Supporting the Revolution: An Analysis of School Food by Katie Cardenas

Food Politics PSCI 485 Dr. Noah Zerbe Humboldt State Universtiy April 28, 2011

When asked what he thought about school food, Patrick age ten said, School lunches stick to the wall (Quotes by Kids 2011). Patrick had no idea just how true his simple statement was. Our nation is experiencing a health and obesity crisis, and this crisis can be directly linked to school food. Millions of children rely on school lunches every day, and they are therefore being filled with unhealthy and unnecessary fats, carbohydrates, sugars, and salt. Students in the United States are also making misconceptions about food and nutrition, and our system has done very little to educate them on how to eat healthy. Therefore, to improve our nations overall health we must reform the National School Lunch Program so that only healthy food is available to our students, and we must ensure that students are receiving a comprehensive nutrition education. However, this will be a difficult task because the school lunch program is a vast social issue that has many players and interests. Things can get a little sticky.

Since the school lunch program is reliant on so many changing factors, and the situation varies from state to state and school to school, my research must be limited in a few ways. First I will focus on the reality television show star Jaime Oliver and his work in both Britain and the United States involving improving school lunches. Oliver first premiered his show in Britain where he received a positive reaction from students, parents, and school districts (Naik 2008). However, when Oliver brought his show to the United States, the fattest city in the country Huntington West Virginia, he received a different response. Students, parents, and school districts resisted dietary change despite their seriously dangerous situation (Jamie Oliver 2010). Oliver then took his show to Los Angeles to attempt to reform their lunches. The school board recently terminated his license to film and now he will focus on increasing awareness about school lunches in the Los Angeles community, but he faces the challenge of being banned from all of the LAUSD lunch rooms.
1

Secondly I will use the Los Angeles Unified School District as a case study for my research. This school district poses many interesting problems when it comes to school lunches being that it is a large and diverse school district that is running on an increasingly limited budget. To respond to the budgetary crisis the sales of a la cart foods has increased since they help compensate for monetary loss attributed to the conventional school lunch program. The increase of high fat, high sugar and high calorie foods has lead to an obesity crisis within the school, and it has not gone unnoticed. Parents have voiced their complaints at school board meetings over various school lunch issues; flavored milk, food quality, and overall nutrition. Furthermore, the solution most commonly offered is to privatize the school lunch system. Throughout my paper I will connect national issues stemming from the quality and price of school lunches to the case study of LAUSD.

Lastly I will consider solutions for the issues posed by the current school lunch program and their limitations. The school lunch program is a huge and intertwined network that involves the interests of parents, students, school districts, food companies, anti-hunger advocates, nutritionists, and the state and federal government. Therefore it is often difficult to come to a consensus among groups, but solutions must be found if we are to permanently change our childrens eating habits.

The research available on this topic is vast and mostly quantitative. As stated above the school lunch program is huge and varies from state to state and from school to school. To help recognize the impact of the federal government, surveys are issued by the USDA involving the quality and price of school lunches served through the National School Lunch Program or NSLP.

Aside from USDA statistics, individual states also collect data on the programs in their schools. Furthermore private companies or organizations may also collect data for varying reasons.

The history and policy issues surrounding the NSLP are best explained in the book Free for All: Fixing School Food in America by Janet Poppendieck. She explains the structure of the NSLP as well as the limitations of the program and how it has evolved. She takes specific interest in the issues of the types of food that are being served to American children and how that will affect their future eating habits. Poppendieck explores all aspects of school food from national policies to individual lunch rooms, from marketing and branding to farm to school programs. She concludes that we cannot teach proper nutrition in schools when students are fed junk food within schools, but she also realizes the complexity and the reality of the current school food system.

There are many journal articles that discuss the complexities of the school lunch program. One article by David Bass title Federal Lunch Program explores the costs and purposes behind the NSLP. Bass focuses on fraud within the school lunch program emphasizing the immense cost of regulating the NSLP compared to limited success of regulation. When he speaks of regulation he means regulating who receives school lunches based off of their certified income. This article helps to further illuminate the complexity of the federal program.

Aside from cost, another concern of parents and students is the nutrition of the food. There are multiple articles that discuss school food nutrition. One article titled, Nutrition Education Initiative: A School-based Program to Promote Healthy Eating Practices of Preadolescents focuses on a study in Florida where students were asked to keep food logs. The research concludes that when students become aware of their eating habits they are more likely
3

to change them in a positive way. Another article titled Food and Nutrition Feeds Inquiry in Multiple Curricular Areas concludes that nutrition education can easily be applied to federal and state standards and taught in a variety of classes. Lastly, the article, Students Perceptions of the Impact of Nutrition Policies on Dietary Behaviors focused on the junk food and soda ban in the LAUSD from a students point of view. The research concludes that about half of the students interviewed felt that their diet had changed because of the policy.

A final concern for parents in the lunchroom is the issue of branding and marketing to children. In Nora Millers article Overmediating our Children she discusses the ways that the media and private corporations have infiltrated public schools and the impact that direct marketing has had on students minds and diets. She concludes that marketing in schools makes it more difficult for schools to teach students to critically evaluate their surroundings.

