Schools Should Be Paid

Many people wonder if teachers should or should not get paid more than they do. A lot of people believe that teachers should get paid more, but there are some that do not. Parents that want their kids to have a good education want teachers to get paid more. For example, P.V Derkachev said, “… teacher pay influences the quality of education.” (Derkachev 574). Teachers that get payed more would be more likely to perform better at their job and not mind the extra time that they have to do stuff outside of work to get everything done. Matt Barnum said, “Higher salaries --- even small bonuses ---- can and do keep some teachers in the classroom, and likely improve outcomes for their students.” (Barnum). The student is going to get taught better if teachers get paid more because the teacher will want to teach at the best of her ability which will help the student.

In “The Case Against High School Sports,” Amanda Ripley tries to argue her point that sports should not be a part of high school. She claims that sports take away from education, and that they are too expensive (Ripley 1-2). Throughout her article, she often switches her topic. She shifts her focus from all high schools to one specific high school, and then to one specific college. Ripley presents an abundance of points, but lacks evidence to support them. Although Ripley makes relevant claims, she tries to support them with logical fallacies and irrelevant evidence.

In “The Case Against High School Sports,” Amanda Ripley, a journalist for The Atlantic, states that America is spending more money on high school sports rather than on academic purposes. “High School Sports Aren’t Killing Academics, “ written by Daniel Bowen, a postdoctoral scholar at Rice University, and Colin Hitt, an assistant professor at the University of Arkansas, discusses the benefits that come out of sports programs to improve the classroom and the school’s social capital. Co-founder of a sports recruiting social network, Kai Sato’s article “The Case For High School Sports,” focuses on how school does not just involve scoring well on a math test but to educate us to be productive in what lies ahead. Ripley’s article discusses how

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.

Student athletes in college are held to a higher standard than normal students since they are juggling a lot more in their lives. Student athletes have to set aside a lot of time for practice while still maintaining good grades and a social life. Some people believe that because of this demanding schedule that student athletes should be paid. Where on the other hand many believe that they shouldn’t since they choose to be on a sports team, this is a topic that is debated upon by many. One solution could be to lower the tuition for student athletes since they are offering their talents to the school. As long as the students stay on the team they will get some money off their college tuition every year.

College sports these days are a huge money pit, NCAA makes millions of dollars off of student athletes every year. Should the NCAA start sharing the profits with these student athletes, which every year help grow the NCAA brand? It’s an important question that seems to come up every day on television, the internet, and even in the newspaper. Student athletes are going to college on scholarships which are sold to them by coaches, scouts, and other school administration as a commitment to the student’s future. All they ask is for the student athlete to make a commitment to the school by signing a contract to attend, which is called the “letter of intent”. With the students make a commitment to attend this school for at least a four year

To many educational institutions, it is controversial whether or not sports are beneficial to scholastic success. Offering athletic programs is said to supply students with an enhanced learning experience, as well as adding amusement to a rather dull school year. Therefore, sports should be provided in all schools to reduce stress, improve academic performance, and develop teamwork skills and equal opportunity in school.

The argument of sports in our high schools will not go away, as kids go to high school and experience the American obsession with high school sports. High schools are supposed to be a place of learning, so we must ask ourselves what are they really? As posed by Ripley, “If sports were not central to the mission of American high schools, then what would be?” (1). I feel that the focus of our high schools should be academics, not how good you are at a sport, because we come to high school for learning and

Recently, the topic of compensating student athletes has become a popular subject of debate within the media. Deciding whether or not to pay student athletes may seem simple at first glance; however, further research into the debate reveals many economic studies that provide persuasive information benefitting one side over the other. Paying student athletes would be more economically efficient and to not allow payment would be considered price fixing, also this would reduce the negative externalities faced by the student athletes in the future. Although paying players would have economic benefits, it would also have high costs to the fans in the form of higher ticket prices and a loss of competition within college sports. Student athletes should

Amanda Ripley, in her article “The Case Against High School Sports,” describes how she believes high school sports is a detriment to the education of America’s children. Ripley compares American academic performance to that of other countries, and explains how American schools place focus on athletics that other countries’ schools do not. Ripley’s argument against high school sports has many inconsistencies, but produces a valid argument in spite of that. Because sports are a priority in the U.S. and not so much in other countries, Ripley implies sports are the reason why other countries have a higher score on a test regarding critical thinking in math. Ripley acknowledges the benefits of sports very briefly.

money to pay for their education. Colleges are very expensive and need to start looking at it on the student perspective. Students who are graduating from high-school barely come out with less than $3,000 or less.WIENER, J. (2015) Not Every individual is able to pay for college and this just isn't fair. A high percentage of students are independent while in high school and are forced to work because of their parents low income. What happens to that student? Smart in academics, good athlete but because they cannot pay for their proper education they are forced to forget about their dreams.

I have been following the argument of whether student-athletes should be paid. Currently, many collegiate athletes feel that they are not properly compensated for their efforts and money generated. The NCAA is clinging to the notion of amateurism and what it means to the state and competitiveness of the game. With the ever-increasing money flow and a heightening amount of scandals and lawsuits the NCAA has reached a point where they need to pay the players or exterminate all impurities and reach pure amateurism across the board. I plan to expand on the rights of collegiate athletes and those forfeited when they become a “student athlete”. Then I will look to see whether the loss of rights is justified and whether the term “student-athlete”

A child decides to join a tee-ball team. During the season, he sits on the ground and picks grass in the outfield. At the end of the season, this child gets an award: best flower picker! Some may say that this child just needed some self-esteem to help him get along. In reality, this child got a reward for doing nothing, even for not doing what he was supposed to. When children, such as this one, receive pointless awards, they assume all rewards come with no effort put in, they expect everything in life to come easily, and they don’t learn how to work diligently to earn rewards.

Imagine you’re a teenager in a high school who is involved in athletics, and sports are the one thing you love doing the most. Now imagine that one day out of nowhere your sports team was cut, and the one thing that you so deeply loved you are no longer able to do. A lot of people wonder if sports are too much of a priority in schools, and whether or not they should be cut. Students disagree that sports are too much of a priority, and claim athletics make them the person that they are, and that they wouldn’t be the same without sports. School districts should not cut sport programs because they benefit students, they bring in money and publicity to the school, and it gives the students a fit and healthy lifestyle.

One of the biggest complaints about interscholastic sports is the belief that sports take focus away from academics. Amanda Ripley, journalist and author, elaborates on this very issue. She provides many examples of the ways that sports play a negative role in American schools, and how she believes that they are the reason to blame for the shortcomings of American students: “Sports are embedded in American schools in a way