Analysis: Is School Lunch Actually Feeding America's Children?

Established in 2010, the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act revised the National School Lunch Program’s policies ensuring that children receive a nutritious lunch in school. These changes included offering fruits and vegetables, whole-grain foods, low-fat dairy products and limit calories, saturated fat and sodium (Fisk). Studies show that many children benefit greatly from well-balanced meals during the day.

The obesity epidemic in America is getting worse to the point that it spread into our children’s school lunches. In Alice Waters’ and Katrina Heron’s article “No Lunch Left Behind” explains that the government is investing a lot of funds into the schools lunches and it is being wasted to buy unhealthy junk foods. Even though with just a little more money, the food can be of better quality, healthier, and safer for the students. Waters and Heron back up their explanation by describing some of the aggravations that some Americans have for this issue through ethos, adding reliable sources to strengthen the piece, and using an informative and serious tone in attempts to be heard and understood by the government and Americans who care about the health and safety of the student.

This article by Great Schools is addressed to parents considered about the current school lunches provided to the children in their district. Unlike any other source, this one focuses solely on 3 organizations that advocate. The diversity of the listed projects gives an opportunity to expand on different approaches to solve the various problems of the lunch program. However, there is no attempt to address the current issues of our system, requiring a previous understanding of how the school lunch system currently operates.

Everyone loves the idea of a government that truly cares about him or her. Especially a government that would go so far as to layout a healthy diet plan to insure the health of your children and to battle childhood obesity. It is great that the government is concerned about adolescent obesity and the nutrition students receive at school. However, the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) Food and Nutrition Guidelines provide more problems for schools and they need to be eradicated, as well as repealing the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act.

One of the most controversial issues today is the question of how to address childhood obesity. Because of the large proportion of meals that children, particularly low-income children, consume in schools, cafeteria food has been targeted by dietary reformers as in need of a major overhaul. However, while many different types of new school menus have been proposed, the extent to which healthier foods can be offered remains controversial. Opponents to reform state that children will not eat healthier lunches, and that changing the food that children eat will have minimal impact, since the children will either bring food from home or eat food at home that is more 'kid friendly.'

As we begin our analysis, we reconstruct the context in which, “10 Reasons to Avoid School Lunches Like the Plague”, was written. Recently, Michelle Obama has made a rule that has forced Colorado school’s to improve the health of the school lunch programs. While all of the Douglas County schools have yet to implement the supposedly healthy lunch program, it has still caused much debate. This debate has been fueled by students, parents, and even teachers. All of which have different responses to the conflict. Some believe that healthy lunches will cause more food to be thrown away and therefore healthier, is a bad idea. Others believe that the lunches are still not healthy. All of these elements contribute to the kairotic moment of Leah Segedie’s

Moreover, allowing students to eat healthy school lunches will be able to partially obtain their daily nutrition and reduce the risk of obesity. As a result, if schools continue to allow unhealthy foods to students, then the next generation of students will have a greater risk of obesity. It is often argued that allowing schools to serve healthier lunches will not be able to serve a variety of foods. The counter argument is incorrect because schools can serve a variety of healthy lunches to students. According to Corey Henry, vice president of communications of the American Frozen Food Institute states in New York Times article, “From our perspective, the new rules improve school nutrition, but at the same time give schools the flexibility to serve a variety of foods to meet the goals of everyone involved”(Par. 12). Giving students a variety of healthy school lunches will make more students interested in eating school meals. In the meantime, authorizing students to eat a variety of school lunches will also allow them to experience different types of food. Additionally, the new rules give schools a better nutrition guide to help students eat healthier. Therefore, students can reduce the risk of obesity and other health diseases.

School lunch rooms have been evolving over the last decade. Healthier food choices and better-quality food are just two of many improvements happening inside school cafeterias. Although school lunch rooms are making various positive changes, there are still negative consequences for some students. Most students can go through the lunch line and not have to worry about the cost of the meal and whether they have enough money to buy a hot lunch. On the other hand, some students are constantly worrying about not being able to eat lunch due to the price. According to a CNN article titled “School Lunch Shaming” by Heather Long, “…an alarming number of American youngsters still can’t afford a $2.35 lunch, despite the dramatic expansion of free and reduced lunch programs” (paragraph 1), which demonstrates the struggles that these low-income families face when it comes to buying their student school lunches. Staff working in cafeterias have started to “shame” those students by taking away the student’s food and giving them a bag containing a cheese sandwich and milk to those students who are unable to afford their lunch. States such as New Mexico are taking a stand against school lunch shaming and have banned lunch shaming completely. Long also explained that, “The USDA is urging districts to stop “embarrassing” and “singling out” students who don’t have enough money for lunch” (paragraph 9), which further demonstrates the lengths people are going to solve the lunch shaming issues.

Children in America are faced with different choices every day. Some of these choices can be either good or bad for them. But these children don't really know the consequences of their actions, but the school does. Schools are serving unhealthy and un properly cooked meals to children every single day. These food companies make big money from these schools because the schools just buy the lunches so the kids will eat something. The schools don't really care what goes into the students stomachs, but as long as the school meets the requirements it's okay. Then the students just eat it because it looks and taste good, but they don't have an idea of what their eating is made out of or where it has been before. The government needs to start making school lunches more healthy for these students, if not then then unfortunately the number of obese children will rise.

The National School Lunch Program needs to standardize and regulate their set nutritional standards at all schools to help curb the growing prevalence of childhood obesity and other weight related diseases.

The author’s intention is to inform the reader that the healthy lunch programs are failing. The author provides plentiful information and research on the failing school lunch programs in the U.S. “In the war to get America’s children to eat healthier, things are not going well.” Kids are not eating their vegetables. This has become a big problem in America and steps need to be taken to stop unhealthy eating. Like The Agriculture Department mandating that students in the federal lunch program choose a fruit or vegetable with their meals. This solution didn’t work and actually worsened the problem. “Their consumption of fruits and vegetables actually went down 13 percent after the mandate took effect.”

The health of students should be considered one of the most important issues in education. However, as of 2012, the Center for Disease Control calculated that over one third of children and adolescents were either overweight or obese. Not only does obesity cause physical health problems, but can also affect the academic performance of students. Over the past few years, Americans have been working together to find solutions for this problem.

Obesity is crucial in this country, in order for there to be a change we need to start serving healthy foods at schools. The First Lady Michelle Obama brought this healthy lunch concern to the educational system. California’s Department of Education Nutrition Services provides fresh fruit and vegetables to students as a supplement throughout the day. California’s schools have moved ahead to support Hunger-Free Kids policy. The local government regulates school districts including Los Angeles Unified School District to serve whole grains, fruits and vegetables versus foods high in calories. The Hunger-Free Kids policy allowed public schools to serve healthy lunches preventing obesity.

According to the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act, the goal of the National School Lunch Program is “to safeguard the health and well-being of the Nation’s children and to

There needs to be some sort of regulation imposed on school lunches, in order to fight the growing obesity epidemic. Many people disagree with this statement, and have their own thoughts on the matter. The National School Lunch Act was passed in 1946 by President Harry Truman. All over the country, school districts joined lunch programs designed to feed children at free or reduced prices. In doing so, school districts had to follow specific guidelines that these programs required. Over the years, these standards have changed increasingly in order to provide children optimal nutrition. While many districts have fully taken advantage and successfully made the turn for the better, others struggle or are taking a little more time in