Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
When cash-strapped public schools are cutting back programs (not just sports but also art, music,etc), private schools benefit from wealthy families transferring their kids. I've seen it here in New Jersey where I work and in Pennsylvania where I live.
Sidwell Friends, Lawrenceville, Phillips-Exeter and the like will be that last ones to drop sports, even as the elite schools in 1900 were the first to adopt them.
A large majority of the wealthy or upper middle class send their kids to private school regardless as to public schools cutting programs. It should also be noted that most private high schools that have good sports programs issue scholarships in which many of their athletes are kids that would other wise never afford the tuition. At least that is the case in the Philly area.
Interesting read. But high school without sports? In many of the smaller towns it's as American as Chevrolet and Apple Pie and I think it would be devastating in some of these places. It brings the community together, it bridges the racial gap, particularly in the deep south (former Georgia resident).
However, I think private prep schools would survive just fine, because it's the academics that are the biggest draw for the well-to-do. The top kids, the ones that make the National Honor Society are usually not in the football program or any sports for that matter. These are the students that private schools attract.
For the record, I was a football jock in high school and I always hated that I had to work my butt off while other players got to "coast". They should have had a GPA requirement in order to "letter". That would have took care of the problem right there in many cases.
There was a similar thread on this issue in another forum, where not just the sports programs were eliminated but the fine arts too. I think it was somewhere in the southern California area.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Momma_bear
In my state there is a GPA requirement to participate in athletics.
As long ago as the 45 years that I went to high school, many of the top students were also athletes. It was also true in my kids' high school 10 years ago or so. I have no reason to think it has changed.
My state also has a minimum GPA to play sports, and in season, the coaches get weekly grade reports. Kids get benched if they don't meet the standards.
I've never understood why schools, institutions that are for the express purpose of teaching young people, have any association with sports, especially football. It seems the football games are more for the entertainment of the adults, particularly in football crazy places like Texas, than for teaching the kids anything.
Sure, a few lucky players may actually go on to play professionally, but 99% of high school players simply end up being a fading memory of the jock they were in HS. So how did that experience better prepare them for the real world once they graduated ?
It is also a joke that the players have to keep up their grades to stay in sports. Even 50 years ago, when I was in HS, they would let the FB players out early for practice and I have seen more than one other student taking a test for that player. Teachers were also encouraged to loosen the rules for FB players and to give them passing grades because they were "important to the team."
As long ago as the 45 years that I went to high school, many of the top students were also athletes. It was also true in my kids' high school 10 years ago or so. I have no reason to think it has changed.
My state also has a minimum GPA to play sports, and in season, the coaches get weekly grade reports. Kids get benched if they don't meet the standards.
At my kids school most of the athletes are good students. There are a few kids on every team who aren't the best students but most of them take academics seriously. Our school has a higher GPA requirement than the state athletic association and the vast majority of kids work to meet their requirements.
The school is set up so that it is easy for the kids to meet their requirements. Every teacher has extra help one day a week immediately after school. Athletic practices start 45 min to an hour after school so athletes have an opportunity to see their teachers if they are struggling. Labs are scheduled immediately after school or on Sat morning so that kids can do their lab work (they sign up for times). Having the academic part of the day and the extra curricular part of the day work together ensures that students have the opportunity to do well in school no matter what their activity. Our school also has many non athletic activities. Students tend to be busy with whatever it is that they like.
I think one of the things the school in the article needed to do was to refocus its students on academics. Eliminating athletics might work but I think that students can be refocused without eliminating extracurricular activities. My kids go to a school where it is the norm in the school community to be active in something outside of school. Maintaining GPA is something the kids are just expected to do along with (not in place of) their outside activities. The school in the article needs a change in school culture.
I thought the article was going to concentrate on the injury aspect, primarily traumatic brain injuries due to concussions, which is a huge concern of mine. The author made a very compelling case that sports are being funded to the detriment of academics, and I agree, that should not be the focus. But, I do think sports have a place in high school. They give the less academically inclined a reason to attend, build school spirit, and engage the community.
Let's face it, college sports are far too profitable for schools to drop them, and they need the high school talent development to keep them going.
The answer, I think, is to have funds dedicated to academics, first and foremost. Whatever remains, can go to sports, and the balance can be handled through fund raising. Yes, some districts will end up with jumbotron screens while others have mostly dirt fields, but that's already the case. And somehow, the high schools with the most impressive facilities frequently also have the highest SAT scores.
I have mixed feelings about the emphasis placed on high school sports.
There ARE definitely good things about HS and collegiate level sports ~ but there are also bad things. Penn State, for example where everyone looked the other way because their football program was so successful.
I think academics should be FIRST and get the majority of the funds. Each sport should be funded equally and parents/fundraising make up the difference.
I have never seen this. If you have seen it you should do something about it.
Not only have I seen other students taking tests and helping football players with tests, I have seen the coach doing the same thing. Since that was 50 years ago, and I was a kid myself at the time, there was no way I could go to anyone and rat them out........hell, even the Principal knew it was happening.
Don't act so shocked. This is nothing new. Schools have always looked the other way when it comes to sports as there is so much pressure on them to have winning teams. Look at the latest scandal where supporters were handing out money and other perks to players. Been going on forever and will continue to be that way probably.
..........It seems silly to eliminate something that benefits 3X as many students unless...............
I think the whole discussion here is whether it benefits the students at all. Just because they participate doesn't mean they are benefiting, and I believe they are not.
The entire purpose of school has been lost.
I sub at a school whose goal this year is to increase the number of coaches and trophies won by the HS.
This school also sends it's middle school coaches on "scouting trips" to other districts.
Middle school coaches going on scouting trips for football.
No. It's too long. The OP has the responsibility to make an introductory statement that summarizes the topic, not just link to an article that might take a quarter of an hour to read, or (as often occurs) a video that runs for over an hour.
Furthermore, the OP used a title to the thread which is not at all the same as the topic of link provided. There is a legitimate case against high school football, but it relates to injury and permanent brain and body damage, not the merits of extracurricular sport.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
