e barmann paper final copy - northwest missouri state ... · 61-683 research paper fall 2013...
TRANSCRIPT
Backsnack Participant1
COMPARTIVE STUDY OF BACKSNACK PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS
AND THE
EFFECTS ON STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT
By
ELIZABETH BARMANN
Submitted to
Educational Leadership Faculty
Northwest Missouri State University Missouri
Department of Educational Leadership
College of Education and Human Services
Maryville, MO 64468
Submitted in Fulfillment for the Requirements for
61-683 Research Paper
Fall 2013
December 12, 2014
Backsnack Participant2
ABSTRACT
This study was conducted to find out if there is a difference in student achievement within
student populations who qualify for the Federal Free and Reduced Lunch Program. Two study
groups were determined: Students who attend schools where the FRLP percentage is above 55%
and do not participate in a weekend backpack program supplying supplemental food; and
Students who attend schools where the FRLP percentage is above 55% and do participate in a
weekend backpack program supplying supplemental food. Two school districts in the State of
Missouri were selected to be a part of the study based upon this criteria. Data from the MAP, the
State of Missouri test given to all students in public schools to measure adequate yearly progress
of student achievement reflecting the norms provided by the federal No Child Left Behind
measures was used. Specific raw data scores from the Communication Arts test at the 3rd grade
level were utilized. Students from each respective school district were divided into two groups:
1) Students who qualified for FRLP and did not receive a weekend backpack; and 2) Students
qualifying for FRLP and receiving a weekend backpack. A comparison study using a t-test was
conducted between the two study groups. This t-test repeated for each of the identified school
districts. While this study is very limited in its scope, the outcome of the study reflects that
there is no significant difference in the two study groups.
Information from Harvesters and the No Kid Hungry program as well as various articles
on hunger in the U.S. public school systems provide other insight into this study. These
organizations have studied the social, emotional and physical effects of students in the classroom
and the improvement shown when qualifying students participate in breakfast, lunch, weekend
backpack and summer food programs. Given the limitations of this study, further research on the
Backsnack Participant3
effects of a weekend supplemental food backpack program is recommended to better assess
student achievement.
Backsnack Participant4
Introduction Background, Issues and Concerns
Student achievement is greater when basic human needs are met. Many students come to
school on Monday morning very hungry. They have not had enough food to meet their basic
needs over the weekend while they are away from school. While schools provide breakfast and
lunch for qualifying students, these same students often go hungry over the weekend or holidays
when school is not in session. In order for students to achieve in school, they must have their
basic needs met. Many school districts, led by caring staff, administrators and teachers, are
trying to meet these basic needs through many different venues. Many news articles in today’s
media cite teachers and administrators who are going the extra mile, providing from their own
pockets, to be sure that their students who come to school hungry are getting something to eat.
Many teachers have been known to send home “extra” food, or to be sure a student has a chance
to eat as soon as he/she gets to school. Students in need often come early to school or stay after,
especially if they feel safe and cared for in the school environment. From these many examples
of childhood hunger present in our American public schools at this time, an awareness from
community organizations is arising and a response is being formed to meet this very real need.
One such example is based upon research conducted by Harvesters, a non-profit organization
that serves as part of a large food bank network in the northern part of the State of Missouri.
Harvesters, working along other community organizations, such as churches, service groups,
etc., are implementing a weekend backpack program to help provide additional supplemental
food to meet the hunger issues that students face when not in school. Even though the research
has been conducted and reflects many positive student behaviors are effected when additional
Backsnack Participant5
food resources are supplied to students, more research is needed to identify the effects on student
academic achievement.
Practice under Investigation
The practice under investigation concerns the availability and distribution of backpacks
filled with food which are sent home with students for consumption over the weekend. The
study assesses two public elementary schools within two different school districts within the
State of Missouri. One of the schools is a rural Northwest Missouri school district which has
more than 55% of their student population qualifying for the federal program of free and reduced
lunch. The second school is within a large suburban school district where over 50% of the
student population meets the criteria for participation in the free and reduced lunch program.
