Anti-War Protesters Rally In Federal Plaza
Expiration Date: An interview with Undateable’s Anne Coyle
Bookstores We Love: The Book Cellar
242
The Right Now Are Right On
State Senator James Meeks, who recently led a controversial two-day boycott of Chicago Public Schools, is set to protest at a Cubs playoff game next week by surrounding Wrigley Field with 6,000 people to protest what he claims is a funding disparity between wealthy and poor school districts. But the city's most powerful White Sox fan is asking Meeks to knock it off. Said Mayor Daley:
We waited 100 years for the Cubs to get in. You shouldn’t disturb them. I really believe that. They've been very helpful [by contributing to] a lot of programs. This is their day...It doesn’t do any good in the long run. People are getting tired of it. Everybody knows the inequity. We’ve been talking about it for a long time. This is nothing new. I don’t know why you’re finally writing about it now. It’s just a waste of time for the children. If he wants to do that, so be it. [But], those kids should be in school and tutoring programs.For his part, Meeks has said:
When we went to Winnetka, that pushed a button that hadn’t been pushed before. By us going to Wrigley Field, it’ll push another button that hasn’t been pushed before. The definition of insanity is to do the same thing the same way and expect a different result. What the mayor has been doing is the same thing the same way. We're doing things a different way.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
So adding 6,000 kids to an atmosphere of among other things, alcohol and extreme congestion (41,000+), on a school day, is not insanity? It's just downright stupid. And to say Daley cares more about the Cubs than the schools is stupid. The Nouveaux Jesse Jackson here had 81 other games to do this during, as well as 10,000 other places to hold his rallies. Why not go to US Cellular field? Assuming they make the playoffs.
Meeks will stop at nothing to show that he's as self-centered as he is stupid. Yup, dragging a bunch of kids down to Wrigley Field is going to solve some problems for schools ... as if anyone is going to care there. But ever the opportunist, Meeks is going to "stand up for what's right and fair!"
go soak your head already.
What are they going to do, handcuff themselves in a ring? This is absurd.
He wants to get on national television. Question is, does he care or not about the increased public safety risk? Things can get ugly in a hurry and someone can get hurt.
Good for him.
We've been ignoring this issue forever and now you're harshing our lily-white margaritaville mellow in Wrigleyville, forcing us and the press to take notice....waaaaah! waaaah!!
if things get ugly it won't matter because then it will be mayor daley's fault for not having enough cops on hand to deal with a protest in the middle of what amounts to a baseball-themed oktoberfest.
This is just sad, sad, sad.
And if things do get ugly, how frightening for the little kids involved. This is disgusting. He's holding the baby up to take the bullet.
Good luck finding room for those extra 6,000 bodies among the 50,000+ that will swarm that block. Anyway, his point will be lost on most of the people there who will have but 2 things on their minds: baseball and beer.
Sounds like a great idea!
Where is he going to park?
I'm with Meeks in spirit but he take those 6000 people to Springfield and take over the state capitol.
Let them play baseball AND drink beer.
"Sounds like a great idea!
Where is he going to park?"
Well I guess he won't be flying his private jet!
Look at me look at me! What a jerk.
half those kids will already be there banging on pickle barrels and selling M&M's.
Wrigleyville knows how to deal with black kids.
Things will be fine.
The real tragedy is that the kids will have to stop drinking after the 7th inning.
Bluefairlane has already won the thread, but what the hell, I'll try.
Look, I'm serious, build a wall around Wrigleyville and just let it go feral. Just toss some meat over the wall every now and then and let the Bud trucks go in and out as regular.
Meeks is utterly foolish. This stunt won't help his cause and will just waste time, money, effort and use kids as media pawns. Meeks is weak.
The irony is that ringing the Cell or Soldier Field with kids would actually make a political point, because the Illinois Sports Facilities Authority financed both and owns the Cell (I think the Park District still owns Soldier Field). Wrigley, though, is part of a privately owned business that pays taxes to the Chicago Public Schools and indirectly supports the tax base by fueling much of the surrounding economic activity.
