Jennifer Grossman states in her essay titled “Food for thought (and for Credit)”, schools should begin teaching Home Economics again in order to combat obesity. Home Economics is not the answer to the problem of obesity whether it is childhood or adult. School districts can arm students with knowledge of nutrition and food preparation to help them make healthier choices, but will it truly be a factor when the choices are presented. There are too many other reasons that contribute to childhood and adult obesity to suggest that bringing back Home Economics will have a large effect on the problem. In the 2003-2004 there were around 5.5 million students taking Family and Consumer Science classes (Auge 2009), the modern name for Home Ec. Since 2004, obesity has increased throughout the nation. Judging by the increase in the number of obese, home economics is not doing much to curb the trend. When students leave the classroom, is their hour Family and Consumer science class going to enter their thoughts. In her essay Grossman says,” obese children commonly grow up to be obese adults”, which is often true. The problem lies in that home economics classes normally begin in middle or high school. The fight against childhood obesity begins when one is a child. Home Economic classes are and would be receiving students who may have already picked up bad habits. These bad habits may have been persisting for years making bad habits much harder to break. If schools were to bring back home economics, they would need to revise the curriculum. The revision would have to make nutrition and healthy lifestyle choices teachable to young children. Many parents today took home economics when they were in high school; however many of these parents have obese children. Why are there so many overweight kids and adults when the adults have taken home economic classes? Many factors have contributed to the obesity starting with the changes in society. In...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document