Cognitive Ability and Breakfast:Collaborating with Parents to Promote Balanced Breakfasts ED Spring 2010 Seminar in Applied Theory and Research II ED Spring 2010 By Tanisha Hanley

Table of Contents Introduction Statement of the Problem Review of Related Literature Statement of the Hypothesis Methods Participants Instruments Experimental Design Procedure Results Discussion Implications

Statement of the Problem The rate of skipping breakfast in children and adolescents is on the rise. Students who do receive breakfast at home may not be receiving a nutritionally balanced breakfast. Many parents are unaware that balanced breakfast consumption may provide benefits toward cognitive function and academic achievement.

Review of Related Literature Pros of Effects on the Brain Breakfast is the most important meal of the day (Matthews & Pollitt, 1998; Anand, 1999). There are two possible biological mechanisms in which breakfast can affect brain function and cognitive test results (Matthews & Pollitt, 1998). Deficiencies of micronutrients have been shown to have an impact on cognitive development (Malone, 2005). Cons of the Effects on Cognition Particular macronutrient compositions of a meal may be more relevant to cognitive function than the meal itself (Matthews & Pollitt, 1998). Timing of the breakfast meal may play an important role (Matthews & Pollitt, 1998). In some studies the effects on cognitive function are limited to “at risk” undernourished children (Bro, McLaughin, Shank & Williams, 1996; Chinen & Cueto, 2008).

Review of Related Literature Pros of Parental Involvement Parental engagement in student’s learning at home makes the greatest difference to achievement (Goodall & Harris, 2008). Children need to know their parents care if they eat breakfast (Cheng, Griffiths, Tse & Yu, 2008). Cons of Parental Collaboration Parents must be nutritionally educated to be able to guide their children to make healthy choices. Parents need to be assessable and support learning in the home (Goodall & Harris, 2008). Many parents regardless of socioeconomic status are unaware of what a balanced breakfast consists of ( Worobey & Worobey, 1999; Bhattacharya, Currie & Haider, 2006).

Theorists Piaget’s Cognitive Adaptation Theory-Children have to construct their own knowledge and eventual understandings (Beichner & Dobey, 2004). Bandura’s Social Learning Theory-Children can learn behaviors rapidly and efficiently by observing other people who model the behaviors (Berndt, 1997). Ex: Children make healthy food choices by watching their parents make them.

Threats External:  Ecological Validity:  Pretest Treatment:  Selection-Treatment Interaction  Multiple Treatment:  Experimenter Effects  Reactive Arrangements/ Participants Effects Internal:  History  Maturation  Testing/ Pretest sensitization  Instrumentation  Mortality

Statement of the Hypothesis HR1: Integrating parental involvement in ensuring balanced breakfast consumption will increase scores on a problem solving math quiz for 16 third-grade students at Private School X over a three week period. HR2: Nutritionally educating both children and parents through a home to school educational partnership will promote better breakfast attitudes for 16 third-grade students at Private School X over a three week period.

Methods Participants The participants for this study were selected from the total population of 24 third-grade students. The students consisted of ten girls and six boys ages eight to nine. The students were from low to middle income working class families in Brooklyn, New York. The participants were 56.5% Hispanic, 25% Asian 12.5% White and 6% Black. Instruments 2 ten question problem solving quizzes (multiplication, division, addition, subtraction)  Parental consent form  Principal consent form  Balanced Breakfast Information Handout for parents  1 Student Pre-survey  1 Student Post-survey  1 Inventory of Parental Influence (Campbell, 1986)

Research Design  Pre-Experimental Design: One-Group Pretest- Posttest Design.  Single Group: Single group is Pretested (O), exposed to a treatment (X), and Posttested (O).  Symbolic Design: OXO

Pretest and Posttest One single group of students were given 2 surveys to access breakfast attitudes before and after a balanced breakfast intervention. Pretest: 1 Pre survey was administered to student group without balanced breakfast intervention (BBI). Postest: 1 Post survey was administered to student group after balanced breakfast intervention has taken place.