By now, though, it's obvious Meeks doesn't think these protests through logically, no matter how valid his underlying message is.
Also, though I know TBS will put the Cubs games in prime time, part of me wishes these were day games, so Meeks would have to do the whole school boycott stunt again.
Does anyone have any other suggestions to "protest what he claims is a funding disparity between wealthy and poor school districts."
I mean, if you just sit here and judge Meeks for what he is doing, without giving any alternative suggestions to his mission...then in a sense you are claiming the status quo is fine.
The status quo is not fine.
There is a funding diparity between wealthy and poor school districts...any suggestions?
From the RUSH song: "If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice".
Irish: Well, I think Meeks would better served encouraging his followers to make sure their kids actually go to school, and to make sure parents take an active part in meeting their kids' teachers, homework, etc.
Granted, I don't know how much of this already does--I assume he does some of this--but CPS would be much improved with more parental involvement and dedication from kids.
Yes, money matters, and it's disgusting how public school funding is handled in this state. But instead of showboating, Meeks should focus on other issues that might produce better results. Does he really think that getting some kids on TV will do anything?
[By the way, can anyone these days offer a thought without backing it up with a line or reference that is NOT from freaking pop culture? Are we as a society incapable of doing that anymore? Quoting crap from pop culture is like quoting what a third-hand source says about a second-hand source quoting a primary source (in this case, the Rush song merely echos certain long-standing ideas from certain philosophers). Or, one can simply give one's own thoughts, usually much more interesting.]
Matilda...I think you make a great point about the school system. Although what you call "showboating" is what I call "exposure to the problem".
If the education is as bad as administrators say it is, then the kids missing a day of school is not that big of a deal. The education sucks in those schools, right?
And c'mon, don't side step the issue by claiming "pop culture! pop culture!" so you can sleep better at night.
These kids are getting fucked every single school year, and the issues on this board are "Wrigleyville", the "Cubs" and "Pop culture"?!?!
Where is the outrage at the educational system? Have we lost?
Let's have these kids get the education that the Winnetka kids get, and THEN we can talk about the influence of pop culture on message boards...agreed?
Irish: Not trying to sidestep anything; the pop culture thing, in brackets, was merely an aside. I hate how nearly every conversation these days, whether on blogs or in person, almost always includes references to TV shows and other forms of pop culture, that's all. It is like we can't even complete a thought without comparing something to a movie or show or whatever. It's a reflection of the poor quality of thought in our society.
In any case, I see your points, and it is a fine line between showboating and drawing attention to an issue. I just think that parental responsibility needs to be a much bigger part of this conversation. I would argue that in places such as Winnetka, parental responsibility and role models matter as much as more money.
As for Wrigely, I don't see how Meeks' message will be anything but drowned out in the commotion of the playoff atmosphere.
I don't think there will ever be an answer to this problem because there are too many issues involved.
First of all, when I think of all the work that I myself have put into my kids' education it blows me away. I'm a college educated person, my kids went to private schools (except for now my son is in a public school).
So, you have my kids (and many others) who have a mom who has probably worked the equivalent of a second job in regards to their education on top of going to really good schools and there were STILL obstacles we had to face.
* and when I say equivalent of a second job I mean things like going to parent teacher conferences, keeping in contact with the teachers, showing up at school events, getting involved in the extracurriculars, having reading material in the house, reminding them, reminding them and reminding them of things that need to be done and making sure it gets done, etc., etc., etc........
So, the answer is just so complicated because it involves money and it involves the parents. Even if you throw money into a district and you have the best of computers and science labs and books, you still need dedicated parents. And you don't just get dedicated parents out of the sky.
In the school where my son goes to now there is a huge discrepancy in grades between white and black students. This is a top notch public school, we pay taxes here through our noses and still there is this discrepancy. So, there are many kids here who are doing poorly in a school where money is no object! (well...money is always an object, but you know what I mean...this is no inner city school where students have to worry about guns in backpacks).
