NationStates Jolt Archive

I'm watching this 20/20 thing on SKY News.

Question: Why the hell do US schools provide lunch? why the hell do schools in the US have security guards? why do they have people paid to clean the grounds, having been to a school where students were put on 'litter patrols'?

I just find it funny how thousands and thousands are spent per student, and the performance of the state school system is shit house.

Could someone from the 'land of the free' give me a heads up on this?

ps. I went to a Catholic and Protestant Colleges/Highschool and Primary school, which was partially subsidised by the public education system.

I'm watching this 20/20 thing on SKY News.

Question: Why the hell do US schools provide lunch?not everyone can afford to bring home lunch. The idea is for the students to have at least one nutritional meal a school day.
why the hell do schools in the US have security guards?after several incidents of Gang Violence as well as child predetors 'hunting' around schools, Guards were placed for protection. Fences were put up to keep kids from cutting classes.
why do they have people paid to clean the grounds, having been to a school where students were put on 'litter patrols'?/QUOTE]job opportunities, students are there to study, and usually those cleaning the grounds also clean the bathrooms, unstop the drains, keep the grass clean and weed free, and deal with hazards like broken glass. however, that doesn't mean that 'Litter Patrols' don't exsist. had them in my school... as well as the Janitor.[QUOTE=Lovely Boys]I just find it funny how thousands and thousands are spent per student, and the performance of the state school system is shit house.

Could someone from the 'land of the free' give me a heads up on this?1) not all students like to learn, and if they don't want to learn, nothing can force them to learn. 2) the money also isn't distributed evenly. alot of schools dont get the money they need.

not everyone can afford to bring home lunch. The idea is for the students to have at least one nutritional meal a school day.

Which is stupid; a loaf of bread is 99cents, grab a jar of marmite - marmite sandwiches, bring along a drink in a sipper bottle, and maybe a piece of fruit, grand total of that, $1.50 or so.

Take a look at this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_in_Finland

Officially the best school system in the world.

I'm watching this 20/20 thing on SKY News.

Question: Why the hell do US schools provide lunch? why the hell do schools in the US have security guards? why do they have people paid to clean the grounds, having been to a school where students were put on 'litter patrols'?

I just find it funny how thousands and thousands are spent per student, and the performance of the state school system is shit house.

Could someone from the 'land of the free' give me a heads up on this?

ps. I went to a Catholic and Protestant Colleges/Highschool and Primary school, which was partially subsidised by the public education system.
School meal is good sign of good country, like we here Finland have meal, but its free two and of course schools have security guards, becouse George Bush thinks it`s good sign of security to other countrys, its all politic

School meal is good sign of good country, like we here Finland have meal, but its free two and of course schools have security guards, becouse George Bush thinks it`s good sign of security to other countrys, its all politic

Why provide it? it isn't the schools responsibility to provide lunch, its the parents - you know, bringing along packed lunches in a lunch box! shock! horror!

In England, lunch is free for those who can't afford it. Everyone else pays or brings there own

Not knowing the Americans system, I don't know how different this is...

In fact why the hell am I posting this?

Lovely Boys, is poverty a foreign concept to you? If students cannot afford lunch and the school can afford to provide it then what is the problem? Cheese and rice.

Why provide it? it isn't the schools responsibility to provide lunch, its the parents - you know, bringing along packed lunches in a lunch box! shock! horror!
didin`t you read my message complete! I sayd this all is part of politics... All of these make are economy/security look COOL to other countrys... And i like school food here!

didin`t you read my message complete! I sayd this all is part of politics... All of these make are economy/security look COOL to other countrys... And i like school food here!

Well, the problem with providing food is this; you end up in the same situation with sex education - parents bickering and whining over what shuold be provided, some wanting kosher, others wanting Halal, some demanding a gluten free diet, whilst others are allergic to some chemical.

The point I'm getting as is; if there are money problems in the education system, the first to go should be non-essential things.

The point I'm getting as is; if there are money problems in the education system, the first to go should be non-essential things.

And food is not essential in some cases?

And food is not essential in some cases?

Its not an essential school function.

Better question; why can other people, from other countries, take the role of feeding onself a role for ones own responsibility rather than expecting nanny state to feed them?

Well, the problem with providing food is this; you end up in the same situation with sex education - parents bickering and whining over what shuold be provided, some wanting kosher, others wanting Halal, some demanding a gluten free diet, whilst others are allergic to some chemical.

The point I'm getting as is; if there are money problems in the education system, the first to go should be non-essential things.
aah, froget it...

Better question; why can other people, from other countries, take the role of feeding onself a role for ones own responsibility rather than expecting nanny state to feed them?
I would've hated the idea of having to eat at school... or having guards patrolling the halls, or having bathroom passes for crying out loud!
We didn't have any of that and most of us turned out just fine ;)

I don't get it either. In Australia, we have a school tuckshop, but you have to pay for things. Otherwise, parents are expected to provide lunch. I don't see how a family could be too poor to get some peanut paste, and a loaf of bread and make a sandwich to send to school with their kids.

So a starving kid is going to learn as well as a well-fed kid? For some kids, that one meal they get at school is the best meal they get all day. The money problems with the US Education System are not because of the free lunches, it is because of a lack of fiscal priority. Sure, Washington goes on and on about how it is a priority but in reality it is not. Instead, they are allocating $150 million to build a rain forest in Iowa as just one example of this. Oh, they pass legislation that is supposed to make schools more 'accountable' but the reality is it is just a way for the government to justify not giving some schools the resources they would need to be successful.

Oh, and for your example, $1.50 per day x 5 days x 21 days is $157.50 per month. For some families, this is simply too much.

Which is stupid; a loaf of bread is 99cents, grab a jar of marmite - marmite sandwiches, bring along a drink in a sipper bottle, and maybe a piece of fruit, grand total of that, $1.50 or so.


First off...Marmite...is foul.

Secondly, the average price of a school lunch, is usually about as much as that same 1.50.

Moreover, theres always a selection of things to choose from.
Any kid can have several meal choices, for about as much as that Marmite sandwich, sippy drink, and piece of fruit.

Moreover, if a students family cant afford the price of the meal, they are usually able to qualify for free meals.

Im having a really hard time figuring out why THIS of all things, bothers you.
If you want to rag on our education system, fine, knock yourself out.
Keep in mind however, that every other country usually wants to send thier kids to our colleges.

Some states, and thier composite counties are poorer than others, and cant afford the same books, materials, and rescources others can.
This is becuase these schools are funded by the taxpayers in the surrounding areas, so if the county is dirt poor....guess how the school is doing?

So..if you want to blast the American Education system..thats a good place to start.
However, if youre going to to be a generalizing swine, and try to imply, all "Americans R teh stuupids", then I suppose our conversation is over.

105 days in a month?

In Australia, not much "free" stuff. At school, you pay for just about everything apart from "free" advice.

Is it so hard to accept that in some countries, including the us, real poverty does exist. In most cases it is not so much about parents not wanting to do right by their child and feed them right and well but about parents not being able to. Whether it is due to poverty, unhealthy lifestyles or plain stupidity does not really matter in my opinion -This is not about the parents and their potential inabilities but about the children.

Also a school meal might provide a measure of equality and unity amongst the children, much like the school uniform worn in some countries, as it erases signs of inequality, and i must concede that that is politics. However, wishing to provide our children with healthy food is caring.

Oh, and for your example, $1.50 per day x 5 days x 21 days is $157.50 per month. For some families, this is simply too much.

I think you mean $1.50 x 21 school days in a month = $31 .50.

If parents cant afford that how can they afford to feed themselves?

I'll add in on the chorus here, there are kids who do not get anything to eat beyond the school lunch (and breakfast, many areas provide breakfast now as well). If you qualify for it, it's free, if you don't fall below the set line for free or reduced lunch, you pay for the lunch or bring your own.

As for the guards, thank Columbine for that one. What was a small amount of schools has grown tremendiously with the fear that one student may just go off his ir her rocker and come in with a gun.

In England, lunch is free for those who can't afford it. Everyone else pays or brings there own

Not knowing the Americans system, I don't know how different this is...

In fact why the hell am I posting this?

That's the way it is in the US. Everyone's parents fill out a form at the beginning of the year. Based on their parents' income form, some kids get free lunch, some get "reduced lunch" (half price), and some pay full price. Anyone who wants to can bring their own lunch instead.

