As we stood in line, waiting to enter the classroom, my mind was reeling. I kept thinking of words like waste, obesity, complacency, responsibility, etc. How could this essentially ideal food program sort of defeat the educational purpose?
The actual concept of the free breakfast is good, by nature. Our school receives the program based on its population of students from low-income families. It is intended to feed those who might not receive enough nourishment at home. Therefore, it also touches on social justice, in the sense that it “serves” equality by making sure that all students start the day from a similar baseline: full bellies — which increases attention, focus and energy.
That being said, I do believe the intended goal is justifiable. However, do we really want to teach our children to fill up their plates, even if they do not want all of the items? That means that the child will do one of two things: One, potentially throw away three out of four items or, Two, eat some of the items, even if they do not truly need the additional calories.
So, we’re looking at two serious issues: increasing waste and impacting childhood obesity. This type of behavior leads children to irresponsible food choices.
Again, the program is optional. Therefore, one could argue it will not impact each child. However, if you look at learning patterns, environmental impact is regarded as a key factor in one’s education. So, if your child is around other kids who are eating the free food, chances are they might be swayed into “wanting” some for themselves. Not to mention, the free breakfast program takes place in the classroom.
This is another downside to the program. The classroom now becomes the cafeteria, and the teacher is not teaching, but rather making sure the classroom does not become a chaotic mess. This process, especially in the lower grades, could potentially take 30 minutes out of their productive learning time.
As I stated above, I applaud the school district and the state for working at decreasing childhood hunger in California. However, it seems that there are a few kinks in the program. Why not allow families to sign up for the free breakfast, based on their desire or need?
To further increase efficiency, why not have the breakfast program in the cafeteria, before school begins? Even 20 to 30 minutes prior to the first bell could provide enough time for students to eat and then get to class.
Once the program successfully transitioned, the cost savings could potentially pay for additional staff in the cafeteria during free breakfast time. There is most likely red tape, or some kind of subsidy toward the program that does not include staff pay. However, it would behoove the district and state to think about the overall consequences of how this program is currently structured.
From the student, teacher and taxpayer perspective, is this program filling a need, or creating more waste?
• Ffjorren Zolfaghar is the editor and content director for HB Magazine, a freelance writer and a mother of four.
@Tracyguy- I would expect a school to provide school supplies long before "free" food. What you obviously haven't realized is that those already on assistance get paid for breakfast lunch and dinner for their children via food stamps and thus when they get to school and have the "free" breakfast and lunch, they are double dipping. We the tax payers are sick to death of this entitlement crap.
If they can't feed their children, they shouldn't be having them. I realize some have fallen on hard times but when I see someone paying with food stamps walk out to their brand new cadillac escalade it makes me realize how much out of touch and out of line California is with the entitlements. NO ONE entitled to anything in this country but Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness!
What does this program REALLY do? Teaches our children that meals are the responsibilty of the state, not the parent or the family ... removes the responsibility from the "parent" ... promotes lazy attitudes towards BASIC family duties. This takes time from teachers to TEACH! ... what a concept!!!
And we pay for this crap ... unbelievable!!!!
How far off that road of sharing have we gone, when we are not willing to promote the idea of providing food to hungry children? These very sole’ are the future life of America, They are the ones who will directly pay for what they receive today or appropriate what is needed for tomorrows elderly; that means US!
However, entitlements do appear to be out of hand, and the best solution for that is to raise payroll taxes on those of us with incomes in excess of 300k; don’t all you folks get upset with the tax issue now.
Only forty-five percent of Americans pay taxes anyway, and only fifteen percent of Americans fall into the 300k AGI which would have them pay any additional tax.
Had we stayed the course POTUS Clinton left us we would not even being discussing this issue, or have we forgot, when he left office there was a 400 billion surplus. Then we got reduced taxes and war, with deregulated money supply to pay for all of it under POTUS Dubya.
TUSD isnoOt a funding source for parents who woul rather buy their kids 100.00 tennis shoes then school supplies, it is parents who have things backwards. And not all just those who talk about the mixed up priorities of TUSD.
TUSD is doing the best it can in this recession.
I could be wrong (because i dont eat them), but I think Poptarts are just as bad as the chips. Doesn't this sort of food selection help reinforce the bad eating habits that began at home? Are children still impressionable enough to seal their future habits at public schools? How many parents are equipped to help unteach what is learned at school? Most people drop them off, expecting the finest of education. I'm not so sure they're getting what they expect.
What appalls me is the lack of parenting. You are the parent get up early, feed your kids and take them to school, it is your job, it is the least you can do for them.
The schools used to be about education they have now become social service entities.
When do they have time to teach?
Also for the person who said that the the free meals are not for just the poor they're offered to any hungry child? So what? Are you actually stating that if a child's parent makes money then the child should go hungry?
Secondly, poor families are not obese due to free school lunches, a bit of research would have helped the posters from sounding ignorant. Poor people will only buy what is cheapest to cook, and unfortunately is usually carb filled foods that promote obesity. Fruits are vegetables are just too expensive for the poor, why spend $3.00 for a bag of 10 oranges when for 3 dollars you can get a bag of chips, box of cookies and a 2 liter soda? The foods that the poor can purchase within their budgets are what is causing obesity along with inactivity.
Lastly, I agree with whomever said that good eating habits start at home.
Would they go hungry?
Just asking ...
Now before ya go off half cocked let me explain.
Havin participated in some of these "free lunch/free breakfast programs" ANY kid that shows up an asks fer it can get a free meal.
Fer th poor this is great but fer th most of em it's simply a way fer many parents ta reduce thair food bill by havin thair kids "steal" free food thair parents could pay fer.
Come on, these parents can afford thair flat screen TVs, a new car every year, have cell phones fer every member of thair families an can go on vacation every year an they can't feed thair children?
Yes, thair are poor that do need these nutritional services but ALL? Nope, not buyin it but shore are payin fer in in th way of th taxes I an you all pay ta support this.