Sunday, November 30, 2008
Do we really need sports in our schools?
Do we really need sports in our schools? Today's educational trend teaches to cooperate rather than to compete and to teach our children that winning is not the ultimate goal. Teachers are required in many schools to break up the rows of desks and place them in groups creating only assignments that must be completed with the help of others in the groups. Maybe team sports are only the ones that really benefit children and those individual sports such as tennis, golf, wrestling, swimming, and track and field should be discontinued. Then again, team sports do not promote the winning of both teams playing but subject students to engaging in activities where strategies are used to create a loosing team. Do we really need sports in our schools? I think competition still plays an important roll in today's life and will always be at the center of the human spirit. If we do not teach out children how to compete constructively, then they will lack the essential skills needed to continue our capitalistic society that we enjoy.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Hi Howard,
First of all I will admit to being an absoulte klutz so sports was not my thing in school, therefore I am probalbly biased as to its importance. I do see many valuable lessons that sports teaches to our students in light of character building, problem solving, and critical thinking skills. I also believe that sports is a great motivator for students as an incentive. In Texas, we have a No Pass No Play rule in which students who are not passing are not allowed to participate in UIL activities. Although this makes sense and should be considered appropriate, it leads to issues of teachers being pressured to "accommodate" athletes so that they have passing grades.
Personally I do not believe that sports should ever be given greater consideration than academic achievement, but the reality is that we see it all the time. Sports activities are better funded and have greater rewards than academic activities and carry greater prestige. That alone speaks loudly about its place in our educational hierarchy.
Donna
Howard,
My four years of studying biology in college and teaching it several years since has taught me that competition is a natural part of existence. It is easy to think that we have evolved past lowly animal competition, but it is in our genes, and in needy times it arises and is helpful.
Certain students may have received relatively better physical genes than academic ones, and since public schools are required to teach all students, I think that athletics are very important for them to feel successful. I teach many students who have developed greater senses of self-worth and confidence over time, likely due to their athletic successes (not from their low 70's in the academic arena). Additionally, no pass no play policies are also great bribery tools for students who are more athletically gifted than academically so.
Although I am largely uncoordinated, sports serves other purposes like socialization that are slowly being eliminated from schools as well (nixing recess from elementary schools, etc.) Also, we are living in a society where more and more people are unhealthy, overweight, and have not learned to be active. Sports can allow students to develop into healthy adults. What is the point of an education if you're unhealthy and cannot use it for as long! Personally, I feel that athletics have a unique place in public schools, and I am unopposed to competition, even in academics.
Howard,
I agree that students should be taught that "winning is not the ultimate goal" but rather "its not as important if you win the game but rather how you play the game" should be the lesson taught. Too often students are trained in competition to win at any cost, but should we not be teaching the critical skills of "stratigizing" to outwit the opponents? Students have to learn friendly competition while in school so that they can understand that in the real world of work and survival, you have to work hard in the game of life, achieve in the game of life, and keep going to stay ahead and survive in the game of life. While I do not always view that school sports is essential, it is the only way some students are ever noticed in their efforts to get out of a life that offers few chances to survive into one that afford them the opportunity to learn to live and survive. Sports is a mixed view point for me as I can see the good and the bad of competitive sports and sports in schools.
Ivyspecial (Janis)
No pass no play is a very important policy in education. The participation in athletic sports is a privilege and not a right. If a child is not capable of accomplishing his or her academic responsibilities, they should not be able to participate in athletics for that period of failure. I do not believe that the child should be withheld from athletic participation for the rest of their educational careers, as some states require. I feel that once a child is back on good academic status, their eligibility should be reinstated. As far as how the community feels about athletics in contrast to academics stems from how the human spirit values competition. As my Blog indicates, educational scholars feel that competition should be avoided in the classroom and rather cooperation be promoted. Programs are being created to yield no losers but rather all winners no matter the effort level. Show up and you will win or the system will make it where no one can win unless you are allowed to win. The evidence that proves this is healthy will show whole improvements on the short term but we have yet to see the results of what the next generation will be like who do not compete but rather have a socialistic mentality of everyone for the whole. We may be in trouble.
Howard, I do not understand why a state would forbid a child from playing sports long after a period of failure. That seems excessive, even referencing my own experience in high school, which was not in the era of "forgive everything always."
I think you are also correct about potential long-term side-effects of ensuring that everyone succeeds equally. I could get on a rant about historical social and political analogies, but I will spare you those. I also feel that while there really can be a place for providing credit when it is not necessarily earned (condition of no competition), institutionalizing it is not an effective answer, and I believe it is detrimental in itself much of the time.
Post a Comment