Your snowflake doesn't need a snack.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My daughter is allowed a morning snack because they have a late lunch time. A note was sent home the first week informing parents they can send a snack. Seems reasonable to me.

Same here.

Most kids bring in a fruit/veggie/pretzels/cheese or some combo therein. Their snack is labeled "snack" so it's not confused with lunch. There's no "mess" as OP envisions and the class is no peanut, not a big deal.

I actually thought snack time was norm in all day school so Larla's mom's complaint doesn't seem that dramatic.

[ThatBetch]

Assume a 4.5 hour gap between the meal and the end of school (it's less, but for argument's sake...).

Let's say the kids are somewhere around 8.

[Anonymous]

My DD is in K and they eat lunch at 10:30am. No snack and dismissal is after 3. She gets home at 3:45 and is extremely crabby and hungry.

I have an EdD and think it's foolishness to expect anyone to learn when they are distractingly hungry. And yes, a 5-year-old who hasn't eaten anything for 4-5 hours is distracted and can't absorb instruction.

Instruction time lost to snacking would be more than made up in quality of instruction time remaining. 1 hour spent attempting to teach hungry 5-year-olds would be better spent divided into snacking and then using the remaining time to teach nourished, comfortable kids.

Anyone pretending this is a "special snowflake" issue doesn't understand the physiological needs that need to be met for school learning to happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see no problem with snacks. I bet the kids would focus better with a snack. The 3 square meals a day rule came from when farmers had giant tables laden with food (read Farmer Boy to get an idea) for each meal. Most cultures have a tea time or afternoon snack. This isn't a bratty American thing. Some kids (and adults!) do better eating smaller meals more frequently. Just because you and your kids don't fit into that mold doesn't mean it's wrong.

Actually it is a bratty American thing to demands snacks constantly. The tea times and afternoon snacks you mention are for special occasions.

One snack is different than "snacking constantly". And many cultures do eat more than 3 meals. My kids eat very healthy, but they wake up early and school starts late. They don't get snack, but my child who had lunch after recess said it was hard to enjoy recess because of hunger.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My DD is in K and they eat lunch at 10:30am. No snack and dismissal is after 3. She gets home at 3:45 and is extremely crabby and hungry.

I have an EdD and think it's foolishness to expect anyone to learn when they are distractingly hungry. And yes, a 5-year-old who hasn't eaten anything for 4-5 hours is distracted and can't absorb instruction.

Instruction time lost to snacking would be more than made up in quality of instruction time remaining. 1 hour spent attempting to teach hungry 5-year-olds would be better spent divided into snacking and then using the remaining time to teach nourished, comfortable kids.

Anyone pretending this is a "special snowflake" issue doesn't understand the physiological needs that need to be met for school learning to happen.

Wow, what school system? That's ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

ThatBetch wrote:Assume a 4.5 hour gap between the meal and the end of school (it's less, but for argument's sake...).

Let's say the kids are somewhere around 8.

Reasonable to expect a snack in that case. Not all kids are even going straight home, some may be going to aftercare and waiting longer to eat.

[Anonymous]

Who cares? If the list serv discussion is not of interest to or annoying to you, stop reading it. Problem solved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DD is in K and they eat lunch at 10:30am. No snack and dismissal is after 3. She gets home at 3:45 and is extremely crabby and hungry.

I have an EdD and think it's foolishness to expect anyone to learn when they are distractingly hungry. And yes, a 5-year-old who hasn't eaten anything for 4-5 hours is distracted and can't absorb instruction.

Instruction time lost to snacking would be more than made up in quality of instruction time remaining. 1 hour spent attempting to teach hungry 5-year-olds would be better spent divided into snacking and then using the remaining time to teach nourished, comfortable kids.

Anyone pretending this is a "special snowflake" issue doesn't understand the physiological needs that need to be met for school learning to happen.

Wow, what school system? That's ridiculous.

I agree that's nuts. I'm a PP with a daily snack. There are (totally reasonable) rules at our school like nothing messy or requiring a utensil. They recommend fruit/veggie, cheese, granola bar, etc. It's quick and NBD.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see no problem with snacks. I bet the kids would focus better with a snack. The 3 square meals a day rule came from when farmers had giant tables laden with food (read Farmer Boy to get an idea) for each meal. Most cultures have a tea time or afternoon snack. This isn't a bratty American thing. Some kids (and adults!) do better eating smaller meals more frequently. Just because you and your kids don't fit into that mold doesn't mean it's wrong.

Actually it is a bratty American thing to demands snacks constantly. The tea times and afternoon snacks you mention are for special occasions.

Yes, afternoon snacks are totally and only an American phenomenon.

How old, OP? My kid's school does snack for kindergarteners, but just for them.

My French teacher, a middle-aged woman from Alsace, used to talk about the snacks they had after school, which include a baguette stuffed with a chocolate bar.

[Anonymous]

Even my 7th grader has been allowed by one teacher to have a snack in class because it's the period before lunch and the teacher found the kids were excessively distracted. It's actually amazing how hungry a 12-year-old boy can get during the day.

[Anonymous]

Give all the kids a bag of peanuts. Survival of the fittest.

[Anonymous]

I am with Larla's mom on this one, OP, and think you are probably a bit of a twat. I mean, look at the use of the word "snowflake" in your subject line. Who talks about children that way?

Are you in North Arlington, by any chance? Sounds like it.

[Anonymous]

I can't believe how viciously anti-snack some of you are. I'd hate to be your kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Give all the kids a bag of peanuts. Survival of the fittest.

LMAO

[ThatBetch]

Anonymous wrote:I am with Larla's mom on this one, OP, and think you are probably a bit of a twat. I mean, look at the use of the word "snowflake" in your subject line. Who talks about children that way?

Are you in North Arlington, by any chance? Sounds like it.

Assume I did that intentionally, with a goal of ruffling feathers. Specifically yours.

And no, I'm not.