Academics vs. Physical Education in our schools.

I have long believed far too much of our education resources are being spent on sports. Football, Basketball, and Baseball are important recreations, yes, but when so many of our children are marginally educated or illiterate this seems negligent to me. What do you think? Inquiring minds want to know.

With the former, I agree with you-- I think too much resources are being spent on sports. But for the latter, I think everyone should take one PE class a semester.

But the sports bullshit HAS TO STOP.

Here's the thing-- for 3 million a year, Stanford University decided to stop charging students tuition and board for all students from families making under 40K a year. It is only costing them 3 million a year to do this.
I wonder how much money goes to their atheletic program; certainly more than 3 million.

Many of the more affluent schools don't really need to charge tuition at all. Most of them have large enough endowments that the tuition is barely a scratch. I read somewhere that they basically charge tuition because otherwise they think people don't take it seriously....

or something...

That's just for the affluent schools though. Like Harvard or Stanford.

The unversity I went to cost $8 per second to run. I paid 10k per semester, the students the year after me paid 13k, and we only paid half of what it costs. The rest were from donations. And the tution keeps going up every year.

is extracurricular. Far too much time, money, and effort is being spent on it. Consider how the money a new sports stadium costs could benefit student's education.

Most of the money for athletics comes from athletics. If there is a new stadium, the money to pay for it comes from donations specifically for the stadium and from ticket sales.

For everyone. Not just football players.

Yeah, dodgeball is good for your health, and climbing 30 feet ropes is too. We used to make human pyramids and I being the smallest person in the class, invariably had to be the top person. I happen to be slightly afraid of heights and climbing some wobbly pyramid is not my idea of a good time.

I happened to have walked to school and back, and it was uphill both ways besides having to fight through roving packs of sabre toothed tigers. So I was getting plenty of exercise without PE. Plus I had a paper route through my junior year and that was about a five mile walk or bike.

athletics and physical education are not the same thing.

Too much emphasis has been placed on athletics in our schools, and also in P.E. class.

Kids are not learning about how to take care of their bodies. Instead, they're sent out to play basketball, or kickball, or dodgeball, etc.

Kids are not learning about caloric intake, good carbs and fats versus bad carbs and fats, target heart rates, muscle groups, etc.

What's worse is that the sports the kids do play cater only to those who are athletically inclined. Staying fit it not about being athletic. It's about being in motion, and building muscle.

They're too expensive, they offer nothing of any lasting, enduring, or needful value to the students or the community, and they absorb and destroy far too much energy that could be used in positive ways.

I wouldn't mind seeing some casual after school sports programs, with teams that change at every gathering and where the sports are played for the fun and the exercise. But no more uniforms, no team names, no schools competing against each other... every single bit of that bullshit should be eliminated from our schools.

I am sickened that so much of my tax money goes to support what is essentially a useless, value-less endeavor, while other essential and valuable educational opportunities are destroyed, downplayed, or degreaded.

There are those who say sports keeps many kids in school. It also diverts some from the real reason they should be going to school, an education.

I'd like to think that schools could build character in kids. Or at least help. It's not a Vulcan academy where kids go to learn logic and match. Heck a huge component of what people need to get out of High School isn't learned in any subject, which is just how to get along with people.

I think sports are just an additional aspect. They shouldn' tbe more important than the basic education, butI don't think they should be eliminated. So many positive things can be taken from sports and the teamwork involved. Not to mention often applying your 'education' to a real activity.

Sports programs that divert from math and science are out of balance. They should coexist in harmony where everyone in a perfect world leaves their Calculus class to go particpate in some sort of organized team activity, whatever it is...

millions of students in America who can neither read nor write. The emphasis should be on teaching them all disciplined academic skills to earn a living, not winning the Big Ball Game.

Not about the reading and writing part, but about the fact that you have to make a decision. Obviously basic literacy should come before a football helmet, and in situations like that, the basic literacy must prevail. That's not to say that the students shouldn't be encouraged in any way possible.

There are far more sports than 'ball teams'. If you're going to eliminate sports you need to eliminate nearly all extracurricular activies. What's the difference between a soccer team or the drama club. Both have many practices, which can be quite physically, mentally, and emotionally draining, as well as character building, followed by a far smaller number of performances open to the public.

I think we need MORE funding for education in this country, and while we need to shore up the basic educational areas such as english, math, science, history, and such, we need to also encourage more extracurricular activies such as sports and other team building excercises.

We are losing or have lost our lead in so many fields now it sickens me.

and put it towards education we could do whatever the hell we wanted. ;)

Obviously in certain situations when things are tight you have to make choices...Science or Art. Well I'd have to choose Science, but I think Art classes are invaluable.

What I'm talking about is more 'perfect world'. If you have a problem with schools barely able to turn on their lights fielding a football team, then good. So do I. We need to get them more funding and redo how we do education in this country. To say that organized sports are bad, and bring nothing to the table or to the students is just baloney.

Organized team sports, not just football but everything, including extracurricular activites, are very beneficial to students in so many ways. Should we put money into teaching them to read first? Yes. Should we have enough money so that every student in america can participate in a well funded organized sport? I think yes also.

I'm curious whether you participated in any team sports in school. I personally think that team sports contribute lots of lasting and enduring values. Teamwork. Working together towards a common goal. It's definately helped shape who I am today, and I like to think for the better.