That's for public schools, all the way up to University. My son goes to private school, and they don't sell lunch. Everyone must bring their own.

I think you mean $1.50 x 21 school days in a month = $31 .50.

If parents cant afford that how can they afford to feed themselves?
Sometimes they can't.

Some light reading (http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Third_World_US/SI_Kozol_StLouis.html)...yeah, free lunches for poor kids isn't even close to the problem.

Oh, and for your example, $1.50 per day x 5 days x 21 days is $157.50 per month. For some families, this is simply too much.
Hehe! Too funny in a US Education System thread :p

edit: The school's function isn't to feed the kids, but to educate them to a certain degree. The rest should be up to the parents, not the school!

why the hell do schools in the US have security guards?

Not all of them do. I went to a rural school, and we didn't have guards, metal detectors, etc. Usually the schools with guards etc. are either very rich, or are in very crime-prone neighborhoods. Or they've personally had a good scare (i.e. Columbine).

why do they have people paid to clean the grounds, having been to a school where students were put on 'litter patrols'?

Some schools do put kids on litter patrols. In my state, that sort of thing is up to the principal (headmaster).

I just find it funny how thousands and thousands are spent per student, and the performance of the state school system is shit house. Could someone from the 'land of the free' give me a heads up on this?

Not every school is in bad shape. Since our culture is very focused on pointing out problems (ostensibly so we can fix them), you rarely hear the good things on American news shows. I'm sure 80% or more of schools are in good shape or better. Unfortunately, in a nation this size, that still leaves millions of kids in bad schools. It doesn't mean the entire nation's school system is in the toilet, however.

As usual, our "news" programs are overly alarmist, in a misguided attempt to create more drama and get better ratings, which translates into more advertising dollars.

Some light reading (http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Third_World_US/SI_Kozol_StLouis.html)...yeah, free lunches for poor kids isn't even close to the problem.
That right there is a brilliant link. (Lame attempt to get everybody to read it... You really should, though, it's good. And haunting.). Kozol's book is from the early nineties (mid-nineties?) but if I were to guess, I'd say things have actually gone downhill from there, esp. considering the economic downturn after 2000/2001 depleting the local tax base even more, and cuts in states' education budgets.

That right there is a brilliant link. Kozol's book is from the early nineties (mid-nineties?) but if I were to guess, I'd say things have actually gone downhill from there, esp. considering the economic downturn after 2000/2001 depleting the local tax base even more, and cuts in states' education budgets.
It's a brutal read. Right after it if you hear someone being dismissive it's hard not to punch them in the face.

[QUOTE=JuNii]not everyone can afford to bring home lunch. The idea is for the students to have at least one nutritional meal a school day.[QUOTE]Ummm, nutritional? After watching Supersize Me (Yes, Micheal Moore
blah, blah, blah liberal biased load of other shit) it seemed that the stuff the served was very UNnutritonal,

It's a brutal read. Right after it if you hear someone being dismissive it's hard not to punch them in the face.
I had just edited "haunting" into my post, cause that story stayed with me for quite a few years after I'd read it, but brutal is really the key word here. Not least for how powerfully the story yanks you out of any reveries/delusions you might have had about how it can't really be all that bad, can it now.

Why the hell do US schools provide lunch?
So we can eat. Does your school allow you to eat? When satified, our brains work better, therefore, schools provide lunch. Most people pay. Ones that are poor and bother to file paperwork don't. I imagine your asking about the ones that don't. Well, its so they can eat.

Most schools in most countries provide lunch. Here in Finland, its free for everybody.

Why the hell do schools in the US have security guards?
Good question. I can't answer that, because every school I've attended has never had security, other than the occasional drug hound.

Why do they have people paid to clean the grounds, having been to a school where students were put on 'litter patrols'?
There's some jobs student's shouldn't do. Like maintanince work and handling of certain chemicals, and that is left to the janitorial and mantinance staff. There's this thing about liability. Anyhow, picking up litter at school is a show of pride in one's school and so forth, which is why some schools enforce it. On the other hand, its a good punishment.

I just find it funny how thousands and thousands are spent per student, and the performance of the state school system is shit house.
Work ethic and motivation are things that cannot be taught in school.

ps. I went to a Catholic and Protestant Colleges/Highschool and Primary school, which was partially subsidised by the public education system.
OK. Cool. Join the club.

not everyone can afford to bring home lunch. The idea is for the students to have at least one nutritional meal a school day.Ummm, nutritional? After watching Supersize Me (Yes, Micheal Moore
blah, blah, blah liberal biased load of other shit) it seemed that the stuff the served was very UNnutritonal,
Supersize Me was Morgan Spurlock (http://imdb.com/title/tt0390521/?fr=c2l0ZT1kZnx0dD0xfGZiPXV8cG49MHxrdz0xfHE9c3VwZXJzaXplIG1lfGZ0PTF8bXg9MjB8bG09NTAwfGNvPTF8aHRtbD0x fG5tPTE_;fc=1;ft=21;fm=1), not Micheal Moore, and it was about McDonalds and fast food culture, not school lunches.

Sometimes they can't.

Some light reading (http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Third_World_US/SI_Kozol_StLouis.html)...yeah, free lunches for poor kids isn't even close to the problem.

O...k. Call me naive but I wouldnt have thought that could happen in the US. I mean, obviously in any nation there has to be some areas where poverty runs rampant, but to that extent...wow.

Supersize Me was Morgan Spurlock (http://imdb.com/title/tt0390521/?fr=c2l0ZT1kZnx0dD0xfGZiPXV8cG49MHxrdz0xfHE9c3VwZXJzaXplIG1lfGZ0PTF8bXg9MjB8bG09NTAwfGNvPTF8aHRtbD0x fG5tPTE_;fc=1;ft=21;fm=1), not Micheal Moore, and it was about McDonalds and fast food culture, not school lunches.

I havent seen it but i thought although it was mainly about McDonalds, school lunches also featured rather heavily and were said to be as bad as McDonalds.

Supersize Me was Morgan Spurlock (http://imdb.com/title/tt0390521/?fr=c2l0ZT1kZnx0dD0xfGZiPXV8cG49MHxrdz0xfHE9c3VwZXJzaXplIG1lfGZ0PTF8bXg9MjB8bG09NTAwfGNvPTF8aHRtbD0x fG5tPTE_;fc=1;ft=21;fm=1), not Micheal Moore, and it was about McDonalds and fast food culture, not school lunches.
Yeah well. I'm crazy and I see Micheal Moore everywhere. Umm, it wasn't all abut McDonalds, quite alot of it was about the obesity epidemic in the U.S. and how the schools are feeding them crap food.

O...k. Call me naive but I wouldnt have thought that could happen in the US. I mean, obviously in any nation there has to be some areas where poverty runs rampant, but to that extent...wow.
Sometimes it seems we're more concerned with rhetoric than reality. I was just as unsettled when I first read it.

Yeah well. I'm crazy and I see Micheal Moore everywhere. Umm, it wasn't all abut McDonalds, quite a lot of it was about the obesity epidemic in the U.S. and how the schools are feeding them crap food.
I haven't seen it but i thought although it was mainly about McDonalds, school lunches also featured rather heavily and were said to be as bad as McDonalds.
In the segments on school lunches it's actually talking about the junk food infiltration into schools. The free lunch program doesn't include Twinkies.

But, to give the caveat, no-the food a kid gets free from school isn't going to be the greatest but it will ultimately be better than nothing.

So, after reading the thread, I'm wondering if I have understood the OP's question correctly.

Is the question why schools should provide lunch for students when most people can afford to bring food from home? And in the case of those who can't afford to buy their children lunch, why should schools spend money for lunch through their budgets when this is a matter more suited to be taken care of by for example social services?

I just would like for the questions to be clarified.

I just would like for the questions to be clarified.
Contemplating the same thing here.

Take a look at this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_in_Finland

Officially the best school system in the world.
I'm sorry, but quoting Wiki as your 'official' source discredits your argument just a little, I hate to say.

So, after reading the thread, I'm wondering if I have understood the OP's question correctly.

Is the question why schools should provide lunch for students when most people can afford to bring food from home? And in the case of those who can't afford to buy their children lunch, why should schools spend money for lunch through their budgets when this is a matter more suited to be taken care of by for example social services?

I just would like for the questions to be clarified.I think what the OP said was that the problem of the US educational system was that it was providing lunch for the students. guess he thinks home lunch means better educated students.