So, my point is, it's the home and family that is NUMBER ONE when it comes to promoting a good education.
This is why I think that what Meeks is doing will do nothing more than be a headliner for a day and then be forgotten.
The problem is way bigger than money.
I would argue that in places such as Winnetka, parental responsibility and role models matter as much as more money.
So a wealthy mom in Winnetka faces just as many hardships when it comes to taking care of her children as a poor mom in Englewood does?
Navin: Perhaps not, but that's not the issue.
Sometimes life is unfair--some parents have it harder than others; mine sure as hell did, as we were always just a missed paycheck away from food stamps--but that doesn't negate the point that parental responsibility and role models matter in education.
What exactly is your point in raising that question? I mean, we can all agree that life sucks more for some than for others, but that doesn't really produce a better education, does it?
Matilda...good spirited debate! :-)
" It's a reflection of the poor quality of thought in our society."
I disagree 100%.
People like Bono, RUSH and Eddie Vedder can say things politicians and the press cannot say. Not all pop culture is created equal. Don't equivilate "Let It Be" by the Beatles with "Paris Hilton". Huge difference.
I also disagree with "parental responsibility and role models matter as much as more money." So that's the solution? Just tell people from those areas to be better parents? That's up there with "just say no". The areas Meeks is referring to have nothing. No jobs, no prospects, no education.
You can be a great parent and Winnetka still has more educational funding.
We are talking about something as simple as an equal education...who on earth is arguing with this?!?!
"I don't see how Meeks' message will be anything but drowned out in the commotion of the playoff atmosphere." --- The press is covering it...we are talking about it...I think that is the point...exposure.
Navin...well put!
And Ingrid...Education is number ONE when it comes to Education. Educational funding is the issue. Don't hide behind the "parents parents" B/S. Are you afraid that if a school in the west side or south side gets the same funding as Winnetka, then Winnetka somehow loses?
The school your son goes to is on a totally different planet compared to the schools Meeks is talking about.
also disagree with "parental responsibility and role models matter as much as more money." So that's the solution? Just tell people from those areas to be better parents? That's up there with "just say no". The areas Meeks is referring to have nothing. No jobs, no prospects, no education.
Well, one of the hard truths of having a healthy society, I think, is having good parenting or role models (whatever the family unit may be--I don't care about that so much as I do about the effort put in). We have to be blunt and uncompromising about this: Good parents typically produce good kids. Perhaps the message is as futile as you claim, but what's the alternative, then? And as I addressed Navin: Yes, life is unfair, often viciously so, but that doesn't change the basic truth that kids need parenting/positive role models. Please don't think I am arguing as someone from the North Shore--my background is about as far as that as one can get.
Tell me: Let's assume the CPS gets millions upon millions of extra dollars next year. What will that do for kids who lack good parenting or role models?
People like Bono, RUSH and Eddie Vedder can say things politicians and the press cannot say. Not all pop culture is created equal. Don't equivilate "Let It Be" by the Beatles with "Paris Hilton". Huge difference.
Fine and dandy and plausible. But why is our society so eager and willing to pepper ever thought with some reference from pop culture, but seems unable to reference great books or thinkers? That is what I am getting at, and that is where I see the danger. And I think you miss something: Celebrities are hardly as free to speak their minds as you claim because they can't stray too far without endangering their income which, as you know, depends so much on their public image. That is why I find your suggestion of freer, more honest speech from pop culture figures to be less-than-persuasive.
I realize I am tilting at windmills (reference stolen from a great book, as I am sure you know), but I still mean it.
irishman,
I see your point, but I disagree. I went to some pretty crappy schools growing up and I was probably saved because we had books in the house and my mom took me to the library a lot.
There are very few children out there who can pull themselves out of the rubble. You have to have parents doing a lot of nudging.
