Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Congressional stuff
Next Post: Crosstown open thread
Posted in:
* The setup…
The Illinois State Board of Education on Thursday delayed action on a proposal that would restrict the kind of cafeteria food sold to students in public elementary and middle schools.
The idea behind the new rules is to curb the problem of childhood obesity and encourage healthy eating habits among young people, supporters say. Critics, though, say the rules are too restrictive and that local school districts should be allowed to decide for themselves how to help kids eat in a healthy way.
The rules cover numerous aspects of nutrition. Whole milk, for instance, would no longer be served to students in eighth grade or below. Instead, they could opt for skim, low-fat or reduced-fat milk.
The rules are stricter for students in fifth grade and below than for students in sixth through eighth grades. The older students would be allowed larger portion sizes and more calories, and they would have a wider range of choices.
For example, those students would be able to buy fruit smoothies made with low-fat yogurt or another low-fat dairy alternative, as long as the serving size doesn’t exceed 200 calories. But students in fifth grade or below couldn’t have the same beverage.
* The question: Should the State Board of Education take action on this, or should the decision be left to local school boards? Explain.
posted by Rich Miller
Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 10:25 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Congressional stuff
Next Post: Crosstown open thread
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Take action, the standards should be uniform. Also education about health need not be limited to the classroom, it would be good for the schools food programs to embrace the concepts as well.
All of that said, the proposed rules may need some adjustment and tweaking.
Comment by Ghost Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 10:42 am
They should take action and since it’s the state, it would be consistent.
Comment by reasonable 1 Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 10:46 am
ok big brother. Parents shouldn’t raise their kids, the schools should. Have you ever noticed a fat kid with healthy fit parents? I usually see fat kids with fat parents. I say we outlaw red cars and yellow cars. Kids will get the idea of stopping at McDonalds. Enough.
Comment by Thanks for taking my call Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 10:47 am
I’m sure the divine wisdom of an inept Springfield bureaucracy should direct feeding habits -since it can’t approach or consider educational issues-maybe the gov and legislators can get directly involved-voila!-a THREE RING CIRCUS-
Comment by gray wolf Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 10:48 am
Yes, the State Board should set these guidelines.
I do not want to see school lunches dependant on school district. A child is a child, and what is healthy is healthy. We already accommodate religious needs regarding foods. Children raised in LDS, Islam, Jewish, Seventh Day Adventist and other churches with dietary restrictions already deal with school lunches by bringing their own, when necessary.
We learn to eat. We are taught through example what is “good food”. School is an learning environment and children can learn new healthier foods to eat and try, just as they normally learn other things at school.
If you do not want government-ran school lunch programs, you are too late. They exist. If you do not wish for your child to eat healthy school food, you can supply your child with their own lunch, filled with pre-packaged lunchables and Twinkies.
I know that there will be debates. But this is measurable. We have nutritionists. We know what is healthy. This is a decision for the State Board of Education, not the local school board.
Comment by VanillaMan Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 10:48 am
The decision should be left to the local school boards. Schools already count the calorie intake of students under federal rules that say no more than 30 percent of the calories consumed can come from fat.
Eating right starts at home, tightening these rules on what kids are eating at school wont change much.
Comment by Speaking At Will Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 10:51 am
The decisions should be left to the local school boards. In our district, kindergarten is at two schools only and elementary is 1st through 6th grade, middle school is 7th and 8th, and high school is 9th through 12th. With what the state board is suggesting - 5th and below with one menu, 6th and above with another - the local elementary schools will need a separate menu for one grade full of students (approx 100 per school) that’s ridiculous.
Comment by kimsch Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 10:58 am
I would rather local school districts to be able to make a choice what their cafeterias can or can’t serve. Indeed I would expect that parents might be best able to decide what local school districts should be able to serve. Would the state board of ed be responsive to the wishes of the parents?
Comment by Levois Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 11:00 am
Levois and others, while I usually don’t take a position on our QOTD’s, I would make one point that I’d like you to consider. Consider it a supplemental question…
If parents know best and the local school districts are doing such a fine job, why are so many children obese?
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 11:01 am
This should be left up to the local school boards. For example, a child from a rural school district who is a farmer’s kid and works outside a lot when they are home would needs a higher caloric intake than a child from a city who sits on the couch all day playing video games. The school districts should be able to tailor for what their district needs are.
