CHAPTER 4

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION

This chapter comprises the presentation, analysis and interpretation of the data that has

been gathered from the questionnaires distributed to the respondents. The presentation of data is

in tabular form along with the corresponding explanation or interpretation.

AGE

42% 40%

11.33%
1.33% 5.33%

15 BELOW 16 17 18 19 ABOVE

Figure3. Age of Respondents

The graph shows the diverse ages of different respondent in which it ranges from 15

years below up to 19 years above. Most respondents who were chosen during the survey are 16

yrs. old in which it has a frequency of 63 and percentage distribution of 42. The next prevalent

age is 17 years old where it got the second rank with a frequency of 60 and a percentage of 40.

Next are 18 years old where it got a total frequency of 17 and a percentage distribution of 11.33.

It was followed by 19 years old where it amassed a frequency distribution of 11 and a percentage

of 5.33. Moreover, 15 years old got the lowest rate which grosses to a frequency of 2 and a

percentage distribution of 1.33.

 GENDER
male female

41%
59%

Figure4. Gender of the Respondent

The pie graph above illustrates that majority of the respondents are male which got a total

frequency of 88 and a percentage distribution of 59 and females has a frequency of 62 and a

percentage of 41.

The selection of respondents’ gender is not that liable since there is a gender bias existed

because of the unequal gender population (Mutz et.al. 2014; Marsh et.al. 2009).

Annual Family Income

80%
60%
40%
20%
0%

30,000 Below
30,000 -60000
60,000 above
Figure5. Annual Family Income of the Respondents

From the illustration above, the reported annual family income of most respondents is in

the bracket of Php30, 000 below which grosses 66%, it was followed by Php30, 000-60,000 with

a frequency of 35 and a percentage of 23.33%. Lastly, Php60, 000 above got the least frequency

which is 16 and a total percentage of 10.67%

Mean Interpretation

scale Interval Description

5 4.21-5.00 Strongly Agree
4 3.41-4.20 Agree
3 2.61-3.40 Somewhat Agree
2 1.80-2.60 Disagree
1 1.00-1.79 Strongly Disagree

The students’ responses were tallied and analysed using the scheme above to determine the

interpretation according to the five-point Likert scale.

Table1. Questions with Highest Mean (Food Availability)

Items Qualitative Description Mean Quantitative

Description

1 I observe in the SNHS Canteen that there 4.37 Strongly Agree

are available foods rich in carbohydrates
such as biscuits, bread, pancit, rice etc.

6 I observe in the SNHS Canteen that there 4.3 Strongly Agree

are available foods high in sugar such as
candies, gulaman beverages, ice candy,
milk bars etc.

7 I observe in the SNHS Canteen that there 3.79 Agree

are available foods high in sodium such as
 chips, cup noodles and seasoned ramen
mixes, canned foods etc.

9 I observe in the SNHS Canteen that there 3.73 Agree

are available foods rich in vitamin B such
as eggs, dairy products, avocado, citrus
fruits, banana etc.

3 I observe in the SNHS Canteen that there 3.29 Agree

are available foods rich in fiber like
chopsuey, ginisang toge, ginisang mongo;
Fruits such as pineapple, oranges, melon
etc.

From the table above it shows in item 1 with a mean of 4.37 that students perceived and

strongly agreed that SNHS canteen has available foods that are rich in carbohydrate such as

biscuits, bread, pancit etc. However, students observed that the said canteen has available foods

that are high in sugar such as candies, gulaman, beverages etc. where it got the second highest

rank with a mean of 4.3 which classified to “Strongly Agree”. Also, it is followed by foods that

are high in sodium such as chips, cup noodles, seasoned ramen mixes etc. It can be seen in item 7

with a mean 3.79 which categorized as Agree.

According to Herforth and Ahmed they describe food environments or setting (canteen)

as the range of foods which are available, affordable, convenient and desirable to people in a

given context (Herforth and Ahmed, 2015), while Hawkes et al. describe the concept as

comprised of the everyday prompts which nudge consumers’ food choices in particular

directions, and which contribute to dietary habits and preferences that can have long-term

impacts, especially in children (Hawkes et al., 2015).

