Here is an excerpt from my policy paper. I have included the thesis, my main proposals, and then the explanation of my first proposal. All proposals follow suit with the same structure, although a shorter explanation. How do you think I can improve on my organization? What improvements can I make to my arguments and claims to make it more plausible and more relatable? Thanks!

In order to reach all students at all levels of financial and nutritional need, the strategies and goals of the federal government and of private companies must synchronously follow these initiatives:

• Further decrease the amount of saturated fats, added sugars, sodium, and artificial additives per meal
• Further increase the amount of fresh fruits, vegetables, whole grains, dairy, and lean proteins per meal
• Source from local farms and processors when possible
• Update facilities to allow for onsite cooking and handling of fresh foods
• Involve students in the farm-to-table educational process
• Decrease corporate influence in the form of advertising and surplus foods
• Promote social learning, making healthy eating cool and fun

The Food

• Further decrease the amount of saturated fats, added sugars, sodium, and artificial additives per meal

The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act            takes the non-radical approach to “increase the focus on reducing the amounts of saturated fat, trans fats, added sugars, and sodium.” (5) Although the Act has slightly reduced the amount of whole milk, enriched wheat, and sweets served during lunches, the program is still predominantly controlled by large food corporations. With the 2010 Act, Congress blocked a measure that would raise the requirement from 2 tablespoons to a half cup for tomato paste to be classified as a vegetable, thus fulfilling one serving of the HHFK Act’s new standards. Essentially, a serving of pizza will remain classified as a serving of vegetables, supported by the dairy and wheat industries. Additionally, Congress opposed a limitation on starchy vegetables to two servings per week, thus allowing French fries to count as a vegetable all week long. Reductions in sodium and refined grains were postponed until sufficient research could prove quantify the dangers of processed salts and grains.  (25)

These limitations weaken the new standards of the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act. The government is cognizant of the need for change, yet cannot separate from the heavy investment from special interests. Of the $1 billion a year the Agriculture Department spends on fresh foods for schools, $445 million goes to processing, turning chickens into nuggets, fruits into pastries, and grains into pizza. (26)

Sodium and fats are essential in the human body, excessive intake can lead to the development of hypertension, which overtime can lead to stroke, heart disease, and kidney failure. Processed foods can often provide way above the recommended 1,500mg of sodium per day and 25-35% of calories from fat per day for children in a single meal. (27)  Consumption of refined grains and simple sugars causes spikes in blood sugar, making it difficult for children to concentrate and learn after lunch. Blood sugar crashes soon follow as glucose is expended through hyperactivity or stored in the body as fat. By reducing the amount of saturated fats, added sugars, sodium, and artificial additives per meal, not only can future chronic disease be prevented, but productive learning environments can be promoted as well. While these are the salty, sweet, and oily foods children crave, one University of Minnesota study found that schools could reduce levels of sodium and fat in meals while retaining student participation in the lunch program. (28)

Two weeks ago, I wrote about the closing of twenty three schools by the Philadelphia School District, analyzing the balance of cutting costs while maintaining a high standard of education. I looked at class size as a major impact on a child’s future success, but often as one of the aspects sacrificed with budget costs. One other major aspect continually cut by districts in order to slice debts is the variety, the roundedness, of education.

To be prepared for a twenty-first century life, English and math are not enough. Even social studies and science, which are often cut with budgets, are not enough. Art, computer science, physical education, music, foreign language, and so much more are needed for a well rounded education. Sadly, with increasing budget strain and pressure to score high on standardized testing, these “extras” are being squeezed out of curriculum.

It’s not only students who are being hurt, but our future economy, too. With students less prepared to tackle problems (other than those solvable with a calculator or a handy vocabulary term), more likely to think inside the box, and less exposed to possible career paths, we have a workforce of very unprepared applicants- a work force expected to solve climate change, cure cancer, and care for the growing elderly population.

My middle school science fair project (good times, good times) examined Howard Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences, a theory that said no to traditional IQ, proposing that all humans possess varying levels of these different intelligences: linguistic (learning through language, writing, reading), logical-mathematical (learning through patterns, puzzles, algorithms), bodily-kinesthetic (learning through – movement), spatial-visual (learning through images), musical (learning through rhythm, sound), interpersonal (learning through interacting with others), intrapersonal (learning through reflection).

Traditional education seems to value linguistic and logical-mathematical, increasingly so with budget cuts.  Education has evolved as teachers are increasingly incorporating this research, introducing new teaching styles, projects that allow flexibility, and activities that engage all students’ learning styles. If our teachers are doing more on an individual basis to engage all students learning styles, the education system on a large scale is failing, and often restricting teachers’ abilities to teach creatively and engage students’ creativity.

When making important budget cuts, besides working to maintain small class sizes, districts must also work to maintain the variety and creativity of a student’s education. By offering, and teaching well, courses other than the essential English, algebra, history, biology, etc., schools can offer students a lot more than book smarts- they can strengthen intelligences (that can then be used to excel in other classes), expand a world perspective, introduce functional life skills, and provide windows to important careers.

The tricky part, in addition to producing the funds to support these classes, is to still maintain a high standard of learning in the core classes, to maintain high scores on standardized testing- to expand education without weakening the core. In reality, this isn’t tricky at all. Although there is less time spent in the core classes when these ‘extras’ are incorporated, the skills and ways of thinking students gain from these classes can help them excel and focus in the core classes.

