Journal of Nutrition and Health

The Korean Nutrition Society (한국영양학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Analytic Hierarchy Process approach to estimate weights of menu management in the school foodservice

계층적 분석과정을 적용한 학교급식 식단 구성의 중요도 분석

  • Hyo Bin Im (Department of Foods and Nutrition, Kookmin University) ;
  • Seo Ha Lee (Department of Foods and Nutrition, Kookmin University) ;
  • Hojin Lee (Major in Food and Nutrition, Korea National University of Transportation) ;
  • Lana Chung (Department of Culinary Art & Food Design, Kyung Hee University) ;
  • Min A Lee (Department of Foods and Nutrition, Kookmin University)
  • 임효빈 (국민대학교 식품영양학과) ;
  • 이서하 (국민대학교 식품영양학과) ;
  • 이호진 (한국교통대학교 식품영양학전공) ;
  • 정라나 (경희대학교 조리&푸드디자인학과) ;
  • 이민아 (국민대학교 식품영양학과)
  • Received : 2024.04.30
  • Accepted : 2024.06.07
  • Published : 2024.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: This study used the Analytic Hierarchy Process to evaluate the relative importance of the factors that school nutrition teachers and dietitians consider during menu planning for school foodservices across various educational levels. Methods: An online survey was conducted from December 2023 to January 2024. The hierarchical structure for school foodservice menu management was developed through content analysis, consisting of five high-level categories and 3-4 low-level factors. Questionnaires were distributed to 395 nutrition teachers and dietitians from kindergarten, elementary, middle, and high schools nationwide. One hundred and sixty-six responses were received, resulting in a 42.0% return rate. These responses were analyzed using Microsoft Excel and SPSS Statistics. Results: The most commonly referenced sources for school foodservice menu planning were 'menus obtained from websites' (19.4%). The most significant challenge encountered was 'incorporating students' preferences' (18.6%). In the hierarchy of categories considered for school foodservice menu management, 'employees and facilities' ranked highest (0.2347), followed by 'preference' (0.2312), 'nutrition balance' (0.2027), 'cooking process' (0.1726), and 'food materials' (0.1588). Within each category, the top-ranked factors were 'employees' cooking skills' (0.3759), 'students' preferences' (0.4310), 'dietary reference intakes' (0.4968), 'foodservice hygiene' (0.4374), and 'food costs' (0.4213). The study also compared the relative importance of factors according to the educational levels, and the top-ranked factors were the same across all educational levels. In particular, 'students' preferences', 'dietary reference intake', and 'food costs' aligned with the top three challenges in school foodservice menu planning. Conclusion: Enhancing working conditions for school foodservice employees and developing menu planning methods that accommodate students' preferences are necessary. These findings will provide foundational data for future school foodservice menu management strategies.

본 연구는 AHP를 적용하여 영양교사 및 영양사의 학교급식 식단 작성 시 고려 요인들의 상대적 중요도를 학교급별로 비교함으로써 효율적인 학교급식 식단 구성 방안에 대한 기초자료를 제공하고자 하였다. 모집단인 전국 유·초·중·고·특수학교 20,548개교를 대상으로 표본을 추출하여 총 395부 중 166부를 회수하였고, SPSS 통계 프로그램을 이용하여 CR이 0.2 이하인 응답에 대해 분석을 진행하였다. AHP를 이용하여 학교급식 식단 구성의 각 분야별 상대적 중요도를 분석한 결과 조리 인력 및 시설, 기호도, 영양의 균형, 조리 과정, 식재료 순으로 높게 나타났으며, 각 분야의 가장 중요한 하위 영역은 조리종사자의 숙련도, 급식대상자의 기호도, 영양소 섭취 기준, 위생, 식품비 예산이었으며, 이는 각 학교급에서 가장 높은 비율을 차지하였다. 더불어 급식 대상자의 기호도, 영양소 섭취 기준, 식품비 예산은 식단 작성 시 어려운 점의 상위 3가지 항목과도 일치해 식단 작성 시 반영이 어려울수록 상대적 중요도가 높게 나타남을 확인할 수 있었다. 본 연구는 향후 학교급식 식단 구성 및 관리 업무 효율 증대에 기여하며 정책 운영 방향 설정을 위한 기초자료로 활용될 수 있을 것으로 판단된다.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by grants from Korea Educational Environment Protection Agency.

