School Gardens Enhance Academic Performance and Dietary Outcomes in Children

R E S E A R C H A R T I C L E
School Gardens Enhance Academic
Performance and Dietary Outcomes
in Children
C LAIRE K. B EREZOWITZ, EdM a A NDREA B. B ONTRAGER Y ODER, MM, PhDb DALE A. SCHOELLER, PhDc
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Schools face increasing demands to provide education on healthy living and improve core academic
performance. Although these appear to be competing concerns, they may interact beneficially. This article focuses on school
garden programs and their effects on students’ academic and dietary outcomes.
METHODS: Database searches in CABI, Web of Science, Web of Knowledge, PubMed, Education Full Text, Education
Resources Information Center (ERIC), and PsychINFO were conducted through May 2013 for peer-reviewed literature related to
school-day garden interventions with measures of dietary and/or academic outcomes.
RESULTS: Among 12 identified garden studies with dietary measures, all showed increases/improvements in predictors of fruit
and vegetable (FV) consumption. Seven of these also included self-reported FV intake with 5 showing an increase and 2 showing
no change. Four additional interventions that included a garden component measured academic outcomes; of these, 2 showed
improvements in science achievement and 1 measured and showed improvements in math scores.
CONCLUSIONS: This small set of studies offers evidence that garden-based learning does not negatively impact academic
performance or FV consumption and may favorably impact both. Additional studies with more robust experimental designs and
outcome measures are necessary to understand the effects of experiential garden-based learning on children’s academic and
dietary outcomes.
Keywords: nutrition and diet; curriculum; child and adolescent health; school health.
Citation: Berezowitz CK, Bontrager Yoder AB, Schoeller DA. School gardens enhance academic performance and dietary
outcomes in children. J Sch Health. 2015; 85: 508-518.
Received on January 22, 2014
Accepted on January 14, 2015
A mong the issues facing public education are 2
competing trends. First, there is increasing
emphasis in schools and districts across the country
on academic performance as a measure of student
outcomes, largely to align with federal and state
legislation such as No Child Left Behind and Race to
the Top. 1 Second, there is increasing emphasis on
public health interventions in schools to improve
children’s health, including those to combat the
problems of low fitness and excess obesity. Both have
gained momentum, the former as a result of national
a Research Assistant, ([e-mail]), Department of Nutritional Sciences and Department of Educational Psychology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1415 Linden Drive,
Madison, WI 53706.
b Research Assistant, ([e-mail]), Department of Nutritional Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1415 Linden Drive, Madison, WI 53706.
c Professor Emeritus, ([e-mail]), Department of Nutritional Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1415 Linden Drive, Madison, WI 53706.
Address correspondence to: Claire K. Berezowitz, Research Assistant, ([e-mail]), Department of Nutritional Sciences and Department of Educational Psychology,
University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1415 Linden Drive, Madison, WI 53706.
This publication was supported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Community Transformation Grant (CTG) Program, which is made available through the
Prevention and Public Health Fund of the Affordable Care Act (Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System: Grant Number 3597; PI: Sarah Van Orman, MD, MMM). The
findings and conclusions in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, the US Department of Health
and Human Services or the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
performance initiatives and the latter as a result of data
showing a decline in US children’s nutritional status,
with nearly one third now classified as overweight
or obese. 2 Despite possible linkages between obesity
and academic performance, proponents of both often
appear to be in opposition: both compete for limited
time and funding. Thus, this article aims to summarize
existing knowledge of possible synergies between
dietary and academic outcomes resulting from school-
based interventions aimed at improving student
health.
508 • Journal of School Health • August 2015, Vol. 85, No. 8 • © 2015, American School Health Association

Obesity is a public concern because obese children
are more likely to be obese throughout their adult
years, and are more likely than healthy-weight
children to begin experiencing weight-related health
complications at an earlier age. 3 Beyond the health
risks, however, are negative associations of obesity
with academic performance, suggesting that programs
to address obesity may also address some issues related
to academic performance. Cross-sectional data show
that obese children have lower grades and standardized
test scores, as well as more behavioral problems
than their healthy-weight peers.4- 7 In one study,
overweight seventh to ninth graders had a mean GPA
that was 0.2 lower than healthy-body mass index
(BMI) children and were twice as likely to have grades
of less than 2.0 on a 4.0 scale.8 Because obesity is
linked to academic outcomes, it should be important
to balance school-based programs that maximize both
health and academic outcomes.
