How a school (or other place of learning) views food sheds a lot of light on how it views education. And the other way around.
Mass-produced, highly processed, standardized, low-cost, and packaged products, engineered and marketed centrally and shipped out to be reconstituted at their point of use, while predictable and cost-effective in the short run, do not work. This is as true with food (such as frozen hamburgers prepared by cafeteria workers) as educational experiences (such as textbooks and curricula presented by teachers).
This comparison is much more than just a semantic flourish. Consider that:
- Food is a uniquely perfect microcosm of learning. Anyone who does not eat well has failed in his or her own ability to systematically learn (while they may be productive in other ways). Which necessarily means that any instructor who does not eat well is hypocritical in trying to teach anything to anyone - he or she is a cautionary tale rather than a role-model.
- Learning is impossible without being fed. The act of growing according to one's genetic blue print supersedes the act of learning. Students who are adding inches to their height are biologically different from people who are not, and the same eating schedule will not accommodate both.
- Every stated goal of an educational institution (or real goal of a parent) is predicated on a student's life-long health, which requires good food as a foundation.