr Health > v.50(1) > 1081485

TOOLS
Lee, Kim, Lee, and Kwon: Evaluation of educational school meal programs in Gyeonggi province, South Korea∗
Research Article

J Nutr Health 2017;50(1):111-119.

Published online: 20 January 2017

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4163/jnh.2017.50.1.111

Evaluation of educational school meal programs in Gyeonggi province, South Korea∗

Youngmi Lee1, Oksun Kim2, Uiok Lee3, Sooyoun Kwon†

1Department of Food and Nutrition, Myongji University, Yongin 17058, Korea

2Department of Food and Nutrition, Jangan University, Hwaseong 18331, Korea

3School Meals Division, Geyonggi Provincial Office of Education, Suwon 16279, Korea

4Department of Food and Nutrition, Honam University, Gwangju 62399, Korea

†To whom correspondence should be addressed. tel: +82-62-940-5428, E-mail: soonara@honam.ac.kr

∗ This work was funded by Gyeonggi Provincial Office of Education.

Received 23 September 2016       Revised 12 October 2016       Accepted 6 January 2017

Copyright © 2017 The Korean Nutrition Society

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Purpose

School meal programs should be part of the educational process to promote good eating habits for students. The purpose of this study was to develop an evaluation scale for educational school meal programs and evaluate the achievement level of educational school meal programs using the developed scale. Methods: The evaluation scale for educational school meal programs consisted of 23 items in eight categories and was developed using content validity ratio (CVR) analysis and analytic hierarchy process (AHP) by 15 related experts. The results of a survey on nutrition teachers or dietitians at 91 elementary, middle, and high schools in Gyeonggi province, South Korea were analyzed to evaluate the achievement levels of educational school meal programs. Results: Overall, total average score was 45.7 out of 100, with significant differences among schools (p = 0.005). Elementary schools (51.9) showed a higher average score than middle (41.5) and high schools (37.1). The score for the category of regular nutrition and dietary education was the lowest (5.7 out of 33.7). In addition, school meal environment (5 out of 10), educational activities through school meal time (9.2 out of 19), and extra-curricular experiential activities (3.5 out of 10) also showed inadequate levels. Conclusion: The results show that the overall level of educational school meal programs is not adequate and needs to be improved, especially at middle and high schools. Government support polices need to be implemented to encourage educational activities related to school meal programs.