There is strong rationale for these associations
between health and academic performance. Health
may impact several pro-academic behaviors, such as
school attendance and time spent on homework.9 In
addition, obesity can negatively impact social interac-
tions, and this, in turn, has been associated with lower
academic performance.10 Previous reviews have exam-
ined school-based nutrition interventions, but have
focused on school breakfast, noting mostly positive
effects on outcomes supporting academic success.9,11
Furthermore, reviews demonstrate that school nutri-
tion programs effectively reduce hunger. 12 -14 There-
fore, studies relating to school meal implementation
are not included in this article.
The history of nutrition-related public health pro-
grams in US schools is strongly tied to school meal
programs. An estimated 52 million children aged
5-17 years spend significant time at school.15,16 The
National School Lunch Program (NSLP), first legis-
lated in 1946, aimed to reduce nutritional deficien-
cies and ‘‘to encourage the domestic consumption of
nutrition agricultural commodities and other food.’’ 3
Later, the School Breakfast Program (SBP) was autho-
rized in 1975 with the goal of providing ‘‘adequate
nutrition,’’ targeting those with high risk for a nutri-
tional deficiency, such as children from low-income
families.3,17 Today, an average of 31 million chil-
dren participate in the NSLP and about 10 million
in the SBP each day.3 NSLP participants consume
an average of 35% of their daily energy at school;
children participating in both meal programs may
consume as much as half. 18 More recent school
nutrition efforts include the national farm-to-school
movement to bring more local fruits and vegetables
(FV) into school cafeterias and classrooms. Thus, it
would seem that school nutrition programs have con-
siderable opportunity to positively influence student
health.
In recent years, schools have begun exploring new
opportunities to educate students on healthy dietary
habits in addition to providing school meals. Health
education has been part of school curricula for decades,
and although a set of national standards published by
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
exists, 19 we are not able to locate documentation of
their use in schools. One such educational opportunity
arises from the provision of school gardens, which
has spread across the United States, supported by
nonprofit organizations, grassroots organizing, and
even federal funding.20,21 Gardens have a history
that began decades ago as a means of science
instruction. 21,22 Today, gardens are also promoted as
a means for children to increase exposure to FV, and
thereby improve attitudes and preferences related to
FV consumption. Loosely rooted in social cognitive
theory, the premise is that exposure, attitudes, and
preferences mediate FV consumption; moreover, the
CDC promotes increased FV consumption as a strategy
for reducing obesity prevalence. 23,24
A few reviews published to date have focused on
the unique effects of school-based interventions aimed
at improving diet quality, with or without garden
education, on student academic outcomes. Fewer still
have focused exclusively on longitudinal, school-based
interventions. This is understandable given the signif-
icant burden of time to undertake such interventions
and evaluations. While the long-standing school pro-
grams are based on nutrition principles related to
health, it continues to be challenging for schools to rec-
oncile increasing academic accountability with public
health programming. Concurrent with the increased
emphasis on standardized test performance, programs
involving school meals, nutrition education (NE), and
school gardens have arisen to creatively address health
concerns. If evidence exists that academic performance
can be maintained or improved while implementing
health-focused programs, they can be justified.
This article aims to collate findings with respect
to school garden interventions that include measures
of academic performance and/or FV consumption. To
dissect these issues, this article is organized around 2
guiding questions: (1) Do interventions with school
gardens change dietary outcomes or their predictors?
(2) Do interventions with school gardens impact
academic outcomes?
METHODS
Database searches for peer-reviewed publica-
tions were conducted in CABI, Web of Science,
Web of Knowledge, PubMed, Education Full Text,
ERIC, and PsychINFO as of May 2013. Keywords
included various combinations of schools, academic
performance/achievement, school performance,
standardized test scores, cognitive function, nutrition
Journal of School Health • August 2015, Vol. 85, No. 8 • © 2015, American School Health Association • 509

education/intervention/programs, schools, farm-
to-school, school gardens, and nutrition/dietary
intervention, yielding 3731 records. Titles and
abstracts were scanned for relevance to our stated
aims with 155 identified as potentially relevant.