Having a variety of classes is essential in developing well rounded citizens. Have you had a class that has specifically impacted your life or career path, whether core or not? I took a ceramics class in my senior year and it reminded me of the importance of challenging my mind in ways other than memorizing facts or understanding concepts. In learning to use my hands, I learned to use a different part of my brain, developing my creativity, which then helped me excel with projects in my other classes, and also expanded my view of myself and expanded how I think. I’d say that’s just as important, if not more important, than learning to calculate a derivative or interpret Shakespeare!

http://www.ourfuture.org/files/documents/starving-schools-report.pdf

http://www.thirteen.org/edonline/concept2class/mi/index.html

http://www.theonion.com/video/authorities-on-alert-as-hundreds-of-crazed-sociopa,31733/

Please watch the quick video above!

In my high school English class, we learned about satire as if it were a chunk of undercooked meat- to be examined, dissected, and then thrown away for fear of poison. Those who did partake seemed to have contracted a food borne illness, weirdly piecing together stories that made no logical sense, with a large serving of strangeness.

My sarcasm, an enormous bowl of uncooked kale, was something I tried not to touch, each taste lingering in bitterness. However, it would have done me a lot more good to reach for the bowl, all of the nutrients I need to grow strong and healthy.

Nomnoms, raw meat and kale, what a great combo.

If I’ve learned anything from eating my veggies, it’s that satire gets things done. The Onion video above on the crazed lunatics invading Congress makes for a good chuckle. However, more than a hearty belly laugh, the video supplies you with a hearty thought process of “What da..?”

We all think it, we all say it, Congress is filled with a bunch of crazies. But do we actually believe it? Obviously not if we claim a small hair more of sanity than these government officials. Calling congressmen and congresswomen stubborn idiots is shallowly self fulfilling I must admit. Actually believing it is ridiculous. Congress gets stuff done, sometimes.

Satire is wonderful because it is left to the audience’s interpretation. We could perceive the video’s message as Congress sucks, let’s round up those criminals and crazies and put them in a ward. We could also perceive it as, at least our Congress isn’t actually mentally insane, okay that has to merit at least a wee bit of credit. And we are left with a clear mental image and plan of action, to either support the slow progress Congress does make (sometimes), or (hopefully not) to pessimistically convene a bashing session. That’s a great deal accomplished in under two minutes!

I mean, hearing an intriguing, humorous story never really interests me, anyway, that would be ridiculous.

I am researching for my policy paper. I have decided on a policy increasing whole, natural, healthy foods into school lunches. I have been searching through historic policy documents which is rather tedious, but I’ve learned a lot about food policy. Recent changes to the National School Lunch Program have made healthy options more available in public schools, but I will argue that the policy needs to be more drastic.

I am unsure what I will do for my advocacy project. It will be tricky to relate this to college students, who have already survived the school lunch program, but perhaps I will do some advocacy to increase local produce in our own dining halls. Any suggestions as to how I can engage college students in healthy, sustainable dining hall eating?

Over spring break, I went home and caught up on all of the news I had missed in my college bubble. Reading The Philadelphia Inquirer, I learned of the battle rattling the Philadelphia School District, ending in the closing of twenty three of the district’s schools. Citing enormous debts, the district looked to consolidate the schools to help save money. Parents, no wonder, are infuriated.

With increasing budgetary stress and pressure to eliminate mounting debts, public officials must also balance the value of education. That is much easier said than done.

In my own school district, there were major cuts that came with the slumping economy. There apparently was a paper shortage, and we were no longer allowed to print things in school- everything, and that’s everything, we needed for class had to be printed at home, much to my miniscule ink cartridge’s chagrin. My high school classmates and I were furious with the new $100 parking permits, the sporadic use of the heater, but we were lucky to have never have had the threat of closing.

What the Philadelphia School District is doing is closing tens of elementary, middle, and high schools (some of them high performing) and transferring these students to the nearest school. Citizens are afraid of the rivalries, both school and neighborhood, that will clash with these combinations, in addition to the longer, more dangerous walks that students may have to make to travel to school.

But more at stake may be the child’s education. With consolidation comes lost teaching positions, and thus larger class sizes. Districts around the country have had to cut jobs and increase class sizes in order to cut costs, but never to the scale that Philadelphia is planning.

With these cut costs, however, comes cut learning. The Tennessee STAR experiment found that students in smaller classes (13-17 students) outperformed students in larger classes (22-26 students) on tests and attendance. The more years students spent in smaller classes, the stronger the noticeable gains were in later years with better grades, lower dropout rates, and higher scores on college entrance exams, and even greater salaries later in life.

How are school districts supposed to weigh these future benefits with the present costs of hiring and maintaining a large teaching staff, supplying and maintaining enough classrooms to support the larger number of classes, along with all of the other costs that come with education?

When making budget cuts, districts usually eliminate non-teaching staff first, so as to avoid this problem, but after trying everything else like restricting printing and heating and charging more for parking as my district did, at some point the teaching cuts are usually made. Is this ethical? Is it right to put a price tag on our children’s future? Is it possible to decrease debts while maintaining a high standard of education?

Schools are already operating on the bare minimum, with already high class sizes, limited field trips, mandatory payment to participate in sports and clubs, etc. Some schools are even cutting back on technology, bringing back the good old transparencies and projectors that work just fine.

But when push comes to shove, as it has in Philadelphia, these tough questions must be faced, and hard decisions made. Could Philadelphia have taken on a bit more than it can handle, reorganizing a whole district in only a few months? Probably. But could Philadelphia be an example to the rest of the nation, and to the world, that a high standard of education can survive through budget cuts? Hopefully! Although class sizes will probably have to rise, the district can work to maintain education to ensure these kids have a bright future.

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20130308_Headline_Goes_In_Here.html

http://www.ourfuture.org/files/documents/starving-schools-report.pdf