Abstract
"Grab 'n Go" breakfast is an alternative service style that brings food and beverages to the students rather than having students come to the cafeteria. Teachers are prime stakeholders in this type of project. The goal of this study was to determine the opinions of teachers regarding this type of service in a suburban Pennsylvania middle school. Teachers were surveyed 1 month after the service was initiated. The majority of teachers were supportive of the "grab 'n go" service and thought it was worth any additional effort. Approximately one third of the teachers also used the new breakfast service as a springboard to talk to students about the importance of eating breakfast. The findings of this project affirm that teachers should be considered as potential allies in supporting new types of breakfast service that make breakfast consumption easier for students in middle school.
BREAKFAST is the most important meal of the day for schoolchildren, because it provides fuel to nourish bodies and prepare youngsters for learning. The federal government supports the role of breakfast in enhancing the health and education of children by funding the School Breakfast Program (SBP). In 2002, 8 million students ate breakfast at school each day, with 83% of those students receiving free or reduced-price meals. 1 The same year, 28 million students ate lunch each day, with only 58% receiving free or reduced-price meals. 2 Breakfast participation was far less than lunch participation, and more economically disadvantaged children ate breakfast. The relative differences between breakfast and lunch participation in school meals programs in 2002 are similar when compared to other years.
Clearly, there is an opportunity to increase participation in the SBP. Many education, school nutrition, and community health professionals are working toward this end because of the role school breakfast plays in improving the daily nutrient intakes of children. Researchers have determined that students who consume food and beverages in the morning, regardless of setting, have a significantly better overall diet. 3-5 Nicklas and colleagues found that breakfast consumption by 15-year-old students made an important nutritional contribution to total daily intake, and breakfast skipping may not be compensated for at other meals. 6
The SBP is designed to provide food items with whole grains, fruit, and milk, and limit items with high concentrations of fat and refined sugars. Accordingly, researchers have found that consumption of a school breakfast may, in fact, enhance a child's profile of daily nutrients over what is consumed elsewhere. 7 Researchers in one study found that very young children (preschoolers) who participated in the SBP consumed less refined sugars and more complex carbohydrates than when they ate at home. 8 Even somewhat older students (ages 6-18 years) who participated in the SBP had a better diet, according to USDA's Healthy Eating Index, than those consuming a morning meal at home or in a commercial foodservice facility. 3
A recent study using nationally representative data found that approximately 17% of adults skipped breakfast, 9 and children's habits seem reflective of this trend. Nicklas and colleagues found that 19% of 15-year old students skipped breakfast, 6 which is a slightly greater figure than the 12% found in an earlier study. 10 Recent research in the state of Pennsylvania showed that 21% of schoolchildren did not take any food or beverage in the morning. 11 Simply instituting a breakfast program at school may not solve the breakfast consumption problem as demonstrated by the 2002 statistics. As children grow older, for example, participation in the breakfast program tends to decline. 7
There are many reasons why children do not eat breakfast, many of which have more to do with time than food availability or parental neglect. Children may want to stay in bed until the last minute, and even when there is time for breakfast, children may not be physically capable of eating when they first wake up. In addition, early morning school bus schedules, parents' long commutes to work, and nontraditional work hours all affect the family's ability to serve an early morning meal to children. Research conducted by the Food and Research Action Center (FRAC) found that state child nutrition program officials rated the top 3 reasons for lack of SBP participation as "buses arrive too late for children to eat breakfast at school" (74%), "students unable or unwilling to arrive at school early to eat breakfast" (53%), and "teachers and administrators opposed to classroom breakfast" (49%). 12 Data also show that perceived welfare stigma may affect students' willingness to take advantage of the SBP. 7,12
School foodservice personnel have developed several strategies to increase breakfast participation by making access easier. One strategy suggested by the American School Foodservice Association is an alternative to the traditional cafeteria line called "grab 'n go." This service attracts students to temperature-controlled carts located in main traffic areas remote from the cafeteria. School foodservice employees offer breakfast food, milk, and juice before and occasionally between morning classes. Once the food items are obtained, students consume them on their way to class or eat their meal during the first class period. 13
Alternative breakfast service that permits students to consume food outside the school cafeteria affects a wide range of school personnel, most specifically the classroom teachers. In FRAC's study, reluctance of classroom teachers to support breakfast eating in the classroom was the third most frequently cited reason for low breakfast participation. 12
Other research, however, indicates that teachers were generally supportive of school breakfast programs regardless of the service location because they observed the effects of eating breakfast on students' performance in the classroom. Ragno examined teachers' opinions on the impact of school breakfast served in and out of the cafeteria on lower elementary students' success in Connecticut classrooms. She found that teachers thought the SBP had a significant influence on students' positive behaviors in the classroom and chances for learning. 14 In the Minnesota universal breakfast pilot study, teachers expressed favorable opinions regarding the effect the breakfast program had on elementary students' behavior and school performance. Teachers believed the breakfast program had the greatest impact on learning readiness and physical effects. An overwhelming majority of respondents (96%) indicated that the program should be continued. 15
Interim results of the national school breakfast pilot program in 6 districts throughout the United States indicated the program was highly regarded by all stakeholders. Ten of 16 teachers (63%) who taught in elementary classrooms where breakfast was consumed had a positive opinion of the experience; however, only 7 of 38 (18%) teachers who had not taught in classrooms where breakfast was served were supportive of the idea. 16 Teachers' anticipation of problems with SBP alternative service may be greater than what is actually experienced.
The authors found no published studies that reported the opinions of middle school teachers regarding breakfast service in the cafeteria or elsewhere, yet the potential benefits of eating breakfast for preadolescent and adolescent children are just as important as benefits to elementary students. The purpose of this article is to chronicle a project that determined the opinions of middle school teachers about the effects of a "grab 'n go" breakfast service instituted for 1 month toward the end of the 2002 school year.