Harvesters, a not-for-profit organization partners with schools and organizations to provide these
backpacks to eligible students.
School Policy to be Informed by Study
Do all students who qualify for the free and reduced lunch programs also qualify for the
Backsnack program? If not, what are the reasons that all students receiving assistance during the
school day with food needs do not receive the weekend backpack? Would providing more
backpacks increase student achievement by meeting basic needs while these students are not in
school?
Conceptual Underpinning
Student achievement is less likely when students don’t have their basic human needs met.
One of these needs that is being addressed is that of hunger and proper nutrition. The federal
government has for years operated a program that allows for students who qualify to receive
breakfast and lunch service at no cost or a nominal cost. Students cannot learn if they are
Backsnack Participant6
hungry, thus the free or reduced lunch program helps assure that students are able to get this
basic need met, at least during the days they are in attendance of school. The federal program
also offers some assistance during the summer months when schools are not in session.
However, many students struggle with getting enough to eat once they leave school for the
weekend or over holiday times. The not-for-profit organization, Harvesters, as well as other
service programs, have developed a plan to help better meet the needs of these students. The
Backsnack program instituted in 2004 by Harvesters, is one such answer to helping meet the
hunger needs of students. In theory students who receive the backpacks have higher student
achievement than those who do not participate in the backpack program.
Statement of the Problem
The problem addressed in this study is the question as to how to respond to hunger issues
among students in order to improve student achievement.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this research study is to compare the MAP test scores at the 3th grade
level in Communication Arts at schools in two different school districts whose students are at a
school where the eligibility to participate in the free and reduced lunch program provided by
federal funding is at 50% or above, with schools within the district whose students are at a school
where the eligibility to participate in the free and reduced lunch program provided by federal
funding is at 50% or above, but additionally offer the Harvesters “Backsnack” program.
Research Question
Is there a significant difference in MAP test scores at the 3rd grade level in
Communication Arts in schools where students who participate in the free and reduced lunch
program also participate in the Harvesters “Backsnack” program distributed through the school?
Backsnack Participant7
Null Hypothesis(es)
There is no significant difference between MAP test scores at the 3rd grade level in
Communication Arts in schools where students participate in the free and reduced lunch program
additionally participate in the Harvesters “Backsnack” program.
Anticipated Benefits of the Study
The anticipated benefits of this study would provide a justification for increased
provision and possibly funding by outside entities to increase the number of schools participating
in the Harvesters “Backsnack” program within schools in the district. If there is a significant
increase in MAP test scores at the 3rd grade level in Communication Arts within schools where
the “Backsnack” program is offered, this would suggest that students who do not have to be
concerned with nutritional needs over the weekend are able to achieve at a higher level than their
peers who do not have their nutritional needs met outside the school.
Definition of Terms
Backsnack program: A backpack supplied with food that is sent home on the weekend with
students who qualify for participation in the Free and Reduced Lunch Program. The program
was founded by Harvesters in 2004.
DESE. Missouri Department of Elementary and Education.
Secondary Feed to Achieve: Funded through Senate Bill 633, West Virginia law that law seeks
to ensure that every student in the State is afforded the opportunity to receive a minimum of two
nutritious meals per day.
Free and Reduced Lunch Program: Founded by Harry Truman in 1946 the National School
Lunch Program. The program has expanded to provide for breakfast, lunch and summer food
assistance to students who qualify based upon household income.
Backsnack Participant8
Harvesters: A regional food bank serving a 26-county area of northwestern Missouri and
northeastern Kansas. Harvesters provides food and related household products to more than 620
not-for-profit agencies including emergency food pantries, community kitchens, homeless
shelters, children’s homes and others. They also offer education programs to increase community
awareness of hunger and teach about good nutrition. The main facility is located in Kansas City,
Missouri.
Kids Café Program: Provides free meals and snacks to low-income children through a variety of
community locations where children gather during the afterschool hours—such as Boys and
Girls Clubs, YMCAs, churches or public schools. In addition to providing meals to kids, Kids
Cafes offer a safe place where children can participate in educational, recreational and social
activities under the supervision of trustworthy staff. Kids Cafe programs also offer nutrition
education throughout the school year. Sponsored through No Kids Hungry Campaign.
