어린이의 채소 섭취 증진을 위한 감각을 활용한 요리활동 영양교육프로그램 개발 : 사회인지이론의 적용 :Development of the nutrition education program including sensory and cooking activity to promote vegetable intake among schooled-age children : based on the Social Cognitive Theory

이현호

추천

검색

자료유형: 학위논문

저자정보: 이현호 (경희대학교, 경희대학교 대학원)

지도교수: 오세영

발행연도: 2017

저작권: 경희대학교 논문은 저작권에 의해 보호받습니다.

이용수74

이 논문의 연구 히스토리 (2)

2019

어린이 채소 섭취 증진을 위한 감각 활용 요리활동 중심 영양교육 프로그램 개발과 평가

이현호 , 신문경 , 김현경 외 3명 Korean Journal of Health Promotion 2019.01 학술저널

2017

어린이의 채소 섭취 증진을 위한 감각을 활용한 요리활동 영양교육프로그램 개발 : 사회인지이론의 적용

이현호 식품영양학과 2017.01 학위논문

이 논문의 후속연구가 궁금하신가요?
연관 학술논문 또는 학술발표를 통해 보다 발전된 연구결과를 확인하실 수 있습니다.
이 논문의 연구 히스토리 확인하기

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기

학동기 어린이들은 올바른 성장과 발달을 위해서 균형 잡힌 영양소가 공급되어야 한다. 또한 이 시기는 육체적인 성장뿐만 아니라 인지의 발달과 올바른 성격이 형성되는 때이다. 최근의 많은 아동들은 간편식 섭취의 증가로 비타민과 무기질이 풍부한 채소의 섭취가 줄어들고 있다. 본 연구는 국내·외의 감각교육과 요리활동을 통한 여러 선행논문들을 바탕으로 아동들의 식습관과 그들의 희망하는 영양교육 형태에 대해 조사한 후, 사회인지이론을 통해 아동에게 채소섭취 증진을 위한 다양한 감각활동과 요리활동을 적용한 영양교육 프로그램을 개발하고 프로그램의 타당도를 평가하였다.
이 프로그램의 개발을 위해서 2015년 11월에 서울시 금천구의 K초등학교 1~5학년 9명을 대상으로 총5회의 예비프로그램을 실시한 후, 영양교육 전문가 집단과 협의를 통해서 보정을 한 후 총 5회차의 영양교육 프로그램을 개발하였다. 이 프로그램의 타당도를 검증하기 위해서 서울시 동대문구의 4개의 초등학교 3~6학년 총 20명을 대상으로 2016년 4월 16일 ~ 2016년 5월 14일까지 5주 동안 주 1회 60분씩, 5차시에 걸쳐 진행되었다. 교육 효과를 분석하기 위해 프로그램 실시 전과 실시 후에 연구대상자에게 설문조사를 실시하였다.
