Obviously, there is almost no school that doesn’t feed their children and make sure they do not go through the day on an empty stomach, but that also has it’s negatives since school lunches have some health problems, specifically calorie intake. Some students get school lunches for free, resulting in some shortage in profit. As much as we would like to assume that schools make their students the number one priority, a school cannot run without money, and money lost from lunches equals cheap alternatives. And these alternatives usually aren’t the most healthy. One thing schools can do to help get better school lunches is offer more of a variety.
School lunches are destroying our children 's health. Everyday students make choices on what they plan to eat, but is it a healthy choice? School lunches are changing all the time and kids get hurt by these choices. Even though some people may think school lunches are healthy for our children, they actually aren’t because of the choices they are making, affect how students will focus in class and the school lunches are formed around many different prices. Students choices they make on food can affect how they will focus in class.
Although changing the school lunch to a healthier, better option would be a good idea, you should not change the lunch from what it is now. Even though the kids would be eating healthier, most of the kids that eat lunch now would not buy the new lunch, also kids not buying the new lunch means not as much money comes into the school, and if you want kids to be healthier all you have to do is give them more time to be active. To begin with, if you changed the lunch at school a lot of the kids that eat lunch now would not eat lunch if you changed it. The new lunches would not taste as good as the lunches they serve now. Taking away some of the kids favorite foods is not a good idea.
Instead, there need to be immediate implications or improvements to the food provided by schools. Students depends on their environments nutrients., “We find that in years when a school contracts with a healthy lunch company, students at the school score better on end-of year academic test (Anderson, 3). The school undeniably needs to focus, “School food service directors often must focus on ease of preparation rather than healthy options because they lack both the skilled staff and facilities necessary to do more”. (Grainger, 2) This is important to keep in mind because it
But this act is actually causing more problems than everyone thought. Even if junk food is bad for kids, it should not be taken out of school lunches. Schools would lose money, kids are not wanting to eat the new choices rather than the old selections m it is not up to the government to control how a kid eats, it is the parents responsibility to control what their kids eats everyday in a lunch. Is It would cost a lot
On the other hand some people think the schools need to change up the menus. They think that the current school lunches is why we have so many obese kids right now. This is not the case because the children who are obese is not only because of the food they are eating it's because they do not get enough exercise. Changing the school lunches overall would not be beneficial because the food they are eating is not the biggest part of why they are obese. In conclusion schools should not change the lunches because they don't have the power to tell students can or can't eat, they don't have the time and money, and finally because they are not allowed to put a limit on how much a student can eat due to the “No Kid Hungry
So why can’t the teens go out for lunch too? Well often times teenagers are seen as irresponsible, but this is not always the case. There are tons of responsible teens out there that could handle leaving school for lunch. Sometime the teens don’t even want to go out to eat, sometimes they just need a break to recharge. Off-campus lunch provides money for our community, the students mature and learn to become responsible adults, not to mention they get a nice break from their learning environment.
Just because these families fall outside the income guidelines of the program does not mean they are able to pay for the meals. A lot of families that are over income still struggle to afford the school meals. In spite of taxpayers and Title 1 funding objections, states should elect for universal free meals within our public-schools because of health, esteem, and academic advantages. Advantages Universal
Often times, schools offer foods that are high in sugar, fats and calories, because they are higher in demand and would satisfy the public youth. In addition to that, these junk foods are much more accessible and cheaper than healthier foods. These foods that are high in sugar and fats don’t provide students with the proper nutrients needed for proper brain development and encourages students to eat unhealthy foods, making school a breeding ground for obesity. Children that spend almost half or more of their day at school need to be provided with a healthier lunch that meets their basic dietary needs. Obesity is a problem that stems even from school itself, a place where students are supposed to feel encouraged to learn, make positive life decisions and staying active.
Moreover, they risk learning nothing at all since at public school they mostly “play, take recess, play again, then have lunch” (Boo 85). This is not surprising given the fact that the teachers, such as Asha, often ignore their responsibilities and do not go to school (Boo 33). Similarly, educational policies of non-governmental agencies do not always benefit students in need. Oftentimes an institution receives money, starts working, and begins teaching children. However, as soon as the photos are taken and necessary inspections are passed both funds and a person responsible for them disappear (Boo 171).