I think making it all casual takes away some of the fun. One game can be meaningless. A twelve game season though spreads it out, and makes it about bonding and teamwork on a higher level. Sacrificing an early ride home, to go help spot someone on weights because they need more strength training. Lingering back with someone struggling to finish a 10 mile run to talk them through it so they don't have to do it alone. So many things. Character building things, not macho building things...

I agree that the tax money that sometimes goes to support it can be sickening, especially when it's unfairly distrubuted as it so often is, but many times the teams that get the most support, such as football teams, actually pay for themselves. At my high school, the football team actually made a profit for the school (which of course only went right back to the team to improve their faciliities, which I think was bullshit).

Anyway I'm for expanded sports in schools, with more money going to a wider variety of teams to get more kids involved.

:-)

But no, I don't think our schools should be in the business of organized sports teams. Let community organizations provide them outside of school time for any youth who DO want the fun and thrill of organized sports.

But in terms of "does having a school football team provide any educational benefit to the students, the team members, the school, or the community?", the answer is "no". And so, there's no reason for school tax money to go for any sport OTHER than sports being used as exercise or in informal ways, in which everyone who shows up gets to play, there are no tryouts, there are no teams beyond that day's fun...

Where one more physical boy might join the football team, another esoteric girl might join the debate team. Both are thrilling and organized in their own ways and both contain very individualistic accomplishments, as well as team.

Does the debate team provide any educational benefit to the students, the team members, the school, or the community? Only the same as any sport does. It's a different activity which requires different thought processes. I just don't think it all comes down to the answer to 'what's the capital of turkey' or determining the squre root of an irrational number. That's part of it, but not all. There's learning how to interact with people. There's learning how to work together.

And yes, I consider that an educational benefit. They're learning to work together towards a common goal, which is harder for most people than they think. It benefits the students, the team members, the school and the community.

My problem with the system is that it isn't supported enough, nor is it balanced equally. Far too much emphasis gets placed on far too few sports, while other sports and activities are relegated to bake sales and car washes.

the kind of teamwork that organized sports teaches is not a helpful kind of teamwork mentality - it mostly teaches a follower mentality that is very handy in training military enlisted personnel - organized sports also instill a very win/lose binary mentality, a them/us mentality, and a "let's not be the best we can be for the satisfaction of a job well done, let's be good so we can beat them" mentality.

There is nothing that sports offer that other activities don't (except excercise, and that can be gotten with non-organized sports) - and other activities, like drama, debate, music, etc., expand the mind and create more well-rounded and worldly person who IS a benefit to society. Plus, the knowledge and mind expansion and soul-enriching things learned in non-organized-sports activities is stuff that will continue with that person beyond high school and into old age. Debate trains the mind to process information, do research, and to be able to look at all angles of an issue. Chess club teaches analytical skills, logic, and problem solving.

And unlike the sports-focused win/lose binary, the other activites provide TRUE teamwork - the collabarative effort in which there doesn't have to be a winner and a loser, but in which the whole group is enhanced by the success of all members who are striving to be the best they can be not to win something, or to beat someone, but because that's the most important goal of a life well-llived. Drama Guild will teach far better teamwork, and a far more helpful to society sense of teamwork, then an organized sports team ever will.

And unlike sports, the other activities very rarely require tryouts in which some win and others lose. There is room for everyone in drama - perhaps not as an actor, but somewhere on the team. Perhaps debate team can't include the stupid, but that's about all I can think of that might have some exclusionary nature. My chess club had the brains, the middles, and some learning disabled. In drama guild, we had the same mix, plus the nerds, geeks, some jocks, some cool people. Band, orchestra, choirs -- all had people from every variety of demographics in the school. Pep club, German club, Spanish club, history club, AV, photo club, yearbook... none of these had tryouts, they were open to everyone. And when its our tax dollars, that's how it should be.

Now, this is not to say that a few of the more intelligent members of the school will learn good things from the organized sports, but mostly, no, nothing of any real redeeming or lasting value to the person or the community will be learned that couldn't be learned in a less exclusionary, more educational endeavor.

and importance added to national competition for debating and other similar teams.

the arts, too.

"One concert can be meaningless. A multi-concert season, though, spreads it out, and makes it about bonding and teamwork on a higher level. Sacrificing an early ride home to go help someone work through a new score, because they need more sightreading training. Lingering back with someone struggling to learn a 10-minute piece before the concert, so they don't have to do it alone. So many things, character building things, not macho building things..."

Turning your head slightly to be more audible to a fellow choir member who is struggling with a passage, learning to subdue your ego by blending perfectly with the rest of your section, the magical feeling of "flow" that you get when a performance is going particularly well, the weary afternoons when you're too tired to go to choir rehearsal, but you know that you'll drag your section down if you haven't practiced the music with them, learning to shut up and do what you're told, even when you think the director is taking the piece too fast or slowly. The emotional expression that one can pour into a performance, and the literal lift can give you when you've had a bad day.

The performing arts give students a sense of teamwork, cooperation, responsibility, and accomplishment. Theater, in particular, has room for virtually every human talent: not only acting, but also leadership (directing), management (production), organizational skills (stage manager), art (scenery and costume design), construction skills (set building), sewing skills (costume construction), and marketing (publicity). If you put on a musical, you have room for singers, instrumentalists, and dancers, too.

One thing the performing arts never have to worry about in American schools is being overfunded. They're often the first to go when budgets are tight.

