News / The Northern Virginia Daily/nvdaily.com
Food reward ban stirs the pot
 |
Resident: Policy caused by mother of diabetic pupil's complaint about use of sweets
By Joe Beck -- jbeck@nvdaily.com
FRONT ROYAL -- A town resident addressing the Warren County School Board at Thursday night's meeting accused school officials of covering up what he called the real reason behind a recent controversial change in food policy.
Matt Tederick said the new food policy in effect since Dec. 1 was instituted in response to a complaint filed by a parent with the U.S. Office of Civil Rights against the school system and a subsequent settlement that has never been disclosed publicly.
The food policy itself states its goal is "to prevent and combat student related health issues" such as diabetes, food-related allergies and childhood obesity.
The policy bans school employees from using "any food as a reward for academic excellence or any other behavior."
It also bans employees from using food "as a learning tool where students are required or permitted to consume food."
On Friday, the mother of former pupil at Hilda J. Barbour Elementary School confirmed that she had entered an agreement with Warren County Public Schools to settle civil rights issues arising from a discrimination complaint she filed against the school under the auspices of the U.S. Office of Civil Rights.
Kelly Ludke said her son Jonah, now 7, has type 1 insulin dependent diabetes, which is classified as a disability under the Americans with Disability Act.
She said she is satisfied with the agreement, although she is now homeschooling her son after his experience as a 5-year-old kindergartner at Hilda J. Barbour left her worried about his mental and physical health.
"There was no one controlling the situation, and it was unsafe, mentally and physically, for my son," Ludke said in an email replying to questions submitted by The Northern Virginia Daily.
She provided a timetable of several pages describing incidents and disagreements involving educators and support staff at Hilda J. Barbour whom, she said, "jeopardized my son for a year."
Ludke described how she and her son grew frustrated with sweets being used to reward other students in class for desirable behavior.
"The constant in your face 'you did a good job, here's a Tootsie Roll,' in regular class, (physical education), music, library was too much and no one wanted to limit it," she said.
"And I personally sent a bag of non-food prizes for the classes and in the course of the year, he came home with Tootsie Rolls and only one of the non-food prizes."
At Thursday's School Board meeting, Tederick, a former member of the county Board of Supervisors, said the new food policy has "caused a great deal of questions and concerns" among some parents.
"I feel the board and the administration have not been honest with the public," said Tederick, who has two children attending county schools.
"The public really deserves a full investigation by the school board on this matter," he added.
Tederick also accused the board of being "a rubber stamp" for Superintendent Pamela McInnis, whom he accused of committing the school system to a far-reaching settlement without bringing it before the public or the board.
Neither McInnis nor the board members responded to Tederick's criticism.
McInnis also refused to comment after the meeting when a reporter showed her a copy of the settlement agreement between the school system and Ludke.
The document, identified as an "early complaint resolution" includes the following passage: "On or before Nov. 30, 2011, the division will revise its policy and regulation manual to state that teachers and other school staff may not use food, including candy, as a reward or as a learning tool in any classroom in the division."
The document also contains other provisions relating to implementation of a medical plan for a diabetic student, permitting parents to accompany diabetic students on school-sponsored field trips and providing Ludke with a copy of the job description for a registered nurse with the school system.
"I'm not going to respond to that at this point in time," McInnis said of the agreement, adding she would address the food policy issue at the next board meeting.
McInnis has been discussing the food policy and its implementation with administrators at individual schools around the division, and has promised to deliver a report to the board on her findings.
 |
WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! what a story. With that being said i suppose we don't need a school board any more, seems like Mcinnis can rule the system and keep us lower people in the DARK.
Come on Mr. Tederick, what's your real reason for being in the news so much. Is it really for the concern, "caused a great deal of questions and concerns" among some parents." Who made you the spokesperson for these alleged parent's questions and concerns?
Or is it because you want to stay in the public's eye for political gain of some sort. Are you thinking about getting into the political ring again.
There was nothing wrong with the school system doing what they did. There is a serious problem with children and obesity.
Anyone who has a problem with this policy regarding sweets, obviously does not have any care or concern for students with disabilities. It is a disgrace that it had to take a civil rights suit just to get the school board to recognize the threat to children's lives. Other counties understand the need to protect children and already have policies in place to insure the safety and well being of all children! We need to protect students with allergies, and with diabetes, and we need to combat the obesity that is happening to our children. There is no reason why children need to receive candy as a reward. Be creative! Teach our children to find intrinsic motivation, rather then holding their hands out for a treat. Kelly Ludke and her family should be applauded for standing up for all children's rights and insuring they can go to school and feel safe and welcome!!
I remind Superintendent McInnis of the famous Nobel Prize winning research by Ivan Pavlov that demonstrated "conditioned reflex" as an automatic form of learning. The best known extract from that research was, after suitable conditioning, laboratory dogs began salivating with the ringing of a bell. The apparently innocent act of feeding pre-school and elementary children sweets as a reward inevitably leads to an automatic conditioned behavior of food as a reward.
What? The school system hide something? But how can that be?
So was there a monetary settlement as well or was this a suit to mandate a policy change? Makes one wonder........if it was mainly for policy change, why does it take this level of litigation to affect a common-sense decision? Better question.......what else has this school board and superintendent hidden from the public?
lower people love to be in the dark... that's why they're lower people
Your use of the phrase "lower people"...What does that mean, exactly? Is it similar to the Catholic religious belief that non-believers are a lower type of humanity called heathens unworthy of salvation? Or is it more similar to the Muslim belief only Korans written in Arabic are real Korans, inferring all Korans written in other infidel languages are invalid and inferior?
If one comprehends the fallacies of any "revealed" religion, one comprehends them all.
As a parent with children in all 3 tiers in Warren County, these people taking an issue with the school board on this need something better to do. Make NO mistake, we are not a house of health nuts by any means, but one only has to take a look at the children in any of our schools to see the last thing they need is candy/junk food. Where are these same concerned parents/citizens when children's grades are being changed to pass them along through the school system? Or SOL answers given pre-test? Where are these same concerned parents when some of us are trying to teach our teenage daughters self confidence while Skyline has girls you cant tell if they are a student or streetwalker? What happened to dress codes? Where are these concerned parents when years of "family life education" at school has your teenage daughter knowing absolutely NOTHING about what to expect at her first female dr appointment, but she can can count on both hands how many teenage parents she has classes with? The so called concerned "parents/citizens" need to get their heads on straight and see there is much more to be concerned about within WCPS than whether or not their child gets a piece of candy like a good little puppy.
I agree with you. There is much more to be concerned about than a Tootsie Roll. The problem is that too many within the school system are only concerned with the trees and can't see the forest. What if this were only a pregnant fifteen year old? Would we be more concerned about a treat or the fact that Warren County has one of the highest teen pregnancy rates in Virginia? More importantly, when are all of us going to stop being our kid's friend and start being their parents and/or guardians? This lady took a stand. It may be small, but at least it's a start.
Leave a comment
Comments
Comments that are posted on nvdaily.com represent the opinion of the commenter and not the Northern Virginia Daily/nvdaily.com. If you feel that a comment is objectionable, please click on the Report Abuse link above. We will review the reported comment and make a decision on deleting it if we feel that it contains inappropriate content.
152 N. Holliday St., Strasburg, Va. 22657
Contact Us: (800) 296-5137 | info@nvdaily.com
nvdaily.com | The Northern Virginia Daily