MAP testing: Missouri Assessment Program. The Missouri statewide test that measures Annual
Yearly Progress in accord with No Child Left Behind.
No Kid Hungry Campaign: A movement to connect kids in need with nutritious food and
teaches their families how to cook healthy, affordable meals. The campaign also engages the
public to make ending child hunger a national priority. Sponsored by Share Our Strengths.
Share Our Strengths: Grassroots movement founded in 1984 on Capital Hill. It has grown into a
nationally recognized movement that is working to rid the United States of childhood hunger.
The not-for-profit organization has been a leader in research and creative solutions to meet the
needs of today’s hungry children.
SNAP. Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program. SNAP offers nutrition assistance to
millions of eligible, low-income individuals and families and provides economic benefits to
Backsnack Participant9
communities. SNAP is the largest program in the domestic hunger safety net. The Food and
Nutrition Service works with State agencies, nutrition educators, and neighborhood and faith-
based organizations to ensure that those eligible for nutrition assistance can make informed
decisions about applying for the program and can access benefits. FNS also works with State
partners and the retail community to improve program administration and ensure program
integrity. (USDA, SNAP, 2014)
Summary
In summary, the purpose of the study is to find additional ways to combat hunger that
may contribute to an effect on increased student achievement. The study attempts to address
whether the Harvesters Backsnack program assists in raising the student achievement level of
3rd graders on Communication Arts MAP testing at two school districts within the State of
Missouri.
Backsnack Participant10
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
Many of our students are coming to school hungry; and, the numbers are increasing.
Even though the recent reported economic upswing is underway, the benefits have yet to trickle
down to many of those in lower social economic situations. According to a 2013 survey
conducted by the No Kid Hungry organization, 73% of teachers and 87% of principals responded
that they regularly know there are children in their rooms and buildings who are too hungry to
learn. The participation in the classroom becomes a struggle with the student not having basic
needs met. Those teachers who become aware of this situation are also trying to help a little in
the classroom as it is reported that many spend an average of $40 per month for snacks to ward
off the hunger. (Klein, 2013, para. 2) “One-fifth of U.S. children struggle with hunger. And the
faces of those hungry children are familiar to most of us. They're kids we see living in our
neighborhoods, playing on our Little League teams, and trying to learn in our classrooms.”
(Felling, 2013, para.5). “Today, more than 46 million Americans—15 percent of the
population—live below the poverty line of $23,050 for a family of four. Of those, 20.4 million
live in "deep poverty" (income of less than $11,500 a year for a family of four). Poverty coupled
with financial setbacks like unemployment, medical emergencies, or other crises means that
more than 50 million people in this country struggle to afford enough nutritious food regularly
throughout the year (Coleman-Jensen, Nord, Andrews, & Carlson, 2012; DeNavas-Walt, Proctor,
& Smith, 2012).” (Felling, 2013, para. 56)
Currently, in place to attempt to take care of the perceived need of hunger in our schools,
is the National School Lunch Program, a federally assisted meal program operating in public and
Backsnack Participant11
nonprofit private schools and residential child care institutions. It provides nutritionally
balanced, low-cost or free lunches to qualifying children each school day. The program was
established under the National School Lunch Act, signed by President Harry Truman in 1946.