개발된 5주차 프로그램은 다양한 채소들을 학생들에게 다양한 방법으로 오감을 느끼게 하며 자연스럽게 노출시킴으로 채소의 특징들을 알아 가도록 하였다. 또한, 각 프로그램은 차시마다 다양한 프로그램을 통해서 결과기대감, 자아효능감, 행동수행력(지식과 기술)등을 높이려 하였다. 1차시에는 채소와 친해지기 위해서 5주 동안 함께 할 채소들에 대해서 소개하고, 특별히 흰색 채소를 통한 장아지를 만들었다. 2차시에는 익숙해진 채소들을 안전칼로 자르거나 채소로 도마에 여러 모형을 만들면서 자유롭게 채소와 친해 지는 시간을 가졌고, 특별히 보라색 채소에 대해서 좀더 알아보았다. 3차시에는 친해진 채소들의 새로운 특징들을 소개했고, 빨,주,노란색 채소에 대해서 좀더 알아보고, 샌드위치를 만들었다. 4차시에는 초록색 채소에 대해서 맛,향,식감에 대해서 알아보았고, 다양한 채소들로 비빔국수를 만들었다. 5차시에는 4주 동안 실습한 요리들을 아이들이 직접 다시 만들어 함께 부모님과 지인들과 같이 식사하는 시간을 가졌다. 총5차시 프로그램은 도입, 전개, 정리의 3단계로 진행되었는데, 도입에는 함께하는 선서를 통해서 자아효능감을 높이고, 안전교육에 대해서 상기시켰고, 학습목표를 이야기하였다. 전개에는 직접 감각을 활용한 활동과 요리활동을 통하여 채소와 더욱 친밀한 시간을 가지게 하였고, 정리를 통해서 그날 배운 내용을 다시 복습하는 시간을 가졌다.
프로그램의 타당도 검증에 대한 내용은 다음과 같다.
본 연구에 참여한 학생들의 평균 연령은 11.5세이었고, 남학생이 25%(5명), 여학생이 75%(15명)이었다. 학년은 3학년 30%(6명), 4학년 40%(8명), 5학년 15%(3명), 6학년 15%(3명)이었다. 소득수준은 100만원~300만원이 80%(16명)이었고, 맞벌이 가정이 80%(16명)로 대부분을 차지하였다.
어린이 식생활 조사에서는 「나는 우리 집의 멋있는 요리사이다」와 「나는 할 수 있는 요리가 있다」두 항목이 유의미한 값(p<0.1)을 가졌다.
새로운 음식 기피증에서는 「나는 새로운 음식을 먹는 것을 경계한다」, 「나는 음식 안에 무엇이 들어가 있는지 모르면, 안 먹는다」, 「나는 다른 나라 음식을 한번쯤은 맛볼 수 있다」의 3개의 항목이 유의미한 값 (p<0.1)을 가졌다.
새로운 채소에 대해서 맛보려는 의도에서는 「해조류의 톳과 세발나물」에서만 유의미한 값(p<0.1)을 가졌다.
친숙한 채소에 대해서 맛보려는 의도에 대해서는 「쑥갓」, 「양파」, 「가지」의 3가지 항목에서 유의미한 값(p<0.1)을 가졌다.
어린이 영양지수에서는 5개의 분류에서 절제에 대한 항목만 유의미한 값(p<0.1)을 가졌고, 총 20개 문항에서 개개의 문항별 평균값의 사전과 사후 점수의 차이는 「식사할 때 채소 반찬(김치제외)은 몇 가지나 먹나요?」, 「김치는 얼마나 자주 먹나요?」,길거리 음식은 얼마나 자주 먹나요?」에서 그 평균값의 차이에 대한 유의미한 값이 (p<0.1) 나왔다.
수업만족도 평가에서는 참여한 학생들이 수업에 대한 흥미, 이해, 실천성에 대해서 긍정적인 평가를 해주었고, 재교육 의사와 교수법에서도 만족하여 다시 프로그램에 참여하고 싶다고 하였다. 영양전문가 평가에서는 교수 및 학습 과정안과 수업실행에 대해서 원활하게 진행되었다고 긍정적으로 평가하였다.
본 영양교육 프로그램은 5주차로 다소 짧아 행동변화에 영향을 미치기에는 한계가 있으나 자아효능감과 요리에 대한 행동 수행력, 비선호 채소에 대한 섭취 의지의 변화가 긍정적으로 나타나 추후 지속적으로 적용될 수 있도록 프로그램을 보완한다면 더욱 효과적으로 어린이 채소 섭취 증진을 유도할 수 있는 것으로 사료된다.