And the school my son goes to may be on a different planet compared to the schools Meeks is talking about, but I can tell you that the kids here who are doing poorly are from the same planet that Meeks is talking about. They are here in a school where they have EVERY advantage, educationally speaking, in the world. This school has so much to offer, and they are still underperforming.
Why is that? It's for a lot of reasons, but the fact is they are in an excellent school and they do not know how to take advantage of the opportunities.
Great debate, people! No Zings, no B/S. Very good points by everyone.
"Let's assume the CPS gets millions upon millions of extra dollars next year. What will that do for kids who lack good parenting or role models?"
At the very least, we are setting up the next generation of parents to be educated. This is a long term investment.
"but the fact is they are in an excellent school and they do not know how to take advantage of the opportunities."
Great point.
But what is wrong with setting the kids up, say, "equally" when it comes to education. And then tackle the parents role.
By crying "parents parents" in a "school funding" topic, that is nothing but fluff. It lets you sleep better at night thinking "those kids are getting fucked when it comes to school funding, but they have negligent parents anyways...good night...zzzzz".
Let's put all kids on equal status when it comes to education, THEN let's tackle the parents issue.
Just to be clear...are you guys saying that there is nothing wrong with the way Chicago funds its public schools?
What are you so afraid of by giving each student equal funding?
"At the very least, we are setting up the next generation of parents to be educated. This is a long term investment."
If this analysis were correct, the easier solution would be to bus kids from Englewood to Winnetka. Then the education would be identical. But it would not be, because the home environment, access to books, etc. all matter. Poverty breeds poverty both because society does not give equal opportunities to the poor, AND because it tends to breed a home situation that sets kids up for failure. Pouring more money into a dysfunctional community's school will not be an investment.
"What are you so afraid of by giving each student equal funding?"
Destroying the good schools in Illinois. Winnetka is extremely wealthy. Every school in the state cannot be funded to Winnetka levels. Bringing everyone to the lowest common denominator means (a) a boon for private schools, and (b) crappy public education for *all* Illinois students.
As an aside, I think Meeks is an asshat because he doesn't have a workable solution either. He's just manipulating these families and using their kids as props.
As a further aside, I attended Chicago Public Schools K-12, a public university, and a public law school. We were poor. I mean, search-the-couch-for-change-to-go-to-Dominick's poor. My mom was a single parent. I did well in school in part because of the environment created for me by my mom. The only (admittedly significant) advantage (other than parenting) I had over the fabled Englewood child was that my neighborhood was physically safe. I suspect that parenting was a more important success factor than security.
Chicago D...Busing?!?! Are you kidding me?
You give a weak "busing" suggestion and then knock the suggestion in the same paragraph.
Good point? I think? I never suggested busing, in fact I laugh at the idea.
Have we ever "tried" equal funding for public schools?
"Bringing everyone to the lowest common denominator means (a) a boon for private schools, and (b) crappy public education for *all* Illinois students."
Where is this data from?
It is sad to see you are turning your back on your public school roots by claiming the status quo is fine.
"Just be a better parent".
"Just say no".
BAM!!...the drug problems and the educational problems in Chicago are solved, right Chicago D?
"Pouring more money into a dysfunctional community's school will not be an investment."
Once again...fucking wow. It is sad that anyone has the balls to make such a fucked up statement like that.
Beyond sad.
They are here in a school where they have EVERY advantage, educationally speaking, in the world. This school has so much to offer, and they are still underperforming.
This could be because they were raised by parents who didn't have those advantages you speak of themselves. It'll take a generations to start to balance the inequities inflicted on the minorities and the poor.
What exactly is your point in raising that question? I mean, we can all agree that life sucks more for some than for others, but that doesn't really produce a better education, does it?
The point is clear, the two different parents are in a completely different environment and financial situation, it's disingenuous to compare the parenting skills of both. Violence, poverty, poor education etc. these parents and children have to deal with hardships unimaginable to somebody in Winnetka. Your argument is one that you hear a lot from people that like to push the 'pull yourself up from your bootstraps' philosophy: These people by their very nature just aren't made of good stuff.