Procedure February, 2010 researcher ed the administrator his consent letter. March, 2010 Principal X introduced the researcher to Mrs. X. March, 2010 the researcher distributed parental consent forms. April 13, 2010 the researcher collected signed parental consent forms. April 14, 2010 researcher facilitated the pre survey and quiz one to participating students. April 15, 2010 students received a balanced breakfast in their classroom. Students were then accessed using quiz two (25-30 minutes after consumption). April 16, 2010 the researcher facilitated a nutrition lesson. Researcher sent home the balanced breakfast information handout to parents which included the class average increase. Students were given a post survey in class to access attitudes as a result of the intervention. Students were sent home with the Inventory of Parental Influence (IPI) Survey. April 19-20, 2010 researcher followed up with Mrs. X retrieving all paperwork.

Results Math Quiz Scores Quiz 1Quiz 2 Mean68.75%76.875% Max Min.5060 Range40 On the second quiz nine out of 16 students (56.25%) improved their score after consuming the balanced breakfast provided in class.

Results Math Quiz Scores Continued

Results-Pre Survey Post Survey Question Pre Survey Average Post Survey Average Average The student’s ratings increased in seven out of nine questions or on 77.7% of the questions. This is due to students who in the pre survey answered a question strongly agree (4) and then in the post survey answered agree (3) for the same question.

Correlation Student Post Survey Question 8 Post Survey Question Correlation between parental collaboration and student’s long term nutritional attitude post intervention. Post Survey Question 8: I plan to make smart breakfast choices all of my life. Post Survey Question 9: My parent and I have talked about making smart meal choices. With a correlational coefficient of (rxy) =.60 there seems to be a low fair positive correlation.

Correlation Correlation between the child parent dialogue at home and a parents desire to collaborate with their child’s school in the future. Post Survey Question 8: I plan to make smart breakfast choices all of my life. IPI Question 10: I would like to collaborate more often with my child’s school regarding his/her nutrition. With a correlation coefficient of (rxy) = -.78 there is a low fair negative correlation. Post Survey Question 8 IPI Question A high parental rating usually correlated with a lower student rating. Table 5 indicates that five out of six parents (83.3%) who returned the survey would like to collaborate more often with schools regarding their child’s nutrition.

Analysis of Data Based upon the data there is: a positive effect between a parent’s willingness to collaborate with schools by continuing dialogue at home and the benefits it provides to their child’s nutritional outlook for the future. the bar graphs illustrate that student’s math quiz scores increased after balanced breakfast consumption and student attitudes regarding breakfast improved post intervention. Though few parents answered the IPI their interest in their child’s nutrition education and their role as a collaborator in it proved consistent.

Discussion of Hypotheses Integrating parental involvement in ensuring balanced breakfast consumption did increase math class average scores at Private School X over a three week period. Nutritionally educating both children and parents through a home to school educational partnership did promote better breakfast attitudes for 16 third-grade students at Private School X over a three week period.

Discussion What the results support: Researcher Ronald Kleinman, M.D.’s findings that math grades are positively affected by breakfast consumption (“Breakfast and Learning,” 1999, p. 29). When children do not eat breakfast there is a lack of nutrient availability to the brain and problem solving skills are affected (“Breakfast and Learning,” 1999). Students ages eight to nine are at a pivotal age for making significant mathematical improvements due to breakfast consumption (“Breakfast and Learning,” 1999). There are certain distinct ages where children may be particularly responsive to healthier food selection particularly third and fourth graders. Breakfast timing may impact performance (Matthews & Pollitt, 1998). Children do adopt their habits and attitudes from the adults in their life (Melanson, 2008).

Discussion What the results contradict: the theory that positive short term effects of eating breakfast on students’ school performance are limited to undernourished populations (Taras, 2005; Chinen & Cueto, 2008). Undernourished-individuals whose food intake is chronically insufficient to meet their minimum energy requirements.

Implications Studies should focus on what can be done to include parents within the school setting. The connection between which aspect of the treatment proved most influential to student attitude warrants further investigation. Future research is needed on the impact of breakfast consumption timing on mathematical problem solving performance. Alternative methods of assessing cognitive performance should also be explored. Additional research needs to be done implementing this breakfast intervention to younger and older students to determine the effect on different age groups. Studies need to be conducted in a variety of settings to determine the true value of parental collaborations with respect to nutrition education.

References O’Connor-Petruso, Sharon. A. (2010, February 18). Descriptive & Inferential Stats, Analyses, Threats, & Designs. Presented at an Ed lecture at Brooklyn College.