A few years ago, the (Portland) Oregonian ran a feature article about the town of Colton, Oregon. Due to budget cuts, the school board had voted to cut art, music, and football. Guess which one the townsfolk rallied to save. This was supposed to be a heartwarming story, but it made me sick. They sacrificed art and music for ALL students and kept football for 11 students--because they were infected with the sports mania that has been deliberately encouraged in this country.

You're absolutely correct, what I said applies to the arts in a big way, particularly orchestras and drama groups. Debate teams as well, plus i'm sure any number of other groups. There are small business teams of students who compete against students in other schools, etc.

I disagree with one thing, you say they sacrificed it for 11 students. To be fair the football team probably has more like 50 or 60 on it. They only have 11 on the field at any given time, but i'm sure they have more.

I'm not saying that we should choose Football for some over the arts for all. I'm saying we should have them all. We shouldn't have to choose. Football is good for the players and the community. So is a good high school musical (just not Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat again....please) or concert. Choosing football in that situation, and it's not alone, over say an art program for all students, I think it idiocy, but that's not to say that Football isn't valuable. They both are. Having to make choices like that are idiocy, and it stems from a lack of fairnes in state and federal funding.

We have a government who spends something like 10 times what it spends on education on the military, and that's not counting the bill for the iraq war.

The initial bill for the iraq war was what, 87 billion dollars? Somethign we didn't need to lose the tax cuts for? Our annual spending on education I believe is more in th eneighborhood of 60 billion. That's the idiocy. Football is valuable. High School Musicals are valuable. Debate teams are valuable. Men's Baseball teams are valuable. They're all valuable.

It's the conervative mindset to education funding that's something we need to lose.

When I was in High School I blew out my leg playing football. We had multiple locker rooms, equipment out the wazzoo, showers, theraputic tubs, practice uniforms, nice game uniforms, etc. When my knee recovered I joined the rowing team. We had shit. Zero school support. We did car washes and bake sales and raised money to buy our own new unborrowed crew shell. We bought our own uniforms out of our own pocket money.

Other than a few sports, such as Football, Basketball, and Baseball as you mention there is often minimal support if any. That's just wrong in so many ways. Why did we have to do car washes ever weekend in order to be able to buy our own crew shell when the cost of one paid for the electricity for the practice lights of one night for the Football team.

The answers are varied, but it comes down to this.

A few sports actually bring in money to the school. Football and Basketball primarily. People actually go to those games and pay for tickets, and concessions, etc. The school can either make money on the team, or it at least comes close to paying for itself. If the hockey team at a school up in northern minnesota makes more money than the football team they're probably far more supported by the school.

Personally I think every kid should participate in some sort of team sport. I think it's good not only on a physical fitness level, but on a teamwork and mental level. I would never force people to do it but I'd encourage it. THe best way to do that is to have as many supported teams as possible. School isn't just about math and science, though those shouldn't be hurt for the cause of football. The greeks had it right I think in the sense of Mind, Body, and Spirit.

that I was being punished.

I had better things to do with my time.

I don't mind a pick-me-up softball game at a picnic, and I used to play informal soccer at recess every day in third and fourth grade, but if someone had said, "Okay, now we're going to break soccer down into its individual element and practice these a couple of hours a day," I would have rebeled, because I would have resented the time taken away from reading, music, drawing, and riding my bike.

I got my teamwork fix from being in choirs and plays.

And I think in one of my other posts I mention that it's more like extracurricular teamwork activies that should be encouraged. If that's football, great. If that's the junior orchestra, super. If it's the field hockey team, off you go then. There should be enough opportunties for every kid to find something that they can enjoy and participate it. Sure smaller communities it's going to be tougher, and schools can join together to offer more alternatives if they can't do it alone.

Even with that though, nobody should be forced to do it, they should just be afforded every opportunity to do so. Team 'Activities' ne Sports I think are very important.

I do think some schools focus way too much on s sports, Ive heard about some of the stadiums they build in Texas for high school football. However, I do see the positives of sports too.

Mesquite Memorial Stadium (Seats 20,000)

As I said some go too far but I think a balance of athletics and academics would be fine. I'll tell you what I do hate though and thats the myth of the dumb jock, most of my friends that played sports are now at much better colleges than me. Sports I admit don't solve everything but I really do ee the value in them, I admit I am biased because I am a sports fan.

I think PE (or some form of it) should be a required class but I felt in HS they made extracurricular activities like football too important. Before I left HS, they were planning budget cuts and were thinking of cutting the Special Ed department in favour of keeping extracurricular activities like music and sports. I was pissed off since I'm deaf and was doing speech therapy then.

I think they've cut the Art, PE, and Music depts since then.

They should be able to have sports AND music AND art AND special ed.

This was '99 I think (graduated in 2000). The Art department created their own school focused entirely on the arts and there were plenty of gifted art students that decided not to go (thought getting the other education completed). One of my family friends graduated from the same school in 2004 and I asked her what has happened to those departments. The Art dept was cut to barely nothing (some projects I did in Art like clay sculpture are no longer there), there's no Drama classes, barely anything for Music.

I visited a friend at Edward R. Murrow HS in Brooklyn and they had a good idea. She had a series of small paper (thick) booklets (the size of a driver's course manual) for each class (like Science and Math), they were purchaseable. Not like the books we were given out in class and had to return (or risk paying the $70 to replace it). I think this would save money, cut back on the heavy, unyielding books and go for a school edited paper booklet. At BU's College of General Studies, where I attended, the Science and Social Science departments edited their own booklets and as a result their booklets were cheaper than the rest of my classes. Not only that, once I got those books, I knew what was most likely to be discussed. I had to take a Computer Science course for my math requirement and I got a $80 textbook that we hardly ever used in class, one of the biggest wastes of money ever.