Finally, studies were assessed for quality and content,
and reference lists were checked for additional sources.
To be included, studies needed to be school garden
interventions conducted during the school day, lasting
at least 1 month, in the K-12 grade range, and
include measures of academic performance and/or
diet. Studies were excluded that were not school-
based, were from non-Western cultures, were shorter
than 1 month, or were not in English. The final set of
papers, totaling 15 individual studies represented by
16 papers, lacked similar designs and measures, and
thus, formal meta-analysis was not feasible.
RESULTS
Twelve studies measuring school gardens’ effects on
predictors of and/or actual FV intake met inclusion
criteria (Table 1). Interventions comprised specifi-
cally designed garden curricula,25,26 comparisons of
NE lessons with and without gardening, or garden-
based learning integrated into regular science classes.
Interventions involved at least 9 lessons, with some
lasting up to 4 months. One intervention compared
outcomes for nongardening students with those in
their first or second year of exposure to the program. 27
Half of the studies included fourth and/or fifth graders;
4 studies focused on younger grades, and 3 included
more advanced grades. Cohort size ranged from 97
to almost 2000 students; most were in the 100-300
range. Cohort ethnicity ratios were included for half
of the studies and varied greatly: 2 were ‘‘predomi-
nantly White,’’ whereas the remaining 4 were 29-93%
non-White, with 84% of 1 study’s participants self-
identifying as Hispanic. No studies specified whether
participating schools were public or private, and only
1 study28 specified whether participants were from
urban or rural settings, although another29 can be eas-
ily identified as urban. Geographic location also varied.
Dietary outcome measures were either predictors of
and/or reported FV intake. Studies assessing predic-
tors of intake included measures of nutrition/dietary
knowledge, 29 -33 willingness to taste FV,28,29,33,34 atti-
tudes toward FV,31,33,35 and preference for or choosing
FV for meals or snacks.27,28,29,31 - 33,36 All indicated
statistically significant improvements in FV intake pre-
dictors. Seven studies measured self-reported FV con-
sumption, but with nuanced interpretation due to the
different tools. FV consumption results were mixed:
2 studies showed no change, 33,35 whereas 3 showed
an increase28,36,37 in FV consumption. The remain-
ing studies focused only on vegetable consumption: 1
showed an increase in vegetable varieties consumed
>1 time per month, 29 and the other showed garden-
ers more likely than nongardeners, including NE-only
students, to choose and consume vegetables in the
school lunchroom. 32
Four studies, described in 5 papers, investigated
academic outcomes in schools with garden-based
interventions (Table 2). Two studies included third to
fifth graders,38,39 2 included first to sixth graders,40,41
and the other included only fifth graders.42 Cohort
sizes were 3769, 1197 (a subset of the larger cohort),
647, 196, and 119 students. Each employed an expe-
riential school gardening curriculum as part of the
intervention, which supplemented traditional class-
room lessons. Intervention durations ranged from
a 14-week gardening curriculum for 2 hours, once
per week, to those implemented across 2 academic
years. Three studies utilized level 1 of the same youth
gardening curriculum developed by the Texas Agri-
cultural Extension Service, designed to educate third
to fifth graders about environmental science, health,
horticulture, and nutrition.43-45 Academic outcomes
were measured by science, math, and in one case
reading achievement test scores. Science achieve-
ment was assessed using a science achievement test
based on the Junior Master Gardener curriculum; 38,42
math achievement was measured using the Texas
statewide standardized test39 or the Florida Compre-
hensive Achievement Test (FCAT).41,46 The FCAT also
assessed reading achievement.41,46 Two studies 38,42
found significantly higher science achievement scores
among gardeners compared with nongardeners, and
the third39 found no difference. When stratified by
grade, fourth-grade gardeners showed increased sci-
ence scores, but fifth-grade nongardeners had higher
science scores, resulting in no overall difference.39 The
fourth study showed significant improvements in math
test scores.47
DISCUSSION
This article is unique in that it examined school-
based garden interventions that have the potential to
influence both academic and health-related student
outcome measures. Sixteen school garden interven-
tion studies measured academic outcomes and/or FV
consumption in children. Results indicated that these
school-based garden interventions improved or main-
tained both FV consumption or mediators thereof and
academic performance. Specifically, garden programs
improved FV intake in 71% of studies measuring that
outcome, and improved or showed no difference in
academic performance in all 5 studies comparing gar-
dening to nongardening students. Moreover, academic
test scores improved or showed no change, regardless
of the academic area assessed. However, this is a small
collection of studies, and as such these findings should
be considered preliminary.