Many children in recent years are getting to consume less vitamin and mineral-rich vegetables, even though children in school age should be provided with balanced nutrients for proper growth and development. Purpose of current study was to develop the several types of nutrition education program utilizing the sensory and culinary activities to promote the vegetable intake based on the observation of eating habits of children and previous reports on nutrition education and social cognitive theory. Based on the social cognitive theory, I developed and evaluated the nutrition education program which includes various sensory and cooking activities to improve the intake of vegetables for the children.
As a first step for developing the nutrition education program, five preliminary sessions were administered to nine students from the 1st to 5th grades of K elementary school in Geumcheon-gu, Seoul, Korea during November 2015. All the sessions were adjusted through consultation with four nutrition education specialists. Manipulated and finalized program were delivered to 20 students from 3rd to 6th grades of four elementary schools in Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul. All 20 children participated in and completed a total of five sessions once a
week from April 16 to May 14, 2016. Pre- and post- surveys using self-answered questionnaires were conducted to analyze the effect of the education program.
The developed five-session encourages students to learn about the characteristics of vegetables by making students feel different senses in a variety of ways and naturally expose them. In addition, each program was designed to enhance expectation, self-efficacy, and behavioral performance (knowledge and skills) through various programs at each session. For the first class, major vegetables were introduced to make participants feel vegetables friendly. Particularly, children learned about white vegetables. As a cooking activity, children cooked pickled radish. In second class, cooking activities including cutting vegetables and expressing various things with vegetables on their cutting boards and learned purple vegetables. Third class mainly included the contents of red, orange, and yellow vegetables. Cooking activity was to make sandwiches using those vegetables. Children learned about the taste, flavor and texture of green vegetables in fourth class and made mixed noodle (Bibimmyeon) using green vegetables. In the fifth class, children served as cooks by making foods which they practices during last four weeks for their parents. Each of the five- session was implemented in three stages: introduction, development, and summary and application. As an introduction, I raised self-efficacy of children through accompanying oath. In addition, safety issue and learning goals were delivered. Through the sensory and cooking activities, children had more intimate time with the vegetables. As a summary participants had time to review what they learned through the session.
The validity of the program is as follows.
Mean age of the participants was 11.5 years old and 25% of them were male. Grade of the participants were third to sixth (6, 8, 3, and 3 for each grade). 80% of their family income ranged from 1 million won to 3 million won. In addition, 80% of their parents were both working.
According to the results of the survey, children showed higher score for two questions after the program: "I am a great chef in my house" and "I can cook" have a meaningful value (p <0.1 for both). In the food neophobia category, participants marked improved score for three questions: "I watch for eating new food", "If I do not know what is in the food, I do not eat" and "I can taste other country food at least once" (p < 0.1 for all).
For the questions about the intention to taste looking-new vegetables, scores only for "Seaweed fusiforme and Seball-namul" were significantly higher (p<0.1 for both). For the question about the intention to taste familiar vegetable, "Crown daisy", "Onion", and "Eggplant" showed significant values (p<0.1 for all).
There is a significant value (p <0.1) for only abstinence in five NQ(Nutrition Quotient) categories. Moreover, the average difference in the average value of "How many do you eat vegetable side dishes when to eat? ", "How often do you eat Kimchi?", and "How often do you eat the street food? were significantly higher(p<0.1 for all).
In the evaluation of the class satisfaction, the participating students satisfied with classes especially for interests, learning activities and practices of the class, retraining intent and teaching method. They were willing to participate in the future program again. The evaluation by nutrition experts and specialist were positive with teaching and learning process and teaching processes.
Even though current nutrition education program was 5-weeks session, visible changes on self-efficacy, behavior performances for cooking, and intention to intake previously non-preferred vegetables. Continuous applying and supplementing this nutrition education program may promote intake of vegetables among children.

#Nutrition education #Cooking activity #Sensory activity #Social cognitive theory #Vegetable intake #Children

