To the editor:
I write in response to recent discussions regarding the ‘no lunch’ policy at Cazenovia High School. In reality, no such policy exists and framing a description in this manner creates confusion.
I would like to offer thoughts as a parent of 10th, 8th and 5th graders. Cazenovia High School offers lunch to all students during periods 5, 6 or 7. The district also offers students a choice to take elective classes during periods 5, 6 or 7. Any practice of having no lunch period results as a matter of choice by a student with input from parents and counselors on what best meets student interests.
Recent debate on this topic includes a “root cause” as block scheduling. A neighboring school district, Fayetteville-Manlius, was brought up as an example, as they use a nine-period daily schedule.
Just like Cazenovia, F-M offers their high school students the option to take an elective in lieu of having a lunch period. In fact, they have a robust “lunch to go” program where fresh sandwiches, subs or paninis can be ordered by a student through a smartphone and easily picked up at a designated time, to be eaten “on the go.” The F-M community does not view this practice as a ‘no lunch’ policy, but as a positive, flexible way to meet various interests within a diverse student body.
For a period schedule, the mandate for teacher contact time with students remains exactly the same as for block scheduling. A teacher can have no more than six student-contact periods within a nine-period day. Two periods are reserved for lesson preparation, and one for teacher lunch. A change to a period schedule would not offer up extra time.
In fact, with a greater number of transitions between classes, there would be less time for instruction, and perhaps this is why F-M’s school day is longer. For my Caz 8th grader, this would mean twice as many times that she would have to carry her full and too heavy backpack to each class due to the 8th grade locker wing’s distant location and not enough time to change classes.
I want to thank the school board and district administration for thoughtfully researching this complex issue. At first glance, most may agree “all children” benefit from having a lunch period. However, any unforeseen consequences to requiring lunch should be identified. Schools need to be nimble and flexible to differentiate instruction to all students.
Cazenovia students are fortunate to have a wide array of electives, and such a change may lead to fewer overall elective classes offered. Is this a worthwhile trade-off? What are other options, such as a longer school day, and if so, how to pay for increased payrolls? What assessment and evaluation plans are needed to understand impacts, to measure a baseline and future progress? How does this issue fit into broader district goals and align with the strategic plan?
Feedback should be collected from all stakeholders through forums, surveys, and/or focus groups.
JoAnne Druke Race
Cazenovia