The point is clear, the two different parents are in a completely different environment and financial situation, it's disingenuous to compare the parenting skills of both.
Well, I am still confused, I think. I agree 100% with that point. But if we don't make an effort to produce better parents, what on earth will that extra money do in such situations?
Your argument is one that you hear a lot from people that like to push the 'pull yourself up from your bootstraps' philosophy: These people by their very nature just aren't made of good stuff.
Sort of, but not exactly. Yes, I put great stock in the bootstrap idea, as I've seen it work countless times. I do realize its drawbacks, though. By no means I am implying that some people are inferior to others. But I am saying this: Life is hard and life is unfair, and if you have bad parenting and bad role models to begin with, extra money will hardly help.
Please, though, provide an example to prove me wrong. Perhaps we are simply talking past each other, and I have not considered every angle.
Irish,
If you want an equal education, give the kids the same education. Why don't you take the argument to its logical conclusion? Is it because this has been tried, and did not actually equalize educational attainment?
"'Bringing everyone to the lowest common denominator means (a) a boon for private schools, and (b) crappy public education for *all* Illinois students.'
Where is this data from?"
The logic (rather than data) come from the paragraph above the one you quoted. We cannot fund everyone at Winnetka levels. In fact, look at what happens in some downstate districts, and you'll see it's as bad as Chicago. Therefore, "equal" will mean "less" for some of the highest achieving districts. Thus, if people perceive a diminuation in the quality of the schools, they will leave (boon for private schools), and the overall quality of public schools will drop (crappy public education).
"'Pouring more money into a dysfunctional community's school will not be an investment.'
Once again...fucking wow. It is sad that anyone has the balls to make such a fucked up statement like that."
Nothing sadder than saying we need a broader solution than more money. Truly a tragedy. How do I live with myself? Oh yeah, by being as involved as possible with my child's education and the school to ensure the best education possible for him. Funny thing, but that is exactly what I take from my public school roots.
And by the way, few mom's were more harried than mine. Individual parents need to commit to their kid(')s(') education(s). For every story you can tell me about people working third shift, etc. etc., how many people simply do not get involved? Don't let them off the hook. Doing so is paternalism, and helps nobody but your conscience.
Please, though, provide an example to prove me wrong. Perhaps we are simply talking past each other, and I have not considered every angle.
I don't think I need to provide an example to prove that funding schools as well as other schools well help a community. Better funded (and run of course) schools will produce the better parents that you speak of.
I don't think I need to provide an example to prove that funding schools as well as other schools well help a community. Better funded (and run of course) schools will produce the better parents that you speak of.
Actually, I think you assume too much. I and many others went to public schools that are hardly funded like the North Shore schools, or even most schools in DuPage. Yet I received a great education that enabled me to have a pick of good colleges. The biggest part of this was parenting and role models. Granted, I did not grow up in a gang-infested ghetto, but I was nowhere near rich, and know what Chicago D is talking about.
I am NOT arguing against funding that is more equal than exists now--true 100% equity of funding is unlikely to happen because of political realities. What I am arguing is for a greater consideration of parental involvement and role models, and not just putting all our faith into greater levels of funding. Having one without the other is a half-solution at best. Meeks, I think, is addressing only one part of the problem, and probably the minor part of the problem.
That is my point. I am still unclear about yours.
>>
I do not know what Meeks says in his church. I am not a member of his church. However, the irony when he makes the funding argument is that he, as a prominent black pastor, is in a great position to talk about parenting, involvement, etc. I hope he does. Church-going people may already understand a lot of those things, but long before you could get agreement about funding, you could get involved in the schools.
"Better funded (and run of course) schools will produce the better parents that you speak of."
Only if the teachers act as parents. I mean, when push comes to shove someone needs to be a parent/role model for kids. Unfirtunately you cannot fun your way out of that.
