If Reese's Pieces could lure even an alien down an unfamiliar path, surely a few M&M's could motivate a bored child to work harder in class, right? Too bad that it's now illegal to distribute candy in Texas classrooms:
Picture this: a classroom of fourth-graders eagerly competing in a math drill for a simple reward — a little piece of candy. As a former school administrator, this is a scenario I have enjoyed watching many times. It is a common teaching technique. It is motivational. It is effective. It is fun. And in Texas, as of Aug 1, 2003, it is illegal.
According to the September 2003 edition of Straight Talk, a newsletter published by the Association of Texas Professional Educators, the Texas Department of Agriculture is prohibiting candy from "being sold or given away on school premises." According to the TDA website, the prohibition comes as a result of the government having "classified obesity as a national epidemic" and is intended to "reinforce the United States Department of Agriculture’s effort to improve school nutrition environments."
...If "caring for children" is the new criterion for determining the boundaries of State power, it stands to reason that nothing is potentially off-limits. The State could use the same excuse to ban school bake sales, to deny an overweight child his or her school lunch, or to monitor students’ blood-glucose levels to see if they’d eaten a glazed donut for breakfast....
Whether you agree or disagree on candy in school is not the point. The point is that it is not the role of government in a civil society to order its citizens around — even for their good...
Peanuts are verboten in most schools, and now candy is out. Fresh fruit might motivate a few kids - a very few. So what's left? Do Texan teachers have to resort to gold stars and verbal praise?
Author Brian Carpenter is right to point out that the suitability of candy for classrooms is not the issue here. It's just the beginning of a slippery slope down which public schools gain the right to analyze every morsel that enters a child's mouth, both on and off the school grounds. That's what the Texas Department of Agriculture considers important, and apparently Texan officials agree.
Ironically, despite all this concern for the caloric intake of Texas's students, it seems that Texas is one of those states that define "safe" schools rather leniently. How leniently? Well, one Austin school got a safe rating from the state despite the fact that, within a few months, one girl was raped in the bathroom, and another girl was murdered on campus by her ex-boyfriend. Both of these assaults took place on school grounds, during the school day.
So, your little Lone Star student might be beaten up or even killed in school without affecting the "safe" rating of that school, but teachers now have to make sure no Snickers get distributed during class time. I didn't think much could be worse than a Nanny State, but a dangerously inconsistent Nanny State that focuses more on sweets than assaults manages it.
Posted by kswygert at October 8, 2003 12:17 PM