Vending Machines in schools

"Cathy Weeks" wrote in message
om...
toto wrote in message
. ..
On 2 Jul 2003 08:19:08 -0700, (Cathy Weeks)
wrote:

That's all I can think of now...I'd love more suggestions and input.

How about vote *for* the tax increases needed to fully fund the
schools so they don't need extra funds from such sources.

giggle people pass a tax levy for the schools??? Now *thats* a novel
idea. The only time residents *ever* voted to increase taxes for the
schools where I went was when the high school burned down.

As much as I'd like people to vote that way, it doesn't seem very
practical. (Not that many of my other ideas were practical, either).

Where I live in New Jersey, every budget must be approved by the voters,
including any new tax increases. I think this is true state wide. Where my
dad lives in PA, they just pass the budget and the tax increases along.

In Michigan, where my cousins live, the voters agreed to a tax increase so
that the kids would have a new place to play soccer and improvements in the
football stadium and a kindergarten room that was not in the high school
(unfortuantely, that was the only place in the school district with room for
the kindergarten room, something parents felt was not an ideal situation). I
am sure there were other educational things in it too. One of the big
problems is getting older voters to vote for the tax increase. I guess they
figure they or their kids won't benefit from it. However, they fail to
realize that everyone benefits from a good education, not just the kids.

All the best,

Jeff

Cathy Weeks
Mommy to Kivi Alexis 12/01 - http://www.bricktopia.com/kivi
to reply remove the spam and Cathy isn't spelled with a K

"P. Tierney" wrote in message
news:tR8Na.7473$I8.2443@rwcrnsc53...

"Cathy Weeks" wrote in message
om...
toto wrote in message
. ..
On 2 Jul 2003 08:19:08 -0700, (Cathy Weeks)
wrote:

That's all I can think of now...I'd love more suggestions and input.

How about vote *for* the tax increases needed to fully fund the
schools so they don't need extra funds from such sources.

giggle people pass a tax levy for the schools??? Now *thats* a novel
idea. The only time residents *ever* voted to increase taxes for the
schools where I went was when the high school burned down.

As much as I'd like people to vote that way, it doesn't seem very
practical.

Well sure it is. All they need to do as title the legislation
"Legalize Casinos For Education!!!" Then, the state can create
and promote gambling addiction (which leads to familial abuse,
bankruptcy, etc.) so that the profits* can fund the schools. (Cue
up the theme to The Music Man.) It's a win-win scenerio!!!

In PA, I think all the sales tax is supposed to go to education.

And all of the money from the lotery goes to benefit senior citizens. A lot
of the buses that transport seniors are marked so that people can see the
benefits from the lotery (I would like to personally benefit from the
jackpot).

All the best,

Jeff

(...)

"Nan" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 09 Jul 2003 06:44:36 GMT, "Byron Canfield"
wrote:

"Nan" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 04:28:23 GMT, "Byron Canfield"
wrote:

The schools DO have the option; they're just afraid to look at it.

And you know this to be fact because.....

Nan

I know the option to be a fact because my daughter's school has done so.

I know the fear to be a fact (apparently the fear of losing funding)
because
you have said so yourself -- unless you were lying?

Oh, now you're putting words in my posts for me. Nope, I never said
anything of the sort, Byron. And absolutely not as *fact*.

What I *have* said is that schools need funding. I *have* said that
major corporations also come in and offer to put the vending machines
in, as an exchange for either money, or supplies, or whatever.

I *have* said that healthy alternatives probably aren't as lucrative
to the school as the junky ones. Some have offered anecdotal evidence
to the contrary.

You're the one that made the assertion that schools have the option.
You only factually know that your daughter's school has chosen that
option. You don't factually know that all other schools (as was
implied in your response) also have that option.
But I'll grant you the benefit of the doubt and go along with you
because the corporations do have water and other beverages available,
so it makes sense that it may be offered as an option to each
school/district.

That is HAS been done is proof enough that it can be done.