(USDA, NSLP, 2014) School lunch programs have been around for a long time. The number of
students who qualify for the free and reduced lunch program is continuing to grow across our
nation. According to the most recent research conducted by Share Our Strength, an organization
that grew from a grass roots efforts founded in 1984, and now a well-established not-for-profit
focusing on ending childhood hunger in America, there are over 21 million children participating
in the public school free and reduced lunch program. (Share Our Strengths Teacher Report,
2013) While this program has been effective in students getting a meal during lunch time, what
the current research is showing is that children are coming to school hungry, and therefore, are
often distracted, restless, unfocused, or have actual physical ailments, such as headaches and
stomachaches. Often important instructional time is being lost because teachers have to deal
with the physical or behavioral issues that are stemming from hungry children. (Felling, 2013)
A recent survey, undertaken by the No Kid Hungry Campaign, sponsored by Share Our
Strengths, reflects that teachers are becoming more aware that many of the problems they see
daily in the classroom may be contributed from hunger. “Child hunger is a serious problem that
negatively affected my students’ self-esteem, ability to learn, and behavior,” Princess Moss, an
elementary school teacher from Virginia and National Education Association Executive
Committee member, says. “I would always keep snacks in my class for students that were
hungry and who were having trouble concentrating during instructional time.” (Parker, 2013,
para.2) Many teachers have tried to respond out of their own pocketbooks. “Teachers spend $37
Backsnack Participant12
a month of their own money buying food for hungry students. That’s $300 a school year or
roughly five tanks of gas.” (Parker, 2013, para.1) “One teacher explained her wake-up call: I
often see children in my classroom who seem sleepy and unfocused. I usually asked them, ‘What
time did you go to bed last night?’ One day, I realized many of these kids were hungry, not tired.
Now I ask, ‘What time did you last eat something?’" (Felling, 2013, para.13-14)
“When students are hungry and distracted, they’re not learning,” said U.S. Secretary of
the Department of Education Arne Duncan who joined Share Our Strength at a panel discussion
in Hyattsville, Maryland., to release the survey findings. “To set kids up for academic success,
we must make sure they’re getting the healthy food they need at breakfast and lunch so they can
concentrate in the classroom throughout the day.” (NEA HIN, 2010, para. 5). “Research backs
these observations. Children experiencing hunger are more likely to be hyperactive, absent and
tardy, in addition to having behavioral and attention problems, compared with other
children.[1] They have lower math scores, and are more likely to have to repeat a grade.[2] And
these struggles continue from elementary school into junior high and high school. Teens
experiencing hunger are more likely to be suspended from school and have difficulties working
with other students. [3]” (Keeping You Informed, 2013, para. 9)
The No Kid Hungry Campaign survey that polled nationwide over 1,000 K-8 public
school teachers’ reports that three out of five teachers see children who are coming to school
hungry. “School meals plan an important role in making sure that, even in tough times kids still
get the healthy food they need. Nine out of ten teachers agree that school breakfast is especially
important for academic achievement. Teachers “credit breakfast with increased concentration
(95%), better academic performance (89%) and better behavior in the classroom (73%). Health
Backsnack Participant13
is also a major factor, with four in five saying breakfast prevents head and stomachaches, leading
to healthier students. Teachers also say that students who eat breakfast are less likely to be tardy
or absent (56%).” (NEA, HIN, 2010, para. 15)
In April of 2013, West Virginia lawmakers recently passed the Feed to Achieve Act
(SB633). The goal of this legislation is to provide every school age child with breakfast and
lunch with no cost to families. West Virginia reports a rate of child poverty that is twice as high
as the national average. Student achievement reflects the real problem as 79% of all 8th graders
are below proficient in math, and 73% of 4th graders are not proficient in reading. “I think we’re
the only state that has state law that mandates breakfast, which is one of the best things to get on
a nutrition program in decades,” said Rick Goff, executive director of the Office of Child
Nutrition at the state Department of Education. (Mays, para. 3)
The shortage of breakfast programs is moving in the right direction with more states and
communities investing in participation. There are other challenges though, one of which is
reflected during the times when school is not in session. Where do hungry children eat in the
summertime when school is not in session? And perhaps more importantly, what do they eat?
Are they making healthy choices when the meals aren’t planned and provided for them? What
happens on the weekends when children are home without access to prepared meals?
One response to this challenge is the Harvesters’ BackSnack program. Since its inception
in 2004, Harvesters’ BackSnack program has grown from 30 students to 18,210 students in
2012-2013. For the 2013-2014 school year, Harvesters will provide backpacks filled with
nutritious, child-friendly food to 19,255 children every week. (Harvesters, para 1)
Backsnack Participant14
Harvesters’ BackSnack program provides a weekly backpack filled with nutritious, child-
friendly food for schoolchildren to take home over the weekend. More than 100,000 children in
Harvesters' service area receive free and reduced-price school meals during the week, and many
of those are at risk of hunger on weekends.