I think what the OP said was that the problem of the US educational system was that it was providing lunch for the students. guess he thinks home lunch means better educated students.

Then again, he might think that schools focussed on finding the appropriate diets for all religious and medical contingencies may find it hard to focus their resources on such problems as teaching students how to add 2 + 6.

Then again, he might think that schools focussed on finding the appropriate diets for all religious and medical contingencies may find it hard to focus their resources on such problems as teaching students how to add 2 + 6.
if that were the case, the food would be much, MUCH better.

I'm sorry, but quoting Wiki as your 'official' source discredits your argument just a little, I hate to say.
Actually, wikipedia is just slightly less accurate than Britannica, and it has more articles according to a recent undersökning...um...what ever that is in English...strange how this never happened before...I read in the European edition of Newsweek. Well, they checked it [wikipeida] against Britannica, in a test like situation, and they [who ever did the testing and was mentioned in the article] concluded that.

Point is...links all good. On top of my example, I have first hand expierence.

The Finns are highly motivated. I find instruction on par with the American system.

Actually, wikipedia is just slightly less accurate than Britannica, and it has more articles according to a recent undersökning...um...what ever that is in English...strange how this never happened before...I read in the European edition of Newsweek. Well, they checked it [wikipeida] against Britannica, in a test like situation, and they [who ever did the testing and was mentioned in the article] concluded that.

Point is...links all good. On top of my example, I have first hand expierence.

The Finns are highly motivated. I find instruction on par with the American system.
They did that study in the emprical sciences, the x+y=z kinda stuff that is either right or completely wrong. Chemical formula stuff. The rest of the information starts getting you to the professor that assinated Kennedy sort of thing.

Actually my claim that we have the best education system was not based on wiki, but the fact that we come on top of international and european studies every year on most parts of education. Our universities are only medicore though.

Are US schools locally funded? Or was that just some crazy rumor I heard. Cause lcoally funded schools would be the worst way possible educating people (in a national sense) as people living in poor places would be unable to afford to higher good teachers, good facilities, lots of teaching resources etc. and thus would do worse, end up with worse jobs and be gaurenteed to stay poor.

They did that study in the emprical sciences, the x+y=z kinda stuff that is either right or completely wrong. Chemical formula stuff.
Don't recall reading that.
But you could be right.
I'll leave it at that, as I can't quote anything.

I think its fun being able to read about conspiracy theories along-side the factual information. Less digging for me. All people have to do is learn to discriminate between the factual and the bull.

Are US schools locally funded? Or was that just some crazy rumor I heard. Cause lcoally funded schools would be the worst way possible educating people (in a national sense) as people living in poor places would be unable to afford to higher good teachers, good facilities, lots of teaching resources etc. and thus would do worse, end up with worse jobs and be gaurenteed to stay poor.
Yep, base funding comes from property taxes. If we wanted to address issues of inequality we should start there, not at the end of the line so to speak.

Actually my claim that we have the best education system was not based on wiki, but the fact that we come on top of international and european studies every year on most parts of education. Our universities are only medicore though.
What? I've never seen one of those studies. All the Ones Ive ever seen, in practically every subject go

1) South Korea/ Scananavian countries
2) Western Eurpoean Countries European Countries
3) Any other countries that participated in the study
4) Canada
5) The US

And us Canadians are always just like "yes! we beat the US, we're still technically soverign!"

I've found that the foriegn people I know have parents that make them work alot harder at their schooling, like just ridiculous stuff, whereas us north americans were born into a 'dominant' position on the globe and just kinda feel we can take it easy. We're incredibly reluctant to go to our six hrs a day of school, let alone do homework after. Canadians have a less dominatnt position, and so are less lazy. (not to say that all americans are lazy)

...the fact that we come on top of international and european studies every year on most parts of education.
So you're Finnish? Yay! Check out the crazy thread about Conan O'Brain and Tarja, I couldn't clarify for sure. In fact, I probably gave the biggest non-answer ever. Its somewhere on the bottom of the thread pile.

Anyhow, I back you up on that.

I think its fun being able to read about conspiracy theories along-side the factual information.
I got more conspiracy theories than anyone else ever born ;)

I'm sorry, but quoting Wiki as your 'official' source discredits your argument just a little, I hate to say.
http://www.oecd.org/document/28/0,2340,en_2649_201185_34010524_1_1_1_1,00.html
http://www.pisa.oecd.org/pages/0,2966,en_32252351_32236225_1_1_1_1_1,00.html

The wiki site explains our education system better.

What? I've never seen one of those studies. All the Ones Ive ever seen, in practically every subject go

1) South Korea/ Scananavian countries
2) Western Eurpoean Countries European Countries
3) Any other countries that participated in the study
4) Canada
5) The US
So Canada isn't so good in geography? (jk)

The meaning of the term "Scandinavian" is highly debateable. Better to just not use it, if not meaning to get something along the lines of this post. It usually includes Finland, unless of course you see it when your in Scandinavia (which is actually just Norway and Sweden). However, Denmark is thrown in there on cultural basis. Finland by common history.

I got more conspiracy theories than anyone else ever born ;)
More than these guys (http://www.insolitology.com/sitelist/index.htm)?

What? I've never seen one of those studies.
www.pisa.oecd.org

Question: Why the hell do US schools provide lunch?
it's not free, unless you are too poor to pay the $1.10 or so a day for it, they serve breakfast too.

why the hell do schools in the US have security guards?
because they are trying to keep drugs, guns, knives, ect. out. not all the schools do though. I went to a particularly dangerous school so we had, real police, metal detectors, drug dogs monthly, cameras in the halls, and random searches.

why do they have people paid to clean the grounds, having been to a school where students were put on 'litter patrols'?
why do offices have janitors? why do churches? because sometimes you need someone whose job it is to clean up. My highschool had 9,000 students, just the squarefootage to house 9,000 students was massive. Do you think they should make a student sweep and mop all of that, or should they spend money buying us all mops and brooms and cleaning carts? it could be an elective "clean the school 101"

I just find it funny how thousands and thousands are spent per student, and the performance of the state school system is shit house.
it has nothing to do with the lunches security guards, or janitors. If you want to know where all the money goes, then you need to look no further than the school board, and superintendents. Ours makes nearly $500,000 a year, and then a few miles over there is a whole other district where the superintendent there makes about $250,000. I have a theory that they could combine the districts and pay one guy about $90,000 and spend the rest teaching the kids how to read.

I don't get it either. In Australia, we have a school tuckshop, but you have to pay for things. Otherwise, parents are expected to provide lunch. I don't see how a family could be too poor to get some peanut paste, and a loaf of bread and make a sandwich to send to school with their kids.

For me, a mother of three and a college student myself, with my husband just declared legaly blind and unable to work until he is retrained (pending acceptance by certain government programs, and we're still waiting nearly 5 months later), we don't have the moeny to afford to keep enough food in our house. If it weren't for free meals at schools, I can't say that our kids would eat but one meal a day, and that simply isn't healthy. While my eldest has food restrictions, because of medical issues (diabetic diet), I am VERY thankful that they are able to eat a healthy meal at school. My middle child gets both breakfast and lunch at school. My youngest gets breakfast and lunch at day care. My eldest only gets lunch, because breakfast isn't provided at her school. We have to keep some breakfast food in the house because she has to take medication with food in the mornings.

While I agree that there are many MANY things wrong with the school system, having food for the children is an essential part of their day. They have to eat, and knowing that the schools do provide at least some modicum of healthy food is one major worry off my shoulders so I can focus on my schooling to get a better job and evenutally get our family out of the spot we've found ourselves.

I don't agree with the overly processed foods they are getting right now, and would love to see more healthy fruit, veggies, a salad bar, and less processed foods used. However, it takes more than one squeaky wheel to get oiled, and where I live, there aren't enough vocal people demnding that junk food be removed. Most of the people where I live subsist on junk food adn don't even know HOW to prepare healthy food. Sad, but a serious sign of the times with such things as childhood obesity on the rise.

Wisteria

The meaning of the term "Scandinavian" is highly debateable. Better to just not use it, if not meaning to get something along the lines of this post. It usually includes Finland, unless of course you see it when your in Scandinavia (which is actually just Norway and Sweden). However, Denmark is thrown in there on cultural basis. Finland by common history.