You also asserted that the schools were "afraid to look at it", but
you haven't backed that up. I've not made such a statement, so it's
not mine to back up.

Every excuse you have provided for not looking into the options has
demonstrated fear of looking at options.


--
"There are 10 kinds of people in the world:
those who understand binary numbers and those who don't."
-----------------------------
Byron "Barn" Canfield

On Wed, 9 Jul 2003 22:43:01 -0400, "CBI" wrote:


"toto" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 9 Jul 2003 17:29:01 -0400, "CBI" wrote:

Yes but, as you say, not all adults can leave for lunch. I think part of
growing up to be an adult is to learn that you don't always get to make
the
rules you want.

However, most college kids have a much better schedule. We are fools
if we think that making high schools like primary schools works to
produce kids who are learning to be adults.

Whatever benefit you can imagine for being able to go out for lunch on their
own can be realized at other times such as nights and weekends at the mall,
on dates, etc. If the school finds that the kids leaving campus in the
middle of the day creates problems such as them getting into trouble and
missing classes then the best move would be to keep them there. It will be
good training for when their boss makes them stay close for lunch or
required classes in college keep them from having lunch when and where they
want.

You don't always get to eat your lunch where and when you want (or at all).
I think the kids would be more poorly served if they grew up expecting that
they would.

I think you don't give kids credit for being able to understand
differing situations.

I ate my lunch when and where I wished in college. I ate on my bosses
schedule when I worked for a large company. I ate on my own schedule
when I owned my own business and when I was at home with my own
children. Schools should give kids a chance to learn how to schedule
their own time, imo.


--
Dorothy

There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..
Outer Limits

I may be the lone voice here, but i think vending machines are not the
issue. Most schools dont let them eat or drink during class anyways.
What needs to change is going to be a shock to everyone here....
parents. there i said it. Parents need to teach their kids how to
eat properly. the vast majority of kids should have very good
metabolisms (meaning they can eat anything and everything and it
doesnt catch up to them) These kids are gaining so much weight
because they have never learned how to eat right. Parents (becaue of
todays econonmy) rarely have time to cook a good meal for their
families. so kids get used to frozen meals and take out. How should
they no that eating snacks at school or after school is any diferent?
and why would they choose the old green beans from the cafeteria, when
they can have luchables....because they have never been tought the
diference. they are also never encouraged to exersize....... these
are much bigger issues that will affect these kids for their WHOLE
LIFE..

"ben121" wrote in message
om...
I may be the lone voice here, but i think vending machines are not the
issue. Most schools dont let them eat or drink during class anyways.

Not from my experience. Nor should they, imo, if they are
going to have the things in the halls. At my last school, they
were turned off during the only non-class time (lunch) because
of the contracts with those who sold school lunches. So why
have the stuff in the hallways at all if the kids can only eat
it by binging?

What needs to change is going to be a shock to everyone here....
parents. there i said it. Parents need to teach their kids how to
eat properly.

Yes they do, but schools do not need to make it more difficult
by adding to the temptation. And if eating properly is important,
then why should schools offer vending items to kids, none of which
would be considered good for a "proper" diet?

Schools cannot control what kids learn, and don't learn,
outside of schools. But they can once they are inside, and offering
junk food in the machines (the school approves of it, so it must
be okay) is most certainly sending a message.

A biology teacher went against the grain and allowed students
to eat in the class, but only if it was fruit, or some other healthy
snack. He had to approve of it to the class, and it ended up being a
good learning experience for the students, consistent with his
curriculum. It's a good example to follow.



P.
Tierney

x-no-archive:yes
toto wrote:

On Wed, 9 Jul 2003 22:43:01 -0400, "CBI" wrote:


"toto" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 9 Jul 2003 17:29:01 -0400, "CBI" wrote:

Yes but, as you say, not all adults can leave for lunch. I think part of
growing up to be an adult is to learn that you don't always get to make
the
rules you want.

However, most college kids have a much better schedule. We are fools
if we think that making high schools like primary schools works to
produce kids who are learning to be adults.