My research concludes that the NSLP is a complex policy issue with many different actors and interests. The top concerns of the authors were price, quality, and nutrition of food offered by the NSLP. They illuminated the issue of size of the NSLP and different levels and concern from students to parents to policy makers. The largest issue arises from attempting to adequately feed the average student on the average day while meeting taste, nutrition, and production standards. The NSLP had humble beginnings in small communities in America. In the 1890s charitable organizations started school lunch programs on a local level to help address the issue of hunger. After World War I these programs saw an increase, but were still based at a community level and relied on donations and volunteer efforts. Ironically, it was surplus, not need, that prompted the federal government to get involved that fundamentally shaped its role in
4

school food, Poppendieck writes in her novel. She elaborates by stating that farm surpluses lead the government to start national school food programs to alleviate hunger during the Great Depression and use the surplus food. Thus the NSLP started and its basis was not in the quality of food given to students, but the types and amounts of national surplus food. The regulation of school lunches was also taken from local communities or even states, and given to the USDA (Poppendieck 2010, chap 2).

In 1935 the United States Congress passed amendments to the Agricultural Adjustment Act, famously titled Section 32. Section 32 has been crucial in the development of the NSLP because it solidified the relationship between school foods and farm surpluses, established school lunch programs be offered on a non-profit basis, and required that poor children eat for free. After funds were granted by Congress the NSLP took off. Poppendieck sites that By 1942, some ninety-five thousand schools were serving school lunch to more than six million children (2010, chap 2). However, as war began the priorities of the country changed and school lunch programs lost funding and food.

During the war advocates of nutrition and hunger continued to lobby for school lunches with the argument that the nation would need a strong and well fed citizenry to protect our borders. After the wars end these advocates were eager to again gain the surpluses offered before the war. Thus in 1946 the National School Lunch Act was passed which guaranteed that the NSLP would again work to feed the nations children. President Truman signed the legislation stating No nation is any healthier than its children or more prosperous than its farmers. From 1947 to 1960 participation in the NSLP doubled from seven million to fourteen million children served daily (Poppendieck 2010, chap 2).

Poppendieck breaks down the rest of the history of the NSLP into policy wars; the war on poverty, hunger, waste, spending, and the war on fat. To combat the war on poverty, during the Johnson administration the NSLP was revamped and funding was increased. Then in 1966 The Child Nutrition Act was passed which extended the NSLP benefits to preschools, kick started the national breakfast program, and gave money to schools to expand and improve their kitchens and equipment. Overall the reforms made during the war on poverty allowed more children access to school food.

Despite the reforms made in the Child Nutrition Act, children were still going hungry in America and in 1967 the American media made hunger a public issue. Through a series of bills Congress mandated the three tiered eligibility system and revamped the school lunch funding structure. This system categorizes students to a lunch based off of their parents economic means and they pay free, reduced or full priced. This series of legislation changed the NSLP and increased participation across the board. It also meant that schools had to become more innovative when preparing and serving lunches. This lead to school districts contracting out their lunch programs to private companies, and in 1969 the White House Conference on Food, Nutrition, and Health recommended that schools do just that. This decision leads to controversy over the involvement of private industry in the public sector (Fekete 2011). The massive growth of the NSLP in the 1960s and 1970s lead to a new set of challenges for school districts and food service directors as meal quality and plate waste became a major issue. This lead to Congress passing an amendment to the School Lunch act which started offer versus serve. Offer versus serve means that a school must offer all five components of a Type A meal (described below), but a student may select only three of the components and still qualify

for meal reimbursement. Many schools then shifted from an eligibility model to a business model and stopped viewing students as recipients, but instead as customers. Then in 1979, the Type A meal was revised and new RDAs were set for different age groups so that schools could offer less food to students who required less calories. Poppendieck then states, Whether as a means of reducing waste or simply in an effort to maintain participation, there is no question that school food service became more responsive to childrens preferencesspecifically fast food items (2010, chap 2).

The need to produce food cheaper and faster was intensified by the war on spending and the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981, which substantially cut funding to the NSLP. With the assumption that the NSLP was loaded with fraud and waste, Congress cut funding for the program which made schools all over the country stop serving lunch to students. As participation decreased lunch prices increased the view of the program changes from one aimed at supporting middle class families and ideals to a welfare program abused by the poor. The Reagan Administration continued the war on spending by reducing nutrition standards which increased the use of fast food and competitive food items in schools, thus initiating the war on fat (Fekete 2011).

The high fat content of school food becomes obvious when you walk into a cafeteria; pizza, hamburgers, cheeseburgers, and other high fat foods are often served daily for reimbursable meals, among other a la cart items available. However, one must be reminded that the school lunch program is based off of farm surpluses and in the 1980s there was a surplus of dairy and beef. As students consumed more dairy, red meat, and other high fat items, advocates became concerned about their health. In 1991 the Center for Science in the Public Interest issued

the White Paper on School Lunch Nutrition which urged the USDA to set limits on fat, sugar, and sodium in school meals to increase overall nutrition of students. In 1994 Congress passed the Healthy Meals for Healthy Americans act which required schools receiving federal funding serve food complying with the Dietary Guidelines. These regulations have made it harder for schools to be incompliance with federal laws and there has thus been an increase in schools that contract out their lunch programs (Fekete 2011).

As the NSLP has evolved there have been concerns that have risen and been addressed. One concern has been over the quality of food. The NSLP is regulated by the USDA which has set many standards over the past seventy years. The original standard is based off of the Recommended Dietary Allowances or RDAs which requires that students receive one third to one half of their calories from their school lunch. This was called a Type A Meal and also included, at a minimum, a half pint of whole milk; two ounces of meat, poultry, or fish, or an equivalent amount of an alternate protein source such as beans, peanut butter, or eggs; six ounces of vegetables or fruit; a serving of bread; and two teaspoons of butter or fortified margarine (Poppendieck 2010, chap 2). The meal plans today are still similar to the original Type A meal, but there have been minor changes in that RDAs have been adjusted for average age and size of students and now schools must be in compliance with the Dietary Guidelines set forth by the USDA.