Sorry for the Mistake, I actually wasn't aware the Finland wasn't geographically part of scandinavia (which makes sense, because its mostly attatched to the main land). And yes, I meant Norway, Sweeden, Finland and Denmark.

Shot out to ya'll

I'm watching this 20/20 thing on SKY News.
* Teachers' unions.

* Lack of uniformity across the school systems.

* Interfering school boards.

* Sorry teachers

* Sorry parents

[ Not necessarily in that order! ]

More than these guys (http://www.insolitology.com/sitelist/index.htm)?
Ya... no. Those are just weird. Mine are political/economic not wierd/religious

www.pisa.oecd.org
Sorry, I thought you were American (I hadn't read the whole thread[an example of North American laziness) Ya, power to the Danes!

School meal is good sign of good country, like we here Finland have meal, but its free two and of course schools have security guards, becouse George Bush thinks it`s good sign of security to other countrys, its all politic


Well, you do know that the Federal government has nothing to do with policies like school security, right? The vast majority of education policy is decided at the state level, not by Uncle Sam.

Anyway, I've never seen a school with security guards or any of that crap. A friend of mine from Detroit went to one, but she's the only person I know that has.

Anyway, I've never seen a school with security guards or any of that crap. A friend of mine from Detroit went to one, but she's the only person I know that has.
Detroit...the buckle of the rust belt. They would have security guards.

Michiganian Mariehamn reporting. ;)

Not every school is in bad shape. Since our culture is very focused on pointing out problems (ostensibly so we can fix them), you rarely hear the good things on American news shows. I'm sure 80% or more of schools are in good shape or better. Unfortunately, in a nation this size, that still leaves millions of kids in bad schools. It doesn't mean the entire nation's school system is in the toilet, however.

As usual, our "news" programs are overly alarmist, in a misguided attempt to create more drama and get better ratings, which translates into more advertising dollars.

Take this for example - why are students specialising at such an early age at highschool - having had a look at the subjects on offer to students at college/highschool in the US, why?

I went right up till the end of College, and I can assure you, that schools certainly don't need to offer things like 'IT', "Criminal Phsycology' etc etc. which is the domain of universities and polytechnics.

Pull the money OUT of non-essenetial subjects like that, and get back to basics, provide the basics as to allow them with the necessary skils to either move on to learn a trade via a polytechnic or persue a degree at university.

Its about allocating the funds to the basics of schooling, and letting pie-in-the-sky subjects get funded at university by individuals who choose to take those subjects and fund it out of their own pocket.

So we can eat. Does your school allow you to eat? When satified, our brains work better, therefore, schools provide lunch. Most people pay. Ones that are poor and bother to file paperwork don't. I imagine your asking about the ones that don't. Well, its so they can eat.

Most schools in most countries provide lunch. Here in Finland, its free for everybody.

Ah, the joys of being anal raped by the tax man - going by the tax rate in Scandinavia, you guys really like it.

I on the other hand prefer deciding where I spend my money rather than letting 120 greasy politicians up in Wellington dictate which pork barrel needs a good push, and in which direction or which special interest group needs to be kept happy.

So, after reading the thread, I'm wondering if I have understood the OP's question correctly.

Is the question why schools should provide lunch for students when most people can afford to bring food from home? And in the case of those who can't afford to buy their children lunch, why should schools spend money for lunch through their budgets when this is a matter more suited to be taken care of by for example social services?

I just would like for the questions to be clarified.

1) If they can't afford to feed their children, they obvious can't budget properly - or the social welfare system need a tweak, what ever the case, it has nothing to do with the education system.

2) It isn't the roll of the education system to feed children - they're an education provider; they sell a service to the public, and thats education, they aren't there to fix the social inequities in the system.

3) People whine about insufficient funds for school - solution, stop providing things that aren't the core focus of the education system.

Like I said, a school lunch at $1.50 per day is nothing, and thats at the high end of the spectrum; I'm sure it would be closer to actually 50cents per day.

it has nothing to do with the lunches security guards, or janitors. If you want to know where all the money goes, then you need to look no further than the school board, and superintendents. Ours makes nearly $500,000 a year, and then a few miles over there is a whole other district where the superintendent there makes about $250,000. I have a theory that they could combine the districts and pay one guy about $90,000 and spend the rest teaching the kids how to read.

Or bulk fund each school based on a certain amount of dollars per person, IIRC, in New Zealand it used to be $1,858 per student - and let the BOT - parents and teachers voted on by the students of the parents to decide where the money should be spent.

Money and school managed by the people which cost the tax payers zip, and once a year, there is an ERO inspection to check whether they're up to scratch adn delivering to the standard as expected by the education department.

For me, a mother of three and a college student myself, with my husband just declared legaly blind and unable to work until he is retrained (pending acceptance by certain government programs, and we're still waiting nearly 5 months later), we don't have the moeny to afford to keep enough food in our house. If it weren't for free meals at schools, I can't say that our kids would eat but one meal a day, and that simply isn't healthy. While my eldest has food restrictions, because of medical issues (diabetic diet), I am VERY thankful that they are able to eat a healthy meal at school. My middle child gets both breakfast and lunch at school. My youngest gets breakfast and lunch at day care. My eldest only gets lunch, because breakfast isn't provided at her school. We have to keep some breakfast food in the house because she has to take medication with food in the mornings.

While I agree that there are many MANY things wrong with the school system, having food for the children is an essential part of their day. They have to eat, and knowing that the schools do provide at least some modicum of healthy food is one major worry off my shoulders so I can focus on my schooling to get a better job and evenutally get our family out of the spot we've found ourselves.

I don't agree with the overly processed foods they are getting right now, and would love to see more healthy fruit, veggies, a salad bar, and less processed foods used. However, it takes more than one squeaky wheel to get oiled, and where I live, there aren't enough vocal people demnding that junk food be removed. Most of the people where I live subsist on junk food adn don't even know HOW to prepare healthy food. Sad, but a serious sign of the times with such things as childhood obesity on the rise.

Wisteria

What you pointed out was a problem with the socialwelfare system, not the education system. If you husband is legally blind, he should be receiving a disability allowance.

Goiing by the NZ system, if it were a workplace accident, he would receive ACC compenstation equal to that of 75% of his income, plus adjustments to his house plus an rehabilitation required.

Like I said, if there is something wrong, its the US social welfare system.

Take this for example - why are students specialising at such an early age at highschool - having had a look at the subjects on offer to students at college/highschool in the US, why?
A couple of different reasons.

1. Most of said courses are offered as electives they're beyond the core curriculum and are meant to both challenge and stimulate students and provide a break from core coursework. Unless you're in a really wonky school district, they cannot be taken in lue of core classes.

2. They provide students with a taste of what a particular course of study, or skill sets needed for future career paths. While they're drying up, there are still jobs for those with a high school degree and some of these classes are meant to provide the skills for that, or let the students know about different careers they may be interested in and what is invloved in them.

3. College prep, the US University system is still the best in the world, and the top colleges are very compeditive. They (and indeed, even the state schools) want to see diversity in the curriculm taken at the high school level.

So it's not taking away from the regular core curriculm, it's adding to it. And it's probably the real strength of the US system.

The US system doesn't test well, but its students come out with other skill sets, being creative for example.

Pull the money OUT of non-essenetial subjects like that, and get back to basics, provide the basics as to allow them with the necessary skils to either move on to learn a trade via a polytechnic or persue a degree at university.
Ah, but what IS the basics? Everytime I hear this I laugh, because the basics have changed so much from the three Rs. What a student needs in order to suceed keeps growing all the time. Many of the courses you think are worthless address issues that the kids will need (like IT skills), or allow practical application of some of the skills they have been learning (and addressing every teacher's bane of "Mr. Smith, WHY do we have to study X, we'll NEVER use it!").

1) If they can't afford to feed their children, they obvious can't budget properly - or the social welfare system need a tweak, what ever the case, it has nothing to do with the education system.
The reason for school lunches is that studies have proven that malnurished children do not learn at the same rate as their well nurished peers. And yeah, we can argue that the US welfare system should be doing this, but this IS the welfare system at work. All states have laws that say children MUST be at school during certain ages, it's a easy way to reach a very large population (I'm not sure how many school aged children there are in New Zealand, but in the US we're talking apox 75 million) and make sure they get at least ONE meal a day.

2) It isn't the roll of the education system to feed children - they're an education provider; they sell a service to the public, and thats education, they aren't there to fix the social inequities in the system.
Sadly though, many Americans are under the impression that if we fix the schools we'll magically fix the country, it's actually the other way around, but that's beside the point. But again, children learn better when they're fed.

