After School Sports

In order for students to have the success they need in school, it is essential for them to on their education before sports. In Amanda Ripley’s article Should Your School Get Rid of Sports? she says, “More than 20 nations have better high school graduation rates” (10). Ripley continues by stating that, Jenny, an 18

Schools should get rid of sports. Although many people think that sports are relaxing and stress relieving; numerous studies say that for sport players in particular, the lack of time to do work and sleep is crushing them socially, physically, and academically. Therefore, districts should get rid of after school sports because the cost is extreme, this would aid students academically, and they are a

The impact of preserving sports in high schools has been surrounded by much controversy as people suspect that it is the reason behind the poor academic achievement of students. Opponents to high school sports feel that allowing athletics to be a part of schools sidetracks the focus of the student body, which goes completely against the main purpose of schools. Indeed, this assertion is completely true and based upon plentiful evidence. High school sports undoubtedly come at the expense of student academic achievement since they divert the attention of students away from academics and they come with far too many financial costs, both of which incur negative impacts on the academics within a school. The bottomline is that sports are harming the education of students, so a school must make the decision between composing quality sports teams or providing high level academics; both of these choices simply cannot occur simultaneously.

Could you be able to not have sports at your school the fun friday night games and the pepper ally before when you get so hyped ? The article “ Should Schools get Rid of Sports” by Amanda Ripley is about sports in schools is a bad thing. The second article “ Sports are more Important than Everything” by Tim O'Shei is about sports are good things in school. School’s that have no sports are good;however,school should have sports. “

Are schools the right place for sports? This is a question that educators and experts everywhere are asking themselves, as more and more schools are faced with budget cuts and low academic scores. No one is debating the health benefits of exercise one receives from sports, but does the exercise benefit outweigh the expense, risk, and impact on academic grades? Amanda Ripley, the author of The Smartest Kids in the World, thinks club organizations, not schools, should provide sports programming (“Should schools eliminate sports” 1). Earl Smith, author of “Race, Sport and the American Dream,” along with Ripley believes sports are given priority in some schools, drawing attention away from education (“Should schools eliminate sports” 1). During an interview with the New York Times, Smith stated “high schools should not have competitive sports teams. And especially not in the under-resourced intercity high schools where academic programs are often sacrificed to finance sports teams” (“Making Sports an After-School Activity” 1). He went on to say “even the student bodies in many high schools have developed cultures that glorify sports at the expense of the scholar.”

Parents and administrators have been wondering of sports are literally helping, or harming education. Schools have had after-school activities for decades, but this has made too difficult for many students to finish their work. Therefore, sports should be removed to increase the ability to save money, improve grades, and give kids the opportunity to pay more attention in class.

High school sports have been like a tradition. Many people enjoy it due to the fact that people with interests in sports have a chance to get their hobby as a career. It also adds some miscellaneous benefits. For instance, the article “What in the Name of High School Football” states that, “For example, a multi-year study conducted in Michigan has shown that children who participate in sports have increased educational aspirations, closer ties to school and increased occupational aspirations in youth.” With all those benefits, high school sports appear with a cost. Expanding just this department ignores the further important academics, the majority of sports players boast a shortage on time, and the injury rate of sports can be extreme.

Whenever someone goes to a school they are going to see that they have a sports team; however, people do not know how much these activities actually cost. According to author Amanda Ripley in a recent article about sports, she states that a grass field can cost more than $20,000 a year (2). “For travel games, schools pay for the busses for teams and also for the band, cheerleaders, and hotels” (Ripley 4). This evidence shows that schools have money but they’re using on sports; instead of using the money on sports they can use it on the education or new technology for the school. Therefore if districts want to save any money they should really consider suspending after school sports.

In the article, The Case Against High-School Sports suggests that American schools are putting too much focus on sports than on education. After analyzing the gathered information, I have concluded that sports are being pushed over education in the United States. In this article, I found myself agreeing with many of the points the author was making. The United States is far behind many countries in our educational system; we don’t seem to take education as seriously as we do sports. We also spend an unbelievable amount of our average school funding on athletes, while sometimes spending less than half on each student. Lastly, we have plenty of evidence of schools improving with school sports cuts, but we haven’t been successful in creating a real balance.

Any school district knows that there are many costs that go into athletics. In her article, Amanda Ripley reported that simply maintaining a grass field can cost more than $20,000 a year, she also states that new bleachers can cost half a million dollars (10). In ripley’s article “Should Your School Get Rid Of Sports”, Superintendent Ernest Singleton made a decision to suspend all school activities and recognized his school district could save about $150,000 dollars a year (Ripley 10). In addition school athletics should be removed because it could reduce large amount of money put into the athletic programs. It’s clear that saving money isn’t the only advantage to cutting physical activities it can also help students to focus in their education.

A school in Premont, Texas was threatened to be shut down for its financial problems and academic failures. Additionally, by getting rid of sports schools could save up to 150,000 and sometimes more. Amanda Ripley from scholastic scope says “New bleachers can cost half a million dollars. Maintaining grass field can cost more than 20,000 a year.” furthermore, When teams travel for games schools have to hire substitutes, buses, the band players, cheerleaders, food, hotels, sectrity, painting the lines, and cleaning up. Snacks sold at games rarely if never cover these costs. All these costs can put a financial burden on schools and by getting rid of sports the amount of money schools can safe is

One reason schools should get rid of sports is, they are too expensive. For example, Premont Independent School District, was in trouble, the state threatened to shut the district down for financial problems and academic failures. This shows that the district was paying too much money on sports and not enough on the district itself. Another example is, the district’s elementary school hadn’t had a music teacher in years, and the high school had sealed off the science labs, which were infested with mold,

America has high school sports for many reasons. One sports allows young individuals to practice life lessons, sportsmanship,and allows kids to work on there social skills as well. Sports allow students to practice time management, character building and for many the high school athlete is also one of your higher academic students as well. Now this is not always the case , but for the most part kids who are involved in sports have to be responsible for academics in order to particpate . In the Article " The Case Against High School Sports" I can see why the principle shut down sports in the school. I think having good teachers and being able to fund good teachers has to be a priority. I am not sure what the principle did would work everywhere

According to Superintendent Ernest Singleton from the Premont Independent School District he realized that if he cancelled all the sports, the districts could be “saving $150,000 in one year” (11). In fact, Ripley announced that new “bleachers can cost half a million dollars” also to “maintain a green field that can cost more than $20,000 a year ” (11). This shows that school sports can be expensive and if they cancelled sports kids can have all their subjects. Clearly, getting rid of sports is important because students need to be able to have all their subjects and should be able to learn more about things in

For many years, people have debated about the importance of keeping sports in academic environments, or getting rid of them. Athletic activities have always been in U.S schools, but getting rid of them could allow kids to focus on their studies and increase their academic skill. Therefore, sports should be discarded in academic institutions to save money, allow more time for kids to study, and have additional activities available to students.