Murrow also had a good idea, they divided up the girls and boys in PE. I was like, "I wish my High School would do the same!" I mean academically, I don't know about dividing them up, but physically, oh yes I agree. We had PE classes where the boys kept beating the girls, and we would complain that it was so unfair. PE was a requirement at Murrow (not at where I went after 2 years of HS), which was another good idea.

Another point from those tv shows, Celebrity Fit Club (I think that's the show) and Biggest Loser, the adults were given assignments, very much like school, to lose weight. I think if this was applied to school (weighed each one of the students and if they're a certain weight, etc). If there's more incentive to lose weight and better fitness (get a grade for losing weight without problems like anorexia), I think this should be applied.

In my first year of BU I exercised (without trying) for the first time in years and dropped about 40 lbs (from 150 to 115 lbs) because I walked from my dorm on Bay State Road to CGS, every day. Even though the T was free going towards Boston College, I didn't take it (I didn't know it was free! whoops). I didn't know how to keep it off though, and went back up to 150. Now I've lost about 20 pounds, I wish I knew the ways to exercise, since my school didn't even emphasise stretching (I only got that the year I was in Cross Country running) and running a certain way to keep breathing up, etc. I really do think this should be emphasised in Elem, Middle, and High school and making it required all through HS so people know how to exercise after they leave school.

The state has mandated that every student must take PE, every day, through grade 9. Even if they are in athletics, they must take PE.

They have also mandated that schools offer art and music. When other states are cutting, we're adding. It has put the hurt on the state, financiall, but it is worth it.

But there are ways to improve it. What if (we actually funding our schools properly)we intergrated nurtition with any PE or sports program? Made it part of the curriculum or even a requirement? Start out easy with the young ones, but kept it consistent?
What if, (I admit to being a sports illiterate, but I know there are such a thing as "stats") The mathematics of the design of plays, the statistics, even the right number or members on a team and why that works was brough into the curriculum? Introducing mathematics in a nominal way, not to teach, but to realize Math has daily, useful applications?
What if, in any sport, one of the requirements was a book report on the sport, or a particular sport hero?

Physical education (and nutrition IMHO) should be in every school, but by high school there are kids who hate every aspect of it, as well as kids who excell. It seems to be more the talent aspect of it, some people are naturally coordinated (and rewarded for that talent by praise etc.)and some are natural not. What if some of the competition within teams (not the games, competitions is what it's about) was lessoned, somehow, so those less talented found "thier spot" in team sports, that wasn't considered an inferior place?

So I don't think sports and education have to be mutually exculsive. I know I'm talking fantasy land here, But reading and math are part of our daily lives, and practical application encourages kids to be less afraid, or enjoy it more.

We could call it Health class. :)

Seriously though, you're right. Nutrition should taught among other things. Heck I think there should also be a basic citizenship requirement which teaches everyone about where they go to register to vote, to how to open a bank account. People leave High School and don't know they need to register to vote, or how to fill out a check...

So much we need to do, and every time we eliminate things we make our kids dumber.

There's been too much emphasis on sports, but kids need to move around.

And I'm all for physical education that is NOT geared toward the jocks, as it was in my day.

Because of the way PE was taught, I grew up believing that you were born physically fit or not, and that there was nothing you could do about. All the PE classes were geared toward the kids who could already run a mile or do a cartwheel or hit a home run. The PE teachers did nothing to help those of us who couldn't; they just made us feel inadequate. One teacher of boys' PE used to punish the last people in a race by making them duckwalk in front of the rest of the class and be taunted.

It wasn't until college that I was put into a PE class where the emphasis was one taking us where we were and helping us improve. What a concept! I learned that I could work my up to running a mile and doing lots of sit-ups. Amazing that I got through 12 years of public school without anyone ever making that clear.

I've seen that, too. It was more like basic military training than physical education.

All the PE classes were geared toward the kids who could already run a mile or do a cartwheel or hit a home run. The PE teachers did nothing to help those of us who couldn't; they just made us feel inadequate.

Which is why I HATED PE in my early years.It was only when I was allowed to go at my own pace that I enjoyed the joys of PE.

Crazy -- if you couldn't play basketball, volleyball, whatever... you got marked down. No matter how much you tried, or whether or not you had any talent for the sport. WTF? I played field hockey and ran track in HS, and was a decent athlete, and in good shape... but I sure as hell couldn't play volleyball or do gymnastics. It was public humiliation and a skewed way to grade... and it caused alot of torment to kids, even if I wasn't one of them.

In NJ when I went to school, we had PE every day in HS, except for one marking period where we had Health (sex ed, drug and alcohol awareness, etc.)

They were a good measure of how competitive, agressive, and physically confident I was.

I was one of those strugglers (see post #91) who never got picked for the teams - and this wasn't due to physical appearance, it was because I was a wimp :) - until my senior year when all the sudden I became agressive in PE.

I still wasn't that great at making a basket, or a goal, or anything, but I stopped being afraid to go "bump" or whatever and became a valued team player. My PE average went from about a 75-80 for 9-11 to mid-90s for my senior year.