Like I said, a school lunch at $1.50 per day is nothing, and thats at the high end of the spectrum; I'm sure it would be closer to actually 50cents per day.
Have you gone shopping for food lately? A healthy meal, in other words one to replace the school lunch, is a whole hell of a lot more than 50 cents a day.

why the hell do schools in the US have security guards?

Its been this way ever since the schools were integrated...the blacks kids gang up and pick on the white kids/steal their money. Also, where I live the spanish kids form gangs, so do the blacks, but not to the same level.

Its been this way ever since the schools were integrated...the blacks kids gang up and pick on the white kids/steal their money. Also, where I live the spanish kids form gangs, so do the blacks, but not to the same level.
Don't white kids sometimes do the same? :p

Or bulk fund each school based on a certain amount of dollars per person, IIRC, in New Zealand it used to be $1,858 per student

$1,858 is all? In Michigan in '03 we spent $8,410 per student. I know we're in the top half of states by spending per student, but not the top 5.

School meal is good sign of good country, like we here Finland have meal, but its free two and of course schools have security guards, becouse George Bush thinks it`s good sign of security to other countrys, its all politic


George Bush has *nothing* to do with security guards; crime in schools has everything to do with security guards.

If you don't know, don't assume.

Don't white kids sometimes do the same? :p

No. They just shoot up schools on their own. They don't do this "Gang" thing...

Don't white kids sometimes do the same? :p

Of course, but not nearly to the same extent.

Take this for example - why are students specialising at such an early age at highschool - having had a look at the subjects on offer to students at college/highschool in the US, why?

I went right up till the end of College, and I can assure you, that schools certainly don't need to offer things like 'IT', "Criminal Phsycology' etc etc. which is the domain of universities and polytechnics.

Pull the money OUT of non-essenetial subjects like that, and get back to basics, provide the basics as to allow them with the necessary skils to either move on to learn a trade via a polytechnic or persue a degree at university.

Its about allocating the funds to the basics of schooling, and letting pie-in-the-sky subjects get funded at university by individuals who choose to take those subjects and fund it out of their own pocket.


So our education system is crap, but our courses are too advanced?
Make up your mind, please.

Ah, the joys of being anal raped by the tax man - going by the tax rate in Scandinavia, you guys really like it.

I on the other hand prefer deciding where I spend my money rather than letting 120 greasy politicians up in Wellington dictate which pork barrel needs a good push, and in which direction or which special interest group needs to be kept happy.

Ah. So children are a "special interest group" that you don't think needs to be kept fed and educated.

Gotcha.

No. They just shoot up schools on their own. They don't do this "Gang" thing...

How many gothic school shootings have there been.....

Ok, now how many times has their been minority gangs dealing drugs, beating up kids and stealing money.

Ok, now how many times has their been minority gangs dealing drugs, beating up kids and stealing money.
Okay...Germany does not have Black kids, or Spanish kids, but we had gangs too at our school. Germans, Turks, Russians, all together in one or two gangs, bullying, stealing and generally being a nuisance.

As for drugs, everyone had them, no gangs required. :p
The people who actually brought it in were full-grown adults with submachine guns from the Ukraine I believe.

Ah, but what IS the basics? Everytime I hear this I laugh, because the basics have changed so much from the three Rs. What a student needs in order to suceed keeps growing all the time. Many of the courses you think are worthless address issues that the kids will need (like IT skills), or allow practical application of some of the skills they have been learning (and addressing every teacher's bane of "Mr. Smith, WHY do we have to study X, we'll NEVER use it!").

That is why in NZ students can leave at the age of 15/16 and head off to polytechnic and learn those IT skills he or she will require later on in life.

The assumption is this; if you're staying right up until the end of college, then its obvious you're going to university, if you're going to learn a trade, certificate or diploma, you head off to polytechnic and attend that place where they specialise your skills in your chosen area.

The reason for school lunches is that studies have proven that malnurished children do not learn at the same rate as their well nurished peers. And yeah, we can argue that the US welfare system should be doing this, but this IS the welfare system at work. All states have laws that say children MUST be at school during certain ages, it's a easy way to reach a very large population (I'm not sure how many school aged children there are in New Zealand, but in the US we're talking apox 75 million) and make sure they get at least ONE meal a day.

But again, that isn't the roll of the school - we have problems with children nutrician, but that is left to the social welfare to provide budgeting classes, emergency grocery grants, charieties to provide vegetables and food that have been donated by local vegetable growing companies and supermarkets.

Like I said, it isn't the schools responsibility to play nanny state.

Sadly though, many Americans are under the impression that if we fix the schools we'll magically fix the country, it's actually the other way around, but that's beside the point. But again, children learn better when they're fed.

Well, sorry to sound Republican, but it all starts at the home - if the home isn't right, the school isn't right, and by enlarge, the school is merely a microcosm of the real world.

Its the parents responsibility to ensure that their children have a good breakfeast, that they take a packed lunch to school, and that their children do their homework when they get home.

Have you gone shopping for food lately? A healthy meal, in other words one to replace the school lunch, is a whole hell of a lot more than 50 cents a day.

Babe, I take a cooked curry to work each day consisting of Pumpkin, Kumera, Carrots, Potato, Parsnip and celery. The whole thing sets me back $2.50 per day, including the cost of the electricity used!

So yes, 2 sandwiches with vegemite, a piece of fruit and a sipper bottle filled with cordel or water will only set you back around 50-80cents per day; hardly something I would called 'budget breaking'.

Okay...Germany does not have Black kids, or Spanish kids, but we had gangs too at our school. Germans, Turks, Russians, all together in one or two gangs, bullying, stealing and generally being a nuisance.

As for drugs, everyone had them, no gangs required. :p
The people who actually brought it in were full-grown adults with submachine guns from the Ukraine I believe.
Germany is NOT the USA.

Germany is NOT the USA.
:eek:
Now you tell me.

Point is that race has nothing to do with criminal leanings, violence at school or any other such thing.

$1,858 is all? In Michigan in '03 we spent $8,410 per student. I know we're in the top half of states by spending per student, but not the top 5.

Well, that was based on statistics years and years ago; I don't know what it is now, however.

All I know is this; things are going down hill since they removed bulk funding and started using the disproven zoning that NZ used 20 years ago, and the US still holds onto.

Competition is good in education, it quickly told those schools in the Wellington region that there are alternatives, and parents were willing to bus them from one side of town to get the best education.

Don't white kids sometimes do the same? :p

I went to a school where I was in the minority, a white boy in a sea of Polynesians and Maori - never had a problem once.

Want to know the source of all the schools problems? poor white trash.

:eek:
Now you tell me.

Point is that race has nothing to do with criminal leanings, violence at school or any other such thing.
You are neglecting the USA's particular situation. If black kids in the USA do indeed perpetrate more crimes and violence, then it is a factor.

I went to a school where I was in the minority, a white boy in a sea of Polynesians and Maori - never had a problem once.

Want to know the source of all the schools problems? poor white trash.
Poor trash period. Economic class has more to do with crime than anything else.

Ah. So children are a "special interest group" that you don't think needs to be kept fed and educated.

Gotcha.

No, parents who expect the government to cloth, feed and discipline their children are a special interest group - and without hesitation I also say, the source of all societies problems.

Poor trash period. Economic class has more to do with crime than anything else.

Who said anything about class? Obviously you know jack about the socio-economic conditions in NZ.

:eek:
Now you tell me.

Point is that race has nothing to do with criminal leanings, violence at school or any other such thing.

Maybe in Germany it doesnt, but youv never gone to school in American, and here it DOES.

Who said anything about class? Obviously you know jack about the socio-economic conditions in NZ.
You used the word poor, did you not? And please, don't try and act as if "poor, white trash" is not a racist slur. You may be white, so your use of it may well not be derogatory, but it is a nasty phrase. If you were to call a black person a "******" you'd be branded a racist instantly. Lets not act as if it isn't racism.

Who said anything about class? Obviously you know jack about the socio-economic conditions in NZ.

That may be, but obviously all of you know jack about the racial make up of gangs and violence in schools in AMERICA (not Germany or NZ).

Maybe in Germany it doesnt, but youv never gone to school in American, and here it DOES.

