Chreia's, Maxim's and the Persuasive Essay

High School Sports are Killing Academics

In the Atlantic's October 2013 edition, Daniel Bowen and Collin Hitt argued that school-sponsored sport programs are not killing academics. "School-sponsored sports appear to provide benefits," they say, "that seem to increase, not detract from, academic success." I see the matter differently and would argue the opposite: that high school sports are killing academics.

Hitt and Bowen state, "We do not doubt that teachers who also coach face serious tradeoffs that likely come at the expense of time they could dedicate to their academic obligations. However, as with sporting events, athletic coaches gain additional opportunities for communicating and serving as mentors that potentially help students succeed and make up for the costs of coaching commitments." I agree with the fact that teacher-coaches may potentially gain additional mentoring time with their students outside of class, and that these times may potentially make up for the time spent away from their teaching-work; I agree that it potentially could help those athletes, but what about the non-athletic students, and the ones who are cut? Their time is being taken away for these athletic ventures.

To support their claim, they quote a study done by the University of Arkansas, "In the most rigorous study on the classroom results of high school coaches, the University of Arkansas's Anna Egalite, Daniel Bowen, and Julie Trivitt find that athletic coaches in Florida mostly tend to perform just as well as their non-coaching counterparts, with respect to raising student test scores." However, this attempt to make a universal statement about the country falls apart in light of an earlier statement, "the fact that states vary at least as much in test scores as do developed countries."As for the children not influenced by sports, what happens to them? The ones who aren't fast enough, aren't strong enough, aren't big enough-what happens to them when they're cut? As Hal Lebowitz said, "Football takes stomach. A boy who doesn't have it will quit of his own accord. The fields are big. They can accommodate large squads. let the boy hand around. Let him do calisthenics. Let him run, until he's out of breath. Let him scrimmage with the fourth and fifth teams after the regulars are finished. But don't cut him. If he hasn't got it, he'll cut himself. If he has, he'll stick it out. He'll be a better man for the experience and by the time he's a senior he'll surprise you. He'll help make you a winner." The children who are cut are excluded, left behind the cool, the popular, and the athletic kids.

"But at school, I wasn't athletic, and if you're not an athlete in high school, it's kind of hard to find your place." Actress Piper Perabo hit the nail on the head with this one; the non-athletic children who are ostracized due to inadequate athleticism feel their exile deeply. As Mother Teresa said, "Being unwanted, unloved, uncared for, forgotten by everybody, I think that is a much greater hunger, a much greater poverty than the person who has nothing to eat. "

So I leave you to come to the realization that sports may benefit their players, but I would argue the opposite: high school sports are killing academics, and the detriment to the non-athletic is the kind that leaves a lasting negative imprint.