periscope report on the interventions in danish … › ws › portalfiles › portal › 49832420...
TRANSCRIPT
Aalborg Universitet
Pilot European Regional Interventions for Smart Childhood Obesity Prevention in EarlyageReport on the interventions in Danish kindergartens
Sansolios, Sanne; Mikkelsen, Bent Egberg
Published in:Pilot European Regional Interventions for Smart Childhood Obesity Prevention in Early age
Publication date:2010
Document VersionEarly version, also known as pre-print
Link to publication from Aalborg University
Citation for published version (APA):Sansolios, S., & Mikkelsen, B. E. (2010). Pilot European Regional Interventions for Smart Childhood ObesityPrevention in Early age: Report on the interventions in Danish kindergartens. In Pilot European RegionalInterventions for Smart Childhood Obesity Prevention in Early age: Report on the interventions in Danishkindergartens (pp. 1-32) http://www.en.periscope.aau.dk/digitalAssets/15/15040_periscope_report-on-the-interventions-in-danish-kindergartens.2009.pdf
General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright ownersand it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.
? Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. ? You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain ? You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal ?
Take down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us at [email protected] providing details, and we will remove access tothe work immediately and investigate your claim.
PILOT E
EUROPEANN REGION
RE
Proje
NAL INTER
PREVENT
(P
EPORT ON
IN DANIS
ect no. 2006
RVENTION
TION IN EA
PERISCOP
N THE INTE
H KINDER
6341
NS FOR SM
ARLY AGE
E)
ERVENTIO
RGARTENS
MART CHIL
ONS
S
LDHOOD OOBESITY
Sanne Sansolios
&
Bent Egberg Mikkelsen
MENU
Mela Sciences and Public Health Nutrition
Aalborg University, Denmark
2009
ContentsList of kindergartens attending the Periscope studies ...................................................................................... 5
Enrolments of kindergartens ............................................................................................................................. 6
Intervention and control kindergartens ............................................................................................................ 6
Timeline ............................................................................................................................................................. 6
Purpose of intervention ................................................................................................................................. 8
Action components ....................................................................................................................................... 8
Questionnaires .................................................................................................................................................. 8
Focus group interviews...................................................................................................................................... 9
Kindergartens as important arena ................................................................................................................ 9
Stakeholders .................................................................................................................................................. 9
Children FG .................................................................................................................................................. 10
Children FG on Food .................................................................................................................................... 11
Children FG on PA ........................................................................................................................................ 12
Children drawing session ............................................................................................................................. 13
Stakeholders GF on Food ............................................................................................................................. 13
Stakeholders FG on PA ................................................................................................................................ 14
Report of food intervention menu and taste workshop result in kindergarten ............................................. 17
FOOD Baseline menu ................................................................................................................................... 17
FOOD Intervention menu ............................................................................................................................ 17
Intervention menu results ........................................................................................................................... 18
Taste workshop ............................................................................................................................................... 21
Sapere method ............................................................................................................................................ 22
Protocol for Sapere Taste workshop ........................................................................................................... 23
Day one: ................................................................................................................................................... 23
Day two: ................................................................................................................................................... 23
Day three: ................................................................................................................................................ 24
Day four: .................................................................................................................................................. 24
Day five .................................................................................................................................................... 25
Children’s food preference and pedagogues as role‐models .......................................................................... 25
Observation and interviews ........................................................................................................................ 25
Role‐models ................................................................................................................................................. 26
Food and meal policies .................................................................................................................................... 27
Learning plan ................................................................................................................................................... 28
Implementation of Sapere taste‐workshop in the learning plan ................................................................ 29
Foodtales ......................................................................................................................................................... 30
Physical Activity book ...................................................................................................................................... 31
Litterateur .................................................................................................................................................... 32
ListofkindergartensattendingthePeriscopestudies
Name Code Address on kindergarten
Intervention‐ or control group
Amount of children participating
A Intervention group 46 children
B
Control group (this kindergarten became an intervention kindergarten during the project)
17 children
C
Control group (this kindergarten became an intervention kindergarten during the project)
10 children
D Control group 27 children
E Control group 34 children
F
Control group (this kindergarten became an intervention kindergarten during the project)
23 children
G Control group 20 children
H
Intervention (this kindergarten became a control kindergarten during the project)
21 children
I Control group 20 children
J
Intervention (this kindergarten became a control kindergarten during the project)
36 children
K Control group 19 children
L Intervention group 46 children
M
Intervention group (this kindergarten became a control kindergarten during the project)
22 children
N Intervention group 20 children
EnrolmentsofkindergartensInDenmark14kindergartens,inthreemunicipalities,wereenrolledinthePeriscopeProject.Beforestartallkindergartenheadmistressandheadmasterswereapproachedbytheprojectstaff,acceptancesweregiventoparticipateandatimeschedulewasdevised.Afterthatallkindergartenreceivedaletterstopedagoguesandkitchenstaffaswellastoparentsexplainingabouttheproject.Furthermoretheparentsweregivenapermission‐letter(acceptanceforthechildtoparticipate).
652permission‐letterswerehandedoutinthe14kindergartensand360camebacksigned(55%).Outofthe360questionnairesthatweregiventotheparentsinthesummer2008,321werefilledoutandreturned(89%).
Outofthe360childrenbetweentheage3‐6yearsofage,thathadbeensignedupfortheproject,340childrenweremeasured(heightandweight)betweenthe5thofAugustand25thofAugust2008(94%).
InterventionandcontrolkindergartensOutofthe14kindergartensixwerechosentobeintervention‐kindergartensandeightascontrol‐kindergartens.Theinclusionwasmadebasedonaresearcherassessmentofresourcesavailable,involvementandcommitmentfromthekindergartenheadmistress/master,pedagoguesandparentboards.Anoralagreementweremadewiththeheadmistress/masteraboutparticipatingintheinterventionincludingprovidingresourcesandagreeingtotakesofaraspossiblethespecifiedinterventionaction.
Timeline(Nextpage)
Kindergarten A
Quest. preHeight & weight
FG ‐observation
PA ‐observation
Baseline FOODTaste‐
workshop Intervention
FOODRolemodels food pref.
Foodtale PA‐folder
Quest. pos
Kindergarten F Quest. preHeight & weight
Baseline FOOD Intervention
FOODFoodtale PA‐
folderQuest. pos
Kindergarten C Quest. preHeight & weight
Baseline FOOD Rolemodels food pref.
Foodtale PA‐folder
Quest. pos
KindergartenB Quest. preHeight & weight
Baseline FOOD Foodtale PA‐
folderQuest. pos
Kindergarten L Quest. preHeight & weight
FG ‐observation
Foodtale PA‐folder
Quest. pos
Kindergarten N
Quest. preHeight & weight
Foodtale PA‐folder
Quest. pos
Kindergarten D
Quest. preHeight & weight
Foodtale PA‐folder
Quest. pos
Kindergarten E Quest. preHeight & weight
Quest. pos
Kindergarten G
Quest. preHeight & weight
Quest. pos
Kindergarten H
Quest. preHeight & weight
Quest. pos
Kindergarten I Quest. preHeight & weight
Quest. pos
Kindergarten J Quest. preHeight & weight
Quest. pos
Kindergarten K Quest. preHeight & weight
Quest. pos
Kindergarten M
Quest. preHeight & weight
Quest. pos
8
Purposeofintervention‐ Increasingthediscoveryandknowledgeofhealthynevertastedfoodsbythe
children‐ Increasingtheexposuretothesespecificfoods‐ Improvingtheparentsempowermentinfoodandgeneraleducation‐ Trainingtheparentsandtheteachersineatinghabitmodificationtechniques‐ Reducingthejunkfoodexposureinkindergartenandfamilyenvironment(asactive
actiontakenbythewholecommunityineachofthesettings–childrenandteachersinkindergartenandchildrenandparentsinthefamilies)
‐ Trainingtheparentsoncheapandfastrecipes‐
Actioncomponents(toolsused):
1. Improvingtheestheticsoffoods(improvingtheappearanceofvegetablesandlegumesdishesmixingcolours,addingdecorations,etc)
2. Improvingandvaryingthewaysofcookingthesedislikedfoods3. Introducingthechildren’smostoftendislikedfoodsthroughshorttales4. TasteshopmedSapere5. Activityinvolvingthechildreninfoodprocessing6. Theacceptanceofkindergartenmeals(wastepercentage)
QuestionnairesQuestionnaireswereproposedtoparents,preandposintervention,togetinformationonparentsfeedingstyleandtheirchildren’slifestyle.Thetopicthatwerecoveredbythequestionnaire;Familyeatingstyle,child’sfoodpreferencesandphysicalactivity(PA)style,parentsknowledgeofbasicprincipleofnutrition,socialeconomicaldeterminantsinfoodchoosing,child’sTVuse,andself‐reportedparentsnutritionalstatus(heightandweight).