Keywords: school meal program, education, evaluation, scale

References

1. Ministry of Education (KR). Korean school meals act [Internet]. Seoul: Ministry of Government Legislation;2013. Nov 23 [cited 2016 Jul 25]. Available from:. http://www.law.go.kr.
2. Kim SA. Effect of nutrition education of school lunch programs: on dietary pattern of elementary school children in Pusan area. J Korean Soc Food Nutr. 1990; 19(4):356–374.
3. Han HY, Kim EK, Park KW. Effects of nutrition education on nutrition knowledge, food attitude, food habits, food preference and plate waste of elementary school children served by the national school lunch program. Korean J Nutr. 1997; 30(10):1219–1228.
4. Oh YM, Kim MH, Sung CJ. Effects of school lunch program on nutritional knowledge and attitude, and dietary behavior of Korean middle school students. Korean J Community Nutr. 2005; 10(2):163–173.
5. Jeong Y, Woo T, Lee KH. Effect evaluation of nutrition education for improving preferences to Korean traditional foods in upper grades schoolchildren. Korean J Food Nutr. 2014; 27(6):1119–1131.
crossref
6. Ko KM, Kim SB. Effects of nutrition education providing school lunch by personalized daily needed food exchange units for adolescent athletes in Jeonbuk province. Korean J Community Nutr. 2016; 21(1):25–36.
crossref
7. Ministry of Education (KR). Status of 2014 school meal program [Internet]. Sejong: Ministry of Education;2015. Jun 1 [cited 2016 Jul 25]. Available from:. http://www.moe.go.kr.
8. Morgan K, Sonnino R. Empowering consumers: the creative procurement of school meals in Italy and the UK. Int J Consum Stud. 2007; 31(1):19–25.
crossref
9. Dimbleby H, Vincent J. The school food plan [Internet]. Manchester: Department for Education;2013. [cited 2016 Jul 25]. Available from:. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-school-food-plan.
10. Schabas L. The school food plan: putting food at the heart of the school day. Nutr Bull. 2014; 39(1):99–104.
crossref
11. Tanaka N, Miyoshi M. School lunch program for health promotion among children in Japan. Asia Pac J Clin Nutr. 2012; 21(1):155–158.
12. Hong YS, Lee JH. Current status and strategic plan of nutrition education comparing nutrition teachers with dietitians in schools, Gyeonggi area. Korean J Community Nutr. 2013; 18(3):233–242.
crossref
13. Jung KA. The review of the researches on the nutritional education state in the elementary school. J Korean Pract Arts Educ. 2013; 19(1):117–145.
14. Lee MY, Choi KS. Current status and activation needs for student nutrition counseling among elementary and middle·high school dietitians. Korean J Community Living Sci. 2013; 24(4):497–515.
crossref
15. Oh NG, Gwon SJ, Kim KW, Sohn CM, Park HR, Seo JS. Status and need assessment on nutrition & dietary life education among nutrition teachers in elementary, middle and high schools. Korean J Community Nutr. 2016; 21(2):152–164.
16. Lim SS, Yang JS. A study on the satisfaction of school meals about elementary, middle and high school's students in Jeonbuk area: an ordered probit analysis. Korean J Org Agric. 2013; 21(4):539–554.
17. Ko SK, Kim DW, Kang HS, Ahn KA. Analysis of influence factors for improving satisfaction with school meal in Gyeonggi area. Suwon: Gyeonggi Institute of Education;2014.
18. Yoon J, Kwon S, Shim JE. Present status and issues of school nutrition programs in Korea. Asia Pac J Clin Nutr. 2012; 21(1):128–133.
19. Kwak DK. Roles of school nutrition teachers. Nutr Diet. 2003; 250:15–17.
20. Yim KS. How should the school nutrition education change? Proceedings of 2007 Spring Conference of the Korean Society of Community Nutrition;. 2007 May 11.
21. Lee MA. Development and standardization of the evaluation tool for the school food service program in Korea [dissertation]. Seoul: Yonsei University;2005.
22. Choi MK. Development of a school foodservice menu evaluation tool & manual. Seoul: Ministry of Education and Science Technology;2012.
23. Lawshe CH. A quantitative approach to content validity. Pers Psychol. 1975; 28(4):563–575.
crossref
24. Saaty TL. Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Int J Serv Sci. 2008; 1(1):83–98.
crossref
25. Vaidya OS, Kumar S. Analytic hierarchy process: an overview of applications. Eur J Oper Res. 2006; 169(1):1–29.
crossref
26. Saaty TL. How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. Eur J Oper Res. 1990; 48(1):9–26.
crossref
27. Pérez-Rodrigo C, Klepp KI, Yngve A, Sjöström M, Stockley L, Aranceta J. The school setting: an opportunity for the implementation of dietary guidelines. Public Health Nutr. 2001; 4(2B):717–724.
crossref
28. Pilant VB. American Dietetic Association. Position of the American Dietetic Association: local support for nutrition integrity in schools. J Am Diet Assoc. 2006; 106(1):122–133.
29. Weaver-Hightower MB. Why education researchers should take school food seriously. Educ Res. 2011; 40(1):15–21.
crossref
30. Rasmussen VB, Rivett D. The European network of health promoting schools: an alliance of health, education and democracy. Health Educ. 2000; 100(2):61–67.
31. Pérez-Rodrigo C, Aranceta J. School-based nutrition education: lessons learned and new perspectives. Public Health Nutr. 2001; 4(1A):131–139.
crossref
32. Bae IS, Shin KH, Lee YK, Lee SK. Perception of the elementary school dietitians and students on nutrition education to set up the roles of nutrition teacher: centered on Daegu City and Gyeongbuk Province. J Korean Diet Assoc. 2005; 11(4):393–404.
33. Nicklas TA, Johnson CC, Farris R, Rice R, Lyon L, Shi R. Development of a school-based nutrition intervention for high school students: Gimme 5. Am J Health Promot. 1997; 11(5):315–322.
34. Perez-Rodrigo C, Aranceta J. Nutrition education for schoolchildren living in a low-income urban area in Spain. J Nutr Educ. 1997; 29(5):267–273.
crossref
35. Cunningham-Sabo L, Lohse B. Impact of a school-based cooking curriculum for fourth-grade students on attitudes and behaviors is influenced by gender and prior cooking experience. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2014; 46(2):110–120.
crossref
36. Edens NK, Sharma S, Folkens S, Wojtowicz A, Ranjit N, Evans A. Experiential cooking and nutrition education program improves fruit and vegetable liking, vegetable consumption, and cooking at home in elementary and middle school children. FASEB J. 2016; 30(S1):): 676.13.
37. Hersch D, Perdue L, Ambroz T, Boucher JL. The impact of cooking classes on food-related preferences, attitudes, and behaviors of school-aged children: a systematic review of the evidence, 2003–2014. Prev Chronic Dis. 2014; 11:E193.
crossref
38. Parmer SM, Salisbury-Glennon J, Shannon D, Struempler B. School gardens: an experiential learning approach for a nutrition education program to increase fruit and vegetable knowledge, preference, and consumption among second-grade students. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2009; 41(3):212–217.
crossref
39. Graham H, Feenstra G, Evans AM, Zidenberg-Cherr S. Davis school program supports life-long healthy eating habits in children. Calif Agric (Berkeley). 2004; 58(4):200–205.
crossref
40. McAleese JD, Rankin LL. Garden-based nutrition education affects fruit and vegetable consumption in sixth-grade adolescents. J Am Diet Assoc. 2007; 107(4):662–665.
crossref
41. Kim GM, Lee YH. A study on nutrition management of dietitian for school lunch program in Seoul and Incheon provinces. J Korean Diet Assoc. 2003; 9(1):57–70.

