School Lunch at APS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The food sounds pretty bad but my son loves it. I just gave birth a few weeks ago and we're still in triage mode, so we've been letting DA buy his lunch every day. One less thing to have to do in the evenings. He loves it, but it's pretty much a rotation of pizza, hot dogs, nuggets and burgers. DS is not a picky eater and I'd love for the cafeteria to serve healthier options. But at least he is happy to eat the cafeteria food every day!

Newsflash: there are already healthier options available on a daily basis.

Yeah, my kids being home lunch but sometimes ask to buy school lunch on pizza day. At our school it's not even served every week. And when I look at the options, I have noticed some fairly healthy options that, to be honest, my kids won't eat (Caesar salad). Granted it's not kale salad with pomegranate dressing, but it's better than the sloppy joes and tator tots that I remember from my childhood. I can't remember seeing nuggets on the menu, but I don't check that frequently. If you want your kid eating quinoa or handmade sushi every day, pack them a lunch.

So anyone asking for better lunch options is asking for quinoa and sushi? How about simple tasty healthy food that kids will like?

Specifics on what they should provide?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pack lunch. This is not hard to figure out.

Why should we have to? Why can’t the cafeteria serve decent food and give them a decent amount of time to eat?

Oh and what about the kids that get a free lunch? Should they be eating crappy food because it’s free?

Why should you "have to"? Because they are your kids and you don't like the options.

I'm thinking if the junky, cheap lunches don't sell things might change. Money talks.

You gave a point though. They should offer healthier food. The thing is, costs will go up. I wonder what effect that would have on the program.

Get parents together and approach administration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pack lunch. This is not hard to figure out.

Why should we have to? Why can’t the cafeteria serve decent food and give them a decent amount of time to eat?

Because they are your damn kids! The schools job is to educate them and your job is to raise them and provide for them! Who made their lunch before they started school? And they get enough time to eat if they bring their lunch. When everyone is getting lunch it cuts into their eating time. Quit being lazy and bitching about a problem that doesn’t need to exist!

The Senators and Representatives who passed the National School Lunch Act, the Children Nutrition Act of 1966 and the Healthy-Hunger Free Kids Act of 2010 all seem to think that it is the school's job to feed students lunch. Read up on the history of school lunch. Yes many politicians have attempted to slash federal school lunch funding (And many were successful) but the principal remains the same: schools are expected to provide their students lunch. It is part of their job. Now some families opt out of school lunch and choose to pack lunch but that doesn't change the fact that the school still needs to provide students with lunch and not just teach.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pack lunch. This is not hard to figure out.

Why should we have to? Why can’t the cafeteria serve decent food and give them a decent amount of time to eat?

Oh and what about the kids that get a free lunch? Should they be eating crappy food because it’s free?

Why should you "have to"? Because they are your kids and you don't like the options.

I'm thinking if the junky, cheap lunches don't sell things might change. Money talks.

You gave a point though. They should offer healthier food. The thing is, costs will go up. I wonder what effect that would have on the program.

Get parents together and approach administration.

Yes it would require a lot of creativity. Otherwise it would be too costly. Other school districts have managed to do it and so can Arlington. Obviously if OP is talking about organic lunches then that wouldn't be practical since organic is more expensive and there are no proven scientific benefits to organic food. However there are proven benefits to eating healthier food so that's where the focus should be. Also healthy food should be tasty. A side of undercooked boiled broccoli sounds disgusting to me and I am Greek - our diet is vegetable and bean heavy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pack lunch. This is not hard to figure out.

Why should we have to? Why can’t the cafeteria serve decent food and give them a decent amount of time to eat?

Because they are your damn kids! The schools job is to educate them and your job is to raise them and provide for them! Who made their lunch before they started school? And they get enough time to eat if they bring their lunch. When everyone is getting lunch it cuts into their eating time. Quit being lazy and bitching about a problem that doesn’t need to exist!