Comment by Miranda Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 11:02 am
The greater aggravating factor in childhood obesity is not diet, but lack of exercise. Grade school children should not be on low fat diets; the better prescription is a high level of physical activity.
Answer to you question: the State Board of Education should not take action on this.
Comment by No Peotone Airport Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 11:03 am
Miranda, please take a look at these two links…
1) USC report finds overweight, obese kids more likely to live in rural America
2) Chartbook: Obesity in Urban and Rural Children
Your bias may be getting the better of you.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 11:05 am
I don’t have a problem with the State Board setting standards. There’s some science to this, and they have more resources than local boards.
I can see some wiggle room, but some basic standards are in order.
No Peotone has a very good point. Kids do need fat in their diet to grow, and they need a lot of exercise.
Schools can’t do it all. But the State Board can lay down some markers.
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 11:12 am
*cranky old man voice*
“In my day, we ate sloppy joes and tater tots, and we loved it. In my day, we drank whole milk or chocolate milk, and that’s the way it was and everybody liked it.”
Of course back then, nobody opted out of PE and recess lasted for what seemed like hours. And most of us walked or biked to school, and kept on playing outside after school.
Comment by 47th Ward Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 11:13 am
The government should stay out of it and leave it to the local school boards. Everytime state or federal government gets involved, it is like getting an upgrade on your computer. Pain, agony and misery. How about just leaving us alone.
Comment by The Federalist Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 11:13 am
Actually, if you’re a real federalist you believe all power emanates up and down from the state.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 11:14 am
I have to admit I have mixed feelings on this.
However when it comes to the obese kids thing, I would suspect that school lunch isn’t the major contributor to that.
Then again considering how much of a problem this has become, I wouldn’t have a problem with the state setting realistic standards and/or providing incentives for better food.
Comment by OneManBlog Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 11:17 am
Yes, the ISBE should make this call. School boards across the state sell out all the time to make money off of contracts with Coke, Pepsi, Pizza Hut, etc. Limiting what is served in the cafeterias and snack/lunch bars would be a good idea.
Comment by Team Sleep Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 11:28 am
Yes - there should be basic standards set by the state. In my perfect world, they would put kitchens back in schools, use locally sourced foods, etc. Of course, my perfect world costs a lot more money.
The bottom line, though, is that our schools should not be serving kids bad (in terms of nutrition) food. There are lots of studies that link the ability to learn to the food. The better we eat, the better we are able to learn. Setting standards that encourage schools to acknowledge that connection is a good thing.
Comment by montrose Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 11:37 am
Let’s see, so now kids are getting fat at school? Not so much. Kids are getting fat because of parents inability to dedicate themselves to proper nutrition.
I don’t mind providing healthy food at schools, but come on. When I was in school, I remember schools promoting healthy eating. But they shouldn’t force it on you. What the hell is wrong with having a horseshoe for lunch one day?
Here’s what I see happening: The more “government” intervention to try and solve all these social problems that plague children only provides parents an excuse to say, “hey, it’s not my responsibility to make my kids eat healthy. It’s the school board’s.”
This blame game, where everyone points the finger at everyone else is pathetic. Every home needs a big fat mirror (no pun intended) where the parents and kids can look in and become responsible for their own actions. If you’re lazy and take your kids to fast food places to eat all the time, they’re gonna get fat. If you order pizza and let them eat 12 pieces, they’re gonna get fat. I see it with my kids friends. And if you sit on your butt and do not stay active with your kids, your kids will respond in the same manner.
NO. the State Board of Education should not take action on this. The decision be left to local school boards. And there should be no restrictions on what is served. Continue spending money on educating the kids and creating programs that encourage parent involvement.
I hate skim milk.
Comment by BandCamp Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 11:39 am
If the state is really concerned about childhood obesity, it should stop granting waivers for districts to skip their required PE classes. Well directed PE classes by qualified instructors would go along way toward improving fitness.
By the way, is the state also going to provide funding for this or is it just another unfunded mandate.
Comment by Bill Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 11:52 am
I agree with Team Sleep…
… Your local school district would be School District #??? PRESENTED by Pepsi Co.!
I am for a consistent statewide program that addresses the diets of our children. The menu can be left up to the schools.
