First Person

This week's healthy schools highlights

Boys drink more sugary beverages than girls, survey shows

There’s been a lot of attention in recent years to soda and other drinks sweetened with sugar. Schools have banned vending machines selling soda and other sugary drinks. Some advocates have urged that the drinks be taxed to discourage their consumption as a way of fighting the obesity epidemic. But how much of this stuff do Americans really drink? Read more in this Washington Post blog.

Parents may underestimate risk of childhood obesity

More than one in six American children and teens are obese, but a new poll suggests that parents and doctors don’t always see eye-to-eye on the seriousness of the obesity epidemic. According to the new report, only about half of parents believe it is “very important” to seek medical care for an overweight child. Read more at LiveScience.

LiveWell Colorado to debut Weigh and Win kiosk

ALAMOSA — A new program in Alamosa promises to reward San Luis Valley residents with cash incentives for achieving healthier lifestyles. Weigh and Win is the nation’s first community-wide program offering cash rewards and prizes to individuals who achieve or maintain a healthy weight. Sponsored by Kaiser Permanente, Weigh and Win is available for free to all Colorado residents over the age of 18. The program opened up in the Front Range in March of this year and to date over 4,800 people have signed up and more than 7,200 pounds have been lost. Read all about it in the Alamosa News.

Is your child a victim of lunchbox bullying?

Your child opens up his lunchbox and takes out the food you so lovingly pulled together that morning. It’s chana masala or falafel or pork buns or kimchi — the cuisine of your family’s culture. Your child’s schoolmates, who brought cheese sandwiches and fruit roll-ups for their lunches, take one look at his home-cooked meal:

“Ew, that smells weird.”

“What’s that? It looks yucky.”

“Your lunch is gross.”

Read more at the Huffington Post.

Do school soda bans curb obesity in kids?

soda bottles and cans(CBS) Has the time come for school districts across the nation to just say no to sugary drinks?

That’s what some experts are saying in light of new research suggesting that Boston’s controversial ban on sugar-sweetened beverages has succeeded in limiting kids’ consumption of soft drinks and sports beverages – which have been identified as major contributors to the nation’s epidemic of childhood obesity. Watch this CBS News report.

District 11 ditches chocolate milk

Watch this video of the Colorado Springs District 11 superintendent defending the district’s decision to eliminate chocolate milk from school lunch offerings.

Get In The Action for Kids comes to DPS

Action for Healthy Kids is launching its national service initiative, Get in the Action, in Denver this September to help schools become healthier places for students to learn.  Bringing this program to DPS will impact 80,000 students through the education of children, parents, teachers and staff.

Here are the schools that are participating and when the kick-off event will be held:

  • Schmitt Elementary – Sept. 9
  • Asbury Elementary – Sept. 15
  • Denver Language School – Sept. 26
  • Brown International School – Sept. 30

The majority of students at these schools receive free or reduced lunches each day.  These activities will be integrated with the school’s wellness fair or carnival so the school can promote the community resources available to their families. This will help to sustain the change.

To ensure the success of these events, it is necessary that the community become involved –  parents, grandparents, teachers, neighbors and local businesses. Some 200 volunteers are needed to:

  • Implement a new salad bar
  • Provide healthy lifestyle face-lifts in the cafeterias with signs, piñatas, and painted murals.
  • Provide the schools with the Action for Healthy Kids ReCharge! program
  • Implement Action for Healthy Kids GameOn! movement challenges using the JAM program
  • Provide fresh fruit, vegetable and whole grain taste testing
  • Install motivating signage on the new school running tracks and learning landscapes
  • Clean up the school garden, playground, or field
  • And most fun of all… host a concert from Denver’s own Jammin’ Jr and the Jammonites whose music promote healthy eating, physical activity and character building.

Register as a volunteer:

Los Angeles schools launch ‘I’m In’ school lunch program

STUDIO CITY (CBS) — Los Angeles County Unified School District’s lunch menu is undergoing a makeover.

David Binkle, the district’s Deputy Director of Food Services and chef by trade and Chef Mark Baida, visited KCAL 9 on Wednesday afternoon to talk about the new “I’m In” healthy school menu. Check out this CBS report.


First Person

I’m a Bronx teacher, and I see up close what we all lose when undocumented students live with uncertainty

The author at her school.

It was our high school’s first graduation ceremony. Students were laughing as they lined up in front of the auditorium, their families cheering them on as they entered. We were there to celebrate their accomplishments and their futures.

Next to each student’s name on the back of those 2013 graduation programs was the college the student planned to attend in the fall. Two names, however, had noticeable blanks next to them.

But I was especially proud of these two students, whom I’ll call Sofia and Isabella. These young women started high school as English learners and were diagnosed with learning disabilities. Despite these obstacles, I have never seen two students work so hard.

By the time they graduated, they had two of the highest grade point averages in their class. It would have made sense for them to be college-bound. But neither would go to college. Because of their undocumented status, they did not qualify for financial aid, and, without aid, they could not afford it.

During this year’s State of the Union, I listened to President Trump’s nativist rhetoric and I thought of my students and the thousands of others in New York City who are undocumented. President Trump falsely portrayed them as gang members and killers. The truth is, they came to this country before they even understood politics and borders. They grew up in the U.S. They worked hard in school. In this case, they graduated with honors. They want to be doctors and teachers. Why won’t we let them?

Instead, as Trump works to repeal President Obama’s broader efforts to enfranchise these young people, their futures are plagued by uncertainty and fear. A Supreme Court move just last week means that young people enrolled in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program remain protected but in limbo.