The Senators and Representatives who passed the National School Lunch Act, the Children Nutrition Act of 1966 and the Healthy-Hunger Free Kids Act of 2010 all seem to think that it is the school's job to feed students lunch. Read up on the history of school lunch. Yes many politicians have attempted to slash federal school lunch funding (And many were successful) but the principal remains the same: schools are expected to provide their students lunch. It is part of their job. Now some families opt out of school lunch and choose to pack lunch but that doesn't change the fact that the school still needs to provide students with lunch and not just teach.

The National School Lunch Program was established to ensure that every school child in this country has access to a healthy, nutritious meal each school day. Approximately 70% of children who eat school lunch qualify for free and reduced-price meals; this means that their access to healthy food isn’t guaranteed. At its heart, school lunch is a social justice issue. Not all families have the ability to pack a healthy school lunch every day for their children. One-third of our country’s children are overweight or obese, and another third face food insecurity. To dismiss school lunch as unimportant is to give complicit approval of the epidemic of malnutrition in our country, especially among children in lower socioeconomic groups.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pack lunch. This is not hard to figure out.

Why should we have to? Why can’t the cafeteria serve decent food and give them a decent amount of time to eat?

Because they are your damn kids! The schools job is to educate them and your job is to raise them and provide for them! Who made their lunch before they started school? And they get enough time to eat if they bring their lunch. When everyone is getting lunch it cuts into their eating time. Quit being lazy and bitching about a problem that doesn’t need to exist!

The Senators and Representatives who passed the National School Lunch Act, the Children Nutrition Act of 1966 and the Healthy-Hunger Free Kids Act of 2010 all seem to think that it is the school's job to feed students lunch. Read up on the history of school lunch. Yes many politicians have attempted to slash federal school lunch funding (And many were successful) but the principal remains the same: schools are expected to provide their students lunch. It is part of their job. Now some families opt out of school lunch and choose to pack lunch but that doesn't change the fact that the school still needs to provide students with lunch and not just teach.

The National School Lunch Program was established to ensure that every school child in this country has access to a healthy, nutritious meal each school day. Approximately 70% of children who eat school lunch qualify for free and reduced-price meals; this means that their access to healthy food isn’t guaranteed. At its heart, school lunch is a social justice issue. Not all families have the ability to pack a healthy school lunch every day for their children. One-third of our country’s children are overweight or obese, and another third face food insecurity. To dismiss school lunch as unimportant is to give complicit approval of the epidemic of malnutrition in our country, especially among children in lower socioeconomic groups.

I'm looking at the school lunches for this week on our school's website and I'm just not seeing this vast conspiracy to make poor kids unhealthy. Here's this week's menu:

Macaroni and Cheese with Chicken Drumstick or Chef Salad w/Turkey served with steamed spinach or assorted fresh veggies and fresh fruit
Pizza served with garden salad or sliced red peppers and fresh fruit (alt. choice is chicken salad)
Terriyaki chicken w/ brown rice or chicken salad served w/steamed edamame or baby carrots and fresh fruit
Hamburger or Chef Salad served with corn and fresh fruit
Baked Chicken nuggets w/mini waffles or popcorn chicken salad served with sweet potato fries or broccoli and fresh fruit

Other than the mini waffles, I have no objection. Even the mini waffles are not so terrible, but these seem to be very popular w/the kids. Is this the best menu ever? No, but it's also so much better than it could be. Remember, ketchup was classified as a vegetable once upon a time for school lunch purposes. They can't force kids who won't eat vegetables to do so. They can only serve them.

[Anonymous]

How about we first focus on the dismal amount of time students get for lunch?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How about we first focus on the dismal amount of time students get for lunch?

THIS! No lunch is healthy if you have to rush through it and have no time to relax. They offer plenty of healthy options (if kids choose to buy them) but a salad takes more time to eat than cramming down a few chicken nuggets and mini-waffles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pack lunch. This is not hard to figure out.

Why should we have to? Why can’t the cafeteria serve decent food and give them a decent amount of time to eat?

Because they are your damn kids! The schools job is to educate them and your job is to raise them and provide for them! Who made their lunch before they started school? And they get enough time to eat if they bring their lunch. When everyone is getting lunch it cuts into their eating time. Quit being lazy and bitching about a problem that doesn’t need to exist!

