A vast amount of energy and money is
invested into sports programs at educational institutions, both public and
private, including schools, colleges, and organizations such as pee-wee
football, Pop Warner baseball, Little League, and so on. The primary concern here is for the
extraordinary amount of resources devoted to sports programs in public schools.
Physical education and exercise programs
in public schools are jokes. Students
might be required to undergo regimens of physical exercise during only one year
of their public school education and then it's dropped. If there was a real concern that the students
needed physical activity then the requirement would exist for every year of
their attendance until graduation.
Instead, there is a minimal requirement for PE, and that exists only so
that there is a justification for keeping coaches on the public school payroll.
Sports in schools began as an
extracurricular activity. It is still
classified as such, meaning that no student can be required to participate in
any particular sports program, but it has also far exceeded the intent of an
extracurricular activity. Clubs and
organizations in public schools began as a way for students to gather together
in order to enjoy a particular passion.
Competition ruins the purity of such social interaction. Some clubs and organizations still exist
solely for the benefit of student socialization, but other groups have
instilled within their framework the idea that competition is the reason for
that group's existence. I'm not arguing
that this is a bad thing; young adults compete against each other constantly in
everything they do, usually for social status.
What I see as a problem is
disproportionate support for one extracurricular activity over another. Sports programs are the number one culprit in
this, with some sports taking a much higher priority over others. Again, I am not speaking out against sports
in school, only against the misuse of resources.
I cannot speak for every school, but here
in my hometown of Chester, South Carolina, the high school football
program is heavily weighted when it comes to staffing and financial
support. The kind of financial support
I'm talking about is the use of governmental funding that the school receives
ostensibly for education. In the school
budget we could find such items as textbooks, teacher salaries, maintenance,
office supplies, equipment...and a large chunk devoted to sports like
football. A typical high school football
team requires extraordinary financial support.
Uniforms, pads, sports drinks, training equipment, a weight room,
laundry facilities, not to mention the astonishing cost of building facilities
in which the team can play.
A gymnasium has been a standard part of a
school's design for several generations.
Typically, it is a basketball court with pull-out bleachers. A gymnasium usually doubles as an assembly
hall for the school, so it serves more than one function. A football stadium has primarily one use:
playing football. Soccer teams often use
the same stadium because the standard minimum requirements for a soccer field's
dimensions are the same as the standard dimensions of a football field. It should be noted, however, that in America
soccer is not nearly as pervasive a sport as football, baseball, basketball, or
even tennis in our public schools.
The staff required for a football team is
expensive as well. There are usually as
many as five coaches even for a small football team. Some schools have as many as fifteen, and
some even more. This is in a setting
where there would be typically four to six English teachers, as many math
teachers, two history teachers, and...you get the idea. We say that education is the most important
part of school, but budgeting doesn't reflect that. Teachers are traditionally underpaid compared
to the amount of work they perform, schools complain frequently about having to
cut back on teacher staffing, textbook purchases, equipment, and so-on, but
rarely does a school sports program suffer.
This is actually quite
understandable. The public loves
sports. Especially professional sports,
and the star players all got their starts playing sports in middle and high
schools. Again, let me emphasize that I
am not against sports, I'm just concerned about the use of public funds
earmarked for education being spent on sports programs that benefit a tiny
percentage of the student body. Other
extracurricular clubs and organizations do not enjoy large budgetary allowances
out of the general education fund, why should sports? If the choir wants to go compete, they have
to come up with the money for the bus, for hotels, for meals, and do it on
their own. When the football team goes
to compete they have a dedicated bus, meals are provided (not just for players
but also for the dozen or so coaches, the support staff, the requisite medics,
and so on). The only other group in the
school that receives treatment like that is usually the band, and only because
they usually travel with the football team and perform at football games.
Football and other sports programs should
be paid for the same way other extracurricular activities are paid for. Privately.
If a student wants to participate in the chess club, for example, he
might have to come up with a membership fee.
Most sports players in high school buy their own equipment such as
shoes, gloves, athletic supporters, and sometimes even uniforms. Football players pay nothing. Football is, after all, the most beloved of
American sports, not to mention one of the most dangerous for those who play
it, so the almost-pampering of the players is understandable in a way. They take great risks for our entertainment,
so they should be given more.
The problem is that it's not just for our
entertainment. The way players play high
school football compares in no way to the way football is played outside of the
school environment. On the other hand,
baseball, soccer, and basketball are good examples of sports that are played
exactly the same in high school as they are privately in pick-up games or in
other non-school settings such as community leagues. High school football is played the way it is
because that's the way it's played in college, and it's played that way in
college because that's the way professionals do it. And here we see the crux of the issue. High school football players are being
trained so that they can secure college scholarships and, in turn, eventually
gain the notice of professional teams.
High school football is the first step on the road to a career for many of
the players.
There has been alot of arguments back and
forth about failures in the public school system. This is not the time to get into all of that,
but one suggestion I might make is altering the educational track to include a
future career in professional sports. At
Chester High School, students have three choices
when it comes to the kind of education they receive. If a student is a low academic achiever and
has no desire to change that, there is a basic education track which is
designed to meet the minimum state requirements for graduation. For those who think they're going on to
college, there is a college preparatory track which emphasizes the kind of
classes a four-year college requires.
Then there is the middle ground for those students who want to go into a
professional career that can be achieved by attending a two-year community or
technical college, and again classes are geared toward achieving that goal.
In most schools, there is a strict
academic requirement for those students who engage in sports. A certain grade level must be maintained in
order to ensure continued participation.
This has, in the past, led to grading scandals where teachers were
pressured to pass otherwise substandard students so that they could continue to
participate in sports. What I suggest is
that we add another education track. One
that focuses on sports.
For those students who want to become a
lawyer, doctor, or CEO of a company, the school accommodates them with
appropriate courses. For those who want
to become an electrician, nurse's assistant, or computer programmer, the school
accommodates them, too. So why not
accommodate those students whose desire it is to become a professional
basketball or football player?
I know, the argument might be that we run
the risk of encouraging a student to pursue something that they can not
achieve, and to that I ask "so what?" Do you really think that
everyone who follows the college preparatory track in school goes on to be a
doctor? a lawyer? a CEO? Statistically, only about half of all students who
start attending college actually graduate within six years with a bachelor's
degree. Graduation rates are slightly
higher for those who attend technical schools.
For those who never pursue education past the high school diploma, well
what needs to be said about them? At the
absolute worst, a student who pursues his or her dream of a career in
professional sports faces nothing more than having to take some remedial
courses in community or technical college in order to get them up to level for
continuing on toward a career in some other field.
For those who want to be professional
athletes, then why not just create an educational plan for them that includes
what they really need to know? But even
with that plan in place, the full burden of that student's education should not
fall on the public. A sports-track
should receive no more funding than the college-prep track with all other funds
coming from private funding. The same
should hold true for colleges. There is
a long-standing prohibition against "paying" students to attend
college. The intent is to discourage
rich schools or those with wealthy benefactors from enticing the best athletes. Ostensibly the student is still there to
receive an education that will lead him to a bachelor's degree in a
professional field, one such as business management, communications, history,
English, science, and so on. Why not
include spots as a viable option? Why not have someone graduate with a degree
in "sports science" with particular focus on his or her sport of
choice?
Arguments are
often made that profound changes need to be made to our education system, and
those arguments are completely valid.
One of those changes must be to include the possibility of a career as a
professional sports player. As to the
other changes...well, that's the focus of another essay.
