6.1 Pupils’ perceptions of the social experience at lunchtime influenced their decisions to choose school meals. Many schools had to accommodate pupils in a variety of settings for lunch. Multi-purpose dining rooms, storage of tables and chairs, and time restrictions had to be taken into account when organising the lunch break. Commitment of senior managers in fostering good relationships and encouraging open communication and respect among pupils and all staff continued to be crucial to a positive social experience.
6.2 In most primary schools inspected, the length of time allocated for lunch was sufficient. Pupils were served and ate their lunch without being rushed, and still had time for outdoor activity before or after eating lunch. The length of the lunch break in secondary schools varied from 40 minutes to one hour and, in the majority of schools, pupils felt they had sufficient time for lunch. A few schools had reduced the length of the lunch break to encourage pupils to take school meals. Almost all primary pupils were not allowed to leave school at lunchtime. In a few secondary schools, pupils in S1 were either not allowed to leave school at lunchtime or were strongly encouraged to stay within the school grounds.
6.3 In most schools, serving and rota systems were effective in reducing time spent queuing and ensured that pupils had equal opportunities to be served. Pupils in secondary schools often commented that they were more likely to use the dining room on days when they were early in the rota and so would be served quickly and have more choice. In almost all primary schools, pupils from P1 to P3 were served lunch first, with pupils at other stages taking turns to be first into the dining room thereafter. In one school, the youngest pupils came for lunch last so that they could eat without the potential anxiety of being rushed by older pupils. Factors such as long queues and perceived unfairness of some rota systems sometimes influenced primary pupils’ decisions on whether or not to take a school lunch. Where pupils had been given a valid explanation of why a certain system had to be used, for example because of lack of space in the dining room, they generally accepted the situation. In the majority of secondary schools, a long queue was a factor which discouraged pupils from using the dining room. LAs were increasingly installing additional service points to minimise the length of time pupils queued for meals.
6.4 In most primary schools inspected, dining room supervision was carried out effectively. It was usually carried out by teaching and support staff, but, occasionally, catering staff had supervisory roles. In a few LAs, specific staff had been employed to supervise and assist pupils in making appropriate choices in the dining room. Younger pupils, in particular, commented on feeling safe and comfortable in primary school dining rooms. In a few schools, the roles of supervisory staff were unclear and resulted in less effective management of the lunchtime process. In a very few cases, over restrictive procedures detracted from the lunchtime experience. In the majority of secondary schools, senior managers supervised the dining room at lunchtime. In some schools, prefects assisted in supervising queues, and other schools deployed additional staff members for lunchtime supervision.
Features of good practice: Support staff employed to promote healthy eating |
One local authority employed Eating for Health Assistants (EFHAs) to help meet the aims of Hungry for Success. The EFHAs had received appropriate training, including training for a food hygiene qualification. In one school, the EFHA had a plan of activities for the year, which was agreed with school staff, and had carried out many successful healthy eating promotions. These health promotion activities included tasting of healthy foods linked to religious festivals and cultural celebrations, smoothie making and exotic fruit tasting as part of class topics, a fish tasting week, an apple promotion, a best diner award to encourage social eating, preparation of pancakes with berries for Shrove Tuesday, and a ‘fit for life’ campaign. The EFHA also encouraged pupils to select and try vegetables and salad items in the dining room at lunchtime. Pupils were very knowledgeable about basic nutrition and healthy eating messages. |
6.5 Less than half of primary schools permitted a completely free choice of seating for all pupils in their dining rooms. Most provided designated areas for pupils eating school meals to ensure that seating was available for pupils choosing hot food. A few schools allocated seating for younger pupils to sit with older buddies who helped them with food and trays. Pupils who brought packed lunches were usually allowed to eat in the dining room alongside pupils having school meals. In some schools which lacked space in the dining room, pupils ate their packed lunches in another area, occasionally without tables or chairs. In many schools, pupils bringing packed lunches were given priority to enter the dining room, while those choosing school meals had to queue. Pupils taking school meals often felt that such arrangements were unfair. In almost all secondary schools, pupils could choose where to sit in the dining room. Where seating was limited, schools often made an additional room available for pupils eating packed lunches. In a few schools which did not allow food to be taken out of the dining room, pupils often felt discouraged from using the school meal provision, particularly if their friends were having a packed lunch and sat elsewhere. Primary and secondary pupils enjoyed having the option of using picnic benches and outdoor seating areas in good weather.
6.6 Pre-ordering systems had been adopted by less than half of all schools inspected. A few secondary schools made them available only to pupils attending lunchtime clubs. Pupils able to pre-order their meals were pleased to know that they would receive their preferred choice. Staff found that queuing time and food waste had been reduced. Many primary schools used coloured bands or tokens which corresponded to particular meal choices. One primary school had introduced the use of electronic white boards in classrooms so that pupils could independently pre-order their meals, with orders going directly to the school kitchen. The system was proving to be very effective. One LA had developed an interactive audio menu board for use in special schools. The menu had pictures of the meals on offer as well as audio descriptions that pupils could hear when they pressed the appropriate buttons. The success of pre-ordering systems in secondary schools varied. They were most effective when the ordering system was accessible and straightforward, and when the service had been well promoted to pupils throughout the school.
6.7 The majority of schools took steps to evaluate their success in implementing the recommendations of Hungry for Success. Approaches to self-evaluation included:
Only a few primary schools and less than half of secondary schools inspected had used How good is our school? Hungry for Success Benchmarks for Self-evaluation3, as part of their self-evaluation process. Many schools were collecting data related to uptake of food. However, they were not always making effective use of this data to measure the effectiveness and success of activities.
6.8 HM Inspectors have monitored progress made by schools whose inspection reports contained main points for action relating to Hungry for Success. In all cases, the schools were found to have made good or very good progress in making improvements.