APS believes that educating the “whole child” is part of its job so even they don’t agree with your reasoning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pack lunch. This is not hard to figure out.

Why should we have to? Why can’t the cafeteria serve decent food and give them a decent amount of time to eat?

Because they are your damn kids! The schools job is to educate them and your job is to raise them and provide for them! Who made their lunch before they started school? And they get enough time to eat if they bring their lunch. When everyone is getting lunch it cuts into their eating time. Quit being lazy and bitching about a problem that doesn’t need to exist!

The Senators and Representatives who passed the National School Lunch Act, the Children Nutrition Act of 1966 and the Healthy-Hunger Free Kids Act of 2010 all seem to think that it is the school's job to feed students lunch. Read up on the history of school lunch. Yes many politicians have attempted to slash federal school lunch funding (And many were successful) but the principal remains the same: schools are expected to provide their students lunch. It is part of their job. Now some families opt out of school lunch and choose to pack lunch but that doesn't change the fact that the school still needs to provide students with lunch and not just teach.

Have you ever tasted the food or are you just looking at the menu for a random week? Food needs to taste good and be freshly made.

The National School Lunch Program was established to ensure that every school child in this country has access to a healthy, nutritious meal each school day. Approximately 70% of children who eat school lunch qualify for free and reduced-price meals; this means that their access to healthy food isn’t guaranteed. At its heart, school lunch is a social justice issue. Not all families have the ability to pack a healthy school lunch every day for their children. One-third of our country’s children are overweight or obese, and another third face food insecurity. To dismiss school lunch as unimportant is to give complicit approval of the epidemic of malnutrition in our country, especially among children in lower socioeconomic groups.

I'm looking at the school lunches for this week on our school's website and I'm just not seeing this vast conspiracy to make poor kids unhealthy. Here's this week's menu:

Macaroni and Cheese with Chicken Drumstick or Chef Salad w/Turkey served with steamed spinach or assorted fresh veggies and fresh fruit
Pizza served with garden salad or sliced red peppers and fresh fruit (alt. choice is chicken salad)
Terriyaki chicken w/ brown rice or chicken salad served w/steamed edamame or baby carrots and fresh fruit
Hamburger or Chef Salad served with corn and fresh fruit
Baked Chicken nuggets w/mini waffles or popcorn chicken salad served with sweet potato fries or broccoli and fresh fruit

Other than the mini waffles, I have no objection. Even the mini waffles are not so terrible, but these seem to be very popular w/the kids. Is this the best menu ever? No, but it's also so much better than it could be. Remember, ketchup was classified as a vegetable once upon a time for school lunch purposes. They can't force kids who won't eat vegetables to do so. They can only serve them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How about we first focus on the dismal amount of time students get for lunch?

The amount of time is shortened only if they wait in line for school lunch. Trust me. I know. Let me tell you what happens. When the kids finish eating (and some of them don’t even start eating, but they are already done eating) they misbehave. They get LOUD. It’s not a good situation. What they need is longer recess. Because lunch turns into recess for too many of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about we first focus on the dismal amount of time students get for lunch?

The amount of time is shortened only if they wait in line for school lunch. Trust me. I know. Let me tell you what happens. When the kids finish eating (and some of them don’t even start eating, but they are already done eating) they misbehave. They get LOUD. It’s not a good situation. What they need is longer recess. Because lunch turns into recess for too many of them.

So that means that students who don’t pack their lunch get less time to eat it. That’s unfair.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about we first focus on the dismal amount of time students get for lunch?

The amount of time is shortened only if they wait in line for school lunch. Trust me. I know. Let me tell you what happens. When the kids finish eating (and some of them don’t even start eating, but they are already done eating) they misbehave. They get LOUD. It’s not a good situation. What they need is longer recess. Because lunch turns into recess for too many of them.

So that means that students who don’t pack their lunch get less time to eat it. That’s unfair.

You’re being ridiculous. You have a choice to have your kids pack or get lunch at school. If you want your kid to have more time you can send a lunch. That way the kids who supposedly rely on the school for a free meal can get it and have time to eat it.