360 questionnaires were handed out in the summer 2008. 320 were filled out and returned (89%).
InMay–June2009thesecondroundofquestionnaireswerehandedoutinthe14kindergartens.Outofthe321fromthefirstroundonly145questionnaireswerefilledoutandreturned(45%).Thereasonforthesmallrespondsmightbeduetothefactthattheoldestchildrenhadletthekindergartentostartafour‐fivemonthpre‐schoolbeforeschoolinAugust,andalsothatthepedagoguesarerequiredtodomorepaper‐workduetodifferentchangesfromthemunicipality.Alsothechangesofheadmistressinthreekindergartenscreatedproblemswiththecooperationbetweentheresearchesandthekindergartens.Furthermorewewereinformedbythepedagoguesthat theparentshavesaidthatthequestionnairewastoolong,orthatthereweresomanydifferentprojectsgoingonatthesametime.
9
Focusgroupinterviews
KindergartensasimportantarenaChildrenspendalargetimeoftheirwakinghoursindaycare(BUPLcapital).Thismeansthatchildreninaveryearlyageareincontactwithotheradultsthantheirparents.Thismakesdaycareaveryimportantarenaforchildren'sdevelopmentandlearning(Grønfeldt,2007),astheyexperiencea"doublesocialization”(Sølvhøj,etal1994,p.127).Thepresentageischaracterizedbyduality,leavingconflictingmovements,butasearchtofindaspaceforboththechildren'sself‐determinationandautonomyontheonehand,educatorsandactiveparticipationontheotherside(Broström2004).
Theaforementioneddevelopmentsetuprequirements to thepedagogues’didactic teachingskills (Broström, 2004). Didactic reflection and planning tools to justify the choices andforcingarenecessaryforthepedagoguestoreflectonwhethersomethingismoreimportantthan something else. The Danish principle of decentralization is maintained. The overallobjectiveofnoticeisthesameforallmunicipalities,butitisuptoeachmunicipalitytoclarifythevaluesandvisionsfortheeducationalwork,andthenforeachkindergartentointerpretanddevelopitsowncurriculum(ibidp.12).
The growing demands on institutions and pedagogues are reflected in the introduction ofannual and corporate plans in kindergartens and the educational curricula designed todescribeeducationalgoalsandpractices(Broström,2004).
InNovember2008twointervention‐kindergartenswerechosenforthefocusgroups(FG)interviews.Firstapilot‐projectwasperformedinanon‐Periscopekindergarten,‐bothchildrenandadultsFG.AfterwardsthefocusgroupswerecarriedoutaccordinglytothemethodsdescribedinPeriscope.DuetothefactthattheexpatiationsonthephysicalactivitywerenotmetduringthechildrenFG,itwasdecidedtovideotapethechildrenplayingintheirnaturalenvironmentinthekindergartenandanalyzestheresultsfromtheobservationstogetherwiththeresultsfromtheFG.InDecember2008,inoneoftheFGintervention‐kindergartensthechildrenparticipatedindrawingtheirfavoritegame.
StakeholdersDevelopmentofinterventionsaimedatimprovinglifestyleincludingPAandhealthyeatinginsettingssuchaskindergartenscannotbedevelopedalonewithstrictscientificallybasedandpotentiallynarrowsdomains.Insteadtheymustbeinformedbypractitioners’broadereverydaylifeperspective.
Parentsandkindergartenteachersareimportantstakeholdersinthelivesofchildren.Thus,thesestakeholdersseemobvioustoinvolveinthepresentproject.Moreover,byinvolvingthesestakeholdersimportantperspectivesofhowchildreneatandprefertheirmealsaswellastheirlevelofPAmightbeaccomplished.Theperspectiveonwhatmightlimitorencourage
10
healthyeatingandPApatternsinchildren,isespeciallyimportantincurrentprojectasthechildreninvolvedhasalimitedcognitivedevelopment,duetotheiryoungage.
Thiswerethestartingpoint,forthefocusgroup(FG)interviewsforchildrenaswellasadults,tocapturekindergartenagechildrenandotherstakeholders(i.e.parentsandkindergartenstaff)viewsonpossibleinterventionstrategiestoeatingandPA.Thefocusgroupswereconductedfirstasapilot‐projectandthenintwokindergartenscontainingchildreninonegroupandparents,pedagogues,headofkindergarten,kitchenstaffinanotherinordertoobtainingbackgroundinformationonhealthbehaviorinthekindergartensaswellasinthefamilies.
TheinterviewswereconductedinconsistencywiththemethodologicalframeworkdevelopedbyMargheritaCaroliandfollowedtheguidelinesoutlinedinthePERISCOPEprotocol.However,itwasfoundthatrecruitmentofparticipantswereratherdifficult,duetoa)timerestrains,astheparticipantisrelativelyoccupiedintheirsparetime,andb)lackofresourcesinthekindergartens.Hence,thenumberofparticipantswasreduced,inordertoconducttheinterviewswithindeadline.
Twoseparateinterviewswithparentsandpedagogues(stakeholders)werecarriedout,regardingwhattheysawaslimitationsandpossibilitiesforthechildrentodevelophealthyeatinghabitsandimprovetheirmovementandPA.Afterseriousconsideration,itwasdecidednottoincludeparentsandpedagoguesinthesameinterview,duetoassumedconflictsofinterest.However,theinterviewguideusedinbothinterviewswasidentical.AstoopentheFGinterview,thestakeholderswereaskedtodiscusswhattheyunderstoodbytheterm‘healthhabits’,toensureanassociationregardingthespecifictopic.Thefollowingstageoftheinterviewwasdividedintotwomainphases,oneregardingthedietaryandonewiththephysicalactivityangle,respectively.Thetwomainphaseswerefurthermoredividedintotwosubphases,oneonthesubjectoflimitations(a)andoneonpossibility(b)todevelophealthyeatinghabitsaswellasimprovepatternsofPA.
ChildrenFGAstheaimoftheFG,weretogainknowledgeaboutchildren’sperceptiononfoodandmealsaswellasphysicalactivity,itweredecidedthataqualitativemethodwouldbemostappropriateforkindergartenagechildren.Withinthelasttwodecades,therehasbeenachangeregardingtheuseofchildrenasrespondentsinempiricalresearch(Andersen&Kjærulff,2003).Theyarenowconsideredasanimportantsourcetogaininformationonhowchildrenthemselvesareexperiencingtheworldinwhichtheylivein.Furthermore,byusingandconsideringchildrenasvalidsources,knowledgeonperspectivesthatmaynotbeobvioustoadultsmightbeaccomplished(Andersen&Kjærulff,2003).Thusrecognizestheparticipantsasexpertsoftheirworld,FG’shavetheadditionaladvantagesofminimizethepossibilityofthechildrenrespondingtopleasetheinterviewer,
11
andalsoremovethepressurefromtheindividualchild(Heary&Hennessy,2002).Non‐leadingandopen‐endedquestions,whichlettogeneratediscussionamongthechildren,werestartedoutwithgeneralquestionsfollowedbymorespecificones.Duetothefactthatchildreninthisagecanhavedifficultiesinunderstandingabstractquestionsduetotheircognitivelevel,itwereemphasisedthatthequestionsweremodifiedinaccordancetothis.Furthermore,itwasdecidedtoseparatetheinterviewintotwo(oneforfoodandoneforPA),inordertokeeptheinterviewrelativelyshort,forthechildrennottolosefocusandconcentrationaswellasstructuretheFGpartaroundafewactivities,asthesewouldhelpfacilitatechildren’sparticipationinadiscussionanddialogue(Heary&Hennessy,2002).Theactivitiesincludedselectingpictures,dialoguebasedonpicturesandthechildren’sdrawingsofhealthyfoodandbestphysicalactivity,astogetavisualassociation.
ChildrenFGonFoodWhenthepicturesoffoodwerepresentedforthechildren,itwasobservedthatthechildrenhaddifferentknowledgeoffooditems.Thechildrenatonekindergartendidnothavethesameperceptionofthecontent,asthechildreninoneoftheothers.Thiswasespeciallyobservedduringthedebateaboutthecontentofthesaladdishinthepicture.Theydiscussedwhetherornotsaladwasaleaforadish;additionallytheyagreedonthattheyellowpieceinthesaladwascheese.Thechildreninonekindergartenidentifiedtheyellow“pieces”correctlyasmango.
Despitetherelativelyyoungageofthechildren,theystillhadaperceptionofhealthyandunhealthyfoods.Inthefinalphaseoftheinterviewthechildrenwereaskedtodrawsomefood,whichtheyconsideredashealthy.Almostallthechildrendrewdifferentfruit(mostlyapples)andryebread.Whenthechildrensubsequentlywereaskedwhytheyregardedtheitemsdrawnashealthy,theyexpressedthatitwasbecausetheylikedthem.LateroninoneoftheFGinterviewaboyexpressedthatunhealthyfoodisunhealthy,asitcontainssugar.Whenaskedwhytheythinkhealthyfoodishealthy,threechildren,respectivelyexpressedthathealthyfoodhelpsbuildmusclesandcontainvitamins.