Even though the problem was a mental issue beyond my understanding (and therefor, control), I think those grades were a very fair indication of how confident I was with finding out what my body could do.

Why was/is it fair that someone is graded on how well they can play, say soccer? If they go out and do everything they can, they should get an A. Period. What difference does it make it they can't learn to dribble, properly mark an opponent, etc.? It doesn't. And, it's not fair for non athletically-gifted students to be marked down because of this.

I was athletic and self confident physically, but that still didn't translate into my being able to do gymnastics, etc.

Many schools are now focusing on weight training, conditioning, and other non-competitive, more real world physical applications. I think that's terrific.

I always was slow, didn't have a lot of physical fitness but I tried my best and I often got B+'s and A's in Gym, the people who got low grades were the people who didn't wear their gym uniforms. Weight training is probably the most popular elective at the high school where I went now.

Dribbling is not that difficult. Hitting a lay-up is not that difficult. Shooting a foul is not that difficult. With practice you can go from suck to adequate in not much time. So what if you don't excell as well as the star player on the school's team?

I was athletic and self confident physically, but that still didn't translate into my being able to do gymnastics, etc.

Gymnastics is difficult for a lot of kids, especially if you aren't trained from a very young age. Part flexibility, part muscle strength, part fear of falling and breaking a bone or something. I'd guess more are daunted by the fear factor than anything else.

Many schools are now focusing on weight training, conditioning, and other non-competitive, more real world physical applications.

Those are also more anti-social applications.

PE sports are about a lot more than how well you throw a ball. It's building teamwork abilities, sense of fair-play, and non-personal oriented competition. These things you can take into the workplace later on, to go along with academic skills.

Not everyone can do the "simple stuff." Some people can never, ever learn to shoot a foul shot. Some people, literally, have zero athletic ability. And, as long as they go out and try their hardest, they should get A's. I know quite a few people who literally were petrified of going to PE. It made them sick... because of basically what you just wrote" hey, it's easy.

I love the idea of the "anti social" aspects of weight training, etc. They build self confidence and self esteem, from every single one of the studies done. Kids aren't on a team they want to be on in PE. They are on teams with bullies, etc. At least with conditioning, and other things, they can learn useful real-world applications... team work can be learned through other activities, not just sports. Maybe you learned ll of that in PE classes (teamwork, fair play, etc.), but I guarantee most people didn't. I bet they learned that on sports teams, debating teams, volunteering at Church, etc. I honestly think you're stretching it to say PE translates into workplace habits. WE have to agree to disagree here, because I think you're either remembering things through rose colored glasses, or you were a kid that excelled in PE. I was generally the latter, but I observed the former... including watching boys cry because they couldn't shoot a foul shot.

we simply disagree.

because I think you're either remembering things through rose colored glasses, or you were a kid that excelled in PE.

No, neither. In public school, 6 years of suck. One final year of quite good. And the self-awareness to know the difference came when I stopped caring what other people might think of my abilities.

I went to a k-8 Catholic school (attended k-6) and was a fish out of water when the transition was made to public school.

As I remember it, we had dodgeball, wiffleball, kickball, and that was about it. There were no uniforms for PE, so activities were limited to whatever we could do in our skirts, once a week, which was not bloody much. The boys at least got basketball.

When I came out of there into public school I was so awkward it wasn't funny. I was too uncoordinated to do well at most of the offerings (a huge range) and embarrassed about that lack of coordination. Bad, bad combo.

I will say this, though, about the orientation: when I was a kid, there were also playgrounds and rec fields all over the place and kids used them. That was where the boys learned to hit those home runs and score basketball goals. I didn't know any girls who were much into baseball or basketball.

Cartwheels were for those who had the families who were inclined to teach them. I think that's something that schools shied away from, for fear of liability. We were only able to use the serious gymnastics equipment in high school.

Of course, one hopes for PE teachers who aren't of the "failed, and therefore bitter and sadistic, jock" variety.

:hi: Lydia.

...it's no wonder we have an "obesity epidemic". People are brainwashed into believing that fitness is born, not made, and learn that exercise is a waste of time unless you're already "fit".

Even in my high school, P.E. was geared for recruiting the sports teams not for teaching the other kids how to do anything. All of my memories of high school P.E. involve sitting in the outfield with the other girls. Even when the ball was hit to me, I couldn't throw it far enough to get it back to the infield. Plus, I remember one teacher didn't even explain the rules of baseball to us and then screamed at me for five minutes along with the rest of my "team" because I didn't know I had to tag someone out. What a frickin' waste of time. That sure taught me the value of "teamwork".

If they had taught us nothing but simple martial arts, calisthenics and stretching starting from age eight or nine, I would never have been obese.

In 1999, when I was sports editor of the local daily, there was a real good tailback on the high school football team. He was 19 — a tad older than the other kids. That was because he'd dropped out of school and joined a gang. He'd also fathered a kid — a gorgeous, huge-eyed little girl.

He was pretty hard-core in the gang, I assume; he had the tattoos, at least, including the tell-tale one on the back of his neck. But he dumped the gang, went back to school and graduated, and it was football that drew him back.

How do you put a price on something like that?

football that drew him back?

You can maintain eligibility for sports in most high schools with a D average. That means that you had a detectable heartbeat and attended class most of the time. In the more "rigorous" high schools, you have to have a C average to play sports. That means that you had a detectable heartbeat, attended class most of the time, and occasionally handed in homework.