Chicago D.
Here is the flaw in your argument:
You claim by taking funds away from winnetka, it will put winnetka with the "lowest common denominator".
But you give zero credit to additional funding for the poorer schools.
Which is it? Does funding help a school or not?
In one hand you say decrease funding will hurt Winnetka, with that you have to give credit to the funding they do get.
Why don't you give the same credit to "additional" funding for the poorer schools?
Your "lowest common denominator" logic fails. Poorer schools will raise their standards, richer schools may feel a squeeze effect...and you know what? I think Winnetka can handle it.
Winnetka will be okay, they have the shoulders to burden the squeeze...I promise!
My dad worked in a factory. My mom was a stay at home mom.
We were poor. They weren't big into education, and believe me...they were far from perfect - we had our share of dysfunction - but we had a lot of structure. There were certain expectations.
I was a young, single mom (widowed), I was in college full time and worked almost full time with a young children, but what I had that many don't is a strong support system.
Do I need $20 for gas? My dad is there. Do I need someone to pick up my daughter from daycare? My dad will do it.
Do I need someone to watch her while I work or go to class?
If the bottom fell out I knew that I would always have a place to live until I got back on my feet.
My parents are there, my grandparents are there.
What my family lacked in money and education they made up for in support. This is what is missing in the poorest communities...a strong support system.
This, in my opinion, is just so very important. You have to have a support system. When you're a kid, you have to have people who care if you come home at night and do your homework.
There was a really good POV called "The Boys of Baraka" or something like that. It was about the inner city in Baltimore. Over 60% of inner city youth do not graduate high school there.
So, they take a group of boys and send them to Africa, they live there, they go to school there and long story short, they learn to see the world in a different way, they do learn respect for education. They are thrown into a new culture and they do struggle with this, but when they come home for vacation it's evident that they have learned something. So, what I got out of this is that taking them out of their toxic environment and giving them the support they need, they will learn to see that they have options.
These kids are going to a poor school in Africa. I'm sure it was nothing like they have in Winnetka, but they grew as human beings. I just don't think it's about the money, it's so much more about support.
A few years ago I watched another really interesting POV about someone trying to fight the school administration. I wish I could remember more details...but I do remember thinking that nobody in the administration wants to listen to sense! It was so frustrating to see the truth of what goes on behind closed doors. It may have been the Chicago schools, I just don't remember. But what I got out of that is that it is near impossible to change things. Nobody wants to rock any boats when they're making a good income and they don't want to risk that.
In the end, it's the kids who suffer.
Irish,
Oh boy. Two problems with your zinger. You did congratulate everyone for respectful discussion and no zingers, right? Anyway, I digress.
First, I don't deny that funding is important. Never could, never would. I deny that funding ALONE is sufficient to get better schools. More money does not equal better schools. More money plus societal/parental support equal better schools. Throwing dollars at schools equals throwing dollars at schools.
In addition, what I said, and I quote was: "Thus, if people perceive a diminuation in the quality of the schools, they will leave (boon for private schools), and the overall quality of public schools will drop (crappy public education)."
Winnetka could certainly stand less funding and still have great schools. Look at the front of the Metro section today and the story on Barrington High School's new scoreboard. Just crazy amounts of wasted resources. However, and reading is key here, "perception" is an important problem. People with money and options will not stick around to see if you are right about "the squeeze." They don't have to. When the good students are gone (they will be the ones whose parents are most likely to react most quickly, since they are involved), the good school will be gone.
So, I guess those two fundamental points would be the problem with your gotcha zinger. You will never fund your way out of ineffective role models and parenting. Ever. Ever. In a million years. Not even using 700 billion dollars.
The Lincoln way school district spends less money per student than Chicago yet sends 90% of their students to college.
There is alot more to this debate than money.