510 • Journal of School Health • August 2015, Vol. 85, No. 8 • © 2015, American School Health Association

Table 1. Interventions Involving School Gardens With Dietary Outcome Measures
Study Participants Design, Intervention
Outcomes: Fruit and
Vegetable Intake
Predictors
Outcomes: Measured
Fruit and Vegetable
Intake
Morris and
Zidenberg-
Cherr30
Sample size: N= 3 schools in 1
district; 3 classrooms per
school; number of students
not reported
Age/grade: fourth grade
Demographics: schools
matched on student
demographic profiles
8.4% African American
3% Asian American
17.2% Hispanic
66.5% White
25% FRPL
Design: quasi-experimental;
nonrandom group assignment
Intervention A: NE+ G; 9 nutrition
lessons, each including gardening
component
Intervention B: NE
Control: no NE or garden
Measures: pre/post nutrition
knowledge questionnaire, vegetable
preference survey
-Nutrition knowledge scores
significantly higher at the
treatment schools than at the
control school
-Results retained at 6-month
follow-up
Not measured
Morris et al34 Sample size: N= 2 schools (1
intervention, 1 control); 3
classrooms per school
Age/grade: first grade
Demographics: schools
matched for ethnicity and
geographic location
ethnicity: not reported
%FRPL: not reported
Design: pilot study to assess feasibility
of garden-based education and
evaluation
Intervention: NE+ G; growing
vegetables outdoors
Control: no garden
Measures: pre/post one-on-one student
interviews to assess knowledge of,
attitudes toward food
-Increased willingness to taste
vegetables grown in the gardens
Not measured
Nolan et al31 Sample size: N= 4 schools; 141
students in 9 classrooms
Age/grade: second to fifth
grades
Demographics:
47% male
84.4% Hispanic
3.5% African American
9.2% White
9.2% Other
%FRPL: not reported
42.4% of
households < poverty line
per US Census Bureau data
Design: quasi-experimental (no
control), to evaluate program impact
of health education through
gardening on children’s knowledge
about nutrition and attitudes toward
fruit and vegetables.
Intervention: Junior Master Gardener
nutrition curriculum+ school
gardens
Measures: pre/post (1) nutrition
knowledge: 13-question multiple
choice questionnaire; (2) preference
for fruits and vegetables: modified FV
preference questionnaire, modified;
fourth, fifth graders; (3) snack choices
-Nutrition knowledge increased,
pre- to post-test; impacted also
by grade
-FV preference increased from pre-
to post-test
-Snack choices improved from
pre- to post-test
Cotunga et al27 Sample size: N= 3 schools in 1
district; 359 students
Age/grade:
-Control: school A, fourth/fifth
grades
-Intervention: school B, fourth
grade; first time in program;
school C, all students, second
time in program
Demographics:
-School A (control): 73% White
-School B: 41% White
-School C: 37% White
∼All schools: 34-38% FRPL
Design: quasi-experimental,
nonrandom group assignment;
cross-sectional, and
longitudinal-by-design: analysis of
new, first, second time exposures to
compare school lunch vegetable
selection with/without gardening
and garden produce
Intervention: garden education:
classroom lessons, school vegetable
garden visits to plant, tend, harvest;
in-garden taste opportunities for
vegetable tended and harvested;
school B: first program exposure,
school C: second program exposure
Control (school A): no garden
Measures: time-of-purchase lunch
observations, 3 separate days: 1day
offered three fourth cup romaine
salad from school garden, 2days
normal-vendor salads; test of
proportions: choosing a salad
-Percent of students choosing a
salad with garden-grown
romaine:
-Control: no change
-School B: 11% increase, day
1 to 3
-School C: 39% increase, day
1 to 3
Not measured
Journal of School Health • August 2015, Vol. 85, No. 8 • © 2015, American School Health Association • 511