BackSnack is a partnership between Harvesters, a participating school and a local
community partner—usually a corporate, civic or religious organization. Harvesters provides the
food and the backpacks. The local community partners help facilitate picking up the BackSnack
food kits from Harvesters and distributing them to the schools. School principals and/or
counselors determine which children receive BackSnacks at each school (para 1 & 2 Harvesters -
https://www.harvesters.org/Learn/Harvesters-Programs/Feeding-Children). A donation of $250
provides a weekly BackSnack for one child for an entire school year. Harvesters feeds 97,150
children a year through our network of pantries, food kitchens and shelters. Besides the
BackSnacks Harvesters’ provides they also have a Kids Cafe program issuing more than 296,000
summer and after-school meals (Harvesters, para. 2).
In order to validate the effectiveness of the BackSnack program, Harvesters hired the
UMKC Midwest Center for Nonprofit Leadership to evaluate the impact of the program. Two
groups of stakeholders – children and school personnel – were surveyed to determine whether
nutritious food impacts program participants in seven key areas: grades, school attendance,
behavior, self-esteem, responsibility, social skills and health. (Harvesters, para. 2) The surveys
were completed by stakeholders in October 2012 and again in April 2013. The initial survey and
post survey asked identical questions, so answers could be easily compared. (Harvesters, para. 3)
The post survey additionally asked children if they share any of the food with other family
Backsnack Participant15
members, if they participate in any other programs offered by Harvesters, and the post survey
offered space for children to write or draw about their experience with the BackSnack program.
(Harvesters, para. 4)
Results from this evaluation and three previous ones consistently show Harvesters’
BackSnack program is achieving its intended objectives, and has a significant positive impact on
children who participate. (Harvesters, para. 5)
Data from the studies show the following:
• Grades improved in all four subject areas studied—math, science, social studies
and English. Increase in student achievement ranged from 12 percent in science to
22 percent in English.
• Children reported it was easier to work without help, to understand their
teachers and to understand their homework after participating in BackSnack.
Test results from schools confirm this data. (p. 2 - Harvesters’ BackSnack
Program Weekend meals for hungry children)
While much progress has been made on the federal, state and local levels to provide for
the needs of hungry children in our schools, there is still a significant gap. In order to meet the
basic need of hunger that exists within the United States there is more work that needs to be
done. Many children who do qualify for the free and reduced lunch program do not have the
opportunity to take supplemental food supplies, such as that provided by the Harvesters’
BackSnack program, home for the weekend nor have access to summer programs due to issues
such as transportation and location of food sites. There is also a need for more awareness by
local communities. While much good work has been accomplished, ongoing assessment is
needed to guide teachers, parents, schools and community organizations to analyze the hunger
Backsnack Participant16
situation within the local area and work towards creating partnerships that can make a significant
impact on relieving or even eliminating these real hunger issues. In order to build strong and
sustainable communities for the future, the basic need of hunger must be addressed in our
schools so that the students of today may become the leaders of the future.
Backsnack Participant17
RESEARCH METHODS
Research design.
The research conducted a quantitative study to determine if there was a difference in
student achievement on the Communication Arts portion of the MAP test at the third grade level.
The independent variable being tested is the status of students who qualify for the free and
reduced lunch program divided into two respective groups, students who receive a weekend
BackSnack, and students who do not receive a backpack for the weekend. The dependent
variable tested was the Communication arts scores from the MAP of these third grade students.
If there is a significant difference found in scores based on those students receiving a
weekend BackSnack, school administrators should be informed and consider the additional
provision of weekend food supply through programs such as BackSnack for more students who
are eligible for the free and reduced lunch program.
Study group description.