Does anyone else think that this will force major companies like Pepsi and Coca-Cola to modify their product lines to meet certain guidelines set by the state?
Comment by The Rookie Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 11:52 am
Well stated Band Camp!
Comment by Speaking At Will Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 11:55 am
VanMan,
In your post on this issue you sound like a “nanny statist”. Have you stopped listening to Rush and Sean and switched to Air America.
Next thing we know you’ll be blogging about what a great president Barack will make and what an excellent job Rod is doing.
Welcome to reality.
Comment by Bill Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 11:58 am
Bill, don’t push the poor guy.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 11:59 am
47th ward-“In my day, we ate sloppy joes and tater tots, and we loved it. In my day, we drank whole milk or chocolate milk, and that’s the way it was and everybody liked it.”
Actually my child’s school still serves this and yeah most kids enjoy it. Or try this one: corndog, fries, corn. Cringe. My school also serves Bread pretzels with cheese sauce with corn, and Raviola, buttered bread and corn. Starch, starch, starch.
I have a picky eating 8 year old and she buys maybe six or seven meals a month and carries her lunch the rest of the time. She is also has galactosemia so she gets juice for her drink and she gets other children and lunchroom ladies nag at her about sugar and she should drink milk. On top of this she had ADHD and takes adderall which kills her desire to eat, I’m lucky if she’ll eat much any anything at lunch time. Lunchroom ladies nag her to put down the home provided strawberries or grapes and eat that peanut butter covered celery stick instead and by the way, where is your sandwich? It never ends and my child hates to eat lunch at school but we have closed campus and she must.
With all that said, a bit less fat in their milk won’t harm them. I’m more worried about starches and why I see no real fresh fruit served and the carbo count on what is served. Where’s the tossed salad with a fresh cucumber and tomato slice? But I also realize the schools are trying to put out meals that must meet cost allowed per student. As we all who visit grocery stores know, eating healthy cost more than eating non-healthy, I think sometimes the school cook gets caught in the middle of planning meals and meeting allowment.
But to answer the question, regulate, and I’m glad my child has the option of bringing her own at my cost.
Comment by Princeville Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 12:01 pm
It will force schools to charge more for lunches. School lunch programs are losing propositions to begin. They obey the guidelines given them as far as nutrition is concerned.
Truly healthful foods–fruits, vegetables, lean proteins–are expensive. Most school lunches already are healthful within the limits provided and within the price constructs schools and parents can afford.
Comment by Fan of the Game Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 12:11 pm
Two things:
(1) Several on here have made a good point: Look what the results have been of leaving the decision up to local school districts and parents–more and more childhood obesity. Yes, kids need more exercise. But the local schools and parents have not come up with a solution to the nutrition issue on their own thus far.
(2) I’m amused by the calls to keep the “government” out of these decisions and leave it up to school boards. Last time I checked, local school board members are elected, and school funds come from local property taxes and state and federal funds. The local school boards are “government.” It’s just a different level of government, and not the level that necessarily has the most expertise in regard to child nutrition.
Comment by blueinaredstate Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 12:19 pm
I hope that the director of the State Board of Education isn’t 60 lbs. overweight. I know that it is kind of hard for a principal to preach healthy eating when his waist size is a 46.
Kids that are taught healthy habits at home are more likely to follow those habits at school. The problem is - and this is what the schools aren’t saying, that that meal at lunch is sometimes the only food some kids are getting.
I bet if every kid was offered fruit like a banana or an apple, in the mornings, they would eat it.
I have had hungry kids in my classroom. It is no picnic. (sorry)
Comment by Shelbyville Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 12:22 pm
Bill -
Don’t be so narrow minded.
It isn’t either/or.
We have a state system. It has been around almost 200 years. We have school lunch programs. They have been around a generation or more.
Nanny-statism would be forcing all children to eat lunches as designed by the School Board. No one is making that demand here. Those companies providing school lunches should be regulated heavily. The food within these lunches should be inspected thoroughly. The nutrition in that food should be measured.
If you don’t want to eat school lunches, opt-out.
I’m not straying from anything, but simply showing common sense. And Air America - what’s that? And I listened to Rush once, on a long distance trip to satisfy the demand of three German exchange students. It was painful to listen to, kinda like it would be if you were on the radio.