Oh pulease, the myth in NZ of 'Maori and Polynesians cause crime', by and large has been disproven - like I keep saying, want to know the source of any disturbance, its white trash.

If black kids in the USA do indeed perpetrate more crimes and violence, then it is a factor.

Trust me, they do. I'm not discussing the reasons behind it, I'm just stating the facts, THEY DO.

No, parents who expect the government to cloth, feed and discipline their children are a special interest group - and without hesitation I also say, the source of all societies problems.
Haven't done your reading yet? (http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Third_World_US/SI_Kozol_StLouis.html)
The occasional free lunch for a poor kid isn't the fucking problem.

That is why in NZ students can leave at the age of 15/16 and head off to polytechnic and learn those IT skills he or she will require later on in life.

The assumption is this; if you're staying right up until the end of college, then its obvious you're going to university, if you're going to learn a trade, certificate or diploma, you head off to polytechnic and attend that place where they specialise your skills in your chosen area.



But again, that isn't the roll of the school - we have problems with children nutrician, but that is left to the social welfare to provide budgeting classes, emergency grocery grants, charieties to provide vegetables and food that have been donated by local vegetable growing companies and supermarkets.

Like I said, it isn't the schools responsibility to play nanny state.



Well, sorry to sound Republican, but it all starts at the home - if the home isn't right, the school isn't right, and by enlarge, the school is merely a microcosm of the real world.

Its the parents responsibility to ensure that their children have a good breakfeast, that they take a packed lunch to school, and that their children do their homework when they get home.



Babe, I take a cooked curry to work each day consisting of Pumpkin, Kumera, Carrots, Potato, Parsnip and celery. The whole thing sets me back $2.50 per day, including the cost of the electricity used!

So yes, 2 sandwiches with vegemite, a piece of fruit and a sipper bottle filled with cordel or water will only set you back around 50-80cents per day; hardly something I would called 'budget breaking'.

Forgive me for being nitpicky, but even allowing for the differences in American spelling versus "proper" spelling, your posts are not an argument for the superior educational system of New Zealand. Nor is the abolition in your posts of apostrophes in possessives.

That said, the US educational system is several orders of magnitude larger than New Zealand's.... you're comparing a nation with a population of 4,035,461 to a nation with a population of 295,734,134. There are 18,976,457 souls living in my home state, 8 Million in my city, and 2,465,326 in my borough alone. A solely centralized system would collapse under its own bureaucracy; not that the state- and city- funded systems work particularly well.

There are students here for whom the school lunch is their one and only meal of the day - were it not provided, a packet of crisps and a 6 oz carton of colored sugar water might be all they ate (and would cost more than your princely fifty cents a day, I might add). If your sense of social justice is such that you think that is sufficient for someone to subsist on, let alone be able to think properly on... well, I can't say I think much of your position.

Oh pulease, the myth in NZ of 'Maori and Polynesians cause crime', by and large has been disproven - like I keep saying, want to know the source of any disturbance, its white trash.
Since when is NZ the USA though?

Forgive me for being nitpicky, but even allowing for the differences in American spelling versus "proper" spelling, your posts are not an argument for the superior educational system of New Zealand. Nor is the abolition in your posts of apostrophes in possessives.

Babe, its because I can't be figged using them - this is a casual post, not some sort of grammar rodeo for people to intellectually masturbate off to.

That said, the US educational system is several orders of magnitude larger than New Zealand's.... you're comparing a nation with a population of 4,035,461 to a nation with a population of 295,734,134. There are 18,976,457 souls living in my home state, 8 Million in my city, and 2,465,326 in my borough alone. A solely centralized system would collapse under its own bureaucracy; not that the state- and city- funded systems work particularly well.

Hence the reason why for many years, the best years IMHO of the NZ education system, they allocated funds DIRECTLY to schools to allow THEM not the beaucrats to assign money were they were needed.

Couple that with local business sponsor ship and fundraising, and subsidising of religious/private schools as well, parents are given choices - a system that was actually put up as a model in Australia as something to follow.

There are students here for whom the school lunch is their one and only meal of the day - were it not provided, a packet of crisps and a 6 oz carton of colored sugar water might be all they ate (and would cost more than your princely fifty cents a day, I might add). If your sense of social justice is such that you think that is sufficient for someone to subsist on, let alone be able to think properly on... well, I can't say I think much of your position.

Babe, I went to school with marmite sammies with a sipper bottle and a piece of fruit, and I turned out quite dandy; and with my paper round money, I bought myself lunch from the tuck shop once a week - so no, I didn't live a 'privilaged life' if that was what you were trying to get at.

Since when is NZ the USA though?
Right.
The OP was about US ed. system.

Why talk about Finnish or even NZ (marmite and toast is a meal!?!) systems end the US one? In those countries education is the first priority... of course US one seems ridiculous compared to them.

Edit: Yes, the whole world envies your universities, USA.

Right.
The OP was about US ed. system.

Why talk about Finnish or even NZ (marmite and toast is a meal!?!) systems end the US one? In those countries education is the first priority... of course US one seems ridiculous compared to them.
Whether or not this holds true, the socioeconomic conditions of the USA and US culture differ so greatly that its not correct to make assertions about what holds true in the USA based on experiences of other countries.

Marmite is edible? It looks like road tar.

Whether or not this holds true, the socioeconomic conditions of the USA and US culture differ so greatly that its not correct to make assertions about what holds true in the USA based on experiences of other countries.

Marmite is edible? It looks like road tar.
I thought I was agreeing with you.

I thought I was agreeing with you.
I was clarifying why I made my original post, not disagreeing with you :p

Yeah. I wish I wasn't making all them typos...
It was not because of the delicious and nutritious free school meals I enjoyed before, though.

Yeah. I wish I wasn't making all them typos...
It was not because of the delicious and nutritious free school meals I enjoyed before, though.
We had to pay for ours :p They still sucked anyway. :headbang:

The OP is right, though... If you neglect schooling totally, why not neglect school food too...

We had to pay for ours :p They still sucked anyway. :headbang:
I never paid for mine, but it wasn't because of a school program but rather because I was a smooth talker. No, really. I would charm the girls that ran the snack and food bars. Whatever the hell happened to that and why I couldn't convert that into becoming a 'ladies man' is a subject of much frustration...

I never paid for mine, but it wasn't because of a school program but rather because I was a smooth talker. No, really. I would charm the girls that ran the snack and food bars. Whatever the hell happened to that and why I couldn't convert that into becoming a 'ladies man' is a subject of much frustration...
That doesn't help make the food any better though...I used to get guys to get me stuff, even if I had cash on me :p

Babe, its because I can't be figged using them - this is a casual post, not some sort of grammar rodeo for people to intellectually masturbate off to.
In other words, be condescending when called on it because you can't be bothered to use the lovely education you allegedly had (because it's not evident in your posts). Honestly, if you're going to sit there and trash the US educational system while holding up Neo Zed as the pinnacle, you could at least try to demonstrate "the basics."

Hence the reason why for many years, the best years IMHO of the NZ education system, they allocated funds DIRECTLY to schools to allow THEM not the beaucrats to assign money were they were needed. They do this, for the most part, in the US now. Do you know what happens when it's given directly to the schools with no one overseeing it at all? The community school boards tend to run off to Jamaica on 'educational junkets' leaving the students with exactly jack.

Couple that with local business sponsor ship and fundraising, and subsidising of religious/private schools as well, parents are given choices - a system that was actually put up as a model in Australia as something to follow. We have that as well. But according to you, it doesn't work.

Babe, I went to school with marmite sammies with a sipper bottle and a piece of fruit, and I turned out quite dandy; and with my paper round money, I bought myself lunch from the tuck shop once a week - so no, I didn't live a 'privilaged life' if that was what you were trying to get at.
Neither did I, but apparently my grammar and spelling IS something to which those inclined can intellectually masturbate, whereas yours is most definitely not. Arrogance is annoying enough when the person actually is as well-educated as they make themselves out to be... it's laughable in other cases.

Do I detect a strong case of nationalism in this thread? I could swear I do -- and refreshingly, it's not floating from the North American continent....

schools have security guards, becouse George Bush thinks it`s good sign of security to other countrys, its all politic
You don't know a damn thing do you? The idea started under Clinton when they had school shootings like the one in Jonesboro or Columbine.

You don't know a damn thing do you? The idea started under Clinton when they had school shootings like the one in Jonesboro or Columbine.
not really we had guards, metal detectors and the like when I was in junior high way back in 1992 :eek: that was way before Columbine.

