A recent headline in the New York Times read “Why Are You Still Packing Lunch for Your Kids?” In a week that also included coverage of the New Hampshire primary, essays about Valentine’s Day and updates on the Roger Stone scandal, the mildly confrontational title seemed to get people’s attention. More than 1,000 readers left comments.
In the article, author Jennifer Gaddis urges middle- and upper-class families to support efforts to make school lunches healthier by letting their kids buy lunch at school. School cafeterias are making big strides in the arena of nutrition, she said, but they need buy-in from families who can afford to pay full price in order to reach their full potential.
Gaddis, an assistant professor of civil society and community studies at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and the author of The Labor of Lunch: Why We Need Real Food and Real Jobs in American Public Schools, estimates that about 20 million students, primarily from higher earning families, forgo cafeteria meals in favor of lunches brought from home. Despite major overhauls of lunch programs nationwide, including robust farm-to-school initiatives in many districts, those numbers haven’t changed much in recent years, she said. Presumably, families who have time to fret over what their kids are eating and money to buy the highest quality food still don’t have faith in school lunch.
But might there be another key reason kids are bringing lunches from home?
School staff may have figured out a way to pack more nutrients into school lunches, but they haven’t yet figured out a way to pack more minutes into the school day. So, while the contents of their cafeteria trays may have changed, students still face a time crunch when it comes to eating lunch.
The average school lunch period is 25 minutes for elementary schools and 30 minutes for middle and high schools, according to the School Nutrition Association. Not so bad, until you consider that the period is usually calculated from the time one class dismisses to the time the next one begins. Depending on the size of the school and other factors, students may have considerably less time in the lunch room than the bell schedule indicates.
If they have to contend with a long lunch line, students have even less time to eat. Given the choice, some are probably going to opt for more time at the lunch table. As the quality of school lunches improves, lunch programs may even be facing a paradox: Better food may increase participation, but in doing so it will create longer lines, which could swing the pendulum back in the other direction.
Upper Valley schools seem to be about on par with the national average when it comes to school lunch periods, with a low of 22 minutes and a high of 30 minutes. What that translates to in terms of actual eating time is hard to say, but some administrators and food services directors are trying to find ways to maximize the time they have.
At White River Valley School, which has a 35-40% average participation rate in the lunch program, the younger grades have started picking up their lunches from the cafeteria and then eating them in their classrooms, said Willy Walker, food service manager for both the South Royalton and Bethel campuses.
“We find they do a better job of eating in smaller groups,” Walker said. “The teacher can kind of drive the conversation.”
Students in grades three through five eat in the cafeteria directly after recess. Middle school students get 30 minutes for lunch, with a little bit of gym time built into the lunch period. Those strategies allow kids to burn off some energy and socialize with friends — and maybe work up an appetite — so they’re more focused on their midday meal, Walker said.
The length of the lunch line varies, depending on what’s on the menu. Kids can usually sail through the line on a salmon patty day, while “pizza day is over the top,” Walker said. The average amount of time spent in line is probably six or seven minutes, he said.
Fresh Picks Cafe, which contracts with several area schools to provide meals, is working on streamlining lunch lines to reduce wait times, said Jordan Roberts, food service director for Mascoma Valley Regional School District, one of Fresh Pick Cafe’s clients.
“When I was in high school, we had about five minutes to eat,” he said. “If you were in the back of the line, you were out of luck.”
Although students still don’t have a leisurely lunch period — lunch period at Indian River Middle School, for example, is 25 minutes — Roberts thinks technology and a concerted effort to be more efficient have afforded them a bit more table time. “The kids typically zip right through the lines pretty quickly,” he said.
At the same time, though, it’s never been easier to pack a healthy lunch. In her article, Gaddis paints a picture of affluent parents crafting Instagram-worthy lunches from farm-fresh produce. But they aren’t the only ones packing lunches. Grocery stores and co-ops brim with products designed for busy families who care about nutrition and have just a bit of extra cash to spare: pre-cut vegetables and fruit, single-serving tubs of hummus, peanut butter and guacamole, pre-cooked, all-natural chicken, drinkable yogurt and on and on.
Sure, school lunch is a bargain even for families who don’t qualify for free- or reduced-price lunch, but in some cases, an extra dollar or so per day and a couple of minutes invested in tossing prepackaged foods in an insulated lunch bag may buy students adequate time to actually eat their lunches and maybe even socialize with their friends.
Investing in quality food is one way schools are providing an equal education for students. But if they’re not giving young people adequate time to eat and socialize, they’re missing an important element of a quality meal.
Why are parents till packing lunches for their kids? Maybe it’s because their days are overpacked.
Sarah Earle can be reached at searle@vnews.com or 603-727-3268.