Duringthefocusgroupinterviewswiththechildren,iswasrevealedthatthechildrenattendingthetwoPeriscopekindergartens(thathadalunchscheme),hadknowledgeofmorevariedfooditems,asthesechildreningeneralcouldmentionmoredifferentdishesandfooditems,comparedtothepilot‐kindergarten,(whichhadnolunchscheme)wherethechildrenshowedalimitedknowledge.Thisindicatesthathavingaplatformforpraxiscanpotentiallyleadtoincreasedlearningopportunities.Thismightbeanindicatorofthatalunchschemecontributestoamorecomfortableandadvancedrelationtonewfoodspresented,thanpackedlunches.Childpeerseatingtogetherwerebothbythestakeholdersandafewchildren,mentionedasafactor,whichcouldincreasetheappetitefortryingnewdishesorfoods.Surprisinglyitwasfoundthatpedagoguesseemtoplayamoreimportantroleasintermediariesinchildren’smealthankitchenstaff,whomdidnotseemtoplayaroleasactiveintermediaries.
12
ChildrenFGonPABasedonthePAresultsfromtheFGitwasdecidedtouseyetanotheralternativemethodologytogetabetterunderstandingonthefactorrevolvingchildren’sphysicalactivitylevel.Researchersobservedthechildrenintheirnaturalsettingsinoneofthekindergartens(bothinsideandoutside)supportedbydigitalvideocamerastorecordtheobservations.Usingthismethoditwaspossibletocapturethemovementofthechildren,inacontextoftheirnaturalenvironmentinthekindergartenandthenuseitassupplementtotheinterviewsanddifferentdrawingsmadeearlier.UsingvideotapingasamethodwithinFG’andobservationresearchisrelativelynew,whichismainlyduetotechnicalreasons.Therefore,limitedliteratureistobefoundonhowtosystemise,analyseandpresentit(Rønholt,H.etal.2003).Themethodhasseveralforces,comparedwithtraditionalwrittennotetaking,giventhatithasthecapabilitytocapturemovement,talk,sounds,coloursandactions,asthesearecapturedintimeandspace.Thisgivestheinterpreteradvantageswhenreviewingthevideotapeanditisthereforepossibletointerpretonactionsnotvisibleandnotcapturedbytheeyeandmemory.Thusithastheabilitytogetclosertorealitythantraditionalmethods(ibid).However,whenaresearcherenters‘thefield’,itmustberecognizedthattheresearcherwillinfluencesitandherebyspoilsthenaturalenvironment(Kristiansen&Krogstrup,1999).
Theobservationswerecarriedoutatdifferenttimes,asitwasnecessarytofollowthekindergartensroutines.Inonekindergartenthechildrenspentthetimebetweenapprox7.30–10.30,outsideattheplayground.Postlunch,approximately12.30‐13thechildrenwereoutsideagainuntiltheafternoon.Thiswascommonroutine,regardlessoftheweather.Iftheweatherwasharsh,theyconsideredkeepingthechildreninside.Thechildrenattheotherkindergartenwereinsideinthemorningandusuallyoutsideafterlunchapproximatelyfrom12‐14.However,iftheweatherwasreallybad,theydecidedtostayinsideorspentlesstimeoutside.
Ingeneralallthechildrenwerequiteactive,butdifferencesbetweengenderswereobserved,astheboyswerethemostactive,whilethegirlsweremorecautiousandengagedinmorenon‐activeactivities,suchasdigginginthesandbox.Furthermore,itseemedlikethegirlsneededmoreinitiativesfromthekindergartensteachersthantheboys,toplaygames,whichdemandsthattheythemselveswerephysicalactive.However,whenanactivitywasinitiatedbythekindergartensteachersthechildrenparticipatedequally(e.g.dancingtomusic).Itwasobservedthatthechildrenwereusingtheentireplaygroundandallitsfacilitiesbothinatraditionalwaybutalsountraditional,e.g.walkinganddancingupwardsalargeslide.Moreover,thechildrenwereclimbingalmosteverywherepossible,ontheoutsideoftheclimbingframe,onthefencearoundthesoccercourtetc.Thiswasnotinterruptedbythekindergartenteachers.Duringtheobservationinsidethekindergartens,itwasobservedthatherethechildrentookfulladvantageofthespaceavailable.
13
ChildrendrawingsessionBeforethedrawingsessionallofthechildrensatdownwithoneresearcherandtalkedabouthowtomoveoncebody.Thisweretogaininformationonthechildren’sknowledge,aswellasthechildren’sunderstandingofthewords;“moving”and“physicalactivity”.Todevelopawiderplatformforthechildrentotalkabout,theresearchershowedpicturesofphysicalactivechildren.Duringthefollowingdrawingsessionthechildrensatquietlynexttoeachother.Eventhoughthechildrenweretoldtodrawthatphysicalactivitythattheyenjoyedmost(aloneorwithothers)theywereinfluentbyeachother,andthereforesomeofthedrawingsareverymuchalikeandcannotbeincludedintheevaluation.
Editiontothedrawingseachchildwereinterviewindividually.Thesamequestionwereaskedandinthesameorder.Theinterviewswerecarriedoutbythesameresearcherthathadbeenconductingthedrawingsession.Thechildrenpreferredtoplaywithfriends,butafewindicatedtheimportantofsometimesbeingabletojustplaybythemselves.Majorityoftheboyspreferredtobephysicalactivewhenplaying.Noneofthechildrenthoughtthatthekindergartenneededanyothertoysorplayingequipment,besidewhatwasalreadythere.
StakeholdersGFonFoodTheparentssawthemselvesasthemostimportantrolemodelsinthelifeoftheirchildren,andoneparentstated,thatshethoughtparentsshouldbemoresupportiveabouttheworkofthekindergartensteachers,bycarryingontheinitiativesathome(e.g.letthechildrensetthetable,allowthemtoparticipateinthekitchen).Alltheparentssawthepedagoguesasrolemodels.Anaspectofthisisthatthepedagoguesareeatingthesamefoodasthechildrenduringthemeal,insteadofjustsupervisingandeatingtheirownfood.Thisperspectivewassecondedbythekindergartenteachers,astheyrecognisedtheirownimportance,bothasrolemodelsbutalsoasfacilitators,astheythoughtthatitwasnotonlyimportantthattheyatethesamefoodasthechildren,butfurthermorealsoencouragethemtotrynewfoods. Althoughthepedagoguesrecognizethemselvesasrolemodels,onepedagoguestatedthatshewouldnottakeresponsibilityforthechildren’snutrition.Inbothkindergartensitwasarulethatthechildrentriedtotastenewfoodsbeforerejectingthem.Ifthechildrendislikedthefoodaftertasting,itwasemphasisedbythepedagoguesnottocreateaconflictaboutit.
Theparentshadinadditionageneralconvictioninwhichthechildrenwouldbemorereluctanttotryandeatdifferentfoods,whenpresentedfortheminthekindergarten,asthissocialsettingisdifferentfromtheoneathome.Onepedagoguealsoexperienced,thatthechildreneithercouldencourageordiscourageeachothertotastenewfood,duetogrouprelationsandpeerpressure.Onetopicthatwasrepeatedamongtheparents,weretheincreasingnumberofchildrenpr.
14
pedagogue,asthiscoulddecreaseactivities,suchasparticipationinthekitchen.Furthermore,theparentsbelievedthatitcouldalsoworsenthemealsituation,ifthepedagoguehadtosupervisealargernumberofchildren.
IntheFGtherewereanagreementamongtheparentsandthepedagoguesthathealthyeatingfocusedkindergartenlunchschemecouldcontributeinimprovingthedietaryhabitsofthechildren,asithasthepotentialtoofferavarietyofdishesandfoodsaswellasadifferentsettingthantheoneathome.Furthermore,inordertoincreaseownershipofthefoodprovidedinalunchscheme,boththeparentsandpedagoguesmentionedthatitwascentralthatthefoodwaspreparedinthekindergartenandnotdeliveredfromelsewhere.Theidealsituationwouldbeifthechildrencouldbeinvolvedinthecooking,asthiswouldfurtherincreaseownership.
Thisparticularpartoftheinterventionwereseenbythestakeholdersasoneofthemostimportantstrategiesinimprovingchildren’sdietaryhabits,asitweresupposedthatthechildrenherebycouldincreasetheirknowledgeonhowfoodisprepared,andwhatthecomponentsofamealcanbe.Inaddition,theparentsassumedthatparticipationincookingwouldincreasethechild’smotivationforeatingitafterwards.