However, based on the study of Mahreen et.al (2019), while many schools sold healthful

foods and beverages, many also sold items high in fat, sodium, and added sugars. Opportunities

to eat and drink at school should be used to encourage greater daily consumption of fruits,
vegetables, whole grains, and non-fat or low-fat dairy products. Maniquiz as cited by Mahreen

et.al (2010), although canteen sold appropriate amount of foods as per the needs of students,

served was not always fresh, newly cooked or prepared. The food was found to be repetitive and

limited lacking the nutritional value needed by the students.

Table2. Questions with Lowest Mean (Food Availability)

Items Qualitative Description Mean Quantitative

Description

10 I observe in the SNHS canteen that there are 3 Somewhat Agree

available foods rich in vitamin C like apples,
oranges, citrus fruits etc.

4 I observe in the SNHS canteen that there are 3.09 Somewhat Agree
available foods rich in iron such as peanut butter,
beans, tuna, chicken liver, eggs etc.
8 I observe in the SNHS canteen that there are 3.17 Somewhat Agree
available foods rich in vitamin A such as squash,
carrots etc.
5 I observe in the SNHS canteen that there are 3.27 Somewhat Agree
available foods high in potassium such as potatoes,
eggplant, sweet potatoes, cucumbers, bananas,
oranges, tomato juice, etc.
2 I observe in the SNHS canteen that there are 3.28 Somewhat Agree
available foods high in protein such as fried
chicken, scramble eggs, steam hotdogs, bulalo etc.

The table displays that item 10 got the lowest mean of 3 which categorized as ‘Somewhat

Agree’, it means that students observed that canteen does not offer foods rich in Vitamin C

regularly. Likewise, foods rich in iron, Vitamin A, potassium and protein were not frequently

perceived by the chosen respondents.

 School cafeterias offer great potential to improve students’‟ eating behavior. When taken

into consideration that most students tend to engage in impulsive decision making, when it

comes to their food, this implies that environmental cues can also “nudge” them in the direction

of more vigorous choices. Mensink et al. (2012)

Based on the study of Meldroum (2013), nourishing students’ health by providing healthy

canteen food and drinks should be a priority for every school, and schools should not wait for

government regulation before they can act. Canteens can make a real difference to the lives of

kids right now and organics can be part of that difference.

Table3. Questions with Highest Mean (Food Preference)

Items Qualitative Description Mean Quantitative

Description

1 I prefer to eat foods rich in carbohydrates such 4.33 Strongly Agree

as biscuits, bread, pancit, rice etc.
10 I prefer to eat foods rich in vitamin C like 4.05 Agree
apples, oranges, citrus fruits etc.
3 I prefer to eat foods rich in fiber like chopsuey, 4.01 Agree
ginisang toge, ginisang mongo; Fruits such as
pineapple, orange, melon etc.
5 I prefer to eat foods rich in potassium such as 3.93 Agree
potatoes, eggplant, sweet potatoes, cucumbers,
bananas, oranges, tomato juice etc.
9 I prefer to eat foods rich in vitamin B such as 3.92 Agree
eggs, dairy products, avocado, citrus fruits,
bananas, fish etc.

Table 3 demonstrate that students most likely preferred foods that are rich in

carbohydrates as seen in item 1, where it got a mean of 4.33 which categorized as ‘Strongly

Agree’. It is followed by the item 10 that has a mean of 4.05 which means that students preferred
to eat foods rich in Vitamin C. Also, students like to eat foods rich in potassium such as potatoes,

eggplant, sweet potatoes, cucumbers, bananas, etc. and foods rich in Vitamin B such as eggs,

dairy products, avocado etc. It can be seen at items 5 and 9 where it has a mean of 3.93 and 3.92

which classified as ‘Agree’.

