School Boards And Legislative Bodies

A public school in Washington DC require 1,25 dollar per meal for the student, but the prize would increase significantly if the government would have delivered the food. Even though the buy and deliver thousand of tons of food around the coutriy the meal choices reflect federal nutritional recommendations, regional culinary preferences, and local district economics. What's a "good school lunch" consist of, still remains a hot debate.

This article by Great Schools is addressed to parents considered about the current school lunches provided to the children in their district. Unlike any other source, this one focuses solely on 3 organizations that advocate. The diversity of the listed projects gives an opportunity to expand on different approaches to solve the various problems of the lunch program. However, there is no attempt to address the current issues of our system, requiring a previous understanding of how the school lunch system currently operates.

One of the most controversial issues today is the question of how to address childhood obesity. Because of the large proportion of meals that children, particularly low-income children, consume in schools, cafeteria food has been targeted by dietary reformers as in need of a major overhaul. However, while many different types of new school menus have been proposed, the extent to which healthier foods can be offered remains controversial. Opponents to reform state that children will not eat healthier lunches, and that changing the food that children eat will have minimal impact, since the children will either bring food from home or eat food at home that is more 'kid friendly.'

Nationwide students waist over 70% of fruits and vegetables,while others are sitting around without food at all in other places(Public brief). Some students only get the 2 meals they are provided with at school ,but they often are not provided with enough to eat. Its import for low income and less fortunate families to be provided enough time to eat to make sure they are receiving there energy and daily nutrients(Godoy& Allison). Increasing the school lunch time will also save the schools a great amount of money(Public brief). School lunch food wasted to cost $1.2 billion dollars each year,which is enough for a person to buy a new car everyday of there life(Public brief). A simple increase in time could save schools a bunch of money needed to improve the school building and faculty. Many cafeteria staff and teachers have reported complaints about how students aren't eating all their food and they have to throw it away(EHHI). Most of the time in high schools foods are sold à la carte instead of a full meal to avoid having to throw away or make more food(EHHI). As a result of the food waste cafeterias started using foods with more fats and less nutritious items to get students to eat( EHHI). Cafeteria are selling french fries and not the healthy food to make there money because students aren't eating enough of the

School lunch rooms have been evolving over the last decade. Healthier food choices and better-quality food are just two of many improvements happening inside school cafeterias. Although school lunch rooms are making various positive changes, there are still negative consequences for some students. Most students can go through the lunch line and not have to worry about the cost of the meal and whether they have enough money to buy a hot lunch. On the other hand, some students are constantly worrying about not being able to eat lunch due to the price. According to a CNN article titled “School Lunch Shaming” by Heather Long, “…an alarming number of American youngsters still can’t afford a $2.35 lunch, despite the dramatic expansion of free and reduced lunch programs” (paragraph 1), which demonstrates the struggles that these low-income families face when it comes to buying their student school lunches. Staff working in cafeterias have started to “shame” those students by taking away the student’s food and giving them a bag containing a cheese sandwich and milk to those students who are unable to afford their lunch. States such as New Mexico are taking a stand against school lunch shaming and have banned lunch shaming completely. Long also explained that, “The USDA is urging districts to stop “embarrassing” and “singling out” students who don’t have enough money for lunch” (paragraph 9), which further demonstrates the lengths people are going to solve the lunch shaming issues.

One of the articles students would read is “No Lunch Left Behind” by Waters and Heron. The article talks about cheap foods, school cafeterias and food that is thrown away. Public safety’s has been redesigned in every school to help kids eat healthier. “Launched in 1946 as a public safety, it has turned out to be a poor investment. It should be redesigned to make our children look healthier” (Waters and Heron). As what the article says many school cafeterias aren’t really “cafeterias”. They usually heat up frozen foods or left overs. I thought our school cafeteria was like that too but, after the field trip to the cafeteria, I saw that the food they make is freshly made, and the pizza is hand made, not frozen and just heated up. This was a good experience; I now eat food from the cafeteria! Thanks to Susan Stewart. The article “No Lunch Left Behind” is very interesting article to read, like the facts of food being thrown

The author’s intention is to inform the reader that the healthy lunch programs are failing. The author provides plentiful information and research on the failing school lunch programs in the U.S. “In the war to get America’s children to eat healthier, things are not going well.” Kids are not eating their vegetables. This has become a big problem in America and steps need to be taken to stop unhealthy eating. Like The Agriculture Department mandating that students in the federal lunch program choose a fruit or vegetable with their meals. This solution didn’t work and actually worsened the problem. “Their consumption of fruits and vegetables actually went down 13 percent after the mandate took effect.”