Table 1.
Results of CVR analysis of evaluation items
Evaluation category No Evaluation item CVR
  1 Compliance with ingredient standards 0.73
Compliance with the school meals act 2 Compliance with nutritional standards 0.87
3 Compliance with quality and safety standards 0.73
  4 Limitation of using chemical seasoning and frying foods 0.73
  5 Labeling of ingredients' origin and nutritional value of menus 0.73
  6 Advising healthy eating behavior 0.73
  7 Nutrition counseling for students 0.60
Compliance with guidance for school meal operations by the Ministry of Education 8 Educational activities to decrease food waste 0.60
9 Provision of dietary information to students, teachers, and parents 0.60
  10 Operation of council for school meal program –0.20
  11 Parents' participation in inspection of ingredients and monitoring 0.20
  12 Collection of opinions to improve satisfaction for school meal service 0.47
  13 Conduction of survey on school meal service and disclosure of survey results 0.47
Hygiene and safety management 14 Hygiene and safety management 0.73
School meal environment 15 Placement of nutrition teacher 0.60
16 Place and method of food distribution 0.07
  17 Incorporation into curriculum 0.60
  18 Discretional class 0.60
Regular nutrition and dietary 19 After-school class 0.07
education 20 Club activities 0.87
  21 Nutrition counseling class for parents 0.20
  22 Dietary education center –0.07
  23 Information provision about ingredients 0.73
  24 Information provision about cooking methods 0.33
Educational activities during school meal time 25 Information provision about food culture 0.60
26 Information provision about hygiene and safety 0.60
27 Education about table manners 0.73
  28 Provision of traditional festival foods 0.33
  29 Provision of special menus 0.07
  30 Farm visit –0.07
  31 Cooking class 0.87
Extra-curricular experiential 32 School gardening –0.07
activities 33 Other field trips 0.47
  34 Operation of jangdokdae 0.07
  35 Other experiential activities –0.20
  36 Cooperation and support of principals 0.87
  37 Cooperation and support of teachers 0.73
Support condition 38 Interest and support of parents 0.60
  39 Participation of students 0.73
  40 Job satisfaction of school dietitian or nutrition teacher 0.33
Table 2.
Results of AHP analysis of evaluation scale
Evaluation category Ranking Weighting value
Compliance with the school meals act 8 3.5
Compliance with guidance for school meal operations by the Ministry of Education 7 4.0
Hygiene and safety management 6 4.6
School meal environment 4 10.0
Regular nutrition and dietary education 1 33.7
Educational activities during school meal time 2 19.0
Extra-curricular experiential activities 4 10.0
Support condition 3 15.2
Table 3.
General characteristics of respondents
Characteristics Elementary schools (n = 43) Middle schools (n = 33) High schools (n = 15) Total (n = 91) p-value1)
Gender          
 Female 43 (100) 33 (100) 15 (100) 91 (100)  
Age          
 20 ∼ 29 3 (7.0) 9 (27.3) 3 (20.0) 15 (16.5)  
 30 ∼ 39 15 (34.9) 10 (30.3) 3 (20.0) 28 (30.8) 0.250
 40 ∼ 49 22 (51.2) 13 (39.4) 7 (46.7) 42 (46.2)
 ≥ 50 3 (7.0) 1 (3.0) 2 (13.3) 6 (6.6)  
 Average 39.7 ± 6.8 36.4 ± 7.5 40.1 ± 7.6 38.6 ± 7.3 0.099
Current position          
 Nutrition teacher 24 (55.8) 16 (48.5) 6 (40.0) 46 (50.5) 0.549
 Dietitian 19 (44.2) 17 (51.5) 9 (60.0) 45 (49.5)
Working career          
 < 5 5 (11.6) 10 (30.3) 4 (26.7) 19 (20.9)  
 5 ∼ 10 18 (41.9) 10 (30.3) 4 (26.7) 32 (35.2)  
 11 ∼ 15 5 (11.6) 6 (18.2) 3 (20.0) 14 (15.4) 0.530
 16 ∼ 20 11 (25.6) 4 (12.1) 3 (20.0) 18 (19.8)
 ≥ 21 4 (9.3) 3 (9.1) 1 (6.7) 8 (8.8)  
 Average 11.7 ± 6.7 9.4 ± 6.6 10.5 ± 6.7 10.7 ± 6.7 0.337
Educational level          
 College graduate 5 (11.6) 3 (9.1) 0 (0.0) 8 (8.8)  
 University graduate 19 (44.2) 12 (36.4) 5 (33.3) 36 (39.6) 0.501
 Master's degree 19 (44.2) 18 (54.5) 10 (66.7) 47 (51.6)  