Healthy eating means an eating behaviour that allows an individual to prevent any

disease and achieve physical and mental health (Chan et al., 2009). Food items sold in and

around the school during school hours/recess play a special role in school life of a student

because it should provide refreshment and fulfils energy requirements of students. It has an

impact on curricular and co-curricular activities and well-being of students and the school

community (Mahreen et.al, 2010).

Table4. Questions with Lowest Mean (Food Preference)

Items Qualitative Description Mean Quantitative

Description

4. I prefer to eat foods rich in iron such as peanut 3.51 Agree

butter, beans, tuna, chicken liver, eggs etc.
7 I prefer to eat foods high in sodium such as chips, 3.74 Agree
cup noodles and seasoned ramen mixes, canned
foods etc.
8 I prefer to eat foods rich in vitamin A such as 3.74 Agree
squash, carrots etc.
2 I prefer to eat foods high in protein such as fried 3.78 Agree
chicken, scramble eggs, steam hotdogs, bulalo etc.
6 I prefer to eat foods high in sugar such as candies, 3.81 Agree
gulaman beverages, ice candy, milk bars etc.

Table 4 shows the lowest mean in food preference where item 4 got a mean of 3.51 that

pertains to ‘Agree’ which means that students also like to eat foods that are rich in iron. It is
followed by item 8 with a mean of 3.74, which entail that students preferred to eat foods rich in

Vitamin A such as squash, carrots etc. On the other hand, they also like foods that are rich in

sodium such as chips, cup noodles etc. and foods that are high in sugar such as candies etc.

These items can be seen in items 8 and 6 where it got a total average or mean of 3.74 and 3.81

which refers to ‘Agree’.

Beth Fontenot posted in her article; new research from Oregon State University

finds that most freshmen are not even eating one serving of fruits or vegetables per day. Leading

researchers Bell and Swinburn (2014) found that “canteen users consume significantly greater

amounts of foods likely to promote unhealthy weight gain, such as fast foods, confectionery and

packaged snacks. The type of foods and beverages that predominate in school canteens not only

undermine the health and nutrition curriculum, but also create the impression that foods and

drinks that are high in fat, sugar and salt belong on the plate as ‘everyday foods’, rather than on

the side as ‘occasional foods’.

Coding for health

Height Coding Weight Coding BMI Coding

1.40 below 5 30 below 1 Normal 1

1.41-1.50 4 31-40 2 Wasted 2

1.51-1.60 3 41-50 3 Severely Wasted 3

1.61-1.70 2 51-60 4 Overweight 4

1.71 above 1 61-70 5 obese 5

71 above 6

Students’ health were tallied and analysed by the used of the coding system above

Table5. Students’ Health

Health Basis Mean

Height 3.12

Weight 3.5

BMI 1.353333

Based on the table above, it shows the basis of the health of the students that focused on

their height, weight, and Body Mass Index (BMI). The mean of all the students’ height grosses to

3.12 which denotes that majority of the students belong to the bracket of 1. 51 -1.60 meters. Next
is the weight where the total mean it obtained is 3.5 which mean that the respondents were in

between the bracket of 41-50 and 51-60 based on the coding system being employed.

Additionally, their Body Mass Index with a mean of 1.353333 which means that the

dominant category of the students belong to normal. Hence, food availability of the SNHS

canteen does not affect the health of the students based on the result.

However, a research report conducted by Feldmana et al ( 2013), the potential for

Universities and Colleges to be settings that promote health and well-being has become the

subject for debate where the role of foodservice has been acknowledge as influential. Food

systems which do not enable healthy diets are increasingly recognized as an underlying cause of

malnutrition (GLOPAN, 2016). Also, people who suffer from obesity and overweight are

increasing; it brings serious health problems for all the age of genders (Gronhoj et al., 2012).

Overweight people will have the problem of body dissatisfaction and slowly involve in

disordered eating behaviour (Chan et al., 2009).