What this means for schools is that to compose a federally approved meal they must be able to prove that all dietary regulations are met; RDA's, the Type A meal standard, and the whole of the Dietary Guidelines. Many advocates for farm to school programs and local food in schools scoff at these regulations because it makes it difficult for them to cook using whole

ingredients. While private companies have perfected the NSLP regulations and guidelines, mostly with fortified food, local cooks find it difficult to create a USDA "balanced meal." However, when you compare what private companies are serving our kids versus what activists want to serve our kids it is obvious that vegetarian lasagna is better for you than pizza and fries. One may then ask if the regulations are set so high, why are our children overweight. The answer is offer vs. serve; children are only required to take three federally approved meal items. This means a child could have pizza, fries, and chocolate milk for lunch and receive full reimbursement (Poppendieck, chap 5). If one recognizes that students don't even have to participate in the whole of the program, doesn't that make the emphasis on guidelines and regulations ironic and excessive?

Funding for the NSLP is also a complex issue. Due to the three tiered eligibility system schools receive different amounts of reimbursement based off of the number of children participating and their level of eligibility. However, schools are funded ahead of time based off of the previous years average percent for daily participation multiplied by the number of children enrolled in the NSLP. For school districts this can be a complicated and unreliable calculation. Some schools may come up short of funds if participation increases, and some schools may receive too much funding in year and be penalized the next. Furthermore, schools do not receive a 100 percent reimbursement from the USDA. The amount varies in the USDA from year to year and states can decide whether or not to compensate school lunch programs. Many schools come short of being able to break even for their meals and must find other ways to generate revenue. The most popular way is through a la carte sales which are not regulated in most states (Bass 2010).

Other nations have been able to find solutions to these issues, and when Britains schools were in trouble Jaime Oliver, the Naked Chef, came to the rescue. It was through his television documentary School Dinners that he was able to illuminate to the citizens of the U.K. the vast issues surrounding their school lunch program. In many ways the U.K. was ahead of the U.S. in trying to develop nutritionally sound lunches for students. Since 1999 Parliament had implemented three new programs that aimed to teach children to cook, educate children on nutrition and nutritional value, offer each child a free piece of fruit each day, limit fat, salt and sugar, and eliminate high fat food from all vending machines and dining rooms. Parliament had also increased funding to help schools build kitchens, train staff, and purchase better food. Regardless of all of the things the British government was trying to do to improve school meals, Jamie Olivers show exposed how unhealthy the food on the trays still was. Olivers show got an overwhelming response from citizens and the media and since its premiere in 2005 school dinners have further improved in Britain (Naik 2008). Imagine Olivers surprise when he came to Huntington West Virginia for his first season of Food Revolution. He found that our system was behind Britains as far as quality and funding, that our school lunch program was highly regulated and complex, and that students and parents were unresponsive to healthy food. Huntington was a city in a crises being that it was named the unhealthiest city in the United States. Diabetes and obesity were common and people were doing very little to change their diets. Oliver was astounded when he entered the schools cafeterias and found pizza, hamburgers, fries, and ketchup being served alongside flavored milk and processed fruit that was high in sugar and fat. He was even more astounded when he realized how difficult it was to create a USDA reimbursable meal. His lunch of homemade lasagna was rejected

10

because it didnt have enough vegetables while children in the other line continued to stock up on fat, sugar, and salt (Jamie Oliver 2010).

Obesity in the United States is becoming an epidemic. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention stated that one if five children in the U.S. was obese in 2009 and that the number of obese children has tripled since 1980. Obesity is a phenomenon that has effected every demographic in the U.S, but low income adults and children and the most likely to be obese. The danger of the obesity crisis is the health issues that are associated with it: type 2 diabetes, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, joint problems, breathing problems, and liver disease. Furthermore obese children are more likely to be anti-social and develop psychological problems that will continue into adult hood. The solutions offered by the CDC to combat childhood obesity are healthier food in schools, nutrition education and awareness, and a greater focus on physical education. Oliver had to convince and work with everyone to reform Huntingtons schools; the media, the lunch ladies, the parents, the students, the local hospital and the community. Over the course of three months he had all of the schools in the district making their own food on site, serving fresh and mostly local produce, and the students were enjoying and eating the meals. His community kitchen also proved to be a success when he taught 1,000 citizens, in one week, to make a simple and easy stir fry. There were also optimistic narratives in the show; a girl who was inspired to take control of her diet, a principal who lost twenty-five pounds just by eating the new school lunches every day, and a family who all together lost over one-hundred pounds after Oliver taught them how to cook at home. (Jamie Oliver 2010)

11

Oliver was asked to take on a new set of challenges for his second season of Food Revolution, the city of Los Angeles. Los Angeles posed challenges for Oliver because he would be trying to reform a much larger, much poorer school district. Oliver would this time have to confront the school board as well. In February Olivers license to film at the LAUSD schools was terminated because the district was afraid of what the reality television show would do to their reputation. Oliver stated, They fail to see me as a positive, and they fail to see the TV as incredible way to spread the word, to inspire people, to inform parents, to see other teachers pioneering things (Verrier 2011). For Oliver's new season he will try to reform L.A's diet, mainly outside of the school, and instead in the community. He has taken half of the menu at a drive thru restaurant to prove that a healthy local diet can be fast and affordable. He has also made a comprise with the school board and has been allowed to teach a culinary art class in one of L.A's alternative schools. However he cannot discuss the students school lunches or his filming license will be terminated(Jamie Oliver 2011). Olivers show has proved, in Britain and in Huntington, that it is possible to change the school food system within the regulations and on budget. He even proved that children will eat the food and appreciate the energy they get and the variety offered by a healthy diet. The L.A. school district didnt even give Oliver a chance to reform their schools stating that they were already above USDA standards because they followed Californias standards (Verrier 2011). In all honesty they were probably afraid of what a food revolution could do to their food production contracts and their jobs, being that school board members are elected officials. LAUSD has instead gone the opposite way of what Oliver purposed and has began talking about further privatizing their school lunch program.