Public schools in the US provide lunches to generate extra income (it's the same reason they have vending machines). The school districts themselves do not subsidize lunches for poor students. The free lunch (as well as breakfast) program is a national program paid for by the US Dept. of Agriculture. This is the same department that handles food stamps and other government food programs for those in need. School districts actually make a small profit off of these subsidized lunches. That money is then typically used to help fund educational programs.

So, in short, school districts in the US provide lunches not only because it is the ethical thing to do, but because it benifits their pocketbooks to do so. It does not take any money away from education. But had you botherd to do some elementary research, you'd already know this. ;)

Public schools in the US provide lunches to generate extra income (it's the same reason they have vending machines). The school districts themselves do not subsidize lunches for poor students. The free lunch (as well as breakfast) program is a national program paid for by the US Dept. of Agriculture. This is the same department that handles food stamps and other government food programs for those in need. School districts actually make a small profit off of these subsidized lunches. That money is then typically used to help fund educational programs.

So, in short, school districts in the US provide lunches not only because it is the ethical thing to do, but because it benifits their pocketbooks to do so. It does not take any money away from education. But had you botherd to do some elementary research, you'd already know this. ;)
What'd'ya know...I wasn't aware of this, I just thought that blaming bad schools on school lunches was ridiculous, but it turns out it's just damn stupid-
Here (http://www.healthyschoollunches.org/background/funding.html)
Schools that choose to take part in the NSLP get cash subsidies, donated commodities, and free bonus shipments from the USDA for each meal they serve.
The amount of reimbursement depends on the number of children receiving free and reduced-price lunches. (In School Year 2003-04, schools received $2.19 for each lunch served free of charge, $1.79 for each reduced-price lunch, and $0.21 for full-price lunches.)

How can these funds be used?
School districts and independent schools that choose to take part in the lunch program receive cash reimbursement and donated commodity assistance from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) for each meal they serve. Funds can be applied to the costs of food, preparation, and other expenses associated with the food service.
Here (http://www.uscharterschools.org/cs/fs/view/uscs_pr/26)
So this whole line of questioning is misguided as well as misinformed.

Silly rabbit.

Thanks Tecoma, for reminding us to research now and then.

That is why in NZ students can leave at the age of 15/16 and head off to polytechnic and learn those IT skills he or she will require later on in life.

The assumption is this; if you're staying right up until the end of college, then its obvious you're going to university, if you're going to learn a trade, certificate or diploma, you head off to polytechnic and attend that place where they specialise your skills in your chosen area.
Guess what Bub, the US system isn't set up to mimic the German system (Unlike New Zealand). Now there's many reasons for this having to do a great deal with aims and needs of the US education system, but we don't have tech schools for high school aged kids.

The con is yes, kids who don't want to be in high school have no other place to go, even if they are obviously never going to university or college.

The pro side is that many years down the road, should they decide to go to college and get a degree when they find out that a tech job isn't pulling in the bucks like it used to, they are able to. That one part of the US system that is amazing, you can always go back and get a second chance.

But again, that isn't the roll of the school - we have problems with children nutrician, but that is left to the social welfare to provide budgeting classes, emergency grocery grants, charieties to provide vegetables and food that have been donated by local vegetable growing companies and supermarkets.

Like I said, it isn't the schools responsibility to play nanny state.
You missed my two points, one it's in the interest of the school to have well fed children. Well fed children are (usually) well behaved children who are able to consentrate on their studies.

And two, it is easier to reach the kids at school then hunt them otherwise. Again, look at the population differences between New Zealand and the US. As Kat said, a centralized system would collapse.

Its the parents responsibility to ensure that their children have a good breakfeast, that they take a packed lunch to school, and that their children do their homework when they get home.
And if the parents cannot pay? If that $2 a day (and if we're talking about children instead of child, that could be $4, $6, or $8 or more) a day means dinner on the table, or bills payed? It helps, yeah, they might be able to afford it, but it helps to not have to pay it.

So yes, 2 sandwiches with vegemite, a piece of fruit and a sipper bottle filled with cordel or water will only set you back around 50-80cents per day; hardly something I would called 'budget breaking'.
Well, one, hate to tell you this, only Aussies and Kiwis can stomach that concoction called vegemite, the rest of the world knows well enough to leave it alone.

Two, it's not going to be 80 cents, again the key term is nutricious. The meals might not taste good, but school lunches DO provide a good meal.

No one has touched upon the fact that it is not the the school system's sole duty to educate. School's also have the responsibility to sociolize students and to make sure a student is recieving proper care. The reason teachers are required to report suspected abuse is the same reason schools provide free and reduced lunch. To say that it is not a school's place to provide warm meals to underprivileged students is to show that you are ignorant of a school's role and the reality of society today.

Thanks Tecoma, for reminding us to research now and then.

No prob.:D

I didn't actually expect the OP would know this info off hand given his location and age. But just by typing "free school lunch program" into a search engine he could easily have found it.

This thread kind of suprised me. I thought most Americans who went to public schools or sent their kids to public schools knew how the lunch program worked. That'll teach me to assume. :p

Why the hell do US schools provide lunch?
There are those in this country that cannot afford to bring, have, or eat lunch. There are programs for many students (if they qualify for it), to have free lunch. Thus, they can at least have one meal each day (rather, weekday).

why the hell do schools in the US have security guards?
This is to prevent or deter crime. If it occurs on school property (ie. gangs, people with weapons, predation of children, etc.) they can be there to stop them. Also, the security at my school helps make sure that students don't cut classes, loiter, or anything of the like. They often help to enforce school rules with the dean, as well.

why do they have people paid to clean the grounds, having been to a school where students were put on 'litter patrols'?
When I was in middle school, litter patrol was a punishment. In high school, that doesn't work (well, at my high school it doesn't), so it's not put in to effect. We then have janitors that clean the premise and do maintanance work.

Schools in the 'States aren't really equally funded. Also, you cannot make anyone or everyone learn. Although it is a law that we have to go to school, that doesn't stop people from not going and running around not in class. It's basically up to the individual -- whether, they want to be there or not. If a person does not want to go to school or learn, they won't want to participate or anything of that sort.

No prob.:D

I didn't actually expect the OP would know this info off hand given his location and age. But just by typing "free school lunch program" into a search engine he could easily have found it.

This thread kind of suprised me. I thought most Americans who went to public schools or sent their kids to public schools knew how the lunch program worked. That'll teach me to assume. :p

Babe, I'm located in NZ.

But according to many Americans here, New Zealand is located in the Netherlands.

Probably explains my collection of clogs outside and have a country full of dykes.

Babe, I'm located in NZ.

But according to many Americans here, New Zealand is located in the Netherlands.

Probably explains my collection of clogs outside and have a country full of dykes.
Riiiiight. That would be why he said, "I didn't expect the OP to know this off hand given his location..." He knows you're not in the US.

But, if you are going to throw a tizzy on a subject, you might want to have researched it for half a second. Regardless of where you are.

Babe, I'm located in NZ.

On the South Island if I recall correctly. Which is part of the reason I gave for why I didn't think you would know this info off hand.

Why provide it? it isn't the schools responsibility to provide lunch, its the parents - you know, bringing along packed lunches in a lunch box! shock! horror!

Meals provided by schools are vital, simply because good nutrician promots better concentration as well as general health. School days also run past the general "lunch" time period.. even at general jobs in the work force.. any employee who works over 5 hours is required to be given a lunch hour.

As for the weakness's of our (the US system) some are very clear.. The very fact that education is put under the gise of individual states themselves is one massive fault. States often face budgetary problems, and education being such a large program in general often makes for an easy target when it comes time for cut backs. Also states control the standards by which their students perform at (in large part), and as such some states have far lower standards then others. This makes the system itself unbalanced.

As well the whole idea of school districting is backwards and really does segregate by classes. Richer communities often pay more in taxes (based on their income) but those extra funds go to their districts school systems. Also the school districts in wealthier communities dont have nearly the same overcrowding problems as many wealtheir youths will go to private schools. Mean while poorer districts public schools will tend to be more over crowded, and will receive far less funding from taxes as their tax base comes from lower incomes. Districting is a sham, and public education being a tenant of national prosperity needs to be striped from the incapable hands of individual states and fully federalized. When we acheive federal standards, oversight, and funding.. you will see a far more successful education system.