What's wrong with our friggin' American culture that only sports can draw a kid back into school?

And who said anything about "only"?

I don't know where you live, but here a 'C' average is a requirement for sports, and if a kid drops below a 2.5 GPA he's "monitored." It's quite common to lose kids here to academic ineligibility, and not just second-string guards, either.

As for the kid in question, he got out of the gangs and got a high-school diploma. Now, go ahead and get cynical on that.

Why have we elevated sports to the level of a religion and developed a cultural milieu in which treating the best athletes as school royalty is considered good old Americanism, while any school that treated the best academic performers (and aren't academics the purpose of school?) as royalty would be considered elitist?

It's our whole idiotic pop culture: school is just for getting a job, and if you like learning you're a geek, and the thing that students should be most proud of is their sports teams, not their National Merit Scholars or the guy who scored the highest in the state on the Putnam math exam.

The fascist values of sports-nuttiness (glorify the buff body, destroy the other team, put all your emotional energy into your team, obliterate the other team, and crow obnoxiously when you win) is a huge part of the dumbing down of America.

I'm not calling sports fans fascists (although some of them have that mentality), but the over-emphasis on the militaristic aspect of team sports is part of the mass media's brainwashing of the American people.

(Years ago, someone posted a report on DU of a meeting of executives at a major network, in which they consciously appealed to the armchair jock to keep him happy and unthinking. I wish I could find it, but it was in the fairly early days of DU.)

Good post. :thumbsup:

scares the hell out of me!

about themselves, and that's a win-win for everyone! Especially WalMart, who need more people who instictively submit their souls to authority.

it would be wonderful for the economy! Seriesly!!! :sarcasm:

I should know. I deal with this boring, pathetic crap people have the gall to call "education" everyday. The older I get, the worse it gets.

x(

how many can be passed than how many can be thoroughly educated.

and assuming. Some of your points are valid, however. Sport is glorified to an often-ridiculous level, particularly in college. I do not understand the mania over, say, the NCAA basketball tournament. We treat major college sports programs as if they're professional — and in some aspects, they are. And that — the hypocrisy of the NCAA and many of its member schools — needs to be changed.

But "we" didn't elevate sport to this level. That was done decades ago. And while I don't fully understand the mindset of the sports fan who turns his home and wardrobe into a tribute to his team, I do understand the human need to feel a part of something, and there are worse things to identify with than a football team — the aforementioned ex-gang member, for example.

But the point remains there are better things to identify with and get involved in, and academics are certainly at or near the top. The reason academia take a back seat to sport is financial as well as cultural: Yale's debate team may be among the best, but it doesn't make millions for the school. And, one supposes, A drives B; since sport is profitable, we're exposed to more and more of it, leading to a greater mania, etc. etc. etc.

All I can really tell you about are the local student-athletes, many of whom I've had the opportunity to know. Most of them are good kids, and many are honor-roll students. One guy, an all-league guard, was valedictorian — not something you'd expect from an interior lineman. :D And California high schools don't often let kids cruise because they're jocks, at least not in my experience.

Take a look at this web site; it's the governing body for high school sports from San Francisco to about 150 miles south. Note the emphasis on academics and sportsmanship. http://www.cifccs.org/ (That isn't just lip service, either; a nearby school recently got two years' probation for eligibility and sportsmanship violations.)

Sports were first introduced into schools in the nineteenth century because it was believed that if you made adolescent boys run around and wear themselves out all afternoon on the playing field, they wouldn't (gasp!) masturbate.

(I'm not making this up.)

We no longer have that rationale for our national sports mania.

Too many schools cut art and music before there is any thought of doing anything about the sports programs.

I've got nothing against sports whatsoever, but sports are NOT any more important than arts and music, just as A&M aren't any more important than sports.

Or don't you have a football team, just the LObster Bowl Team?

It's really quite annoying.

:D :P :D :P :hi:

here even if they are way below grade average
as long as they are good with a ball.
Free tuition in the private schools.

:eyes:

I don't know how much it costs the school, I know they charge for fans of Varsity Football and Varisty Hockey , we also have Boosters who get donations from people who want to support athletics (alumni, businesses, Fire Dept, Police Dept. etc) and there are sports fees for parents - I thinks it's 150.00/sport.

In HS kids can only take 2 semesters of PE for the entire 4 years.

I don't think there are any programs that are not offered because we have sports programs.

• I'd be tutoring them myself.

• I'd welcome anything that would get them interested in school. And that goes regardless of their literacy.

lack the resources for home schooling. One of my step-Sons was functionally illiterate when I met him in his teens. We were able to get him one on one tutoring in a religious school, so he did learn to read and write.

a team.

Schoolwork is first - but many kids can do both.

You know something's wrong with public schools.

When athletic programs are higher on the list than PROPER gifted education at the high-school level (and no, slapping an "honors" label on a class with twenty-fucking-nine kids in it and giving the kids in the class more tests than their "level 3" classmates does NOT qualify as proper gifted education!), you know something's wrong with public schools.

:eyes:

"The gifted don't NEED special education! They can teach themselves!"

Really? Is that so? How about the statistics that PROVE that pull-out gifted education is not elitist: it takes kids with extremely high intelligences and a willingness to push the envelope and puts them in with other kids of the same stripe, so that instead of sitting there bored in other classes raising hell, they have social interaction with other kids of their same intelligence level?

:eyes:

I can empathize with that.

x( x( x(

Simon's Rock.