Comment by VanillaMan Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 12:25 pm
I’m with Shelbyville on the fruits and vegetables. One of my PTOs tried to set up a morning fruit stand in the local junior high. The dead hand of the administration wore them down to surrender. Not a lot of initiative or imagination there.
Meanwhile, across the street, the kids are loading up on pop and chips for breakfast. You can see it from the principal’s office. Parents fault, yes, but some school administrators are just marking time to retirement and will fight anything “different.”
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 12:29 pm
And -
I would be writing about what a great president Obama would be if I knew who the heck he was and what he stood for. He took his entire personal crusade for political reform and threw it under the bus yesterday. The guy turned Nixon on us!
And I would be delighted to say what a great guy Blagojevich is if it was true. You and your little imaginary friend are the last two Illinoians still popping off about SuperRod the last time we checked the polls.
Comment by VanillaMan Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 12:30 pm
===He took his entire personal crusade for political reform and threw it under the bus yesterday. The guy turned Nixon on us!===
You guys can never get your stories straight. He’s either naive or too cunning by half. Jimmy Carter or Richard Nixon. He’s not black enough, or he’s too black. Etc., etc. lol
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 12:32 pm
===He’s not black enough, or he’s too black.===
How about “He’s not black enough to be too black!” lol
Comment by Fan of the Game Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 12:44 pm
It’s better if left to local school boards.An even better solution would be to get rid of public education so then these issues wouldn’t exist.If Catholic schools want a certain menu and parents don’t like it,they can go elsewhere.Centralizing government power isn’t a wise decision.As far as Rich’s second question on why kids are fat;The cold weather and lack of physical exercise can’t but help.We can’t blame cold weather and kids playing video games on politicians.
Comment by Steve Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 12:44 pm
I am on a private school board and we are told portion size, balance and type of food to serve. By doing this we can participate in the school lunch program like most public school. We have regulation we don’t need more of something that’s not working. Bill is right most kids need to move around, no opt-out of P.E. is a better start.
Comment by Down South Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 12:45 pm
Local school boards traded scoreboards for 12 oz cans of high fructose corn syrup (HFCS). Kids sit on their bee-hinds 85% of the time they’re in school. I think there should be a statewide system, with accommodations for those districts with different class levels than the state plan.
Children have become so obese because when they do get home from school they see mom and dad planted in front of the tube (do they still call it that anymore?). Monkey see, monkey do.
Comment by Vote Quimby! Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 12:48 pm
In the world of sunshine and rainbows, schools could serve whatever they want, because kids will have nutritious meals provided by their loving parents.
However, this is the real world. Parents aren’t getting the job done. Unfortunately, schools have to step in to try and help. This isn’t a good solution, or even a preferred one. But I think it’s the only one we’ve got.
This issue sounds very similar to sex education. When the parents are not doing an adequate job, the school must step in and try to help.
Comment by the final countdown Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 12:48 pm
Bill’s first post is 100% on point. More PE and intermural sports supplementing the competitive ones would really go a long way. If the state wants to send down voluntary guidelines that’s fine, however the final authority should stay local. The over consumption of gravity has become pandemic! Tax the poundage over a BMI base, that will provide the necessary funding for steak and potatoes for all.
Comment by A Citizen Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 1:29 pm
And if not sex ed. what about values education? I can admit there are parents who aren’t doing their jobs as far as their children’s nutrition, values or even the birds and the bees.
Comment by Levois Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 1:33 pm
Give the gruel! If the state is going to dabble in health care, they may as well try to nip it in the bud at childhood. If they are going to fund food programs, why not have a say in what foods are in them?
My suggestion may be hard for a bueracrat to comprehend, don’t overanalyze! Set basic regulations, but do not dictate the minutia
Comment by Wumpus Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 1:38 pm
Sorry if I repeat a comment from above, but I am passing through today.
As a school board member, I speak from experience. This is exactly the kind of thing school boards are NOT qualified to determine. We are not (for the most part) nutritionists. We will tend to go with popular and low cost alternatives. We certainly need guidance, and it’s nice to be able to blame unpopular but necessary choices on the state.
As long as the State Board relies on research, this is a very good idea. We can use the help.
Comment by Pot calling kettle Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 1:43 pm
Am I the only one at a loss trying to figure out what local school boards should be doing? It seems that everything is being shifted to the state.