12

To put it all in perspective, the Los Angeles Unified School District serves 670,000 children breakfast and lunch every day. This means that the school district serves approximately 42 billion meals a year, and a child, who eats lunch and breakfast at school, every day, will eat over 7,500 school meals over thirteen years. LAUSD has the largest breakfast program in the nation and the second largest lunch program in the nation. There is no question that this school district has an enormous impact on the diets of students in the L.A. community. However the school district faces many challenges too including; serving the most free and reduced lunches of any district in the United States (Bass 2010, 68), dealing with yearly increasing budget cuts, helping a large student population with lots of diversity, and conforming to the high standards set by the California state government.

Considering the many challenges that LAUSD faces they are still taking on initiatives to change school food in their district, but some people believe that policy cannot go far enough. The article Students Perception of the Impact of Nutrition Policies on Dietary Behaviors tried to analyze the effect that policy initiatives have in changing childrens diets. They measured the effects of the Healthy Beverage Resolution (soda ban) and the Obesity Prevention Motion (junk food ban) in LAUSD focusing on students perceptions of nutrition, students knowledge of LAUSD nutrition policies, and students attitudes toward those policies. The research found that the majority of students believed that their eating and drinking habits had changed at school, but those habits did not change at home. Students were also often hostile toward the bans and believed that they should be able to choose what they want to eat and drink at school. The authors conclude that the nutrition policy is a step toward changing the menus at school, but physical education, nutrition education, and parent involvement must also be part of the equation for long term change (Vecciarelli et. al 2006, 527).
13

If policy complicates our issues instead of fixing them, and money is scarce, who should school districts turn to? Before the recession school districts were more likely to turn to their community as a line of support in crisis. Through the community programs can be created or saved, and partnerships can be made that support parent, student, and school interests. However, two years deep into a recession many of these schools have lost community support. Schools have turned to business as a last resort. Privatization in schools can happen at different levels and to different extremes. For example, in Pasadena the businesses and the parents made an unofficial agreement that if the businesses supported the schools then the parents would support the businesses (Lopez 2011). However, privatization of school food is a different matter, where schools allow private companies to completely take over their lunch rooms. This sort of privatization has a long history and a bad rap.

The Nixon Administration authorized that schools could contract out their school lunch programs in 1970 to cope with schools without kitchens. However, today private companies are seen as valuable from the perspective of school districts because they are effective at controlling labor cost, meeting federal and state food regulations, as well as keeping finances. Ultimately private companies shift liability and accountability from the school to the company. However private companies are bad for schools because they take power away from the school district and the community in choosing menus. Private companies are driven by profit values and in that nature will strive for higher profits over healthier, better food. In Las Vegas, one of the first school districts to attempt privatization of school food, the menus resembled fast food. Children were served hamburgers, cheeseburgers, pizza, and fries with few healthy alternatives because the company lost money when they offered healthy choices due to lower rates of participation.

14

This example shows that companies, while more efficient, are more likely to put their profit margin above your childs overall health (Poppendieck 2010, chap 2).

Not to say that private companies are always bad. Small private businesses have given enormously to schools and some private companies have no other mission than to make school lunches healthier, like School Food Plus based in parts of New York City. School Food Plus partnered with other nonprofit organizations to focus on integrating nutrition education into the school day and serving healthier lunches. Through their program students learned how to grow and cook their own food. Furthermore, school lunches dont include artificial colorings or flavors, more whole and locally grown food, no trans fats, and no high fructose corn syrup (Poppendieck 2010, chap 5). The efficiency and resources that the private industry offered in this example prove that business can be a positive influence in our system.

Privatization raises another concern for parents; marketing, branding, and advertising. Ten years ago this meant that students saw slick lunch menus with corporate logos and corporations would hold rallies at schools. However, today activists have fought to keep this kind of corporate influence out of lunch rooms and out of schools. Recently LAUSD approved to allow corporate sponsorships on athletic fields to raise money for athletic programs with conditions. Companies that are associated with unhealthy food will not be allowed to advertise even if McDonalds wanted to advertise salad, oatmeal, or other healthy alternatives. Some activists believe this is a fair solution; however others see this as a slippery slope. By allowing corporate sponsors to advertise for one program, you open the opportunity for other programs to seek similar funds. Furthermore, some believe that school should never be a place for advertising, but a safe haven where children arent influenced to make consumer decisions.

15

In the article Overmediating our Children Nora Miller takes issue with privatization in schools. She states that by advertising in schools we are raising consumers instead of critical thinkers. She questions how students would be able to evaluate news issues or advertising claims when they are being taught in schools to take everything at face value. Furthermore she worries that by privatizing school lunches we are allowing our children to believe that the food they are served for lunch is good, and therefore other foods like it are also good. She concludes that children will not change their eating habits unless the nutrition education they are given matches the quality of lunch they are served, and that children will not be effective critical thinkers unless schools are free of advertisements.