Whatever benefit you can imagine for being able to go out for lunch on their
own can be realized at other times such as nights and weekends at the mall,
on dates, etc. If the school finds that the kids leaving campus in the
middle of the day creates problems such as them getting into trouble and
missing classes then the best move would be to keep them there. It will be
good training for when their boss makes them stay close for lunch or
required classes in college keep them from having lunch when and where they
want.

You don't always get to eat your lunch where and when you want (or at all).
I think the kids would be more poorly served if they grew up expecting that
they would.

I think you don't give kids credit for being able to understand
differing situations.

I ate my lunch when and where I wished in college. I ate on my bosses
schedule when I worked for a large company. I ate on my own schedule
when I owned my own business and when I was at home with my own
children. Schools should give kids a chance to learn how to schedule
their own time, imo.

I don't think that they should if it is not safe for them to do so.
And while I think kids should learn how to schedule their own time, it
isn't necessary that they do the lunch part of it in high school.
That's a really minor part of scheduling time.

I'm sorry Dorothy, but as a former high school teacher, I see very
little benefit in letting the kids leave the campus for lunch unless
there are good safe places for them to go where it is easy for them to
get back in the time allowed.

It's not a high priority with me that they not be restricted or have a
chance to schedule their lunch. They will have plenty of time to do
that later when they actually are adults, and they have plenty of
things that the can schedule while in hs without scheduling lunch.
And if they have to drive a vehicle to get off campus, I absolutely am
adamant that they should NOT be doing that to go to lunch.


grandma Rosalie

On Thu, 10 Jul 2003, Rosalie B. wrote:

x-no-archive:yes
toto wrote:

On Wed, 9 Jul 2003 22:43:01 -0400, "CBI" wrote:


"toto" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 9 Jul 2003 17:29:01 -0400, "CBI" wrote:

Yes but, as you say, not all adults can leave for lunch. I think part of
growing up to be an adult is to learn that you don't always get to make
the
rules you want.

However, most college kids have a much better schedule. We are fools
if we think that making high schools like primary schools works to
produce kids who are learning to be adults.

Whatever benefit you can imagine for being able to go out for lunch on their
own can be realized at other times such as nights and weekends at the mall,
on dates, etc. If the school finds that the kids leaving campus in the
middle of the day creates problems such as them getting into trouble and
missing classes then the best move would be to keep them there. It will be
good training for when their boss makes them stay close for lunch or
required classes in college keep them from having lunch when and where they
want.

You don't always get to eat your lunch where and when you want (or at all).
I think the kids would be more poorly served if they grew up expecting that
they would.

I think you don't give kids credit for being able to understand
differing situations.

I ate my lunch when and where I wished in college. I ate on my bosses
schedule when I worked for a large company. I ate on my own schedule
when I owned my own business and when I was at home with my own
children. Schools should give kids a chance to learn how to schedule
their own time, imo.

I don't think that they should if it is not safe for them to do so.
And while I think kids should learn how to schedule their own time, it
isn't necessary that they do the lunch part of it in high school.
That's a really minor part of scheduling time.

I'm sorry Dorothy, but as a former high school teacher, I see very
little benefit in letting the kids leave the campus for lunch unless
there are good safe places for them to go where it is easy for them to
get back in the time allowed.

It's not a high priority with me that they not be restricted or have a
chance to schedule their lunch. They will have plenty of time to do
that later when they actually are adults, and they have plenty of
things that the can schedule while in hs without scheduling lunch.
And if they have to drive a vehicle to get off campus, I absolutely am
adamant that they should NOT be doing that to go to lunch.


I'm usually pretty "liberal" in my positions but I don't have a problem
with closed campuses either. We were an open campus before last year
and many students used that time to cause trouble. And a good chunk
of them didn't came back after lunch. Afternoon attendance was half
of what morning attendance was. Our school isn't within walking
distance of any place useful so the parking lot emptied out at
lunch too. Lots of kids on the road....

