3 ms·
>Teachers are not feeding kids in statistically significant volumes. Likely untrue, given a few moments search. For example, "On average, teachers spend $37 a
by ChrisLomont 7y ago
>Teachers are not feeding kids in statistically significant volumes.
Likely untrue, given a few moments search. For example, "On average, teachers spend $37 a month and principals spend $59 a month for food for their students." [1].
There's lots more data on teachers feeding kids in perhaps causal amounts.
[1] http://neatoday.org/2013/09/10/report-teachers-spend-37-every-month-to-help-feed-hungry-students/ http://neatoday.org/2013/09/10/report-teachers-spend-37-ever...
- dooglius 7y agoHow many students do teachers have on average? $37 per month definitely does not seem significant enough to explain the effect found.
- ChrisLomont 7y agoAvg public school teacher:student ratio is 16:1, avg school meal costs $2.48. This may be a non-negligible effect. Given the strong correlation between some breakfast vs none, and school performance, it would not take much to affect the outcomes by feeding hungry kids little snacks.
- cgriswald 7y agoThe linked article cites a survey that it doesn’t currently link to, if it ever did, and implies it’s because kids are hungry; but without the survey we don’t know how it is phrased and they could be spending that money just to get the entire class cupcakes for birthdays or some kind of treats for holidays, rather than for feeding the hungry kids.