Nutrition Needs to Be a Core Subject

The American K-12 curriculum is guided along by one key idea, the core subject. According to Brian Miller in, “What does a High School Curriculum include?” the core subjects are english, math, science, social studies, and foreign language. In order for a student to legally graduate high school, they must pass whatever their state’s required amount of classes is for these core subjects. This is a simple enough concept to grasp. Its easy enough to see how subjects like science and english will play a role in students lives after their graduation, so we don’t really think about how or why these subjects are selected to be the core subjects. As it turns out, there isn’t any set of criteria that determines what the core subjects are. Searching for, “What is a core subject” will often yield results that tell you what those subjects are, rather than showing you how they benefit the students. For example, Information published by the College Board defines a core subject as, “mandatory classes you must take to meet graduation requirements in the subject areas of English, math, science, and social studies.” Unfortunately, this type of surface-level definition is the most common result when researching the topic. The issue with these types of definitions is that they don’t actually tell us the reason why the government requires students take these courses in order to graduate. They lack any substance. So is there a definition that can help give us the reason? What is the criteria that actually makes a subject “core?” And should be questioning that criteria?

Maybe its obvious to some what determines a core subject. All of the previously mentioned core subjects are umbrella terms that cover a wider variety of more specific topics. A student’s schedule would never say math or science, it would instead say statistics or physics, for example. So this means that one characteristic of a ore subject is that its broad enough to fit another, smaller subjects into it. You could argue that putting thought into the what we consider a core subject is useless because every subject somehow fits under those main 5 core subjects, however even if this is true, I still think its worth examining why we value the core subjects so much. Why do we value the problem solving skills that students gain from math classes, and why do we think that learning how the world works in the form of science is valuable? The answer to these questions will help us define what makes the core subjects, core.

One potential definition of core subject comes from the federal government itself, specifically, the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. Nancy Saffer in a piece written for the Bureau titled, “Core subjects and your career” talks about both the general applications of each subject in the real world, but more specifically, the career implications that each subject has. For example, when writing about the benefits that taking english courses has, Staffer tells the reader how the communications skills that students learn in english classes are valuable to all career types, even ones that require little communication. Now we’re getting somewhere. This concept tells us that the skills we learn in core classes should be applicable to wide variety of potential careers. This makes sense because if everyone is required to take these courses, then those courses should teach you things that act as a foundation for any number of careers. We now have another piece of criteria that we can use to define a core subject. A core subject should be valuable in its ability support at least foundational skillset for any career.

If the selection process of core subjects was only concerned with how it impacted careers, then that would be disappointing to say the least. So what else besides careers are core subjects concerned with supplementing its students with? Well one answer could come from Jackson Best, who states that, soft skills can be learned through mathematics, a subject where soft skills wouldn’t seem too intertwined. According to Best, “But this same anxiety [anxiety of failing in mathematics] can be used to develop resilience instead of trauma if we give students the right tools to manage it.” What this means is that we see the core subjects as something that can enhance other skills that aren’t inherently related to the subject. These subjects must provide skills that students are able to utilize in different way. While similar to the careers criteria, this differs slightly because these soft skills learnt from the core subjects are able to be sued in environments outside of the workplace as well. These skills are used to prepare students for their adult lives.

Now we have our criteria for a core subject. A core subject must be able to fit other, similar subjects into it, it must prepare students with skills specifically geared towards careers, and it must prepare students with skills they can utilize in their adult lives. So how does it actually look in practice? One example that I think is extremely relevant is how in high school, I would often hear fellow classmates ask, “Why aren’t we taught how to do taxes in school?” I often agreed with their assertion that learning how to do taxes would be beneficial to the students. Let’s take a look at a theoretical ‘tax education’ subject, and if it would fit our criteria? Well, a tax education would first have to be broad enough to fit other, more specific classes as well. This might be a stretch, but students could learn different parts of tax law, so we’ll say it passes this criteria. This subject would absolutely fit our criteria with preparing kids for their futures, no questions asked But what about our criteria with preparing kids with career oriented skills that prepare for a broad variety of careers. This is where I have my doubts. This type of subject would be incredibly specific. Would the skills learned in this class be undoubtedly applicable to students and their wide array of careers? I don’t think so.

