Blog post about food in the curriculum

[LinksEtc]

"Food in the Curriculum and the Food-Allergic Student"
http://www.asthmaallergieschildren.com/2013/06/25/food-in-the-curriculum-and-the-food-allergic-student/

[twinturbo]

I don't get it. She says she has clients what exactly does she do?

[LinksEtc]

I don't have any personal knowledge about her or her organization, but there was a link to this site.

http://www.foodallergyed.com./Consulting.html

[ajasfolks2]

.

[twinturbo]

One vital reality check one of my older child's schools gave me is our child's medical condition, and even allergen set, isn't a reason to facilitate food where it isn't necessary. Mine was primarily peanut only and some of the parents were trying to collaborate with me to work around the no candy policy for celebrations. Well did I ever deservedly earn a chew out because there was at least one other kid with MORE allergens than my child. So my near acquiescence was putting other kids at risk.

The point being food anaphylaxis doesn't give us either the right or make us the champions of making sure food can be retrofitted where it has nothing to do with the fundamental nature of the lesson. I think it makes people uncomfortable to remove the food due to emotional reasons, they're afraid.

[Macabre]

I feel a bit sold out.

[CMdeux]

   TT.

There are VERY few instances in which food is a completely appropriate teaching tool.

The blog post's author actually hit upon just ONE... the 8th grader.  Food is legitimately a part of a foreign culture, and is often a key part of understanding ritual and cultural values at a fundamental level.

Now, with that said... I vehemently disagree that either of the other two instances had ANYTHING to do with "learning" in a classroom setting.  No.  They were simply a way to accommodate the preferences... of the teacher.

[twinturbo]

As the blog author herself puts it a "Food Channeled" curriculum presents an issue for more than just kids with food allergies. That my kids do have food allergies does not give me the ability to sign off for food use amongst kids with diabetes, obesity, eating disorders, Celiac, dental issues, sensory issues leading to distraction, or parents like Bettina who don't want me to feed her kid, period.

Yes, we have food anaphylaxis. Yes, I also respect that others have their own opposition to a Food Channeled curriculum. I personally think it dumbs down the curriculum. Want a big word for it? Demand artifact. Perhaps it alters or influences the fundamentals of the lesson until the food itself overwhelms the learning goal.

I will respectfully disagree that teaching foreign culture requires food to really gain understanding. IMO, I feel too many people rely on consumption as a crutch to believing that it's tantamount to experiencing and understanding a culture. For travel preparation when the experience will be in an actual host country then it would be prudent to prepare for eating there. Honestly, the last thing I would ever want is someone to eat some sushi and dumplings thinking lesson over I know it all!

And while I know CMdeux would never think that way and FASers wouldn't think that way the average grade school foreign culture lesson plan in America probably does roll out that way. Don't get mad! Just saying from my perspective I'd put food last on my list in order to understand culture even though it's a huge part of any culture.

[LinksEtc]

I think from a food allergy perspective, the article made some good points.

I liked how the different scenarios were presented of food being used in the class and what the different outcomes were (reaction, exclusion, and the teacher who changed his lesson to make it safe).  Mentioning that allergens can be found in items like crayons is also important.

This seems obvious, but so many schools don't have this as a policy:

A student's food allergens should never be used in the curriculum, regardless of whether the child is in elementary, middle or high school

I tend to separate, in my mind, the two issues of "addressing the needs of FA students" and "the overuse of food at school" ... I prefer there to be much less food at school for many reasons, but when we were initially setting up an IHP & 504, we concentrated on health/safety/FA.  I do think using food is a big responsibility for the schools that they don't always seem to appreciate ... Coordinating all of the needs (FA, diabetes, etc) for all the students in the class can be a huge task.

One area that the article seemed a bit lacking imo is the difference between a 504 & IHP ... I do think a 504 protects students more and that a good practice is to have the IHP be a part of the 504.

I also would hate for parents to assume that they need to hire somebody to help them set these things up since with a board like ours, many parents can do it themselves by working directly with the school.  On the other hand, it doesn't hurt to know that one does have the option to hire an attorney or other advocate ... and to realize that they are not all going to be of the same quality or in the same price range.

[twinturbo]

I don't have a problem with the approach--at all. I have a problem with the premise of someone under the mantle of advocate writing an article that, however passively or subtly, argues that it's my responsibility to make sure food stays where it's unwarranted as long as it's lowered risk.

Very practical, yet still unacceptable by my standards and concurrent needs of my child as a whole who has problems maintaining a healthy weight, eating meals then snacking appropriately as both ped and ped dentist would agree. He unfortunately also has the sort of teeth that carries food particles longer requiring either a full brushing or xylitol gum as a quick n dirty removal.

That paradigm also does not jive for either parent in this household, one of whom is well versed in both instruction and human behavior. Not to mention by my wild guestimation the current trend to Food Channeled (author's words) curriculum has more to do with concerns of test performances for the school's own good than what the longterm educational content bears out.

There is nothing wrong with questioning the use of food merely because we have food allergies. I'm just more aware of how pervasive it is because we have an additional dire consequence.

But yeah, plugging into that paradigm the article offers very practical advice. I'll pass but it would certainly be less controversial. To each his or her own, including private school and home school.