Comment by Skeeter Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 1:47 pm
In Illinois we already see problems with education funding and teaching parameteres that do not follow uniform or common standards. If we have one set of rules, ate least if there is a problem we have one target to look at and one place to go to implement a fix. Leaving so much of education to be handeled by scattered boards makes it harder to identify the source of problems or to work with solutions.
Comment by Ghost Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 2:04 pm
ISBE should be spending more time improving education, not meals
I am entirely in favor of fat students who are smart, instead of what we have today.
I spent this last week educating a college graduate three years of teaching how to write a proper paragraph on his summer job.
We have teachers who can not spell, who can not write a declarative sentence. How can this be? How can top ranked high schools, supposedly excellent colleges pass through young men who can not write a senstence and put them in the classroom?
If I had spare hair, I would tear it out.
Comment by Truthful James Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 2:10 pm
Was the irony of Truthful’s post intended?
Comment by Skeeter Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 2:12 pm
Local school boards should be focused on local issues: hiring administrators, negotiaing with unions, facility management (including bond issues for new schools paid for locally), deciding which students earn expulsion, engaging citizens (primarily parents) in the education process. By state law they are unpaid, which cuts down on the ego-driven candidates, but they are certainly there. Most I’ve met are genuinely concerned about their local school(s). They face compelling, competing interests in their hometowns. They get confronted in the grocery store. They’ve got enough on their plate (sorry).
There’s got to be a decent, flexible plan that could be implemented statewide. I hope it addresses issues other than calories, as we know now a balanced diet is pretty complicated.
Comment by Vote Quimby! Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 2:17 pm
Some have a distorted view of what schools can and cannot do in terms of meal programs. In 2006, ISBE prohibited elementary and middle schools from selling “junk” food (foods with minimal nutritional value), including soda, during the school day.
Comment by Fan of the Game Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 2:25 pm
I had a cup of coffee with sweetner this morning and then ran errands. Then I spent two hours reading. Now I’m on the computer eating microwave “natural” popcorn and drinking a highball. Supper tonight is Gabatoni’s pizza. I don’t feel that I have any right to make comments regarding nutrition. Having said that…I walked to elementary school, junior high, and five blocks to high school from bus stop. I ate like a horse and I was skinny. It’s the exercise!!!
Comment by Chanson Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 2:53 pm
While I was reading this-it occurred to me-I doubt that very many school boards set the menues -I suspect that most menues are set by a Principal or Superintendent or the cooks, following guidlines and budgets. Our local shcool had a problem a few years ago with the cooks choosing easy to fix meals, rather than something the kids would eat. Personally, I would rather let the kids eat whatever they want, rather than throw away “healthy” food.
Comment by Downstate Commissioner Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 3:37 pm
Take it away from the local boards.
I welcome anyone to give me an example of an instance where more “local control” lead to a better educational outcome.
– SCAM
Comment by so-called "Austin Mayor" Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 3:45 pm
Let the Board of Education decide in order to keep it consistent. Children need to eat healthy so when they get into the real world their systems will be able to tolerate the political crap thrown at them….such as that thrown by this governor.
Comment by Justice Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 4:17 pm
There is an educational and good solution - Assign the Home Economics Class the task of researching and determining the menus for the cafeteria, and do it for the full year. Add in a critique by the consumers (Steak Holders) and let it be a contest from class to class. They would take into account nutrition, special diets e.g. diabetics, and cost and budgeting.
Comment by A Citizen Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 4:59 pm
Do we really need the state to step in and make this decision. I think the local school board should be able to figure this out. But I’m sure this idea will keep a few state staffers busy, they have to earn a living too……
Comment by GOPJay Friday, Jun 20, 08 @ 5:02 pm
leave it up to the local school boards. and take away the option of getting out of PE> we certaily do not need any more ‘government’ agencies telling us what to do and how to do it! enough already…I also read a letter in the paper where the person thinks the schools should buy the graduation gowns and pass them down to the next class etc. it is very costly to have children in schools let alone have to buy uniforms, gowns, and the like! commen sense has flown out the window! local governments, local schools, local businesses should have the say in their communities NOT state government!!!!!
Comment by Sofia Monday, Jun 23, 08 @ 7:09 am