I. 서론 ···························································································· 1
가. 연구배경 및 필요성 ·································································· 1
나. 연구목적 ·················································································· 3
다. 용어정의 ················································································· 3
1. 감각교육 ············································································ 3
2. 새로운 음식 기피증 ······························································ 4
3. 새로운 채소를 맛볼 수 있는 의도 ·········································· 4
4. 요리활동 ············································································ 4
5. 포커스그룹인터뷰 ·································································· 4
II. 이론적 배경 ················································································· 5
가. 감각교육 ················································································ 5
1. 감각교육의 개념 ································································· 5
2. 감각교육의 연구현황 ··························································· 7
나. 요리활동 ·············································································· 10
1. 요리활동의 개념과 필요성 ··················································· 10
2. 요리활동의 연구현황 ························································· 11
다. 사회인지이론 ········································································ 16
1. 사회인지이론의 개념 ··························································· 16
2. 사회인지이론의 연구현황 ··················································· 18
라. 포커스그룹인터뷰 ·································································· 19
1. 포커스그룹인터뷰의 개념 ····················································· 19
2. 기존의 영양교육 중 포커스그룹인터뷰의 연구현황 ················· 20
III. 연구 방법 ·················································································· 22
가. 연구 대상 ·············································································· 22
나. 연구 도구 ·············································································· 22
다. 연구 절차 ·············································································· 24
１. 프로그램 목표수립 ····························································· 25
２. 프로그램 개발 및 예비프로그램 실시를 통한 보완 ·················· 25
３. 사전 조사 ········································································· 34
４. 프로그램 실행 ··································································· 34
５. 사후 조사 ········································································· 34
６. 자료 분석 ·········································································· 34
７. 윤리적 고려 ······································································· 35
IV. 연구결과 및 고찰 ········································································ 36
가. 프로그램 개발 ······································································· 36
1. 1차시_채소와 친해지기 ····················································· 38
2. 2차시_채소와 놀기 ····························································· 42
3. 3차시_채소와 오해 풀기 ····················································· 46
4. 4차시_채소의 특징 찾기 ····················································· 50
5. 5차시_채소를 소개하기 ······················································· 54
나. 프로그램 타당도 검증 ···························································· 57
１. 일반사항 ·········································································· 57
２. 어린이 식생활 조사 ···························································· 60
３. 새로운 음식 기피증 ···························································· 62
４. 새로운 채소에 대해서 맛보려는 의도 ···································· 65
５. 친숙한 채소에 대해서 맛보려는 의도 ···································· 68
６. 어린이 영양지수 ································································· 72
７. 수업만족도 평가 ································································· 79
V. 요약 및 결론 ··············································································· 81
참고문헌 ·························································································· 84
Abstract ··························································································· 89
국문초록 ··························································································· 93
부록 ································································································· 96

최근 본 자료

전체보기

구분	그룹	데이터 항목
AI 학습용 데이터	원문	원문 PDF 파일
AI 학습용 데이터	원문 + 메타 (기본/상세)	원문 PDF 파일 및 서지정보 CSV
대량 구매용 데이터	B2B 구독 방식	특정 자료 한정으로 원문 접근 권한 부여
대량 구매용 데이터	URL 전달 방식	바로 PDF 뷰어를 열람할 수 있는 URL 제공

구분	그룹	데이터 항목
AI 학습용 데이터	기본 메타	발행기관명, 간행물명, 권호명, 권(vol), 호(issue), 통권, 발행연도, 발행월, 논문명, 저자명, 시작페이지, 종료페이지, 전체페이지, 상세페이지URL
상세 메타 데이터	발행기관 메타	발행기관 이명, 영문명, 창립연도, 홈페이지URL, 발행기관 소개
	간행물 메타	부제목, 간행물 유형, ISSN, ISBN, 최초발행연도, 폐간연도, 간행빈도, 발행주기, 등재사항, 이용수, 피인용수, 권호수, 논문수, 표지이미지
	논문 메타	작성 언어, 부제목, 대등제목, 목차, 키워드, 초록, 이미지, 참고문헌, 이용수, 피인용수, 논문활용도, DBpia통합주제분류, KDC분류, DDC분류, 한국연구재단분류, UCI, DOI
	저자 메타	소속기관, 소속부서, 직급, 연구분야, 연구키워드, 이용수, 피인용수, 저자 논문활용도

구분	그룹	데이터 항목
※ 결합형/맞춤형 메타 데이터는 신청 내용에 따라 다양하게 제공 가능
이용순위 정보	주제분야별 많이 이용된 논문	“인문학”에서 많이 이용된 논문 TOP100
	이용기관별 많이 이용된 논문	“중고등학교”에서 많이 이용된 논문 TOP100
	세부기관별 많이 이용된 논문	“서울대학교”에서 많이 이용된 논문 TOP100
	키워드별 많이 이용된 논문	“Chat GPT”에서 많이 이용된 논문 TOP100
키워드 정보	많이 이용된 키워드	특정기간/분야/저널 내 많이 이용된 키워드
	많이 발행된 키워드	특정기간/분야/저널 내 많이 발행된 키워드
	많이 검색된 키워드	특정기간/분야/저널 내 많이 검색된 키워드
	연구 트렌드 키워드	특정 키워드 연관 연구동향 분석 데이터 키워드

논문 기본 정보

이 논문의 연구 히스토리 (2)

초록· 키워드

목차

최근 본 자료

댓글(0)