The study group consists of two accredited school districts in the State of Missouri. The
first school district lies in the Northwestern part of the state and is very rural in nature. The
district population as of the DESE report card of 2014 is 442. The ethnicity of the 442 students
is quite homogenous with 95.5% of the population reporting as White; <1% Black; and <1%
Hispanic. Of the total number of enrolled students 60.6% qualify for the Free and Reduced
Lunch Program and 24.7% of households within the district receive Food Stamps. The average
family income is $27, 823 as of 2014. Twenty-two percent of the population under the age of 18
live in a single family home. The adult unemployment rate is at 7.1% and 11% of under 18 year
of age population live in poverty. (DESE, 2014)
Backsnack Participant18
The second school district in the study group is within the greater Kansas City area and is
comprised of both urban and suburban areas. The district population as of the DESE report card
of 2014 is 19,199. The ethnicity of these students is varied with less than 1% of students
reporting to be of Asian descent; 12.2% Black; 12.7% Hispanic; <1 Indian; and 63.6% of the
population reporting as White. Of the total number of enrolled students 49.6% qualify for the
Free and Reduced Lunch Program and 24.9% of households within the district receive Food
Stamps. The average family income is $43,622 as of 2014. Nearly thirty percent of the
population under the age of 18 live in a single family home. The adult unemployment rate is at
8.8% and 11.1% of under 18 year of age population live in poverty.
Third grade students from these two selected school districts who have reported a free
and reduced lunch level of above forty-nine percent from the 2013 school year were selected as
the group to be evaluated.
Data collection and instrumentation.
Data from teachers and administrators from these two selected Missouri school districts
was collected to identify raw scores of third grade students on the Communication Arts MAP test
from the 2013 school year as well as the numbers from the DESE website.
Statistical analysis methods.
A t-test was conducted to find if there is a significant difference in Communication Arts
MAP test scores based on participation in the BackSnack program. The source was broken into
two categories: students who qualify for free and reduced lunch program and students who
qualify for participation in the BackSnack program. The mean, mean D, t-test, df, and p-value
were concluded from this test. The Alpha level was set at 0.25 to test the null hypothesis: There
is no difference in test scores of third grade students who participate in the BackSnack program
Backsnack Participant19
and third grade students who qualify for the free and reduced lunch program but do not receive a
BackSnack on the Communication Arts Missouri Assessment Program exam.
Backsnack Participant20
FINDINGS
A t-test was conducted to discover whether there was a difference in performance on the
2013 Communication Arts MAP test based on students participation in the BackSnack program.
The following tables, graphs, and charts will show the results based on the statistical raw data
collected from the two selected Missouri school districts.
Figure 1
District FRLP % Food Stamps
Average Yearly Family Salary
Children in single parent home
Adult Unemployment rate
% Children living in poverty <18
#1 60.6 24.7 $27,823 22.6 7.1 11
#2 49.6 24.9 43,662 25.9 8.8 11.1
State MO 50 37.4 $41,040 32.6 9.6 20.2
Figure 1 shows a table that defines shared characteristics which reflect variables that
directly affect student qualification for the Free and Reduced Lunch Program. The first column
identifies the two school districts that were evaluated in the study as well as the comparable
analysis for the State of Missouri as a whole. The second column identifies the percentage of the
number of the student population participating in the FRLP. The third column shows the
percentage of the household populations within the district who also participate in the USDA
Food Stamp program. Column four provides information on the annual yearly household salary
of the identified groups. The fifth column shows the percentage of children under 18 years of
age who are living within a single family home. The final two columns indicate the percentage
of the adult population over 18 who are unemployed; and the percentage of children under the
age of 18 who are living in poverty.
Backsnack Participant21
Chart 1
Chart 1 reflects raw data from school district #1. The x-axis shows the range of scores of third
grade students Communication Arts MAP scores. The y-axis defines the student group with #1
being students who qualify for participation in the FRLP and #2 identifying those students who
qualify for the NSLP but also receive a weekend backpack with food supplies. The raw data was
collected from administration sources at the first selected school district. The scores from all
students who qualify for the FRLP ranged from 609 to 700, with the mean score being 651.13
The range of scores for students who participated in the BackSnack program was 635 to 672 with
the mean score being 651 thus creating a Mean Difference of .13. The standard deviation is
20.77.
