Appendix U
- This is a collaborative research project that I contributed to in EDU 508. Other contributors include: Jason Arnauckas, Sharon Calabrese, and Kathy Waddington.
- This project demonstrates my understanding of the research process as it relates to education. Additionally, it shows my understanding and knowledge of sophisticated data analysis. Our results were inconclusive.
- This appendix demonstrates my competency in NETS 4.A, 5A, 5B, CTTC 1.A 1.C, 3.C, 4.A, 4.B.
Student Perceptions of Newly Implemented School Lunch Program at Wells Road Intermediate School, Granby, Connecticut
For the past fifty years, Wells Road Intermediate School had no cafeteria. Lunch was brought from home and eaten on temporary tables in the gym. In September 2005, a newly renovated school reopened with a fully functional cafeteria. The lunch period this year has been described by staff and students as chaotic, noisy, and too short.
The purpose of this study is to conduct and analyze a survey of the student population of Wells Road Intermediate School to determine students’ perceptions of the school lunch process. Analysis of survey results will indicate how students perceive meal choice, atmosphere, and the time allotted for lunch. Allowing students a “voice” in the lunch process may produce a more comprehensive, less stressful and more efficient lunch period plan. The following descriptive and relationship questions were used to guide the research process: 1.) How much time do students at Granby Elementary School perceive they are waiting in the lunch line? 2.) How does cafeteria atmosphere affect students’ lunch experience? 3.) Is there a correlation between perceived lunchroom atmosphere and grade level?
LITERATURE
Past studies indicate there are three major complaints that students have towards the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) in our public school system. Although there are many documented issues pertaining to the NSLP, three recurring themes are variety of food, quality of food, and service/eating time.
Variety of food. Research indicates that elementary students are more satisfied with the overall school food service than secondary students (Meyer, 2005). One factor contributing to the increased negative perception appears to be the repetitive menu choices (Meyer, 2005). Dr. Meyer concludes in her study of elementary students that, “Students were more satisfied overall and more pleased…when they perceived they had a choice” (2005). In addition, a study conducted in eight Cincinnati public schools showed that students listed food items as their least favorite because they were offered too frequently (Marples, 1995).
Quality of food. The most obvious variable affecting satisfaction is the quality of food. When surveyed, as many as 2/3 of the nonparticipating students in the Cincinnati schools said they would participate if the quality of the plate lunch was improved (Marples 1995). Dr. Meyer’s research indicates that, “students want school meals that look and taste like the convenience of the fast food they consume outside of school” (2005). With high percentages of students (Marples 1995, Meyer 2005) rating food as poor quality, this aspect of the lunchroom experience warrants further investigation.
Service/eating time. A major point of contention is the amount of time allotted for service/eating. Since this is left to the discretion of the individual school systems, in order to boost class time, the average lunch period has shrunk from 30 minutes to 23.7 (Vaishnav, 2005). However, students cite this more often than any other factor as contributing to their dissatisfaction with school lunch programs (Bergman, et al 2000). Specifically, waiting in line and subsequent insufficient time to finish eating comprised a majority of the complaints (Marples, 1995, Bergman, et al 2000).
These concerns are echoed throughout the public school systems. In an attempt to reverse these negative perceptions, studies such as ours are needed to pinpoint the major concerns so they can be addressed accordingly.
METHODOLOGY
Participants
The participants in this study were selected by convenience sampling of intact classes drawn from third through sixth grade students in a public school. The student body is primarily heterogeneously grouped, middle income and contains 99% Caucasian students. There were 344 students who participated in the survey: 142 boys and 196 girls, with six students not indicating gender.
Instrument
This is a cross-sectional study, based on survey design, to examine student opinions of current lunch practices. The survey was developed electronically via a web based survey tool called Quia. The study began on April 6, 2006 and ended on April 12, 2006. Prior to the development of the questions, informal interviews were conducted with administrators, paraprofessionals and students. Closed-ended multiple choice questions were developed based on these interviews. Statistical analysis was done by coding the results of the survey into Microsoft Excel (Table 15), and then running the coded data through SPSS version 12.
Procedure
The questionnaire was comprised of three demographic questions, two preference questions, and
six questions dealing with lunchroom environment. Students responded to questions prior to the start of their weekly technology classes at various times of the day. The student survey was posted on the intra-school website. Permission to administer an anonymous student questionnaire through the school website was granted by the school principal.
RESULTS
Descriptive statistics were run on each category using SPSS version 12. SPSS automatically adjusted for the missing data, inserting the mean for any unanswered questions. Pearson moment correlations were performed to determine the relationship between gender and favorite foods or grade and favorite foods. A minimal correlation between gender or grade was found (Table 12). Additionally, as seen in Table 11, there was a noteworthy correlation between grade levels and wait time. This correlation was positive with an r=.308. This was significant at the .01 level. There was a correlation between grade levels and the noise level in the cafeteria. It is a fairly weak negative correlation of -.118. This implies that as the grade level increases the perception of cafeteria noise lowers and visa versa. There was no correlation of any consequence between gender and noise perception or gender and wait time (Table 11).
Interestingly there are no significant correlations (Table 12) between gender and grade and their preferred food or their preferred plate, or their ability to finish on time. Although this may seem obvious there is a negative correlation between the length of time a student spends in line and the ability to finish lunch in time. This was a -.237 negative correlation (Table 13). This implies the expected—the longer you wait in line the less likely you are to finish on time. Finally, we can see that there was a correlation between being hungry and waiting in line. This was a positive correlation of .163, suggesting there was a relation between students’ perceptions of hunger and wait time (Table 14). An interesting finding was that there was no relationship of any consequence between students’ perception of being still hungry after lunch and students who perceived they had not been given enough time to finish their lunch. Meaning that students that do not finish are no more likely to be hungry than students that do finish.
DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS
Past literature indicates problems with the National School Lunch Program (NSLP), and this study indicates similar problems. However, this study is limited in scope and relied on student perceptions rather than concrete evidence as to time spent waiting in line and whether students were finished eating. Further research is needed to determine how much time is actually spent in the lunch line etc., in order to obtain conclusive results that could drive changes within the lunch process. A qualitative study with administrators and paraprofessionals who monitor lunch might be compared to this study’s data analysis of student perception of the lunch process in order to define specific areas of weakness and then to address those areas.
This study indicates a need to change or manipulate student perceptions of the lunch process and environment. Strategies to address students’ negative perception of wait time and noise level should be explored in more depth. This study, in correlation with the suggested additional study areas, could provide a solid scaffolding to improve the overall school lunch process for the general population.
References
Bergman, E., Buergel, N., Joseph, E., Sanchez, A. (2000). Time spent by schoolchildren to eat lunch. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 100 (6), 696.
Marples, C. (1995). Factors affecting students’ participation in the Cincinnati public schools lunch program. Adolescence (Fall).
Meyer, M. (2005). Upper-elementary students’ perception of school meals. The Journal of Child Nutrition & Management, 1 (Spring).
Quia Corporation, (n.d.). Where learning takes you. Retrieved Apr. 19, 2006, from http://www.quia.com.
Statisitcal Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). Student Version 12.0 for Windows. SPSS Science, Inc., Chicago, IL. http://www.spss.com.
Vaishnav, A. (2005). School lunches are no picnic: Longer student breaks advocated. The
Boston Globe, August 6.
Appendices
Appendice A
Survey given to 344 students in grades three through six at Well Road Intermediate School, Granby, Connecticut
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|