With this idea of a core subject now properly defined, we can now use it to determine what core subjects should look like moving forward. We can criticize this set of criteria and use it to change the education system, or enhance it.

So if Nutrition is supposed to be a core subject, it is important to consider any potential risks that come with it.

The phrase, “Knowledge is power” is a phrase that is commonly used in all institutions of life, and is one that’s value is often misunderstood. The quote is true, knowing things does allow us to make more informed decisions that will positively impact our life, and that could very easily be considered a form of power. However, this quote seems to always be used to drive home the belief that having knowledge is an objectively good thing, and the negative aspects of having knowledge are never considered. Knowledge has undoubtedly been what’s allowed humanity to push forward and survive for millions of years, but these triumphs have made us largely uninterested what negative aspects knowledge may have on the individual who possesses it. Sure, phrases like “Ignorance is bliss” and the infamous troubled genius stereotype do explore how possessing knowledge can be a bad thing, but they fail to establish a direct link between having knowledge and being unhappy.

Sarah Lindberg in her article titled, “Is Watching the News bad for Mental Health” examines the relationship between news consumption and mental health. She explains how the emotional impact of consuming negative news can lead to heightened feelings on depression and anxiety. The fact that consuming a lot of news is bad for our mental health is a well-documented and unsurprising fact at this point, but how does it relate to negative effects of possessing knowledge? When we watch the news, we are gaining knowledge on current events, and that knowledge makes us think about what we can do about it. For example, if someone watches a story on a mass shooting, that knowledge could make them want to go to a protest, or fundraise for a politician who promises to implement a solution to the issue. In other words, the knowledge they gained from watching the news gave them the power to make a change, which is great for society as a whole. But how does that effect the person on a personal level? Not only were they subjected to the horrors of the original news story, but now they are spending their time thinking about a morbid subject. It would be a lot easier for this person to have never saw the news story in the first place.

One argument against the idea that knowledge causes unhappiness could be that the knowledge isn’t whats causing the unhappiness, but the actions we take as a result of the knowledge is. Knowledge in itself though can absolutely be what causes unhappiness. For example if someone has cancer, getting a diagnosis from a doctor is the best thing for their physical health because now they can start treating the cancer and getting better. This isn’t how cancer patients tend to view the diagnosis though. According to information published by the ADAA, “After diagnosis, 40 percent of cancer patients report developing significant distress that can include serious worry, panic attacks, depression, and PTSD, or posttraumatic stress disorder.” What’s key to focus on here is that these symptoms are occurring after the initial diagnosis, not after the extensive treatment of the patient that would undoubtedly negative impact their mental health as well. The knowledge of having an awful, life threatening disease, despite that knowledge being the best thing for them, causes the patients to become more unhappy. And this reaction is completely understandable, but it also proves how knowledge can be negative.

While the previously mentioned examples are certainly extreme examples, we can even see examples of knowledge creating a sense of disappointment in our daily lives. Many people use honey as a way to sweeten whatever they are consuming, thinking that its a healthier alternative to sugar. In reality, consuming honey is pretty much the exact same as consuming sugar, with the only difference being that honey is sweeter, so you’ll use less of it. The people who have been slathering their pastries and beverages in honey would probably be pretty upset to learnt that they’ve essentially been consuming pure sugar for years. Once again, its pretty safe to assume that they’d rather not learned this fact at all. After all, they want whatever they’re eating or drinking to be sweet enough. Similarly, those who take melatonin before bed would probably be upset to hear that daily intake of the supplement actually damages their quality of sleep in the long run. In both of these cases, the person would be able to make an informed decision about how they want to change the way that they are living, and this is a good thing! But despite this, the immediate psychological effects that this knowledge gives us tend to be negative most of the time.