References

  1. Choi MK, Kim EM. Importance-Performance Analysis of school foodservice menu management. J Korean Soc Food Sci Nutr 2012; 41(7): 1020-1027. https://doi.org/10.3746/jkfn.2012.41.7.1020
  2. Choi EJ, Choi MK. Eating out status according to skipping and type of breakfast among male high school students in Incheon. Korean J Community Nutr 2020; 25(2): 102-111. https://doi.org/10.5720/kjcn.2020.25.2.102
  3. Ministry of Education (KR). Operation plan of major tasks in the field of student health promotion in 2024 [Internet]. Sejong: Ministry of Education; 2024 [cited 2024 Apr 11]. Available from: https://www.moe.go.kr/boardCnts/viewRenew.do?boardID=316&lev=0&statusYN=W&s=moe&m=0302&opType=N&boardSeq=97790. 
  4. Bianchini VU, Martinelli SS, Soares P, Fabri RK, Cavalli SB. Criteria adopted for school menu planning within the framework of the Brazilian School Feeding Program. Rev Nutr 2020; 33(3): e190197.
  5. Lee Y, Kwon S, Kim M. Importance-performance analysis of sodium reduction practices by school nutrition teachers and dietitians in the Republic of Korea. Nutr Res Pract 2023; 17(4): 812-825. https://doi.org/10.4162/nrp.2023.17.4.812
  6. Jang S, Kim K, Lee YK. Awareness and practice of sugar reduction in school foodservice and the practice of nutrition education in Daegu. Korean J Community Nutr 2021; 26(3): 167-176. https://doi.org/10.5720/kjcn.2021.26.3.167
  7. Choi SH, Jang DH, Moon SH. Analysis of the impact of eco-friendly food ingredients purchase competence and purchasing performance - verification of mediating effect of school nutrition teacher's communication competency -. Korean J Org Agric 2022; 30(2): 171-189. 
  8. Lee H, Park YI, Joo N. The awareness and usage of school meals excluding food hazards by nutrition teachers and dieticians - focusing on the 5 hazard-free meals project of the Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education -. Korean J Food Nutr 2022; 35(1): 51-61. 
  9. Gearan EC, Fox MK. Updated nutrition standards have significantly improved the nutritional quality of school lunches and breakfasts. J Acad Nutr Diet 2020; 120(3): 363-370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jand.2019.10.022
  10. Blanquer-Genovart M, Manera-Bassols M, Salvador-Castell G, Cunillera-Puertolas O, Castell-Abat C, Cabezas-Pena C. School Menu Review Programme (PReME): evaluation of compliance with dietary recommendations during the period 2006-2020 in Catalonia. BMC Public Health 2022; 22(1): 2173.
  11. Ahn YJ, Lee YE. Current and future operation of menu management in the school foodservices of Chungbuk (1) - menu planning -. J Korean Soc Food Sci Nutr 2012; 41(8): 1118-1133. https://doi.org/10.3746/jkfn.2012.41.8.1118
  12. Saaty TL. Fundamentals of Decision Making With the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Pittsburgh (PA): RWS Publications; 2000. 
  13. Jo KT, Jo YG, Kang HS. The Analytic Hierarchy Process. Seoul: Donghyun Press; 2003. 
  14. Salvatore FP, Fanelli S, Lanza G, Milone M. Public food procurement for Italian schools: results from analytical and content analyses. Br Food J 2021; 123(8): 2936-2951. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-09-2020-0807
  15. Lee Y, Kim O, Lee U, Kwon S. Evaluation of educational school meal programs in Gyeonggi province, South Korea. J Nutr Health 2017; 50(1): 111-119. https://doi.org/10.4163/jnh.2017.50.1.111
  16. Lee MA, Yang IS, Yi BS, Kim HA, Park SH. Analytic Hierarchy Process approach to estimate weights of evaluation categories for school food service program in Korea. Korean J Nutr 2006; 39(1): 74-83. 
  17. Park MJ, Kim SW, Lee JS. An analysis on the priority of selection of supplier for school food service materials. Korean J Community Nutr 2008; 13(4): 531-539. 
  18. Ministry of Education (KR), Korean Educational Development Institute. Statistical yearbook of education 2022 [Internet]. Sejong: Ministry of Education; 2022 [cited 2024 May 31]. Available from: https://kess.kedi.re.kr/publ/view?survSeq=2022&menuSeq=3894&publSeq=2&itemCode=02&menuId=0&language=en. 
  19. Lee CH. Multi-Criteria Decision Making. Seoul: Sejong Books; 2000. 
  20. Ministry of Government Legislation (KR). School meals act [Internet]. Sejong: Ministry of Government Legislation; 2021 [cited 2024 Apr 11]. Available from: https://law.go.kr/%EB%B2%95%EB%A0%B9/%ED%95%99%EA%B5%90%EA%B8%89%EC%8B%9D%EB%B2%95. 
  21. Gyeonggido Office of Education (KR). Basic direction of school melas, 2024 [Internet]. Suwon: Gyeonggido Office of Education; 2024 [cited 2024 Apr 13]. Available from: https://www.goe.go.kr/. 
  22. Yim KS, Lee TY, Kim CI, Choi KS, Lee JH, Kweoun SJ, et al. Strategies to improve nutritional management in primary school lunch program. J Korean Diet Assoc 2004; 10(2): 235-245. 
  23. Kim SY, Yang IS, Yi BS, Baek SH, Shin SY, Lee HY, et al. Assessment of the foodservice management practices in child care centers and kindergartens. Korean J Food Nutr 2011; 24(4): 639-648. https://doi.org/10.9799/ksfan.2011.24.4.639
  24. Yang HJ, Rho JO. A study on menu management and cooking equipment utilization at school foodservices in the Chonbuk area of Korea. J East Asian Soc Diet Life 2008; 18(2): 253-263. 
  25. Park EA, Chae IS, Jo MN. Importance-Performance Analysis (IPA) of foodservice operation, dietary life education, and nutrition counseling tasks of nutrition teachers and dietitians in Jeju, Korea. Nutrients 2017; 9(10): 1157.
  26. Ministry of Education (KR). Operation plan of major tasks in the field of student health promotion in 2023 [Internet]. Sejong: Ministry of Education; 2023 [cited 2024 Apr 11]. Available from: https://www.schoolhealth.kr/web/bbs/selectBBSList.do?bbsTyCode=BBST01&bbsId=04&lstnum1=4260&pageIndex=1&pageOrder=0&pageUnit=10. 
  27. Forman EH, Selly MA. Decision by Objectives: How to Convince Others That You Are Right. Hackensack (NJ): World Scientific; 2001. 
  28. 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. 
  29. Lee IO, Ro HK. A study of school meal management satisfaction in middle and high schools in Jeonnam. J Ind Innov 2022; 38(2): 67-76. 
  30. Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency. 19th Youth Health Behavior Survey. Report No. 11-1790387-000797-10. Cheongju: Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency; 2024. 
  31. Lee KE. Adolescents' nutrient intake determined by plate waste at school food services. Korean J Community Nutr 2005; 10(4): 484-492.