Perhaps it could be a privilege earned for seniors and maybe juniors.
I'd hate to have to deal with supervising exits under those conditions
but it seems a possible compromise.

On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 21:59:30 GMT, "P. Tierney"
wrote:

A biology teacher went against the grain and allowed students
to eat in the class, but only if it was fruit, or some other healthy
snack. He had to approve of it to the class, and it ended up being a
good learning experience for the students, consistent with his
curriculum. It's a good example to follow.

And again, I see a need to allow students some freedom to eat and
drink in class given the knowledge that teenage bodies need more
food than average to sustain their brains and bodies. Water, btw,
is particularly important to this, imo, as hydration allows brains to
make connections more efficiently.

Bathroom breaks are also another area where schools *control* the
students or attempt to. I think that we believe that kids will take
advantage of this and constantly interrupt class, but if we trusted
kids more, I think that they would act up to our expectations.


--
Dorothy

There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..
Outer Limits

x-no-archive:yes toto wrote:

On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 18:06:03 -0400, Rosalie B.
wrote:

I don't think that they should if it is not safe for them to do so.
And while I think kids should learn how to schedule their own time, it
isn't necessary that they do the lunch part of it in high school.
That's a really minor part of scheduling time.

Yes, it is somewhat minor. OTOH, kids in high school have so
little freedom to schedule anything that I do think this one would
be helpful.

I'm sorry Dorothy, but as a former high school teacher, I see very
little benefit in letting the kids leave the campus for lunch unless
there are good safe places for them to go where it is easy for them to
get back in the time allowed.

I taught HS too. I agree that it does depend on where the campus
is in relation to the places that would offer lunch. OTOH, I think
that in many places this is already in place. My high school in the
town I grew up in is within walking distance of the downtown area.
So is the high school my own kids attended. And so are most
suburban and city schools at least.

I attended a suburban school in the county seat very near to the city.
There was no place to go from there to eat. I could have walked home
for lunch but I didn't have TIME. I can't understand how anyone can
have time to go to lunch with the schedules that we have/had for
lunch. I barely had time to go through the cafeteria line and eat let
alone go home. Had I gone home, I'd have had to run both ways and I
only lived two short blocks from the school.

None of the schools that my kids ever attended had any place to go for
lunch. I think that the places where there is somewhere reasonable to
go for lunch off campus without driving a car is far less than your
experience would have you think. IME the hs where this is a viable
proposition are by far in the minority.

It's not a high priority with me that they not be restricted or have a
chance to schedule their lunch. They will have plenty of time to do
that later when they actually are adults, and they have plenty of
things that the can schedule while in hs without scheduling lunch.
And if they have to drive a vehicle to get off campus, I absolutely am
adamant that they should NOT be doing that to go to lunch.

Well, I agree that it is a risk to let kids drive off campus for
lunch, but no more so than allowing them to drive to school or
to the mall after school.

When kids must be bused to school their driving privileges are
restricted anyway. They are not allowed to drive to school unless
they are in some activity (such as sports or band) which requires them
to stay after school.

Our parking lots are quite restricted and the kids who are allowed to
drive have to have a permit, and the parking lots are locked during
the school time so that cars cannot be taken off the grounds. Around
here we have no malls to drive to unless you go 40 miles or so up the
road. Driving TO school is not the problem so much as driving away
from school.

I live across the street from a parochial HS at which my SIL taught.
They do the same - kids who are allowed to drive park in an impound
lot and the gates are locked until school is dismissed. Parents who
pick up kids are restricted as to where they can park and wait for
kids.

I've seen too many accidents out in front of my house, and too many
friends of my kids have been in accidents or been maimed or paralyzed
to think that kids driving to lunch is a right and that they need to
do it in order to learn scheduling. They DON'T.

I think we are far too *risk-averse* as a society in general.
People who cannot take risks, cannot learn anything.

But the risks they take should be ones that they can recover from.
Car accidents are often not risks of that type.


grandma Rosalie