So knowledge makes us unhappy. Does this mean that we should abandon all forms of knowledge in pursuit of a happier wellbeing? Not at all. Even if knowledge makes us unhappy, the insight into whatever we are learning about allows us to make more informed, and therefore better, decisions about our lives. The discomfort we may experience from learning a fact may make us unhappy in the short term, but we live our lives for the long term. We can even see this play out in the examples above. By watching the news, we know what’s happening in the world we live in, and that is extremely important! Hearing about atrocities happening around the globe is never easy, and we all may wish that we had never known at all. But with the knowledge of these current events, we can work towards preventing similar ones in the future. A cancer diagnosis is one of the scariest things that a person can hear in their entire lives as it causes a wave of dread to pulse through their mind. But for someone who does have cancer, a diagnosis is the best thing they could possibly hear because it will start their treatment, and increase their chances of surviving. We often envy those who we feel are blissfully unaware of what’s happening in the world, but don’t be fooled. Life always has examples of give and take, and when we give away our immediate satisfaction, we take the ability to improve our lives in the long run.

According to Oona Hanson, who wrote “‘Healthy eating’ curriculum can do more harm than good” for CNN, adding nutrition classes to schools would be ultimately harmful to students because of how state education standards would likely cause them to develop eating disorders. Hanson makes a compelling argument; poorly structured nutrition classes causing eating disorders amongst the youth is a reality that nobody wants. However despite this potential risk of establishing nutrition classes in schools, I believe that focusing on this one specific issue undermines the overall need for these classes in the US.

Norway is one of the only countries in the world that has a mandatory nutrition curriculum in their schools. The Norwegian Ministry of Education outlines some of what this curriculum looks like, which includes the expectation that primary school students are able to, “describe the characteristics of healthy and a wide variety of food and why they are important to health.” This is an important aspect of any nutrition curriculum, but how does it impact the rate of eating disorders in Norway? Well, according to an article published by World Population Review titled, “Eating Disorders by Country 2023,” the United States, without a nutrition curriculum, already has a slightly higher anorexia index compared to Norway. Many factors can contribute to disordered eating in a population, and while Norway’s numbers are far from perfect, what’s important to take away is that Norway has a lower rate of anorexia despite the fact that they have this mandatory curriculum. This proves that if implemented correctly, a nutrition class in the United States would likely not increase disordered eating in the enough to warrant not implementing the class, especially when you consider the other benefits of these classes.

Is the harm of potentially instilling eating disorders into children by nutrition classes in schools worth the benefit of having a healthier population? What even is the benefit? Well, the truth is that there is an undeniable massive obesity problem in the United States. Its so bad that according to a study published by the CDC titled, “Prevalence of Overweight, Obesity, and Severe Obesity Among Adults Aged 20 and Over: United States, 1960–1962 Through 2017–2018,” the number of Americans who are simply, “overweight” has gone down since 1960. This seems like a good statistic that would suggest that Americans are getting healthier. Unfortunately, the reason why less people are simply, “overweight” now is because more people just skip this category entirely and go straight to obese. Not only is the number of unhealthy Americans going up, but the degree of their unhealthiness is also rising as well. It’s difficult to look at this data and not want to do anything about it. Clearly public health initiatives by the government departments targeted at adults are not working, so why not try to establish healthy habits in school children, who are much more likely to adapt the habits that they are learning in classes?

Well, Hanson would argue that if school children are more likely to adapt these healthy habits, then they would be more likely to adapt harmful ones like eating disorders as well, and there is some truth to that. I’m not here to argue that either obesity or an eating disorder is worse than the other. Both are awful conditions that we should try to prevent. However, it is a fact that there are significantly less people who suffer from eating disorders compared to obesity. The already high number and the sheer rate of just how rapidly obesity is rising is should absolutely take precedent above all at this point. American’s are only going to get more unhealthy if the current public health initiates stay in place, so what other choice do we have? Even Hanson’s own proposed solutions involve working with students to ensure that they do not develop eating disorders if nutrition classes were mandatory. It is likely that if these classes were established, they wouldn’t be perfect, but given the extreme circumstances we are in, the good absolutely outweighs the harm. And until a better solution is suggested, can it really be afforded to consider anything else at this point?