Some better funding could help. maybe a few less TIF districts would provide the money.
maybe Meeks give me more give me more tax money plea would be better recieved if taxpayer money wasn't used to build his mega church, and his church didn't rake in thousands upon thousands in tax money via grants. Meeks just continues the Rev Jackson tradition of it's everyone elses fault . Never blame the student or the absent father, or the 16year old kid having kids, or the drug addict mom. No, it's those bad people in Winetka that go to work care for their children maybe do something crazy like read to them or check the homework and pay high taxs so their kids could go to nice school.Those damn people with jobs who do they think they are.
Oh he is right about the CUBS protest I blame Kerry Wood for all the problems in the Chicago public Schools. Thank god they got rid of Mark Prior he was seen keeping a whole generation of kids from learning to read.
Chicago D.
Fair enough.
Call mine a "half zinger"...or a zinger hold the mayo!
:-)
I think we agree more than our posts show.
"More money plus societal/parental support equal better schools"
100% agree! Great point.
Have a great weekend everyone.
Lots of great points made today.
The score board that was mentioned above reminded me of an opinion I have about school sports that I always take a lot of heat for, but I have always felt strongly about this:
I think that sports should NOT be in schools. Not that I'm against sports but I feel that they should be 100% community based.
Schools everywhere are just such a jock based culture and that's going off topic, but I'd rather see the money saved on sports crap go towards the education part of school
Ingrid,
For a lot of CPS students, playing a sport is what keeps them in school. I am not a big sports fan, and when I was a high school student myself out in the burbs, I despised the jock mentality, but in the CPS school where I taught for five years, I have to say that sports provided a reason for a lot of kids to come to school.
I think that's true for extracurricular programing in general. I know that at least a few of my students made grades and showed up on time because being part of the school drama program was important to them. I know of at least two students who were on detention and snuck into school to attend play practice.
I think Meeks is an idiot, I think he's showboating and wasting the time of everyone involved, and I think he is putting the safety of a lot of children at risk, however, there is something to be said about his point. School funding in Illinois is a mess, and it needs to be fixed.
Will giving CPS schools more money fix the problem of absentee parents? Of course not. But there are specific things that extra money can do.
I don't know how many of you have eaten lunch in a CPS school recently. When I was teaching, the cafeteria ran out of food by the final lunch period, and the only lunch available was nacho chips with cheese sauce, similar to the kind you get at the 7-11. For many of those kids, about 85% of whom were on free or reduced lunch, that meal of nachos and cheese sauce was the one hot meal they could expect. I don't know anyone who can perform at his or her best on a steady diet of junk food, certainly not a growing child. Studies have shown that school lunch impacts student behavior. http://www.feingold.org/PF/wisconsin1.html
It's obscene to build scoreboards for some schools, when children at other schools are not even fed an adequate lunch.
lulu,
Yes, I can see that being a problem, but isn't it a rule that you have to keep a minimum grade average to be on a sports team?
It would be the same in a community based sport. If you don't make the grades at school, then you don't play the sport.
And don't get me going about lunches in public schools. Even the school where my son goes to it's a logistical nightmare. This year he has the first lunch period, which means that he's eating lunch before 11 am! I find this ridiculous.
And running out of food is common here as well. There have been many times where he'll be waiting in a food line for 20 minutes, he'll get to the top of the line and the food is gone, which means there is no time to go stand in any other lines, purchase the food and then actually eat it.
Although what you are describing sounds worse because at least he has the option of grabbing a muffin or something like that.
In my Utopian world, all schools would be much, mcuh smaller and teachers would be well paid. It just kills me that no matter where I go, no matter what city I'm in there is always enough money to build new sports stadiums, always enough money to poor into sports, but never enough money for schools.
lulu,
the problem you point out with lunches isn't about money it is about corruption and mismanagment. If the school is running out of lunches before the kids are fed someone needs to be held accountable. The school knows how many kids ae attending and howmany are getting free lunchs (this is a federal program) if the money is not there it was stolen or squandered. And this is a a better example of why the schools need to be held accountable for the money they do recieve. Maybe less waste or outright theft from the schools would help.