600
620
640
660
680
700
720
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Communication Arts Scores
#1 = Non‐BackSnack Participants #2 = BackSnack Participants
School District #1
Backsnack Participant22
Table 1
t-Test Analysis Results for School District #1
Source Mean Mean D t-Test df p-value
Non-Backsnack (22) 651.13
BackSnacks (4) 651 0.13 0.01 25 0.99
Note: Significant when p<=0.25
The above table shows the results of the first of the two Missouri school districts chosen
for this study to determine if there is a difference between students who participate in the FRLP
(Non-BackSnack Participants and those qualifying for this program but also receiving additional
food supplements over the weekend through the Harvesters BackSnack program (BackSnack
Participants). The number of Non-Backsnack participants was 22. The number of those
receiving BackSnacks was 4. The MAP Communication Arts test scores were used from the
2013 school year for third grade students at this selected school. The mean score of the Non-
BackSnack students from school district #1 was 651.13 and the mean score of the BackSnack
students was 651. The Mean D, or difference between the two groups, was 0.13. The t-test
result was 0.01 and the df was 25. The null hypothesis states that there is not a significant
difference in MAP scores based on the students’ participation in the BackSnack program. This
null hypothesis was not rejected because the p-value, 0.99, is higher than the alpha level, 0.25.
This small study shows that the student participation in the BackSnack program does not
significantly impact the state standardized test scores in the Communication Arts content area.
Backsnack Participant23
There is not a significant difference between students from school #1 who participate in the
BackSnack program compared to those other Non-BackSnack students at the same grade level.
Chart 2
Chart 2 reveals the raw data from school district #2. The x-axis shows the range of
scores of third grade students Communication Arts MAP scores. The y-axis defines the student
group with #1 being students who qualify for participation in the FRLP but do not receive a
backpack for the weekend (Non-BackSnack participants). The second plot points identify those
students who qualify for the FRLP but also receive a weekend backpack with food supplies
(BackSnack participants). The raw data was collected from administration sources at the second
selected school district. The scores from all students who qualify for the FRLP ranged from 574
to 716, with the mean score being 648.29. The range of scores for students who participated in
the BackSnack program was 582 to 716 with the mean score being 644.53 thus creating a Mean
Difference of 3.76. Another interesting observation from this information reveals that both the
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Communications Arts Scores
#1 = Non‐BackSnack participants #2 = BackSnack participants
School District #2
Backsnack Participant24
top score of 716 and the lowest score of 582 are within the BackSnack participant group. The
standard deviation is 30.07.
Table 2
t-Test Analysis Results for School District #2
Source Mean Mean D t-Test df p-value
Non-BackSnack (50) 648.29
BackSnack (16) 644.53 3.76 0.44 66 0.66
Note: Significant when p<=0.25
Table 2 shows the results of the second Missouri school district represented in this study
to determine if there is a difference between students who participate in the FRLP and those
qualifying for this program but also receive additional food supplements over the weekend
through the Harvesters BackSnack program. The number of Non-BackSnack participants was
50, while 16 students participated in the program. The MAP Communication Arts test scores
were used from the 2013 school year of third grade students at this school. The mean of the
students from school district #2 qualifying for the FRLP was 648.29 and the mean of the students
participating in the BackSnack program was 644.53. The Mean D, or difference between the two
groups, was 3.76. The t-test result was 0.44 and the df was 66. The null hypothesis states that
there is not a significant difference in MAP scores based on the students’ participation in the
BackSnack program. This null hypothesis was not rejected because the p-value, 0.66, is higher
than the alpha level, 0.25. This shows that the student participation in the BackSnack program
Backsnack Participant25
does not significantly impact the state standardized test scores in the Communication Arts
content area. There is not a significant difference between students from the second school in
the study group who participate in the BackSnack program compared to those other students at
the same grade level who also qualify for the Free and Reduced Lunch Program.