Some feel that the alternatives to privatization have been used up. The government is out of money, the communities are out of money, and the schools are still failing at providing essential programs and services. One of the inspiring things about Jamie Olivers Food Revolution was that he proved that with a little more effort, in some situations, you can work inside the system to create sustainable healthy change. However in a school district like L.A. this is less plausible because of the sheer size and the massive budgetary issues. Most lunch ladies already complain that with the increased focus on testing and achievement, the lunch hour has been shortened to where their job is almost impossible. They cannot imagine attempting to prep more food and serve more food within their limited time constraints. Furthermore it is difficult for them to use whole foods and develop a USDA approved meal and they must also bear the reactions from the kids (Jamie Oliver 2010).

The last challenge that schools face when attempting to develop meal plans for kids is that kid wont eat what they are served and we are all worried about plate waste because the food

16

that goes in the trash doesnt benefit anyone. However, children who are eating high fat, high sugar, and high calorie meals are actually putting their health at risk by eating the school food. We cant force kids to eat their lunch if they dont like it, but we could try to expand the number of things kids like. If school lunches added more variety to their meal plans, and thus students were exposed to a variety of meals, they would be more likely to try new things. This isnt a culture than can be bred only at school, but must also come from home. If parents reinforce food diversity and encourage their child to try new foods it might help schools sell healthier food items. If parents taught their children to expect healthy food, it would be easier for the schools to serve healthy food.

From the examples of LAUSD and Huntington a theme arises of awareness being a solution to the obesity crisis. Knowledge empowers people to take control of their life and make informed and weighed decisions. When policy was implemented and children became aware that soda and junk food was bad they changed their eating behaviors at school and some of them changed their eating behaviors at home. In Florida when students were asked to keep a food log for a week, they became aware of what they were eating. The authors then judged whether or not students changed their eating habits in the school lunch line. Students were more likely to choose dairy, vegetables, grains, and meat after keeping a food log. They were also more likely to pay attention and avoid foods that looked like they were high in sugar and fat (Greenwood et. al 2009, 47). Nutrition education encourages students to take responsibility for what they eat, and with parental support, this lifestyle change could extend into their homes.

In the movie Waiting for Superman director David Guggenheim challenges the idea that bad communities make bad schools. He instead theorizes that bad schools make bad

17

communities because when students do not learn what they need to know to, at the minimum, to apply for a job, they become a strain on their community. Following that line of logic, are public schools also partially responsible for the obesity issue in the United States? If students were getting two proper meals every day we could guarantee that they were getting vitamins, minerals, and less fat, sugar, and calories. If students were getting a proper nutrition education then we could guarantee that they were aware of how to eat, cook, and live healthy. Furthermore, we wouldnt be creating bad food habits that can last a lifetime. Through education we could start to reform the ideas of the children, the future, and individual communities. Furthermore better food in schools and better health in communities is another step toward Guggenheim's vision of a better education system.

As stated at the beginning, reforming the National School Lunch Program is a complex issue that involves many players. For sustainable change to be achieved all of these players must support the healthy school food initiative and they all must be willing to make sacrifices. All of these changes must also be made with a long term goal in mind; to help our children become healthy, productive, and smart young adults. When looking at the federal governments role in the NSLP it is easy to see that some of the regulations and ideas have gotten out of hand. While all of these regulations were originally instituted with good intent, they create a strain on the schools to meet nutritional, monetary, and cleanliness standards. Nutritional standards are the major issue with the regulations. Something is wrong when Oliver can make a home cooked meal that cannot pass nutritional guidelines, but other children meet their dietary needs by eating nothing but French fries. The regulations, and the need to prove that a school is meeting regulations, has forced school districts to sign on with

18

large food distributors who serve mostly frozen, and typically unhealthy food. Furthermore, it has made it harder for school food to come fresh out of the kitchen because so much work has to be put into the documentation that there is not enough time to prepare the food (Poppendieck, chap 3). It should be obvious whether or not food is good or bad, and sometimes it seems more rational to go back to common sense, local, food control.

However, the federal government is not going to stop regulating social programs, so President Obama has taken new steps in attempting to make school food healthier. To fix or further regulate the school lunch problem, President Obama recently passed a new set of guidelines to make school lunches healthier. The new guidelines require schools to serve more whole grains, fruits, and vegetables, cut sodium by more than half, and limit starchy vegetables to one serving per week. President Obama signed the bill, but his wife is the one who brought this issue to the attention of the American people (New Guidelines 2011). It was partly because of her Lets Move Campaign that Congress passed the Healthy Hunger-Free Kids act which added six cents to the federal meal reimbursement and allowed the USDA to set standards for foods sold in the a la carte lines (MacVean 2011d). It is through these types of regulations, guidelines, and campaigns that the federal government will have its impact on school lunches. States too may increase reimbursement funds, promote healthy eating, and set higher guidelines for schools. Michelle Obamas Lets Move Campaign focuses on educating and empowering parents, providing more healthful foods in schools, increasing access to healthful foods in underserved neighborhoods and encouraging more physical activity. The author of the book Food Politics, Marion Nestle, stated, Lets Move!" is the first time food issues have had this

19

kind of legitimacy at this high a government level. Just doing that is an enormous, enormous contribution (Ogilvie 2011). Obamas campaign aims to help people change their diet through education and access, but to improve your individual school, you must influence the interests of the school board, the cafeteria staff, other parents, teachers, and your students.

