Teaching and learning cooking skills in Home Economics: What do teachers for students with mild intellectual disabilities consider important to learn?

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to explore which elements of cooking skills Home Economics (HE) teachers in schools for students with mild intellectual disability (ID) consider important for their students to learn.

Design/methodology/approach

In total, 22 qualitative interviews with HE teachers of students with mild ID were conducted. The transcripts were analyzed thematically using the sociocultural approach on learning and knowledge as a theoretical framework.

Findings

The elements of cooking skills that were emphasized included mastering the language of cooking, measuring, following recipes, representing an instrumental and task-centered – knowledge on cooking.

Practical implications

The results of this study provide an insight into cooking lessons in HE in schools, not only regarding the focus that teachers give to cooking skills, but also to how cooking skills can be understood on a theoretical level. This has implications for both regular schools and schools for students with mild IDs since the elements that teachers consider important then guide what the students are given to learn. Teachers should be conscious that the planning of lessons should also be based on the students’ specific circumstances and context.

Originality/value

To the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study that provides knowledge about how HE teachers reason regarding which cooking skills they consider important for students to learn. HE is taught to both children and adolescents, and it is important to investigate teachers’ perceptions about the subject and how the teaching is organized, including cooking skills.

Citation

Granberg, A., Olsson, V. and Mattsson Sydner, Y. (2017), "Teaching and learning cooking skills in Home Economics: What do teachers for students with mild intellectual disabilities consider important to learn?", British Food Journal, Vol. 119 No. 5, pp. 1067-1078. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-09-2016-0435