Backsnack Participant26
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The outcomes of this study show that there is very little significant difference in third grade
students who qualify for the Federal Free and Reduced Lunch Program and do not receive a
weekend backpack of supplemental food and those who qualify for FRLP but do bring a
backpack of food home for the weekend. The t-test results from this 2013 data reflect a p-value
of 0.99 for the first school district selected and a 0.66 p-value for the second identified district.
These reported findings are both significantly higher than the set p-value of 0.25; therefore, the
null hypothesis is not rejected.
While research provided by organizations such as Harvesters and No Kid Hungry program point
to the significant contribution that the BackSnack program makes to many aspects of student
success in school, this study is not able to quantify the difference in student achievement
between those who qualify for the Federal Free and Reduced Lunch Program and do not receive
a weekend backpack and those who take home a backpack with food supplies for the weekend.
Even though the current research provided by Harvesters and other organizations attempting to
combat childhood hunger shows a strong improvement in student social, emotional, and physical
behaviors in the classroom, further studies are recommended to see if this additional food supply
to students can also impact improvement in student achievement.
Researchers and school personnel may wish to give more attention and analysis to the process by
which students are selected for the Harvesters BackSnack and other weekend backpack
programs. This study shows that the number of weekend backpacks actually available to
students who show a great need for food assistance during the school day is very limited. In the
Backsnack Participant27
first selected school district, in the identified third grade group, only four backpacks are available
while 28 students qualified for the free and reduced lunch program. In the second school district
identified, a mere 17 weekend backpacks with food supplies are accessible while 69 students
qualify for the FRLP. These numbers also indicate a substantial need to expand the number of
backpacks made available for qualifying students. In both identified school district communities
the percentage of children under 18 years of age living in poverty is about 11, with a quarter of
both districts populations relying upon the USDA Food Stamp program (SNAP) to supplement
the family income for food needs. This again reflects the great need for children of school age to
have additional support to meet the basic needs of hunger.
It is recommended that in order to both enable students to function at their best to achieve in a
school setting in all aspects – academically, socially, emotionally and physically - that further
research is conducted. It is also highly recommended that administrators, teachers and other
school personnel who are aware of this very real and essential issue continue to let the public
know of the needs of these students. Perhaps through working together, communities,
philanthropic organizations, YMCA’s, churches, individuals and other entities can together work
towards providing the basic needs of these students.
Backsnack Participant28
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. District Information. November, 2014.
http://mcds.dese.mo.gov/quickfacts/SitePages/DistrictInfo.aspx
Felling, Christy. 2013, May. Vol. 70, No 8, “Hungry Kids: The Solvable Crisis. Educational
Leadership. ASCD. Pp. 56-60.
Harvesters, the Food Community Network. 2013.
http://www.harvesters.org/Learn/Harvesters-Programs/Feeding-Children
Klein, Rebecca. 2013, August 27. The Huffington Post. You’ll be Shocked How
Many Kids are Too Hungry to Learn in Class.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tag/child-hunger-in-america/
Mays, Mackenzie. 2013, August. Feed to Achieve: Students will see change in breakfast as
first phase of new law is implemented. West Virginia Gazette.
http://www.wvgazette.com/News/201308080113
National Education Association Health Information Network. 2010. Educator Resources.
http://www.neahin.org/educator-resources/
Parker, Suzy. 2013, August 27. Half of Teachers Report Hunger Is a Serious Problem in
Their Classrooms.
http://www.takepart.com/article/2013/08/27/child-hunger-school-breakfasts
Share Our Strength Teachers Report. 2013. No Kid Hungry.
http://www.nokidhungry.org/pdfs/NKH_TeachersReport_2013.pdf
Texas Hunger Initiative. 2013. Hunger in the Classroom. Keeping You Informed.
http://texashunger.wordpress.com/2013/10/22/hunger-in-the-classroom
USDA. National School Lunch Program. October, 2014.
http://www.fns.usda.gov/nslp/national-school-lunch-program-nslp
USDA. Supplemental National Assistance Program. 2014.
http://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/supplemental-nutrition-assistance-program-snap