While Trump and the Congress continue to struggle to find compromise on immigration, we have a unique opportunity here in New York State to help Dreamers. Recently, the Governor Cuomo proposed and the state Assembly passed New York’s DREAM Act, which would allow Sofia, Isabella, and their undocumented peers to access financial aid and pursue higher education on equal footing with their documented peers. Republicans in the New York State Senate, however, have refused to take up this bill, arguing that New York state has to prioritize the needs of American-born middle-class families.

This argument baffles me. In high school, Sofia worked hard to excel in math and science in order to become a radiologist. Isabella was so passionate about becoming a special education teacher that she spent her free periods volunteering with students with severe disabilities at the school co-located in our building.

These young people are Americans. True, they may not have been born here, but they have grown up here and seek to build their futures here. They are integral members of our communities.

By not passing the DREAM Act, it feels like lawmakers have decided that some of the young people that graduate from my school do not deserve the opportunity to achieve their dreams. I applaud the governor’s leadership, in partnership with the New York Assembly, to support Dreamers like Sofia and Isabella and I urge Senate Republicans to reconsider their opposition to the bill.

Today, Sofia and Isabella have been forced to find low-wage jobs, and our community and our state are the poorer for it.

Ilona Nanay is a 10th grade global history teacher and wellness coordinator at Mott Hall V in the Bronx. She is also a member of Educators for Excellence – New York.

First Person

I was an attorney representing school districts in contract talks. Here’s why I hope the Supreme Court doesn’t weaken teachers unions.

PHOTO: Creative Commons / supermac1961

Many so-called education reformers argue that collective bargaining — and unions — are obstacles to real change in education. It’s common to hear assertions about how “restrictive” contracts and “recalcitrant” unions put adult interests over children’s.

The underlying message: if union power were minimized and collective bargaining rights weakened or eliminated, school leaders would be able to enact sweeping changes that could disrupt public education’s status quo.

Those that subscribe to this view are eagerly awaiting the Supreme Court’s decision in the case of Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees. At issue is the constitutionality of “agency” or “fair share” fees — employee payroll deductions that go to local unions, meant to cover the costs of negotiating and implementing a bargaining agreement.

In states that permit agency fees (there are about 20), a teacher may decline to be part of a union but must still pay those fees. If the Supreme Court rules that those agency fees are unconstitutional, and many teachers do not voluntarily pay, local unions will be deprived of resources needed to negotiate and enforce bargaining agreements.

Based on my experience as an attorney representing school districts in bargaining and contract issues, I have this to say to those hoping the Court will strike down these fees: be careful what you wish for.

Eliminating fair share fees (and trying to weaken unions) represents a misguided assumption about bargaining — that the process weakens school quality. To the contrary, strong relationships with unions, built through negotiations, can help create the conditions for student and school success. Indeed, in my experience, the best superintendents and school boards seized bargaining as an opportunity to advance their agenda, and engaged unions as partners whenever possible.

Why, and how, can this work? For one, the process of negotiations provides a forum for school leaders and teachers to hear one another’s concerns and goals. In my experience, this is most effective in districts that adopt “interest-based bargaining,” which encourages problem-solving as starting point for discussions as opposed to viewing bargaining as a zero-sum game.

Interest-based bargaining begins with both sides listing their major concerns and brainstorming solutions. The touchstone for a solution to be adopted in a bargaining agreement: Is the proposal in the best interests of children? This important question, if embedded in the process, forces both sides to carefully consider their shared mission.

For example, some districts I worked with paid teachers less than comparable neighboring districts did. It would have been unreasonable for unions to insist that their pay be increased enough to even that difference out, because that would mean reducing investments in other items of importance to children, like technology or infrastructure. At the same time, it would have been untenable for management to play “hard ball” and deny the problem, because to do so would likely lead to a disgruntled workforce.

Instead, both sides were forced to “own” the issue and collaboratively craft plausible solutions. That made unions more agreeable to proposals that demonstrated some commitment by the district to addressing the issue of pay, and districts open to other things that they could provide without breaking the budget (like more early release days for professional development).

To be sure, many school administrators could get frustrated with the process of bargaining or having to consult the negotiated agreement when they want to make a change. Some districts would very much like to adopt an extended school day, for example, but they know that they must first consult and negotiate such an idea with the union.

Yet, in districts where school administrators had built a reservoir of goodwill through collective bargaining, disagreement does not come at the cost of operating schools efficiently. Both sides come to recognize that while they inevitably will disagree on some things, they can also seek agreement — and often do on high-stakes matters, like teacher evaluations.

How does this relate to the Supreme Court’s pending decision? Without fees from some teachers, unions may lack the resources to ensure that contract negotiations and enforcement are robust and done well. This could create a vicious cycle: teachers who voluntarily pay fees for bargaining in a post-Janus world, assuming the court rules against the unions, will view such payments as not delivering any return on investment. In turn, they will stop contributing voluntarily, further degrading the quality of the union’s services.

Even more troubling, if fair share fees are prohibited, resentment and internal strife will arise between those who continue to pay the fees and those who refuse. This would undercut a primary benefit of bargaining — labor peace and a sense of shared purpose.

Speaking as a parent, this raises a serious concern: who wants to send their child to a school where there is an undercurrent of bitterness between teachers and administrators that will certainly carry over into the classroom?

It is easy to see the appeal of those opposing agency fees. No one wants to see more money going out of their paycheck. The union-as-bogeyman mentality is pervasive. Moreover, in my experience, some teachers (especially the newer ones) do not recognize the hidden benefits to bargaining contracts.

But, obvious or not, agency fees help promote a stable workplace that allows teachers to concentrate on their primary responsibility: their students. Removing the key ingredient threatens this balance.

Mark Paige is a former school teacher and school law attorney who represented school districts in New England. He is currently an associate professor of public policy at the University of Massachusetts – Dartmouth.