Establishing nutrition classes into classrooms seems like a big change, and with such big changes, it makes sense why people like Hanson may want to consider the risks. The sad truth however is that the United States is quite behind a lot of the developed world when it comes to nutrition education. According to a study published by Kim Smith et al. titled, “How Primary School Curriculums in 11 Countries around the World Deliver Food Education and Address Food Literacy: A Policy Analysis,” 11 countries either partially or comprehensively address food literacy in their primary schools. It shouldn’t come as a shock that these countries have less obesity compared to the United States. The fact that so many countries with healthier populations than the United States already have some form of nutritional education in place means that we can establish a system that we know works in other places. Its a lot easier to live with potential the risk of an increased number of eating disorders if you know that the system that you’re buying into is going to be effective.

Overall, Hanson’s concerns of students developing potential eating disorders as a result of nutritional education classes are completely warranted. In fact, these concerns are welcomed because they will help these classes be as safe for students as possible, should they ever be put into place. However as for the question of if these classes will be more harmful than beneficial, the answer couldn’t be any more clear. There is a reason why obesity in the United States is referred to as an epidemic, and addressing this epidemic through schools seems to be the only effective option moving forward. The unfortunate truth is that the United States is far behind a lot of the world in establishing some form of formal nutritional education, and if we know that countries with these systems have healthier populations than us, then why are we still questioning if these classes should be established or not?

References

Best, Jackson. “Finding Soft Skills in Mathematics Isn’t As Hard As You Might Think.” 3P Learning, 2 Mar. 2020 https://www.3plearning.com/blog/finding-soft-skills-mathematics-isnt-hard-might-think/

Miller, Brian. “What Does a High School Curriculum Include?” – Education Degree. https://www.educationdegree.com/articles/what-a-high-school-curriculum-includes/#:~:text=What%20Are%20the%205%20Core,and%20a%20foreign%20language%20course. Accessed 22 Oct. 2023.

What’s the Difference between Elective and Core Subjects? – BigFuture | College Board. https://bigfuture.collegeboard.org/help-center/whats-difference-between-elective-and-core-subjects. Accessed 22 Oct. 2023.

Nancy, Saffer. “Core subjects and your career.” – United States Bureau of Labor Statistics. https://www.bls.gov/careeroutlook/1999/Summer/art03.pdf

“Is Watching the News Bad for Mental Health?” Verywell Mind, https://www.verywellmind.com/is-watching-the-news-bad-for-mental-health-4802320. Accessed 5 Nov. 2023.

Serious, Chronic, or Terminal Illnesses – Tips for Patients and Caregivers | Anxiety and Depression Association of America, ADAA. https://adaa.org/serious-chronic-or-terminal-illnesses#:~:text=People%20who%20have%20serious%2C%20chronic,for%20experiencing%20anxiety%20and%20depression. Accessed 5 Nov. 2023.

Hanson, Oona. “‘Healthy Eating’ Curriculum Can Do More Harm than Good.” CNN, 9 Oct. 2023, https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/09/health/unhealthy-school-nutrition-lessons-wellness/index.html.

Eating Disorders by Country 2023. Ranking Eating Disorders by Country 2023 https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/eating-disorders-by-country. Accessed 1 Dec. 2023.

Fryar CD, Carroll MD, Afful J. Prevalence of overweight, obesity, and severe obesity among adults aged 20 and over: United States, 1960–1962 through 2017–2018. NCHS Health E-Stats. 2020.

Norway Ministry of Education and Research. Curriculum for Food and Health. Ministry of Education
and Research, June 29, 2020. https://data.udir.no/kl06/v201906/laereplaner-lk20/MHE01-02.pdf?lang=eng

Faberman, Rhea. “State of Obesity 2023: Better Policies for a Healthier America.” Trust For America’s Health, 2023, https://www.tfah.org/report-details/state-of-obesity-2023/.

Smith K, Wells R, Hawkes C. How Primary School Curriculums in 11 Countries around the World Deliver Food Education and Address Food Literacy: A Policy Analysis. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Feb 11;19(4):2019. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19042019. PMID: 35206208; PMCID: PMC8871606.