School boards often find themselves in a very interesting dilemma. Since the beginning of the recession many schools have sacrificed teachers, specialty staff, and extracurricular programs to harsh budget cuts. What this means for the lunch room is that schools are more likely to look at privatizing their programs, or reducing their program in size or labor, which means more frozen, packaged, processed food (Lothrop 2010). For a school board to decide to improve the school lunch program by making it healthier they would most likely need, extra financial support, community support, parental support, and student support. In any community this poses itself as a challenge, especially when the alternative (primarily privatization) is easier and more financially sound.

However, advocates for school lunches have an argument that is more than financial. Nutrition advocates are especially concerned as seventeen percent of our students are now obese (Ogilvie 2011), and anti-hunger advocates are still concerned that there are too many children who still come to school and leave hungry. They both argue that well nourished students learn more and can derive more from their education, becoming well educated adults, who will then become citizens or soldiers. These advocates believe that by providing a healthy breakfast and lunch to students you are saving money in the long run, because they will receive more from their public education and pay it back through service or taxes in the future (Fekete 2011).

20

Furthermore, healthy eating habits can save money in health care expenses, both immediate and long term.

Nonetheless, the best advocate for a child is their parent, and parents have an uphill battle in the school food world. Parents who rely on the NSLP have only their voice to defend their child, and one voice is not enough. Parents who seek true change in the system must gain support from other parents and the community. Even in Huntington, Oliver had to seek community support to gain the funds needed to train staff and support the new menu (Jamie Oliver 2010). If you gain the ideological support to change school lunches, you still must consider the regulations and financial barriers. Once those issues are sorted out parents must convince the school board, teachers, and lunch staff that the idea is sustainable.

When looking at the challenges that face us in the lunchroom, it is easy to come back to the issue and ask, again, why we need reform. The answer is the victim of the lunchroom every day. It is difficult to make general conclusions about how school food has affected students in the United States, because there are so many other factors relating to health. However, we can state that if we improved our school lunches we would only be improving the diets of the children who rely on the food. With this country feeding millions of children 180 days a year, the impact of an unhealthy diet has been immense. By improving school lunches we are only guaranteeing that, for at least one meal a day, the students of the United States are receiving essential vitamins, minerals, and proteins needed to get the education they will need to build our country in the future.

There are many creative solutions to help students become more in tune with their diets. The article Food and Nutrition Feeds Inquiry in Multiple Curricular Areas explains how easy it
21

is to incorporate nutrition education and principles into other subjects like science, math, foreign language, English and art. Incorporating these ideas has been very successful with test groups. Students find that the information is relevant, easy to understand, and easy to apply to their everyday lives. For younger students, school gardens have been a successful and easy way to help them understand more about their food. The article, The Child in the Garden: An Evaluative Review of the Benefits of School Gardening explains how school gardens can be used to explain ecosystems and plant cycles, help students develop an appreciation for the environment, and increase knowledge of nutrition. School gardening is successful because it allows students to gain hands on knowledge and appreciation for food and the environment. Teachers also report that students think that gardening is fun and are more attentive during the hands on learning sessions. In this paper I have argued that to improve our nations overall health we must reform the school lunch program. This reform must have support from all parties involved and will require deliberation and cooperation. An ideal change to school food would include; less regulations in favor of higher quality and local control, more fresh and local fruits, vegetables, and whole grains, more food prepared on site by kitchen staff, and more money to support these reforms. Opponents to these principals might believe that this reform would be too costly or as Minnesota Representative Michele Bachmann worries, Obama is trying to implement a nanny state. Her friend Sarah Palin criticized "Lets Move!" while eating a smore stating This is in honor of Michelle Obama, who the other day said we shouldnt have dessert (Daum 2011). This argument isnt about attacking dessert, however, it is about finding a solution to the obesity crisis and helping Americans find a balance between nutrition and pleasure. To ignore the health crisis in this country is counterproductive and a crime against our children.
22

Author of the article Feeding Frenzy, Meghan Daum believes that Americans have resisted reform because we have food issues and political issues. She believes that our personal relationship with food will impair us from making changes within the system because it is just too hard for some people to talk about, but this issue is to large and important to be swept under the socially sensitive rug. We all must take responsibility for our children, for our diets, and for our schools. Even though parents are at the grassroots level of reform, their influence will be the most crucial for change. They will be the ones who bring the issue to the institution and fight for what their children deserve, and the government will be responsive. As the Obamas have shown us, the federal government currently supports the agenda of healthy students. This issue must remain a priority in other presidencies that follow. Finally, local and state government will be crucial in implementing change, and citizens should look to elect candidates who support healthy schools.

Jamie Oliver has shown us that it is possible to feed our kids healthy lunches, and it is now up to parents and citizens to support the food revolution and start asking for government reform. Our students are relying on us and our future depends on it. Oliver stated in a recent interview, Look, theres the home, advertising on TV for kids, theres the fast-food industry, the supermarket industry. But if I had a magic wand and one wish that could maybe influence and stop the vicious circle of bad health and obesity and early death, its school, school, school, school, where the future of your country goes 180 days a year (Morrison 2011). It is time to support the revolution and permanently change school lunches in America. It is time to advocate for a healthier tomorrow.

