Food and Culinary Knowledge and Skills: Perceptions of Undergraduate Dietetic Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The objective of the current study was to examine food and culinary skills and knowledge of dietetic students. METHODS: to explore the skills, knowledge, and perceptions of undergraduate dietetic students regarding food and cooking. Chi-square and logistic regression analyses were used to compare skills and knowledge of food and culinary concepts. RESULTS: The final sample included second- (n = 22) and third-year (n = 22) students within the Baccalauréat specialisé en sciences de la nutrition program at the University of Ottawa. There were no significant differences (P > 0.05) on 3 of 4 skills (preparing a cake, whipping egg whites, or baking a yeast bread) or knowledge concepts (fold, baste, braise, grill, and poach) amongst second- and third-year students. Third-year students perceived more skill in preparing a béchamel sauce. There was a trend for third-year students (59%) to have higher food and cooking skills and knowledge compared with second-year students (32%). CONCLUSIONS: Perceived knowledge and confidence was proportional with the academic year, whereas overall knowledge and skills of food and culinary concepts were moderate among both groups of students. This research suggests that more dedicated time may need to be spent on food and cooking competencies in undergraduate dietetic education.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".