Allthekindergartenteachersagreedontoemphasizethatthechildrenhadknowledgeaboutwherefoodorigins,astheyseethisasaperspectiveofbeinghealthy.Inmostofthekindergartens,farmvisitswerearegularactivity.Inaddition,severalkindergartenshaddifferentherbsgrowinginthegardenandonekindergartenhadtheirownkitchengardenatoneofthefarmswheretheygrewtheirownvegetables,whichwereusedinthekindergartenkitchenafterharvesting.
StakeholdersFGonPAThelevelofhowmuchparentsthemselvesregardedtheirowninvolvementandresponsibilityonthesubjectofPAandmovementwerediverse.However,someparentsdidseeitasimportant,tosupportthehealthimprovingapproachesinthekindergarten,forinstancebylettingthechildrenwalkthedistancefromthehometothekindergarten,insteadofbeingdriven.Thisisinlinewiththeresultfromthequestionnairewhere37%ofthechildreneitherwalkorbike(themselves)tokindergartenand45%homeagain.(Unfortunatelyitwasnotpossibletocomparetheresultsfromthepreviousquestionnaire,becauselasttimeitwasnotstatedcleanenoughwhetheritwasthechildortheparentridingthebike).Buteventhoughonly41%livesfurtherawaythan1kilometre,50%aredrivingtokindergartenbycarand42%homefromkindergarten.
Someparents,werefurthermoreverykeenonlettingtheirchildrenattendtoi.e.swimclassesorgymnastics,since,theyrecognizedthatplaydoesnotalwayscontainedmuchactuallymovementorphysicalactivity.Thisviewwasespeciallyregardinggirls,asparentsofboys
sawnoprstatedtha
Thisstatemattendoneactivity.ThThisresulactivitydu
Thefigurefrom2008handball.Oandgolf.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
O
oblemwithtitwasap
mentisinlesportactihemostpotsshowanuringthew
ebelowsho8‐2009.TheOtheractiv
One activity
htheirchildproblemto
linewiththivity,13%copularspornincreaseoweek.
owsthatthemostpopvitiesmenti
Two activities
drennotgekeepthem
heresultsfrchildrenatrtsaregymof11%,sinc
espreadbepularsportsionedwere
sThree
activitie
ettingenoustill.
romthequttend2spomnastics,swceinprevio
etweenthesaregymnedance(in
es
ughPAtrou
uestionnairrtsactivitiewimming,soousquestio
ebiggestgrnastics,thencl.balletan
ughplay.On
ewhere57esandonlyoccer,handonnaireonl
rouphasnonswimminndhiphop)
2008
2009
nthecontr
7%ofthecy1%attenddballanddly46%wen
otchangedng,soccera),icehockey
2008
2009
rarythey
childrendathirdancing.nttoan
muchndy,scout
15
Thestakehimportantdebated.Oespeciallydiscussed.pointedouforinstanc
Inreviewithepossibthem,howenvironmeandhelpfimportantThismeaninthekindaswellas
Inrelationsupportansomechildthatgirlsnlackofres
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
holdersacktrolemodeOneonhowtheaspect.Eventhouutthattheycesoccerg
ingtheobsbilitiesinthwever,thisdentonlyisfrompedagtbuttheornsthatpedadergarten,bbymanage
ntothis,obndchallengdrenhadthneedmoresourcesava
Gym
knowledgeels.Twoaspw,pedagogutonhowthughchildreystillneedgames,tag,e
ervationsohesurrounddidnotalwnotasufficgoguesisnerganisationagogueshabutthatanementcom
bservationsgetheseskheneedforsupportanailablefort
Swimming
dtheimpopectsofhowuescouldphepedagogunhaveanaadultstoaetc.
onphysicaldings,thecwayscontribcientprecoeededinadalenvironmasthepotennyintervenmitment.
spointtothills,amongradultstoindattentionthis.
Footbal
ortantroleowthepedaparticipateuescouldaaturalwayactascataly
lactivity,itchildrenwabutetoactonditionforddition.Inomentiseventialtoinitntionneeds
hefactthatgothersbynitiatePAanandsome
llHan
ofthepedaagoguescouactivelyinactinorderofinitiatepystsandor
twasfoundasratherskualmovemrmovemenotherwordenmoreimtiatemorepstobesupp
titiscentrathepedagoandmovemepedagogu
ndball
agogues,asuldactasrtheplaygartoinitiateplayandgaganisersin
dthatalmokilledintakmentandPAntbutthatmdsphysicalmportantadphysicalacportedbyn
althatthesogues,asitment.Obseruesexpress
2008
2009
theysawtrolemodelsames.SeconeplayandPames,itwencertainsit
stindepenkenadvantA.Thisindimotivationenvironmedeterminanctivityandmnecessaryr
surroundinwasobserrvationsinsedconcern
2008
2009
themasswerendly,PAwaserestilltuations,
dentlyoftageoficatethat,supportentisntofPA.movementresources
ngsvedthatdicatednsofthe
16
17
Reportoffoodinterventionmenuandtasteworkshopresultinkindergarten
FOODBaselinemenuFromJanuary2009–February2009fourintervention‐kindergartensparticipatedinthefood‐intervention(A,B,CandF).Abaselinemenusfromallfourkindergartenswerecollected(foranalyzingthenutritionandquantity)andineachkindergartenobservationsweremadeforfivedayson;howthefoodweremade,howthefoodwerepresented,howthechildrenate(physically/logistic),howmuchthechildrenateandhowmuchwerewasted(664mealsintotal).
Twoofthekindergartensservedbuffet(therewasalwaysbreadandcoldcutservedtogetherwiththewarmdishincasethechildrendidnotlikethedishoftheday).Theothertwokindergartensservedonlyonetypeoffoodperday.
Beforevisitingthekindergartenslettersweresenttotheheadmistress/headmasterexplainingtheimportantthateverythingshouldbeasnormalaspossibleandthatwewouldonlyobservedthemakingofthefoodandthelunchsituationitself.Nointerferingwouldbemade.Aletterofinformationwashungupontheparent‐informationboard,sotheycouldseewhentheresearcheswouldbeintheirchild’skindergarten,andespeciallywhattheywouldbeobserving.
FOODInterventionmenuInMarch2009,afterthefourweeksofobservationinfourintervention‐kindergartens,alldata’swerekeyedinandanalyzed.Accordinglytotheresultsthekindergartenfoodhadalreadyhighstandards.ThestandardsoftheNNR(NordicNutritionRecommendation)weremade.
ThebasisoftheDanishinterventionwerechosentoasfollowed;Morelegumes,morevariesvegetable(carrotswerethemostpopularvegetable),moredark‐greenvegetable,lessbreadatlunchtime,moreoilinfoodandlessbutteronthebreadandmoremilk.Fivelunchrecipesandfourafternoonsnackrecipeswerecreatedspecificallyfortheinterventioncontainingthefoodmentionedabove.Outofthefourkindergartens,twowerechosentoparticipateinthefood‐intervention;onebuffet‐kindergartenandonekindergartenwheretheyservedonetypeoffood(AandF).Lettersweresenttothetwokindergartenheadmistress,explainingthemenus,theimportantofcooperation,notjustfromthekitchenstaffandbutalsothepedagoguesduringtheinterventionweek.Sincethepedagogueseatthesamefoodasthechildrenandwiththechildren(pedagogicmeal),itwasimportantthattheyknewthebackgroundforthechangesofthefoodandthattheyunderstoodtheirroleasbeingrole‐modelsforthechildren.
18
Themenusweresentoutbeforetheintervention,notjustforthekindergartenstafftobeabletogettheingredients,butalsoforthemthegettoknowtherecopiesandtoworkoutatimeframeforthemakingofthefood(372mealsintotal).Aposterwerehungupontheparentsinformationboardwithmenus,explanationsforthedifferentingredientsandthankingforthecooperationduringtheweekstheprojecthadbeengoingonintheirchild’skindergarten.
InterventionmenuresultsThefindingfromtheobservation‐baseline(the4kindergartenx5days)showedthatthechildrenwereeatinglotsofcarbohydrates,majorlyryebreadandhomemadewhite/wholegrainbread.Thetotalamountofcerealproducts,wereduringbaseline168gprchildprweekand190gduringintervention,outofwhich116gwasbreadduringbaselineand145gduringintervention.Ingeneraltheyeatmanyvegetable,butthesourceisverylimited.Carrots,cutoutassmallsticks,arethemainvegetablesource.Duringbaselinethechildrenhad72gofvegetableaweekandduringinterventionthiswasincreasedtill115g.Intwoofthekindergartensonepieceoffruitprchildapproximatelyeverydayisbeingprovidedbythekindergarten,inonekindergarten½piecesoffruitprchildisprovidedandinthefourthkindergartenthechildrenbringonepieceoffruiteverydayforthemselves.Inaveragethechildrenhad77goffruitaweek(mostlyapple,banana,clementine,andpear)duringbaselineand88gduringintervention.
