User:Kristen.morazzano/sandbox

Open campus lunch is the situation where students, or specified groups of students, are allowed to leave campus to eat lunch. The students may make the choice of going home to eat, going to a fast food establishment to eat, staying at school, or making decisions for tutoring/studying for classes during this time period (5). Students tend to favor open campus lunch more than adults (8). Adults in the school communities tend to be apprehensive of these open campus policies due to the potential safety risks associated with them. They fear students being unnecessarily exposed to accidents, tardies, and truancy, all of which can impact their education and impending graduation from high school (2).

Contents:

1.    Defined

2.   Open Campus Lunch Benefits

a.   Overcrowded Cafeterias b.   Choices c.   Impact on costs/the economy 3.   Criticisms of Open Campus Lunch

a.   Negative Effects on Students b.   Nutrition 4.   Process to change

a.   Proposal to School Board

Defined: Open Campus lunch is defined as a campus policy for student lunches that allows for students to leave campus during a specified lunchtime. This type of structure is used in some high schools, while a closed campus lunch structure is used in others (not leaving campus during lunch). Advocates on both sides of the issue have several concerns for their side of the policy. In most cases, the policies affect the older students, such as the juniors and seniors, since those would be the groups who would have the elements necessary for departing a campus at lunch, specifically a car and driver’s license. Many times, the privilege of leaving campus for lunch is earned by the students. Students may have expectations to meet with regard to attendance, grades, and behavior.

Open Campus Lunch Benefits:

Several groups could benefit from an open campus lunch policy, such as students, the local economy, and the campus as a whole. These are considerations schools take into account when they consider the type of lunch policy to implement in their individual schools. Also, by using the privilege as a reward, the student and the campus both benefit.

Overcrowded cafeterias: The high school campus must feed a large number of students in a small amount of time. With a school cafeteria having a finite amount of space, a specific number of students fit into the cafeteria at a time. Fire code must also be considered in any confined public space. Schools have grown in student populations that they must feed due to regulations on student nutrition. Additionally, the cafeteria workers can only produce a finite amount of food in that time frame with fixed fiscal and physical resources. The cafeterias are not large enough to accommodate all the students the school needs to accommodate within the short amount of time allocated for lunch. With an open campus lunch, students who were allowed the open campus lunch opportunity would be allowed to leave (7).

Choices:  With regulations on school lunches, the cafeteria can only serve certain foods. Students in an open campus situation can make the food choice that is best for them. This also helps the students to self regulate as they mature and become young adults ready to enter the workforce or college life. The students are making choices and decisions that are best for them and their current situation (3).

Impact on Costs/the Economy: The impact on the economy has proven to be beneficial for both the school and the community. For the school, the number of cafeteria and custodial personnel required decreases, as does the number of administrators needed to monitor the cafeteria each day. The impact on the local economy shows an upswing as students spend money at food establishments, thus increasing their profits, and increasing the need for more workers during the lunch shift (3).

Criticisms of Open Campus Lunch:

Those who favor a closed campus lunch criticize the open campus policy for the negative impacts it has that directly impact the students and Students making poor nutrition choices. Critics of an open campus lunch fear the increased risks of car accidents and injuries, as well as the potential for increases in tardies and truancy.

Negative Effects on Students: Students having an automobile accident is a concern expressed (9). With the added drive time at lunch, coupled with the often crowded conditions, accidents have happened (10). Students getting hurt is a fear of the policymakers. Car accidents involving students often make the news, and the school looks at fault when the campus allowed the students to leave, such as would be the situation with an open campus lunch. Another concern is the potential increase in tardies and truancy. The open campus policy allows students to leave campus midway through the day. Once students leave campus, the fear is that some may not come back at all, while others may be tardy trying to get lunch and get back to school in a short amount of time (2).

Nutrition: Students making poor nutritional choices is also a criticism of opponents to open campus lunch. Critics fear that the poor nutritional choices will have a negative impact on the overall health and well-being of the students. Schools are required by federal and local laws to serve nutritious foods. Keeping students on campus increases the likelihood that the students choice would be the more nutritious school lunch. Research on student eating habits have shown that students would be more likely to eat less healthy foods than if they were required to remain on campus at lunch (4).

Process to Change/School Board: Schools with one type of lunch structure, such as open campus lunch, who want to change to the opposite type must follow certain steps. Policies are board approved and written into the district policies. Policies must be presented to the School Superintendent and approved before going to the school board. The school board then will vote on it.

References

1. Associated Press. “Free-Range Lunch Period? Schools’ Open-Campus Policies Vary.” ABCNews.go.com. 12 July 2017. http://abcnews.go.com/amp/Lifestyle/wireStory/free-range-lunch-period-schools-open-campus-policies-48565775. Accessed 3 Oct. 2017.

2. Bliesner, Guy. “Why a Closed Campus at High School Lunch is Safest.” KSL.com. 13 March 2012. https://www.ksl.com/?nid=1009&sid=19522933. Accessed 3 Oct. 2017.

3. Johnson, Adrian. “Should High Schools Have Open Campus for Lunch?” Kalamazoo Gazette. 25 Oct. 2008. http://www.mlive.com/opinion/kalamazoo/index.ssf/2008/10/ should_high_schools_have_open.html. Accessed 3 Oct. 2017.

4. Mieszkowski, Katharine. “Open-Campus Policy Eats Away at School Nutrition Effort.” Revealnews.org. 9 May 2013. https://www.revealnews.org/article/open-campus-policy-eats-away-at-school-nutrition-effort. Accessed 4 Oct. 2017.

5. Miura, Marlo R. “Off the Map: Extracurricular School Food Open Campus Lunch.” Public Health Advocacy Institute. Feb. 2009.

6. Neumark-Sztainer, French, Simone A., Hannan, Peter J., Story, Mary, Fulkerson, Jayne A. “School Lunch and Snacking Patterns Among High School Students: Association with School Food Environment and Policies.” International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity. vol. 2 no.14. 2005.

7. Sanchez, Nealie E. “KISD Retains Open-Campus Lunch Policy. Killeen Daily Herald. 20 Aug. 2016. http://kdhnews.com/news/education/kisd-retains-open-campus-lunch-policy/article_7c4c0186-673d-11e6-9f81-cb0b87b96acd.html. Accessed 3 Oct. 2017.

8. Sauder, Erin. “District 300 High School Students Lobby for Open Campus.” Elgin Courier News. 23 May 2016. http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/elgin-courier-news/news/ct-ecen-district-300-open-campus-st-0524-20160523-story.html. Accessed 4 Oct. 2017.

9. Stone, Lorraine & Runyan, Carol W. “High School Off-Campus Lunch Policies and Adolescent Motor Vehicle Crash Risks.” Journal of Adolescent Health. Vol. 36 no. 1, 2005, pp. 5-8.

10. Vara-Orta, Francisco. “In Accident’s Wake, Open-Campus Policies Questioned.” Mysanantonio.com. 1 March 2013. http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/ education/article/In-accident-s-wake-open-campus-policies-4318174.php. Accessed 3 Oct. 2017.