23

References Bass, David. 2010 "Federal Lunch Program." Education Next 10 (March). www.hwwilson.com (February 25, 2011). This article discusses fraud in the National School Lunch Program. It is important to my research because it talks specifically to Los Angeles Unified School District which is a case study in my research. It also gives statistics on the cost and purpose of the NSLP. Blair, Dorothy. 2009. "The Child in the Garden: An Evaluative Review of the Benefits of School Gardening." The Journal of Environmental Education (Winter). hwwilsonweb.com (March 20, 2011). This article discusses the benefits that both teachers and students can receive from school gardening. Among the benefits students receive is a better relationship and understanding of their food. Daum, Meghan. 2011. "A Feeding Frenzy." The Los Angeles Times. http://articles.latimes.com/2011/mar/03/opinion/ (April 11, 2011). In this article, author Meghan Daum discusses the opposition to the federal governments Let's Move campaign. She concludes that the opposition doesn't have a valid position because school food has proven to be bad and health should come above money or political ideals. Donsky, Andrea, and Randy Boyer. 2011. "Kid's Lunches: Keep 'em Healthy and Interesting." Los Angeles Times. http://www.latimes.com/theguide/ (February 19, 2011). This article discusses ways that parents can keep their kids interested and eating good food. It states that the NSLP could learn from variety and creativity. Fekete, Vonda. 2011. "National School Lunch Program." Pennsylvania Department of Education. www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/national_school_lunch/ (March 20, 2011). This website offered a comprehensive background of the NSLP. It helped me to develop an understanding for the history of the NSLP. Gratzer, David. 2010. "The McVictim Syndrome could Kill Us." The Los Angeles Times. http://articles.latimes.com/2010/dec/08/opinion/ (February 19, 2011). This op-ed piece discusses obesity in America and America's schools. This author asserts that many Americans believe that their own obesity is someone else's problem to solve. He argues we should teach healthy living as a civic responsibility.

24

Greenwood, Bonnie , et al. 2009. "Nutrition Education Initiative: A School-based Program to Promote Healthy Eating Practices of Preadolescents." Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences 101. www.hwwilson.com (February 25, 2011). This article discusses a study done with middle school children in Florida. They introduced a Nutrition Guide to the teachers to be taught to the class and then required that the students keep food logs. Although this data is limited in many ways, like the relatively small sample of the students and the issue in trusting student logs, it is important to my research because it shows that when you introduce nutrition information to kids they will change their eating habits. Jamie Oliver's Food Revolution. 2010. Produced by Seacrest, Ryan , and Jamie Oliver. American Broadcasting Company. ABC, New York City. Television. This television show is mentioned multiple times throughout my paper. It discusses Oliver's work in Huntington, West Virginia. This show is in reality style, but offers many of solutions to the issues of the NSLP. Krueger, Karla. 2009. "Food and Nutrition Feeds Inquiry in Multiple Curricular Areas." School Library Media Activities Monthly (September). www.hwwilson.com. (February 25, 2011). This article discusses different ways to incorporate nutrition education into the everyday school environment. It is important to my research because it shows that it can be easy to teach students about nutrition while teaching them about other things like math, science, and culture. 2010. "L.A. Unified, by Nike?" The Los Angeles Times. http://articles.latimes.com/2010/dec/14/opinion/ (February 19, 2011). This article discusses possibility that the school lunch program and others at LAUSD could be privatized due to lack of state funding. It argues that children need the resources that the money would provide despite the fact that they are being exposed to corporate logos. Lopez, Steve. 2011. "Pasadena Businesses Step in to Aid Schools." The Los Angeles Times. http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jan/30/local/ (February 19, 2011). This article discusses how the city of Pasadena has made an informal agreement with local vendors to support schools who have been losing money from state budget cuts. Parents promised to support businesses who gave large amounts to the school. This is a case study that shows mild integration of business into the public education system. Lothrop, Gloria R., and Ralph E. Shaffer. 2010. "Stop L.A. Unified's 'Charterization'." The Los Angeles Times. http://articles.latimes.com/2010/feb/03/opinion/ (February 19, 2011). This article discusses the issues with privatizing LAUSD's school lunch program. They assert that privatizing is just a quick fix to a long term and more serious problem. They also worry about the intentions of private companies involved in the public sphere.
25

Luther, Claudia. 2011. "Jack LaLanne Dies at 96; Spiritual Father of U.S. Fitness Movement ." The Los Angeles Times. http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jan/23/local/ (February 19, 2011). This article is important because it talks about the work of Jack LaLanne who was not only the father of the U.S. fitness movement, but also an avid supporter of better nutrition in schools. As a child he personally understood that being hungry or malnourished distracts you from learning. MacVean, Mary, and Alexandra Zavis. 2011. "Charter Choices: Good Food, Free Food, No Food." The Los Angeles Times. http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jan/01/local/ (February 19, 2011). This article discusses the difference of quality in charter school food versus traditional public schools. It recognizes that while some charter schools have amazing school lunch programs some have none at all. The lack of standards behind the charter school program give more power to the teachers and parents to decide where the money is spent. MacVean, Mary. 2011. "Celebrity Chef Jamie Oliver, of 'Food Revolution', Speaks to California School Nutritionists ." The Los Angeles Times. http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jan/17/local/ (February 19, 2011). This article discusses Jamie Oliver's plans to reform the LAUSD school lunch program. It discusses his obstacles with the school board and the community. Macvean, Mary. 2011. "Group Rallies to Get Flavored Milk out of School Cafeterias." Los Angeles Times. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/ (February 19, 2011). This article discusses a protest held by parents at LAUSD over flavored milk being served to their children during school breakfasts and lunches. This shows parent activism for their child's nutrition. Macvean, Mary. 2010. "Child Nutrition Bill will Mean More Produce for Lunch, Officials Say." Los Angeles Times. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/dailydish/ (February 19, 2011). This article discusses how the new Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act will change the menu of the school lunch program. Miller, Nora. 2006. "Overmediating our Children." ETC: A Review of General Semantics 63 (October). www.hwwilson.com (February 25, 2011). This article discusses the multiple ways media has infiltrated public schools. It is of particular interest to my research because it discusses food companies in schools as well as more general school marketing issues. Mintz, Sidney Wilfred. 1985. Sweetness and Power: The Place of Sugar in Modern History. New York: Viking.
26