Onefindingwasverysurprisingly.Especiallyinonekindergarten(kitchenstaff)wasafraidofusingfat(butter,oilandfattydairyproducts).Thereasonforthismightpartlybefoundinthepublicawarenessonchildren’singeneralfattydiet.Butalso,asitwasobserved,becauseofthepedagoguesinterferinginthemenu,duetothefactthatbecausethepedagogueseatthe
0
50
100
150
200
250
Baseline Intervention
Fruit
Vegetable
Total fruit/veg
Bread
Potato, pasta & rice
Total cereal
19
samefoodasandwiththechildren(pedagogicmeal),theyareverymuchawareofthefatlevelinthefood.Thiswasespeciallynotedwhenthetwointerventionkindergartenwerepresentedthenewmenu.Severalcommentweremadefromthefemalepedagoguesthatifthatkindoffoodwerepresentedinthekindergartentheycouldgainweightandduetotheuseoflegumesandmorewholegrainproductscommentsweremadebythemalestaff.
Belowisafigurethatshowsthedifferentintakeinthetwointerventionkindergarten.Especiallyoneofthekindergartensdidnotconsumethequantitiesthatwhereexpected.Thereasonforthedifferentmightbefoundinthefactthatonekindergartenwasa“buffet‐kindergarten”(ryebreadwithsomedifferentcoldcutwasalwaysservedbesidethemaindish)whiletheotherkindergartenonlyservedonedishforlunch.Duringtheinterventiononlyonedishwasserved.Thiswasaverybigprobleminonekindergarten,becausetheywereverymuchusetohavingachoice.
Thefigurebelowshowstheaverageintake(ingram)perchildovertheweekoftheintervention:
ThevegetableintakefromkindergartenF,weremostlyconsumedduringthemorningsnackthroughcarrotsticksandthebreadintakeduringtheafternoonsnack.Itwasobservedthatthechildrenwasuseto,andenjoyedverymuchcomingtothekitchendeskbetween9‐10andtalkwiththekitchenstaffwhiletakingthecarrotsfromabigbowl(Thecarrotslaidinwaterandwastakenoutbythechildrenwithapairoftongs).
Somechildren(andpedagogues)refusedtoeatanythingforlunch(andthentheyatealotduringafternoonsnack).Especiallythepedagoguesreactionwassurprisingly,sincetheyknewabouttheprojectandknewthatanewmenuweredevelopedespeciallyforthis
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Kindergarten F Kindergarten A
Fruit
Vegetable
Potato, pasta & rice
Bread
Protein
Fish
20
intervention(meaningmorefat,morelegumesandmoredifferentvegetable,particularlydarkgreenvegetable).Onethesecondday,thekindergartenwasapproachandameetingwasheldthenextdaytoinformthepedagoguesthattheyneededtokeeptheirpersonalopinionstothemselvesandinsteadactasanintermediarybetweenthekitchenandthechildrenandbecomearolemodelforthechildren.Duringthelasttwodaysinthatkindergartenthepedagogueswereverymoreopenandpositivetowardsthenewfood.Thiswasobservedbytheresearchespresentduringthelunches.Eventhoughthechildrenwerestillreluctanttotrythenewfood,thepedagoguesnowtriedinapositivewaytomakethechildrenjusttastethedifferentfood.Thedifferentattitudefromthepedagoguesgavethechildrenthecouragetotry.Stilltherewasnoconversationatthetableaboutthefoodtherewasserved.Alltheinformationwasonlygivenbythekitchenstaffwhenthechildrenaskedthemaboutthefood.
InkindergartenA,aconversationwasobservedbytheresearcher.Toboyswerediscussingthetasteinoneoftheshreddedvegetabledishes(shreddedcarrots,beetrootapples,whitecabbage,‐andvanilla).OneboythoughtittastedlikevanillaicecreamandtheotherthoughtittastedlikeaDanishsummerdishwithbuttermilk,eggandvanilla.Noneoftheboyscouldidentifythevanillasugarasbeingthesubstancethebothrecognised,buttheybothknewthattheotheronewastakingabout(bothboyshadbeenintheSaperefoodworkshopafewweeksbeforethisconversationtookplace).Theconversationbetweenthetwostartedamoreopenconversationbetweenmorechildren.
Thefigureclearlyshowsthatbread,pastaandricearethechildrenpreferfoodgroupaccordinglytotheparents.Withinthiscategorymostchildrenpreferspasta,thenbreadandlastrice.Thefigurealsoshowsthatthesecondpopularfoodgroupisfruit.Legumes(fresh
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Prefere. 1st Prefere. 2nd Refuse. 1st Refuse 2nd
Bread, pasta and rice
Fruit
Legumes
Potato
Fish
Milk and cheese
21
anddried),isthefoodgroup,thatoftenisdeselected.Fishdeselectedmoreoftenthanitisselected,whilethefoodgroupmilkandcheeseareselectedanddeselectedequally.Inthelastcategory,cheeseisbeingdeselectedmoreoftenthanmilk.
Eventhoughpotatoesarenotafoodchose,thatthechildrenprioritiesanddeselectmoreoftenthanselect,74%oftheparentsstillservethem1‐3timesaweek.
50%oftheparentsdonotservelegumes,whichisinlinewiththechildren’schose,asthefoodgrouptheydeselectmostly.
Fisharenotbeingservedforhalfthechildrenandfortheotherhalfitisserved1‐3timesaweek.Itshouldbenotedthatifthisresultiscomparedwiththechildren’sdeselectoffish,whichisonly10%,whenitistheparentslacktoservefish,whatisthereasonforthechildren’sminorintakeandnotthechildren’sownpreferences.
TasteworkshopAsinitiallydescribed,overweightandobesityisanincreasingproblem.Howepidemiologistspreviouslydealtwiththedeficiencydiseases,societytodayfightanaffluentsocietywithlifestyle‐relateddiseases(Nielsen2008).Whenfoodissofreelyavailable,leaveourtastepreference,‐whicheitherspeakfororagainstcertainfoods,animportantroleinourdailyfoodchoices(Wardleetal2001,s.217).Taste,asdeterminantofchoicebetweendifferentavailablefooditems,isnotsomethingnew.Tastebudshaveformillenniahelpedtochoosebetweendifferentavailablefood,becausethetastehasbeenanimportanttoolinsurvival(Stenderetal,2005p.83).Modernsensoryresearchoperateswithfivebasictastes,aspeoplearebelievedtobeabletodistinguishbetween.Thesearesweet,salty,sour,bitterandumami(Nielsenetal2008).
Children'sdietismainlycharacterizedbytheirsugarandfat.Thereasonbeing,whyit’sthesweetandrichlifestylethatappealstous(andsopositivelychargedexpression),mightbeconnectedwiththefact,thatwehaveapredilectionfortheverysweetandfattening.Fromearlydayswhenmanwentforthesweettaste,(asweknowitfromfruit),theywerecapableofsimultaneouslysteeringroundthesourandbitter,whichcouldindicatethattheywererottenorpoisonousfood(Beauchampetal2009,p.S2).
Thatfoodshouldhavesomerecognitionvalueforthechildren,doesnotmeanthatitmustbetrivialandshouldonlycoverthemostbasicfood(Léon2006).Ifthebuilt‐inpreferenceforsweetandfattyfoodsshouldbenuancedandseeksdiversedietarypreferences,thisrequirespositiveexperienceswithpreciselybalancedmeals.Whenchildrenhavealittleexperiencetoframetoeatfrom,onemustassumethattheydeselectavarietyoffoodsanddishes(ibid.).Theavailabilityofhealthyfoodisthecornerstoneinthedevelopmentofhealthydietarypreferences.
22
StudiesmadebyJaneWardle,DirectorforcancerresearchatUKHealthBehaviorUnit,DepartmentofEpidemiologyandPublicHealth,Englandhasshownthatparents'ownintakeoffruitandvegetables,aswellastheircontroloftheirchildren'sintake,hasanoverallimpactonchildren'sfruitandvegetableintake(Wardleetal2005,s.227‐230).Parentsactingrolemodelisanimportantfactor,sinceasmallornon‐consumptionoffruitsandvegetablesbythemhasanegativeeffectonchildren'sintakeoffruitandvegetables(ibid.).Inaddition,studiesshowthatparents,whoeatlittlefruitandvegetables,aremorereluctanttoforcetheirchildrentoeat(ibid.).Themoreparentspushtheirchildrentoeat(thattheydonoteatthemselves),thelowertheaverageintakeoffruitandvegetableswillbecome(ibid.).Furthermore,thereisariskthatthechilddevelopsanaversiontocertainfoods.Havethechildfirstanaversiontoaparticularfood,thisisdifficultto"cure"andarejectionofthatfoodmayconsistofmanyyears(Wardleetal2008,s.S16),evenafterthechildasanadult,becomesawarethattheaversionswereduetocircumstancessurroundingthefoodandnottheactualfood. Children'srejectionofcertainfoodscanresultintheparents(duetoconcernforchildren'soverallenergyintake)givesinandonlyservesthefoodthatthechildrenprefer.Bycontinuallyavoidingaspecificfood,theaversionenhances(Wardleetal2008,s.S17).