This is the reason why so many European countries outperform us with half the cost.

But according to many Americans here, New Zealand is located in the Netherlands.

At least they have some grasp of history then ;)

Riiiiight. That would be why he said, "I didn't expect the OP to know this off hand given his location..." He knows you're not in the US.

But, if you are going to throw a tizzy on a subject, you might want to have researched it for half a second. Regardless of where you are.

Excuse me, there was no 'tizzy' and all that happened is we have different views on how social services should be delivered to the public - hardly something I would say that is going to bring the world to and end.

Also, many have bought up the flaws within the system, in regards to how funding is allocated.

So actually now I'm a little more enlightened on the issue than what 20/20 originally gave me in their segment.

Excuse me, there was no 'tizzy' and all that happened is we have different views on how social services should be delivered to the public - hardly something I would say that is going to bring the world to and end.

Also, many have bought up the flaws within the system, in regards to how funding is allocated.

So actually now I'm a little more enlightened on the issue than what 20/20 originally gave me in their segment.


Sounds to me you watched a 30 min show,considered yourself an expert, and made a half-assed, ill-informed, rant.

shrug.

Sounds to me you watched a 30 min show,considered yourself an expert, and made a half-assed, ill-informed, rant.

shrug.

Babe, where did I say I was an expert? I attached a couple of statements to a balloon to see who could shoot it down; I have be corrected.

If I wanted to be a real asshole, I could go Republican and claim that irrespective of the good points made here, I'm still right; the fact is, I have accepted that I have been corrected.

Oh, btw BackwoodsSquatches, DHL is at the door, its the clue I ordered for you.

Babe, where did I say I was an expert? I attached a couple of statements to a balloon to see who could shoot it down; I have be corrected.

If I wanted to be a real asshole, I could go Republican and claim that irrespective of the good points made here, I'm still right; the fact is, I have accepted that I have been corrected.

Oh, btw BackwoodsSquatches, DHL is at the door, its the clue I ordered for you.


Wait...youre the one who made an il-informed, and invalid rant, and Im the one who needs a clue?

Sounds about as logical as the other posts you made.
Must be that top-notch New Zealand education coming into play again, eh?

Must be that top-notch New Zealand education coming into play again, eh?

Not all the Kiwis are like that. I had a friend in Japan, Andy, from NZ. Did his post-secondary work in Anthropology, I think. Loved to get drunk and ride his bicycle around the train station, grabbing peoples hats off and riding away cackling. Did it to a cop one night.

But he was usually quite admirable.

Wait...youre the one who made an il-informed, and invalid rant, and Im the one who needs a clue?

Sounds about as logical as the other posts you made.
Must be that top-notch New Zealand education coming into play again, eh?

And yet you go on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and and ON!

You're right, I'm wrong - simple and straight to the point!

And Americans wonder why they're loathed.

Why are we even comparing the U.S. to some place like Finland, anyway? We've got 300,000,000 people in this country, a large percentage of which consists of children who don't speak English as a first language. Finland has a dying population of barely 5,000,000, with only a small percentage consisting of school-aged children, and a small influx of immigrants, compared to our massive, mostly unchecked flow of Latin America's poorest and least educated citizens.

I'd be worried if they *couldn't* manage that few children with the percentage they take in taxes, and with the bureaucracy they have set up, not proud if they accomplish what anyone with that meager task should be able to.

Sounds to me you watched a 30 min show,considered yourself an expert, and made a half-assed, ill-informed, rant.

shrug.
At least [s]he learned something. many out there (as well as alot on this forum) refuse to learn no matter what is presented and how.


Education does not stop when one leaves the classroom. :D

Heres an example of why our education sucks. I am currently taking honors Spanish III (in high school). Reason being that I used to be fluent in spanish when I was living (having been born and raised in Southern California, though I'm not spanish) but I forgot alot of it and I would like to be fluent again. So Im taking this class to learn Spanish, and while we do learn it half the time, the other half of the time is spent learning about the amazing diversity of different amazing hispanic culturs :rolleyes: such as Spain, Costa Rica...etc....I didnt take this class to fucking learn about Argentinian cowboys, I took it to learn Spanish. Who gives a shit about the cultures in those countries. NOT ME! And they should have seperate classes on latin America culture and history and not mush it into a Spanish language class, language being the key word.

Anyway thats my problem with our education here in the good old US of A.

I'm watching this 20/20 thing on SKY News.

Question: Why the hell do US schools provide lunch? why the hell do schools in the US have security guards? why do they have people paid to clean the grounds, having been to a school where students were put on 'litter patrols'?

I just find it funny how thousands and thousands are spent per student, and the performance of the state school system is shit house.

Could someone from the 'land of the free' give me a heads up on this?

ps. I went to a Catholic and Protestant Colleges/Highschool and Primary school, which was partially subsidised by the public education system.
So I'm 15...a sophomore in high school...I should be able to answer some of these, hmm?

Anyway, we get lunch because not all of us can afford the lunch they give to us at school. Not all of us have schedules and budgets where we can purchase lunch at the grocery store. Mom gets home at 7 pm every weekday now and dad's not really helping out as much as he should. Due to mom's low income, me and my brother both qualify for the federal lunch program where both our breakfast and lunches are free. Which is great really, considering the school charges $2.75 per lunch. Sometimes I don't even eat all the food the school gives me, though. It's too lousy. I get it for the water. Stupidly, my food isn't free if I just get water. I'd have to pay for it.

Our schools have security guards because our schools have violent people in them. Take my school. We have 4,200 students. We're a mix of upper, middle, and lower class students. Because of that, there are a considerable number of fights, thefts, and your occasional vandalism. Though my school is quite lucky, we don't have as many fights as the high school down the street, which sees a fight once a week.

And the trash picking people...well....4,200 kids can cause a big mess. Many of us actually throw our trash away but stuff gets around. And our school isn't exactly small...

And I don't see how lunch, security guards, and trash have any effect on an education system. I think it's the mentality of students, enviornment, the will of the teachers (Really, I can tell the difference between a good teacher and a bad teacher), and school administration coupled with state budgets.

Heres an example of why our education sucks. I am currently taking honors Spanish III (in high school). Reason being that I used to be fluent in spanish when I was living (having been born and raised in Southern California, though I'm not spanish) but I forgot alot of it and I would like to be fluent again. So Im taking this class to learn Spanish, and while we do learn it half the time, the other half of the time is spent learning about the amazing diversity of different amazing hispanic culturs :rolleyes: such as Spain, Costa Rica...etc....I didnt take this class to fucking learn about Argentinian cowboys, I took it to learn Spanish. Who gives a shit about the cultures in those countries. NOT ME! And they should have seperate classes on latin America culture and history and not mush it into a Spanish language class, language being the key word.

Anyway thats my problem with our education here in the good old US of A.
Really? Our Spanish II (We have no foreign language honors classes) class teaches nothing about Spanish cultures (That was the first week of Spanish I), but our Spanish II class consists of idiots who intentionally forgot everything they learned in Spanish II.

Last month we learned everything over about such petty things (el, la, los, las usage, etc.) It's the students.

Really? Our Spanish II (We have no foreign language honors classes) class teaches nothing about Spanish cultures (That was the first week of Spanish I), but our Spanish II class consists of idiots who intentionally forgot everything they learned in Spanish II.

Last month we learned everything over about such petty things (el, la, los, las usage, etc.) It's the students.
Yah Im in Spanish 1 and like most of my classmates I dont care about learning Spanish, I just dont really have any praticular motivation to remember what I learn. The only reason I try is to not bring down my GPA

Yah Im in Spanish 1 and like most of my classmates I dont care about learning Spanish, I just dont really have any praticular motivation to remember what I learn. The only reason I try is to not bring down my GPA

Well I dont mind learning spanish...I used to be fluent when I was young and lived in Southern Cali but I forgot alot of it, but I just wish we had more options, I would love to learn German and Russian.

Which is stupid; a loaf of bread is 99cents, grab a jar of marmite - marmite sandwiches, bring along a drink in a sipper bottle, and maybe a piece of fruit, grand total of that, $1.50 or so.


If you have 3 or 4 children in school, that can add up. $6/day= $30 a week, $120-$150 per month. Thats a lot for people who may only make the minimum wage. I agree that the US spends a hell of a lot, yet arent up to par on the education standards itself, but lets not find fault with providing food to children. Thats beyond nit- picking.