Mintz discusses how poor diets in England started to lead to nutrition problems for the working class. This is important to my research because it shows that excess amounts of sugar consumption can only lead to temporary increased productivity. Morrison, Pam. 2011 "Jamie Oliver: Food Fighter ." The Los Angeles Times. http://articles.latimes.com/2011/feb/26/opinion/ (March 20, 2011). This article is basically the transcript from a recent interview L.A. Times reporter Pam Morrison did with Jamie Oliver. This interview helped me to expand on Oliver's perspective considering the LA school district, and the issues surrounding reform of the LAUSD lunch program. Naik, Asmita. 2008. "Did Jamie Oliver Really Put School Dinners on the Agenda?." The Political Quarterly 79. www.hwwilson.com (February 25, 2011). This article focused on school dinner in Britain. It is especially useful and important to my research because we can compare the reaction of the government and citizens to the JOFR and Oliver's reform to school foods. This article also discusses the medias involvement in facilitating the discussion. Based off of my general knowledge I believe the most pertinent points of comparison are the governments reaction, the citizens reaction, and the media's role. In the U.S, the government would have been less involved and less interested, and the citizens might not even know that the issue is being debated because of lack of media coverage. 2011. "New Guidelines to Make School Lunches Healthier." CBS News. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/01/13/health/ (February 19, 2011). This article discuses the new federal guidelines to help make school lunches healthier. The most important points are reducing sodium, banning trans fat, and requiring more fruits, vegetables, and grain. Niman, Nicolette Hahn. 2011. "America's Good Food Fight ." The Los Angeles Times. http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jan/09/opinion/ (February 19, 2011). This article is an op-ed piece that asserts we can have a sustainable food system in America. This article is important to my article because she points out that the school lunch program is one of the best avenues to create change. 2011. "Obesity and Overweight for Professionals: Childhood." Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/childhood. (April 16, 2011). The CDC helped me add facts and figures to my research that illuminate the obesity crisis. Their website has comprehensive data on how obesity has increased in this country over the past 30 years. Ogilvie, Jessica Pauline. 2011. "Childhood Obesity: Can Let's Move! Make a Dent in the Childhood Obesity Problem?." The Los Angeles Times. http://articles.latimes.com/2011/mar/20/health/ (March 20, 2011).
27

This article discusses the impact that Michelle Obama's Let's Move campaign has had on the nation, and questions whether or not the campaign can actually reduce childhood obesity. Poppendieck, Janet. 2010. Free For All: Fixing School Food in America. Berkeley: University of California Press. The beginning of this book has given me a history of how the NSLP has developed in the U.S. She also discusses her personal experience from working in a school lunch cafeteria for a week. This book will be useful for my research because it will give me a foundation for the NSLP, how it developed and how it has changed. 2011. "Quotes by Kids." Generation Terrorists. http://www.generationterrorists.com/quotes/kids.html (April 11, 2011). This website is where I got my opening quote for my paper. They asked student's what they thought of the school lunch program and I believed his answer suited my research. Skiba, Katherine. 2011. "Michelle Obama: First Lady Michelle Obama Talks to Reporters." Los Angeles Times. http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/ (February 19, 2011). This article discusses First Lady Michelle Obama's campaign to end childhood obesity and her opposition from the right. This article shows that the U.S. Government is starting to take a larger role in preventing childhood obesity and educating the youth. Vecchiarelli, Stephanie , Sumiko Takayanagi, and Charlotte Neumann. 2006. "Students' Perceptions of the Impact of Nutrition Policies on Dietary Behaviors." Journal of School Health 76. www.hwwilson.com (February 25, 2011). This article discusses two new programs implemented at LAUSD that banned soft drinks and junk foods from schools. Their research concludes that about half of the students interviewed have changed the way they think about nutrition. This research is important to me because it shows policy working in the school lunch program. Ventura, Emily, and Michael Goran. "Our Schools' Sweet Tooth." The Los Angeles Times. http://articles.latimes.com/2011/mar/02/opinion/ (April 11, 2011). This op-ed piece discusses the issues surrounding reform in the Los Angeles School District. This article discusses the size of LAUSD in relation to the issues surrounding reform. Verrier, Richard. 2011. "On Location: LAUSD Puts Celebrity Chef Jamie Oliver on No-Film Diet." Los Angeles Times. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/ (February 19, 2011). This article discusses the issues that television reality host Jamie Oliver is facing in LAUSD where he is trying to film the second season of his show. If I compare this article to my article about Britain's reaction to JOFR by Asmita Naik, it become obvious that Americans are more
28

connected to the status quo of their food system. Oliver said he would continue to film the show with or without the approval of the school. Waiting for Superman. 2011. DVD. Directed by David Guggenheim. Hollywood: Paramount Vantage. This movie discusses the immense issues in America's education system. Many of its themes could be related back to school food.

29