Ring. Ring. Ring. The twelve o’clock bell sounds for lunch. Hundreds of thousands of students around the United States of America rush from their classes to the school cafeteria. Children and teenagers ranging from grades K-12 grab a lunch tray and jump in line. The food that these students get to choose from has changed over the past years because of the new National School Lunch Program regulations, which limit the different foods that can be offered in schools. The passing of the National School Lunch Program has led to the implementation of new nutritional standards when deciding what foods can be served, changed the type of foods that are required to be served, established new rules on how the regulations are monitored, and

Is school lunch actually feeding America’s children? (1. Rhetorical Question) Today, many students are reporting that they are unsatisfied with their school’s lunch. Strict guidelines set for America’s schools control what exactly is going through cafeterias in order to maintain healthy and happy students. However, students are disappointed in these guidelines and disagree that they are of any benefit. School lunches still lack nutrition, limit food choices and proportions, and neglect appeal. (2. Parallelism)

Obesity is crucial in this country, in order for there to be a change we need to start serving healthy foods at schools. The First Lady Michelle Obama brought this healthy lunch concern to the educational system. California’s Department of Education Nutrition Services provides fresh fruit and vegetables to students as a supplement throughout the day. California’s schools have moved ahead to support Hunger-Free Kids policy. The local government regulates school districts including Los Angeles Unified School District to serve whole grains, fruits and vegetables versus foods high in calories. The Hunger-Free Kids policy allowed public schools to serve healthy lunches preventing obesity.

Nationally, about 17% of people under the age of 20, about 12.5 million are considered obese. School districts that serve students food that are high in calories and fat are to blame for the growing numbers of obese children. Although school lunches provide students food at minimal costs, the poor quality of food served delivers inadequate nutrition and is responsible for the rising numbers of obese minors in the United States. In order to combat this growing problem, school districts must limit student choices in the lunchroom and provide healthier food nationally. Although some school districts may argue this, it is necessary to do so as school districts in Pennsylvania and Mississippi and university studies support this claim.

Schools in high-poverty areas with most children in need of free or reduced lunch, tend to do well with these new regulations. However, schools will less kids eligible for free or reduced lunch do not do so well, and a lot of districts in this category have dropped the program. Theory is that schools with more children than not eligible for free or reduced lunch, are more likely to eat what is served to them. “Some of our students show up for breakfast and haven’t had anything to eat since lunch the day before” (Hill). The Executive Director of Nutritional services points out a harsh fact, and the good these lunch programs bring to table.

Federally-funded school meal programs, including the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) and the School Breakfast Program (SBP), serve an average of 31.3 million lunches and 11.1 million breakfasts per day at a cost to the country of $11.1 billion in 2011 (Food & Nutrition Services, 2012). These federally-funded meals are an excellent opportunity for regulation of nutrition as well as education regarding healthy choices. Obesity is clearly a great threat to the health of our nation, and the federal government must step in to defend its citizens against this growing threat. Children are at the mercy of their families, their social conditions, and their schools, predisposing them to obesity through poor nutritional options and a lack of education; the federal government must intervene through regulation of school meals and snacks to protect children from the abundance of unhealthy options while also educating them and reducing childhood obesity.

Encouraging better nutrition in school is important because fewer kids would go hungry. In Michigan a child went to pay for his meal and his balance was unpaid so he was denied a lunch. The minute the principal found out he decided to do a school meal program that had students pay later or have lunch for free (Student Denied Meal Because of Negative Balance) This child out of many could not afford a meal and the school did something about it by getting a school meal program so no child will go without food again. The (USDA) U.S. Department of Agriculture is an act that gives money to pay for low-income students’ lunch. Studies show forty present of families are considered low income in the districts (Bass and Free Lunch Programs). This meaning forty percent of families cannot afford a meal for their children and a school meal program will give food to those children who need a lunch. Studies show in Kentucky, which was the first state to enroll in the school lunch program. Low income families are saving around $500 a year (Free Lunch Programs). When these families are saving $500 a year the

a) What action, if any, should have been taken by the school administration when the local teachers’ association publicly criticized the administration and the school board?