SaperemethodInFebruary2009oneintervention‐kindergarten(A)werechosentoparticipateinaTasteWorkshopbasedontheSapere‐methodbyJacquesPuisais.Foraweekthechildrenandthepedagogues,smelled,saw,tastedandmadefood.Theyusedtheirbodies,wentontreasurehunts,theytalkedaboutfoodandtheplayedfood‐games.
ThepurposewithSaperemethod:•Toteachhissensesandhistastetoknow•Todeveloptheirabilitiestoexpressthemselvesverbally•Todaretrynewfoodsanddishes•Tohavegreatervariationintheeating•Tocreateaconsciousconsumer
Duetolimitofresources,wechoseonekindergartenforthefoodworkshop.Thetimeframewerefivedaysandtheparticipantswerethechildreninsmallgroup,twopedagogues,twokitchenstaffandtworesearches.
SincetheoriginalmethodaswellastheSwedishmethodhavenotbeentriedonsmallerchildrenthan11‐12yearsold,itwasnecessarytomakedifferentadjustmentsduetothekindergartenchildren’scognitiveagelevel.Furthermoreaboardsense‐gamewasinventedbytworesearchassistants.Informationlettersweresenttotheheadmistressandthepedagogues.Afterthatmeetingsweresetupbetweentheresearches,headmistress,kitchenstaffandthetwopedagoguesincharge,wheredetailsofthetasteworkshopwereexplainedandatimeframeweresetup.Afterthateachparentreceivedaletterwithbackgroundinformationontheimportantofrecognizingsweet,salty,sourandbittertastetodevelopa
23
potentialfoodcourageandthattheunfamiliarityofsomefoodcouldlettofoodaversionthatwillfollowthechildrenforaverylongtime.
ProtocolforSapereTasteworkshopBelowasummaryontheactivities,themethodandtheresults:
Dayone:Introducingfourofthefivebasictastes;sweet,sour,saltandbitteraswellascolour,smellandtexture.
Everythingwasplacedinsmallglassbowlssothechildrencouldseecolourandtexture.Afterthesessionitwasdiscussedtheimpotentsofnexttimetohavethewholefruitnexttothebowl,forthechildrentorecognizeit,notjustbeforetastingit,butalsoforlateron,iftheysawitinashop.
Firsttheytastedsomethingsweet.Thiswaschosen,duetothefactthatmostchildrenhaveapreferencetothesweettaste.Theytastedacaciahoneyandartificialsweetener.Allthechildrenwereveryeagertotryandtheylikedthehoneyverymuch.Allhadtastedhoneybefore,butnotallacaciahoney,andforthose,itwasmoredifficultforthemtoguessthatitwashoneybeforeactuallytastingit.Beforethechildrentastedtheartificialsweetener,theywereaskediftheythoughtthatallsweetthingstastedgood.Theyallthoughtso,butaftertastingtheartificialsweetener,theychangedtheyminds.Somethoughtthatittastedsourandothersthoughtitwastoosweet.Theycouldnotunderstandthatitcouldbeusedasasubstituteforsugar.
Afterthatthechildrentastedsomethingsour;limeandGrannySmithapples.Whenthechildrensmelledit,mostofthemcouldnotsmellanything,butsomesaidthatitsmelledsour.Onlyoneboyguesseditwaslime,theothersthoughtitwaslemon.Allthechildrenlikedtheapplesbetterthatthelime.
Thethirdtastewasbitter;Ruculalettuce,grapefruitandradish.Surprisinglymostofthechildrenlikedthelettuce.Thechildrentookthegrapefruitasbeingorange,butwhentheytastedit,theyknewthatitwasnot.Onlyafewgirlsreallylikedthetaste.Allthechildrenlikedtheradish,eventhoughsomeofthemthoughtitwasstrong.
Thelasttastethechildrentastedwassalt.Thereasonforleavingsaltasthelasttastewasduetothefact,thatmanychildrenlikethesaltytaste(chips)andthatwouldendthesessionwithatastetheywerefamiliarwithandthattheyliked.Theytastedsaltbiscuitsandsaltypeanuts.Notsurprisinglyallthechildrenlikedboththebiscuitsaswellasthepeanuts.
Daytwo:ThechildrentastebudswerenowchallengewhilethebasictastewasnowmixtwoandtwotogetherAndtheythereforehadtotryandrecognizethemfromeachother.Thedifferentmixedtasteswerelimejuiceandacaciahoney,grapefruitjuiceonsmallpiecesofGranny
24
Smithapples,saltbiscuitswithradish,saltbiscuitswithstrawberryjamandgrapefruitwithsugar.
Limejuiceandacaciahoney.Thechildrencouldeasilytastethattherewassomethingsweetinthejuice,buttheyhadproblemsfindingoutthatitwashoney.
GrapefruitjuiceonsmallpiecesofGrannySmithapples.Everyonethoughtthatittastedbetternowthanwhenthegrapefruitwasonitsown.Thesourapplehadtakenalittlebitofthebittertasteaway.
Saltbiscuitswithradish.Allthechildrenthoughtthattheradishnowtastedsalty,butalsoalittlebitstronger.
Saltbiscuitswithstrawberryjam.Someofthechildrensaidthatthejamtasteofsalt.Theycanrecognizethetwodifferenttastes,buttheycandistinguishthemfromoneanother.
Grapefruitwithsugar.Thisisthemostdifficultforthechildrentorecognize.Someofthemsaidittastedsourandsomesaidbitter,buttheyknewthattherewasanothertaste,buttheyjustcouldnotdeterminewhatthesecondtastewas.
Daythree:Thiswasaphysicalday.Thechildrenweredividedintogroupstogotreasurehunting.Buttogettothetreasuretheymustpastseveralpost,wheretheyeitherhadtoanswerquestionsordosomethingphysically.Thequestionasked,wereaboutthedifferentfruittreesandberrybushes,growinginthekindergarten.Tohelpthechildrenpicturewereshown.This,becausenotallthetreesandbusheswerecarryingflowers/fruit,atthepresenttime.Thephysicalactivitywasclimbingupintheplaytower,godowntheslide,kickaballintoagoal.Allthechildrenlikedtheactivityandespeciallythetreasure,whichwasacarrot/squashmuffin,sweetenedwithraisins.
Dayfour:Anewboardgamewasinventedandpilottestedduringtheintervention.
Itwasdesignedasanordinaryboardgamewherechildrentookturnswithadiceandmovetheirgamepiecethenumberoffieldsdice.Someofthefieldsarecoloredandeachcolorbelongstoacategory.Thereare3categories,senses,foodandmovement.Foreachcategory,therearequestionsaboutfoodandsenses.Besidesthethreecategoriestherearephysicalcardsthatdescribedanactivityforthechildforperform.Thisgivesthechildrentheopportunitytomovearoundandshowtheirmotorskills. Thechildrenandthepedagogueswasveryexcitingandthoughtitwasfuntoplaythegame,andfurthermorethepedagoguesthoughtitwasnicethattheysawawholenewsideofthechildren.
25
DayfiveThelastdaythechildrenbakedbreadwiththestakeholdersinthekitchen.Allthechildrenwereveryeagertoparticipate.Duetocolourandsmell,itwaschosen,thattheycouldmakefoccaciawithredpeppers,squashandfreshlychoppedherbs.Everyoneparticipatedinmakingthebread,choppingtheherbs,peppersandsquash.Butmostimportantly,thechildrentookgreatprideinmakingthebreadthatallthechildreninthekindergartenshouldeatintheafternoon.
Children’sfoodpreferenceandpedagoguesasrole‐modelsBothmealandmeal‐patternhasundergonearadicaltransformation.Theavailabilityofmanufactureandsemi‐manufacturefoodincreasesthecompositionscomplexity.Atthesametimewelosehouseholdknowledge,insightandskillsincooking(Holmetal1997,p.41).Thelackofinvolvementofchildrenalsoincreasestheriskthattheremaininginformationislostfromonegenerationtothenext(DVFA2009,kap.5).Thiscanleadtochildrenbeing"culinaryilliterateswherefoodissomewhatabstract,theymayfeelestrangedfrom"(ibid.).“Children´sfoodpreferencesareimportantdeterminantsoftheirfoodintakeandassuchareofinteresttoresearchersandpractitionersalike.”–(Wardleetal2008s.S18).Theknowledgeoffoodisthebaseforitsacceptance.Thepriorirefuseofaspecificfood,especiallyinpediatricage,isgenerallydeterminedbythelackofknowledgeandfamiliaritywiththatparticularlyfood.Toinitiatechildrentoacompleteknowledgeofdifferentfoodmeanstolaythefoundationofafutureacceptance.
