Universal free school meals are usually discussed from the perspective of health, poverty, and/or opportunity policy. However, a new American study by Andres Cuadros-Meñaca looks at something else: whether free meals for everyone also affect school suspensions.

The researchers analysed data from schools that introduced such free meals at various times. Their conclusion: schools that implemented such a system saw fewer suspensions on average. In primary schools, this involved a decrease of approximately 10%, and in secondary schools, approximately 6%.

That makes the study interesting. Still, we should be careful not to draw major conclusions too quickly. One reason this research is methodologically stronger than some earlier analyses is that the authors explicitly account for the fact that schools introduced these measures at different moments in time. Earlier studies could therefore underestimate or distort effects. Here, the researchers use statistical techniques that better handle phased implementation and make it possible to analyse those differences more accurately.

At the same time, this remains observational research. That has advantages because it reflects real-life school contexts, but it also means the study can only offer strong indications rather than definitive causal proof, as a tightly controlled experiment might. In addition, fewer suspensions do not automatically mean student behaviour fundamentally improved. Suspension rates also depend on school policy, school culture, and the decisions schools and teachers make.

The effect sizes also deserve nuance. The decreases are relevant, but not gigantic. It is not really a miracle cure that suddenly solves behavioural problems. Rather, the research suggests that free school meals may potentially influence daily stress, stigma, or the general school climate.

Also, be aware that, as I wrote, this is a study on schools in the US. There, free meals are often strongly linked to poverty and administrative selection. Universal systems partially remove that distinction. It is therefore quite possible that such measures influence not only the food aspect but also social dynamics at school.

Of course, there is a risk that both proponents and opponents will immediately read more into this study than it actually shows. Proponents will see it as proof that free meals help solve all kinds of school problems. Opponents will emphasise that suspensions are not a perfect measure of behaviour. Actually, both camps have a point there, to some extent.

So what can we say? This study makes it more plausible that free school meals for everyone do more than just reduce hunger, but it is still too early to attach major educational claims to it.