1) p value by χ2-test or ANOVA n (%) or Mean ± SD

Table 4.
General characteristics of subject schools
Characteristics Elementary schools (n = 43) Middle schools (n = 33) High schools (n = 15) Total (n = 91) p-value1)
Feeding number (lunch)          
 < 500 10 (23.3) 5 (15.2) 0 (0.0) 15 (16.5)  
 500∼999 22 (51.2) 21 (63.6) 7 (46.7) 50 (54.9) 0.077
 ≥ 1,000 11 (25.6) 7 (21.2) 8 (53.3) 26 (28.6)  
 Average 739.3 ± 342.9a 782.4 ± 297.4a 1,011.5 ± 364.2b 799.8 ± 341.0 0.025
Food distribution method          
 Self-control 2 (4.7) 1 (3.0) 1 (6.7) 4 (4.4)  
 Fixed amounts 33 (76.7) 17 (51.5) 2 (13.3) 52 (57.1) < 0.001
 Partial Self-control 8 (18.6) 14 (42.4) 12 (80.0) 34 (37.4)  

1) p value by χ2-test or ANOVA a, b: significantly different at p < 0.05 using ANOVA and Duncan's multiple range test n (%) or Mean ± SD

Table 5.
Results of evaluation of educational school meal programs
Evaluation category Elementary Middle High Total (n = 91) p-value1)
 schools schools schools
(n = 43) (n = 33) (n = 15)
Compliance with the school meals act (3.5 points) 3.36 ± 0.38 3.29 ± 0.54 3.34 ± 0.41 3.33 ± 0.45 0.76
Compliance with guidance for school meal operations by the ministry of education (4 points) 3.44 ± 0.50 3.38 ± 0.47 3.41 ± 0.53 3.41 ± 0.49 0.87
Hygiene and safety management (4.6 points) 4.42 ± 0.10 4.43 ± 0.10 4.35 ± 0.24 4.41 ± 0.13 0.16
School meal environment (10 points) 5.53 ± 4.97 4.80 ± 5.02 3.96 ± 5.02 5.00 ± 4.98 0.56
Regular nutrition and dietary education (33.7 points) 8.88 ± 9.35b 2.38 ± 5.44a 3.74 ± 9.17a 5.68 ± 8.60 < 0.001
Educational activities during school meal time (19 points) 9.54 ± 2.11b 9.36 ± 2.73ab 8.04 ± 2.87a 9.23 ± 2.51 0.13
Extra-curricular experiential activities (10 points) 4.65 ± 5.05 2.73 ± 4.52 2.00 ± 4.14 3.52 ± 4.80 0.09
Support condition (15.2 points) 12.04 ± 2.17b 11.17 ± 2.67b 8.26 ± 2.90a 11.10 ± 2.80 < 0.001
Total (100 points) 51.86 ± 18.12b 41.53 ± 15.45a 37.11 ± 18.17a 45.68 ± 18.06 0.005
Score range 26.45 ∼ 88.15 22.71 ∼ 74.17 25.11 ∼ 86.90 21.11 ∼ 88.15  

1) p value by ANOVA a, b: significantly different at p < 0.05 using ANOVA and Duncan's multiple range test Mean ± SD

TOOLS
Similar articles