ObservationandinterviewsInApril2009,afterthefoodinterventiontwoofthefourfood‐interventionkindergartens(AandC)werechosenforafoodpreferenceanalyzes,usingvideo‐observationduringthelunchsituationandinterviews.Theobservationstookplaceoverfourdays,twoineachofthetwokindergartensandonedaywheretheinterviewswereconducted.Fivepedagogueswereinterviewedintotal,threefromthebaselinekindergartenandtwofromtheother.Beforehandallparentshadreceivedaninformationletter,sotheyknewthattheirchildrenwouldbeobservedandvideotapedduringthelunchsituation.Thepedagoguesweretold,priortheobservationthattheresearcheswouldobservethelunchsituationtwodaysinaroadandthattheycouldbeinterviewoneononeafewdayslater.Thequestionsaskedduringtheinterviewswereaboutwhetherornotthepedagoguessawthemselvesasrolemodelsforthechildrenduringthemealsituation,whethertheyhadorhadhadaninfluenceontheFood&MealPolicyinthekindergartenandiftheybelievedthatthepolicyhadaneffectintheirbehaviorduringthemealsituation.Thereasonbeingforchoosingthetwodifferentkindergartenswastoobserveanydifferentinthepedagoguesbehaviortowardsthefoodandthefoodsituationduringlunch,knowingthatoneofthekindergartenhadparticipatedinthenewmenuinterventionandtheother“only”asabaselinekindergarten.
26
Role‐modelsGoodrolemodelsareimportantforreductionrejections(Wardleetal2003a,s.342;Wardleetal2008,s.S16‐18),duetotworeasons:First,observingotherswhoeatfood(beingparents,educators,peers,etc.),canbeadirectcauseofdietaryimitation.Thisisalsocalled"modeling".Secondly,thisintake(exposure)willinitselfpromotethepreference,asexplainedabove.Thecommonmealhasabuilt‐inteachingfunctionthroughbeingwithothers.Socialintercourseprovidesanopportunitytooversteponesboundariesandindividualtastepreferences.
Thefigureshowsthatmostparentsneverusefoodasanemotionalstabilizer,exceptifthechildissad.Hereonly39%statesthattheydonotusefoodasanemotionalstabilizer.Butwhen“never”and“rarely”arecombined,thedistancenarrowsdownandthetotalscoreofparentsneverorrarelyusingfoodasanemotionalstabilizerinsituationswherethechildrenareunhappy,naughty,hurt,moodyorangryisthen94%.
45%wouldneverpromiseadesserttomakethechildeattheirdinner,while35%rarelywouldusethismethod.Withthetotalamountof82%itisconcludedthatparentsuseonekindoffood(dessert)tomakethechildeatanotherkindoffood(dinner),butnotasarewardorpunishmentforgood/badbehavior.
Observationsduringlunch(4weeksduringbaseline,2weeksduringinterventionand2dayswithfocusonthepedagoguesandtheroleasmodeling)showedthatchildrenwereinterestedin,forexamplevegetabledish,ifthepedagogueofferedthefood,ateitthemselvesand
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Never Rarely Never and rarelytogether
Sad
Naughty
moody
Hurt
Angry
27
physicallypastedthedishtothechildren.Thepedagogueswereveryconsciousonsocializationissues,suchas;thattheyatethefood,thatwereservedandthattheyshowedaninterestinthefood.Conversely,therewasnoreflectiononhowthefoodwasprocessed.Forexample,pedagoguessatsqueezedinbetweenorbehindthechildren;eatingwiththeplatesontheirlaps;didnotbegineatingbeforelongafterthechildrenhadbegun;gavecommonmessageswhilethefoodwaswarmatthetable;talkingonthephoneduringthemeal;leftthetablewhilethechildrenwerestilleatingandgaveconfusinginformationonhowandwhetherthechildrencouldleavethetablewhentheywerefinished,etc.Focusontherolemodelfunctionwasinotherwordslimited,tothefooditself,butdidnotincludetheframeofthemeal.
Theaboveobservationsaresignificant,becausethereisastrongcorrelationbetweendietarypreferencesandthecontextofwhichthefoodisincludedin(Léon2006).Theemotionalreactiontofood,rangingfromrejectiontoindifferenceorpleasure,associatedwiththeexperienceofagiventypeoffood,isverymuchsomethingpersonal(ibid.).Cultureandthepeoplethechildrenaresurroundedby,arethereforeimportantfactorsaccordingtowhichfoodthechildprefers,becauseitisthesurroundings,whatintroducefoodtothechild(ibid.).
Inseveralsociologicalstudies,mealresponsiblewomensays,thatitisdifficulttoprioritizenutritionineverydaycooking.Onegoalistoeconomizebothtimeandfinancialresourcesandcreateahealthymealforthefamily.Andanothergoalistodoit,inawaythatsecuredthefamily'srecognitionandgratitude,whichmeansaconfirmationofthelovingrelationshipswithinthefamily(Holm2003,p.23).Desiretobenefitthenutritionispresent,butisoffendrefrainfromthisinordernottocreateconflicts.Thussaysoneinterviewee(mealresponsiblewoman):"Igivethemwhattheylove,insteadofwhat'sgood"(Holm2003,p.23‐24).
Itisthereforenotonlytheenjoymentoffoodthereisatstake,butalsoa"symbolicformoffoodbecausethecarefullypreparedfoodexpressescareforthemthefoodismadefor"(Holmetal1999,58).Theaboveisconfirmedinthestudythat“DanishDiets”publishedbytheFoodDirectorate.Thisfeatured73%offamilieswithchildrenthattheessentialschoiceofmealswerethatthefamilylikedthefood.Theexamplesshowthatpreviouslyelucidatedthatthefoodfirstandforemostembeddedinculturally‐rootednotionsofwhat“real”foodis.Toservethewrong(butnutritious)rightfood,couldresultintheguiltyconscienceofthemealresponsible(Jensen2003,p.77).
FoodandmealpoliciesFoodandmealpolicies(FMP)isasetofcommongoalsonfoodandmeals.Thepolicycoversbothwhatiseaten,andtheframeworkforthemeal,suchasfurnishings,location,incl.timeadayanditslength.Thepurposeofafoodandmealpolicyistomakedemandsandattitudestowardsfoodandmealsvisible(DVFA2008).Studieshavehighlightedthatfoodandfoodpoliciesareameanstoclarifymutualexpectations,bothinternally(betweenmanager,kitchenstaffandpedagogues)andexternally(betweenparentsandkindergarten)andcanprovideaframeworkforanchoring,continued
28
dialogueandexchangeofexperience(Lissau2006).Intheinterviewsitisthereforeasked,howthepedagoguesexperiencethefoodandmealpolicyinKindergarten.Theseshowedthatpedagoguesagreedthat,thefoodaswellasthemealsisanimportantpartoftheinstitution'slife.Mealsforthekindergarteninwhichtheinterviewstookplaceisrelativelynew,sinceitwasfirstintroducedfor1½yearsago.Thedecisiontointroducecanteeninkindergartenwasbackedupnotonlyofemployees,butalsooftheveryactiveparentscommittee.NoneofthethreepedagoguesthatwereinterviewedhadbeenintroducedtotheMMPandhadnotbeenpartofthedevelopment.TheknowledgeofthecontentsoftheMMPwaslimitedtoecology,variabilityandthatthemenuwasdividedintoweekday.ForthesamereasonallthreepedagoguessaythatthecurrentMMPplaynoroleintheeducationalwork. ManagementhasshownnointerestinfollowinguponpolicyandtwopedagogueshighlightedthattheyfeelalienatedfromtheMMP,becausetheyhavenotbeenpartofthecontext.Throughouttheinterviewsandobservation,itwasclearthatthepedagogueshadverydifferentperceptionsoftheirrolesinthemealsituation.Onepedagoguedidnotapproveofrulesandbelievedlunchfirstandforemostshouldbeafunexperience.Anotherpedagoguewasverycarefultoteachthechildrensocialskills,suchastablemanners.Athirdpedagoguedidnotwanttointerfereandbelievedthatthelunch‐brakeneededtobeanactivitywherethechildrenhad“timeof”fromrules,duetothefactthatthereweresomanyotherstructuredactivitiesthoughtouttheday.Allthreepedagoguesagreedontheneedofguidelinestoestablishaframeworkaroundthemealsituationandthatthiswouldprovidefocusandaframeworkfordailyimplementation.
Thepedagoguesseemeddedicated,butlackedvisionandconcreteactionexperienceonwhatwouldstrengthenthechildren’sfoodandeatingknowledgeandhabits.Itisthereforeconsideredtorequireanefforttostrengthenpedagogues’competencetoact,ifmealpedagogyistohaveasolidfoundationongoodfoodmannersandculture,asaprimetarget.
