Do you like options? Of course! Everyone does! We make choices every day - what to wear, what to eat, what to do. If those options become boring or inconvenient, we try to ‘freshen things up’ by introducing new options. So why should students not be able to do the same with their lunch? Open campus would allow students more freedom. It would also prepare them for a world of work later in their lives, forcing those who participate to learn to adapt to time constraints. It would prove vital in teaching students responsibility by enforcing strict rules regarding their transport to and from school during the lunch period, and following through by disciplining them when those rules are violated - either by choice or due to a lack of time management
…show more content…
Why, then, are we so insistent on making lunch the exception? Why have we not taken this opportunity to enact open campus to allow them the option of learning for themselves the diligence and responsibility required of them? Should we not take any given opportunity to instill these values in them? Many of the potential problems can be eliminated by making students act responsibly.
With a plethora of nearby restaurants, students have little need to leave Oakland. This would supply local restaurants, such as Amore’s or Fish Hut Pizza, with much-needed revenue. Open campus would also encourage a sense of unity among the community by enabling students to become regulars at frequented establishments. It could be presumed that, by allowing open campus at our school, there would be a boom in business. That number of students leaving for lunch would create a surge of revenue. It would also serve to lessen the gap between students and teachers. A point of contention between the two has always been the freedoms allocated to teachers. While it is understood that teachers will always have more freedom, students want what is arguably the most attainable one: the ability to leave campus for their lunch period. It seems hypocritical at best to allow teachers, most of whom also have ‘active’ periods after lunch, to leave without doubting their ability to return in
Why, then, are we so insistent on making lunch the exception? Why have we not taken this opportunity to enact open campus to allow them the option of learning for themselves the diligence and responsibility required of them? Should we not take any given opportunity to instill these values in them? Many of the potential problems can be eliminated by making students act responsibly.
With a plethora of nearby restaurants, students have little need to leave Oakland. This would supply local restaurants, such as Amore’s or Fish Hut Pizza, with much-needed revenue. Open campus would also encourage a sense of unity among the community by enabling students to become regulars at frequented establishments. It could be presumed that, by allowing open campus at our school, there would be a boom in business. That number of students leaving for lunch would create a surge of revenue. It would also serve to lessen the gap between students and teachers. A point of contention between the two has always been the freedoms allocated to teachers. While it is understood that teachers will always have more freedom, students want what is arguably the most attainable one: the ability to leave campus for their lunch period. It seems hypocritical at best to allow teachers, most of whom also have ‘active’ periods after lunch, to leave without doubting their ability to return in