It's just better all around.

There are kids who are good at athletics, lets let them succeed. The lucky ones are good at lots of things. My daughter is good at English, but there is little recognition for that. The Math wizzes get to skip ahead, but the English Wizzes get their "A" and nothing else. There are kids who aren't good at academics, but if they are good at Athletics, let's let them succeed. Once kids are out of high school, they may realize that being good at some of this stuff doesn't carry them far in the real world, but having succeeded does. So lets do what we can to let as many kids as possible feel successful.

But it may let them know they are good at something. Maybe they start working with Boys and Girls clubs youth sports programs, maybe they work at the YMCA to help low-income kids get active in sports because they learn that for some, this is the way they feel good about themselves.

alot of kids who couldn't otherwise go to college, would struggle to find funding. I'm all for scholastic athletics, and athletic scholarships. Sports raise alot of funding for schools that they couldn't get otherwise.

Think about it. A kid excells in sports in high school, which raises money for the school, and potentially gets him or her a scholarship to go to college, which goes a long way to life success.

I don't buy your arguement. You can't learn to hold a job. Either you get it, or you find something else to do.

and their families on sports? A very, very small percentage, I'll wager. Those unprepared to support themselves either way fall through the cracks and wind up a burden on society.

there are just as many, if not more, academic scholarships for bright, poor kids than there are athletic scholarships, but the coaches will never let kids know that, because they want fresh meat for their teams.

Case in point: At the last college I worked at, there was an extremely bright young woman who had grown up in a trailer behind a gas station in rural Oregon. She had so much outright grant money that all she owed for tuition, room, and board was $2000, at a private college. This was a sum she could earn during the summer.

A student of color from a poor background who has good grades in solid subjects can write his or her own ticket, so in the case of all the would-be NBA stars who are spending all their free time on the basketball court, they'd have a much better chance to escape poverty if they buckled down and worked hard on their academics.

This is especially true at private colleges, which can sweeten the deal any way they want, in addition to what the numbers tell them. I've known of cases in which my college engaged in a bidding war with another Oregon private college to attract a bright student. But the state schools can offer good deals as well.

(About twenty years ago, the University of Minnesota's Institute of Technology became concerned about the low number of students of color enrolled, so they decided to start a recruiting program, complete with special scholarships, in Twin Cities high schools. That's when they found out that in all the high schools in both Minneapolis and St. Paul, only seven African-American students were taking pre-calc. On the basis of that information, they revised the recruiting program so that it started in eighth grade.)

their jobs.

I was just not good at sports and I had no interest in potentially injuring myself or investing my energy into it. I think physical education is good, but it's just like other classes. If a student lags behind, the answer isn't ridicule. Younger-me in PE is like a freeper in English class. Not quite right.

I think PE teachers are required to take some course in sadism. I did try to do well, but a shorty like me isn't meant to "study" basketball for weeks at time - especially not against much taller people.

My school had "Nature Education" as a PE elective, though. A semester of hiking (in the woods near the school), starting fires, and camping was fun. And sports can teach teamwork and keep some kids invested in school. (Sports usually require kids to pass). Many highly academic people also excel at sport (alas, not me). So, I don't know that it's sports per se that are the problem.

The problem seems to be that PE is the least progressive field of education. Additionally, it's the crazy parents and community members that place undue emphasis on sports instead of academics. Or coaches and schools. I once witnessed my debate coach being bullied by two PE teachers (who also coached football). He wanted to give a football member an Incomplete. They tried to get the kid a D.

an athlete was "given" a pass on academics. They should learn the academics or repeat the course.

My debate coach was giving him an Incomplete so he could finish out the required assignments. Hypothetically, the kid could have earned a much higher grade than a D. However, all the coaches could think is that a player wouldn't be able to play at the next game. They wouldn't even focus on helping the kid get caught up.

education. Such people are not educators.

I think PE ought to be funded well and encouraged. At the same time, it really shouldn't be mandatory. This year, my schedule is filled with really tough class like AP Chem and AP Physics, classes that I enjoy and chose to take. In order to graduate however, I need a half a credit of personal fitness and half a credit of another PE class.

I take both of my PE classes online at the Florida Virtual School (FLVS). It's free for all students in Florida. The thing is, my other PE class is called "fitness lifestyle design" and it is almost exactly the same as personal fitness. I waited so long to take both of them and now I'm rushing to get them done so I can graduate in time. The thing with online classes is that is so hard to buckle down and do the work. There are too many games, too much porn, and too much DailyKos and DU :P.

I think as long as every student takes a decent health class that includes living a healthy life style, PE shouldn't be required. I say decent because our current health class is a joke. "Don't do drugs. Don't have sex." Give me a break!

Edit: On a related subject, if you take away our soda and snack machines, there is going to be heck to pay. Heck I tell you!

this (freshman) year, because I was upped to sophomore English mid-way through the first quarter, and I couldn't get both 10th Eng. and gym in. So now I, too, am waiting on senior year to get 2 gym half-credits in and a health half-credit.

But that doesn't mean they should be eliminated altogether. If anything, there needs to be a movement in high schools and colleges to make athletes better students.

lacrosse and hockey I am often surprised by their high academic performance (yes I read the Honors and High Honors lists in our newspaper). I would agree that there are probably kids who play on sports teams that are not high performers in academics but there are also many kids who don't play any sports and don't participate in any extra-curricular activities who do not perform well in school.