LearningplanCurriculainkindergartensThelearningplanisapedagogictoolthateverykindergartenhavetowritedownasguidelineforthetopicsthekindergartenhaschosentoworkwithanditmustincludesixcompulsorysubjects,butcaninaddition,addothertopics‐dependingonwhatisdesirableandappropriateineachkindergarten.Resultsfromthetasteworkshopandtherole‐modelsobservationshavebeenincludedinthelearningplanbelow:
29
ImplementationofSaperetaste‐workshopinthelearningplan
1. Personaldevelopment.Childrenmustbeableto:•Takepartinimportantsocialandculturalexperiences•Unfoldasstrongandversatileindividuals•ExperiencethemselvesasvaluableparticipantsinasocialandculturalcommunityThroughplay,childrencanlearntheculturalcommunitywhichsurroundscookingandeatingfoodtogether.Inadditiontheymaybemoreversatileintheirfoodlanguage‐andpreferences,andfeelpridewhentheyhavetastedsomethingtheymaynothavedaredbefore.
2. SocialskillsChildrenmust:•Berecognizesandrespects•Experiencethecomfortandconfidenceintheirrelationtobothchildrenandadults•BeinvolvedandencouragedtobecomeactiveparticipantsindemocraticprocessesLearningaboutfoodandhealthyeatinghabitsis,likelearningingeneral,asocialinteraction.Furthermoreitisasocialprocesstoeatwithothers,cooking,etc.
3. Languagedevelopment:Childrenmust:•Beabletodeveloptheirlanguageinalldailyactivities•Bechallengertolinguisticactivity•Havesupporttodeveloptheircuriosityforthecharactersandsymbols•HaveaccesstocommunicationtoolsOneobjectiveofSapereistodevelopchildren'slanguage,sotheyarebetterabletoverbalizetheirexperiencesandfeelingsaboutfood‐andherebydeveloplanguageskillsinotherareasalso
4. BodyandMovement:Childrenmust:•Experiencethejoyoftheirbodiesandbybeinginmotion•Beabletostrengthentheirphysicalhealth•Beabletoactivelyexploreandassimilatetheworldthroughallsenses•Knowthebodyfunctionsanddeveloprespectforselfandothers'physicalityBodyandfoodbelongtogether,andchildrenalsolearnbestwhentheyareinmotion.
5. Natureandnaturalphenomena:Childrenshouldbeallowed:
30
•Toexperiencethejoyofbeinginnatureanddeveloprespectfornatureandenvironment•Tolearnasnaturalspacesforplayandimagination•Togetdifferentexperienceswithnatureandnaturalphenomena,andexperiencenatureasaspaceforexplorationoftheworldFoodcomesfromnature,notfromthesupermarketandtherefrigeratorathome.Givingchildrenfoodexperiencesinthewild:pickingfruitsandberries,bakebreadoverthefire,makeasmallvegetablegardenwheretheycanseethevegetablessproutandgrowandharvestthemthemselves.
6. Culturalexpressionsandvalues:Childrenmust:•Meetadultswhocommunicateculturalandsupportsthemtoexperiencevariousformsofexpression•Haveaccesstomaterials,toolsandmodernmedia•ParticipateinlocalculturaltraditionsandartisticofferFoodiscultureandithasgreatculturaltradition.Childrencanlearnabouttheirown,aswellasotherculturalthroughfood
Inadditiontheabovealldaycarecentersmustofferchildrenahealthylunchmeallastfrom1stofJanuary2010.(Itispossibletogetdispensationtill1stofJanuary2011).MealsmustbehealthyandliveuptotheofficialrecommendationsoftheFoodAgencysets.Lawonthelunchmealinthedaycareispartofthebudgetagreementfor2008.ThisActshallcomeintoforceon1January2011,butmunicipalitiescanalready1Januaryemphasizeparentalpaymentfromthecurrent25%toamaximumof30%ofthebudgetedgrossoperatingexpensesifthemunicipalityoffersalunchmealtoallchildreninmunicipaldaycare.Thebackgroundtothislawincludetheincreaseinoverweightandobesityamongchildrenandadolescents,asitwashighlightedintheintroduction.
Foodtales
Thefoodtalesweregiventheinterventionkindergartensbeforethesummer.Onlytwokindergartenshaverespondedthequestions.Theresultsofbothkindergartenswerethesame.Notofthepedagoguesfeltthatthechildrenwereinterestedinthestories,theycouldnotrelatetothestoryandthecharactersinthestoriesasbeingmorethanjustfiguresinastory.Theysawnoconnectiontothefruitandvegetablethattheycouldeat.Duetothefactthatthispartoftheprojectweredonewithoutobservationfromtheresearches,itisnotpossibletoconcludewhethermoreorlessengagementwouldhavemadeadifferentefficacy.Duetothefactthatonlyhalfthekindergartensrespondedtothequestions,
31
itislikelytobelievethattheengagementandfeasibilityfromthepedagoguesnothavebeenveryconsistently.
PhysicalActivitybookMostofthegamesarenaturallybeingdonealreadyintheDanishkindergartens.DuetothefactthatmostoftheDanishkindergartenchildrenareoutside,beingphysicalactiveplayingbetween2‐5hoursaday,itisouropinionthattheefficacywouldbedifficulttomeasure(whetherornottherewasbeenatimedifferentinthephysicalactivitybeforeorafter).Instead,duetotheresultsfromtheobservationandfocusgroup,wehavechosentofocusonthegirls,sincetheyneededmoreencouragementfromthepedagoguestoplayphysicallyinsteadofstandingorsittingdownplaying.Thefeasibilityhasnotbeenoptimal.Accordinglytothepedagoguesthegirlsdidnotfindthegamesinterestingenough.Theyratherwantedtoplaythegamestheyalreadyplayedorusetheplayfacilitiesinthekindergarten.Likethefoodtales,thispartoftheprojectweredonewithoutobservationfromtheresearches,itisnotpossibletoconcludewhethermoreorlessengagementwouldhavemadeadifferentefficacy.Duetothefactthatonlyhalfthekindergartensrespondedtothequestions,itislikelytobelievethattheengagementandfeasibilityfromthepedagoguesnothavebeenveryconsistently.
32
Litterateur•Andersen&Kjærulff,2003:"Whatcanchildrenrespond?‐Onchildrenasrespondentsinthequantitativesurveys.Copenhagen,InstituteofSocialResearch03:07•BUPLcapital:"PedagogicalPerspectivePlan"Source:http://www.bupl‐hovedstaden.dk/FAF/2003/2003.08.11%20p%C3%A6dgogiske%20persp%20ny%20version.pdfLastvisitdate:02/05/2009.•Broström,S.(2004):"Educationcurricula‐toworkwithdidacticsforkids."1.edition,1.oplag.SystimeAcademic.•StatisticsDenmark2006:"Almostall3‐5yearareininstitutes"NewsfromStatisticsSource:http://www.dst.dk/pukora/epub/Nyt/2006/NR005.pdfLastvisitdate:05.052009•Grønfeldt,V.etal(2007)"HowhealthyistheDanishkindergartens?Resultsfromthequestionnairesurveyamongdaycarefor3to6yearolds."1.Issue.FoodInstitute,DTUhttp://www.google.dk/search?hl=da&q=Hvor+sunde+er+de+danske+b%C3%B8rnehaver%3F+Resultater+fra+sp%C3%B8rgeskemaunders%C3%B8gelse+blandt+dagtilbud+til+3+%E2%80%93+6+%C3%A5rige&meta=Lastvisitdate.06.05.2009•Heary&Hennessy,2002:"TheUseofFocusGroupInterviewsinPediatricHealthCareResearch."JournalofPediatricPsychology,Vol.27,No.1,pp47‐57th•Holm,Letal(1999):"Mealsasfamily‐buildingandliberation".Kristensen,S.T.Foodanddrink.JournalAnthropologyNo39Metabolism,Copenhagen•Holm,L.(2003):"Food,peopleandmeals‐socialscienceperspectives."1.edition,2.printing.Munksgaard•Jensen,KO(2003):"Whatis'realfood'?"Holm,L..Food,peopleandmeals‐socialscienceperspectives.1.edition,2.printing.Munksgaard•Leon,F.(2006):"Children,Foodandpleasure".ChildreninEurope,p.18‐19.BUPL.•Lissau,I.etal(2006):"Foodandphysicalactivityinnurseries,schoolsandschool/schoolservices‐Developmentoffoodandmealsinschoolsandschool/schoolclubsfrom1999to2004",NationalInstituteofPublicHealth,Copenhagen•Rønholt,H.etal.2003:"VideoIneducationalresearch‐thebodyandexpressioninmovement."Publishermainland.