Pearson Product Moment Correlation

Food Availability and BMI

Descriptive Statistics

Mean Std. N
Deviation
Food 3.4947 .66259 150
Availability
BMI 4.6467 .79543 150

Correlations

Food BMI
Availability

Food Availability Pearson Correlation 1 -.004

Sig. (2-tailed) .965
N 150 150
BMI Pearson Correlation -.004 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .965
N 150 150

There is no significant relationship between Food Availability and BMI of the students at

P-value 0.965 which is higher than 0.05 marginal error. A negative correlation is also evident at -

0.004 R-value.

It did oppose the study of Drummond et al (2010), that the food purchased from the

canteen can provide students with a complete lunch or can supplement food brought from home.

Therefore, the foods sold at the school canteen may have consequences for the health of students.

Research indicates that canteen users consume greater amounts of foods likely to create

unhealthy weight gain, such as confectionery and packaged foods(Bell and Swinburn , 2014). In

his study, food availability in the canteen plays a crucial role towards the health of the students.

Food Preference and BMI

 Descriptive Statistics

Mean Std. N
Deviation
BMI 4.6467 .79543 150
FoodPreference 3.9047 .61941 150

Correlations

BMI Food Preference

BMI Pearson Correlation 1 .005

Sig. (2-tailed) .954
Sum of Squares and 94.273 .347
Cross-products
Covariance .633 .002
N 150 150
Food Preference Pearson Correlation .005 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .954
Sum of Squares and .347 57.167
Cross-products
Covariance .002 .384
N 150 150

There is no significant relationship between Food Preference and BMI of the students

because the P-value is 0.954 which is higher than 0.05 marginal error. However a positive

correlation is evident at 0.005 r-value

It contradicts to the study that canteen use was associated with frequent consumption of

some high-sugar/high-fat foods in a dose response manner, even after controlling for how much

or how little food students brought from home or bought at dairies/takeaway shops. Among

younger students, canteen users were significantly more likely to drink soft drinks (i.e.

carbonated drinks such as cola) 5+ times a week, eat meat pies/ sausage rolls 3+ times a week,

and have chocolate/sweets/lollies (candy) 4+ times a week. Older students using the school

canteen were significantly less likely to eat the recommended 2 servings of fruit and 3 servings
of vegetables daily and more likely to be frequent consumers of pies and sausage rolls and

chocolate/sweets/lollies that more likely high in sugar (2009 National Children's Nutrition

Survey, Utter et al, 2009). This indicates that canteen users consume significantly greater

amounts of foods likely to promote unhealthy weight gain, such as fast foods, confectionery and

packaged snacks (Bell and Swinburn , 2014).

Food Availability and Food Preference

Descriptive Statistics

Mean Std. Deviation N

Food 3.9047 .61941 150
Preference
Food 3.4947 .66259 150
Availability

Correlations

Food Food
Preference Availability
Food Pearson Correlation 1 .527(**)
Preference
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
Sum of Squares and 57.167 32.244
Cross-products
Covariance .384 .216
N 150 150
Food Pearson Correlation .527(**) 1
Availability
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
Sum of Squares and 32.244 65.416
Cross-products
Covariance .216 .439
N 150 150
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

There is a significant relationship between food availability and food preference at 0.000

p value which is lower than 0.01significance level. Also, a positive correlation is also evident at

0.527 r-value
 Drummond et al (2010) says in Australia, school canteens are an integral part of the

school environment and an ideal site to encourage healthy eating. The school setting is a crucial

part of the social environment that shapes eating behaviour, especially given that children’s food

preferences are learned through repeated exposure to foods. According to the study of Hawkes et

al. describe the concept of food environment or setting (canteen) as comprised of the everyday

prompts which nudge consumers’ food choices in particular directions, and which contribute to

eating habits.

Similarly, a study confirms that the school canteen is a means of affecting children's

eating habits. Thus, improvement in the foods sold through schools provides an important

contribution to model supportive environments for healthy food choices (Finch et al 2011).