I don't think sports is the cause of low performance in school, it's just that making a team is not based on academics (other than you can't be flunking out) so these kids are visible as sports players instead of invisible as poor performers in school.

I agree that football and basketball are way over-emphasized, way over funded, and way over "idolized" -- and, this abuse translates right into what we see from these players in college and the NFL and NBA. Cross country, filed hockey, soccer, crew, etc...? Many of these kids are athletes, but they are also kids who have a life outside of this. And, an athletic scholarship for them can mean the difference between college or not... where they WILL get an education, not graduate functionally illiterate.

But I think football and basketball are way overfunded in high schools. Crazy. And, five hour practices? That's a job, not an activity...

are playing sports "in self defense," to avoid the stigma of being considered an academic geek. I'm asking because one of my brothers did that.

We were G&T, National Honor Society geeks, who got bullied a bit in grammar school and ninth grade. It's amazing what a difference it made just wearing that letter jacket around, or being seen practicing with the field hockey or track team. Suddenly, you were "okay"...

Although I wound up basically enjoying it, my motive wasn't a good one for a kid to feel forced to have.

and none that I know. Most of these kids play more than one sport. If they were doing it so they wouldn't be considered a geek, all they'd have to do is play one season. The other thing is that in HS it is difficult to get on a team (with the exception of Freshman year, the lacrosse and football teams have a no cut policy). Kids train pre-season for tryouts, then play the season and then play on a select team in the off (school) season (this is pretty much a requirement now). There's a lot more effort and commitment required to make a team nowadays.

I'm not saying that every kid plays HS sports for the love of the game, I'm sure there are other motivations involved (scholarships are the main one). Plus kids have it drilled in their heads that they need to have a well-rounded resume for college - academics is not enough - they choose to supplement their resumes with sports, community work, and/or other extra-curricular activities.

They get a new stadium... while my friend's trumpet is falling apart. Her parents can't afford to get it fixed (Dad's working two jobs, Mom's working one. My friend is taking care of two younger brothers.) and the school can't get it fixed, either. She's really good at trumpet.... it's so sad.

in my deluded opinion. I didn't play sports in high school, and I don't care for sports on tv. However, I do think that it's important for students to be able to not only excel at something (and I'd say the same thing for art, music, or any other "non-academic" activity) but to also be able to learn to play as part of a team. I think that sort of thing is very important for many future careers.

So, the problem is, of course, how do you fund it? Only way I can see it, is to throw the bums and cowards in our government out, and replace them with some decisionmakers that actually give a shit about this country and where it's going.

including PE, should be an elective. I understand the obesity problems plaguing most youth today, but ultimately, the decision to stay fit should rest on either the student or the parents and not be mandated by the school.

I was thankful that my school considered Marching Band as both a PE and Arts credit so I didn't have to waste my time in a class that held no academic weight on my transcripts. It allowed me to fill that space with more honors and AP-level courses that boosted my GPA and made me look favorable to more selective universities.

strenuous exercize should try a few miles of it carrying a load!

But the way it's taught is crazy. Dump the couch potatoes in with the same class as the jocks. Hmmm, in other subjects we have remedial courses along with advanced courses. Why not for PE? Is making that fat kid run wind sprints till he pukes gonna prove anything? Rather than that why not put them on a program that will instill a lifelong love of physical activity?

With the academic programs there needs to be a way to ensure that those coming out of high school can read and write at grade level or nearly so. Way back in yesteryear when schools weren't being defunded kids were still shoved through the system unable to master the very basics. I don't know how many people I've seen in my day who've gone through the supposedly world class educational system we have in Iowa who are illiterate. People in their 50's and older, not just the dropouts of today. This shouldn't be happening. Anywhere.

I am a public HS graduate w/ a school that seats 8K on friday nights. I am an SEC graduate with a football team that brings in 10's of millions a year.

For what its worth, I don't see that eliminating the sports teams would add a single thing to the academics, and would likely hurt them significantly.

At the HS level, the football team not only pays for itself (including facilities), but it an basketball pay for every other sports related activity in the school system. They also pay for their coaches and the coaches of other sports.

My college FB team, after paying for all of its expenses (including multi-million dollar coaching staff, all athlete scholarships, facilities, etc), contributes over 10 million / yr to the other atheltic programs at the school.

In both cases, eliminating the sports teams would do nothing for academics. In fact, its my contention that it would massively hurt academics. The sports teams act as a draw for the Alumni, and keep the involved in both the academics and sports of their respective schools. 10's of million's of dollars are raised for our academic endowment annually, and that wouldn't happen w/o continually bringing a diverse and wide ranging alumni back to campus 5-6 times a year, for reunions, etc.

Doesn't that pretty much confine said sports to wealthier subdivisions? Doesn't that make sports, perhaps the one thing in our society where class barriers can be fairly easily transcended, yet another thing that only the rich are able to partake in?

Others havef said, and they are right, that sports do help keep students who otherwise would simply fail and drop out in school.

You put in to words better than I could, I know that many professional athletes come from less fortunate backgrounds.

Although I think it should just be pass/fail. Students don't need more stress when they do physical activities - in fact, PE should be encouraged. At the college level, I think some schools give too many sports scholarships and not enough academic ones. The main goal of college should be mental education.

Bye, all! Going out to enjoy the weather.

What good is teachin math and science if everyone has type 2 diabetes when they are 20 and are stuck to a dialysis maching by 30?