The development of sport in schools through favorable legislation

The Impact of Government Legislation on Sports in Schools

The topic is affected by several social experiences, communities, and organizations. The district governments are the first stakeholders, as they have grown and fostered sport growth in schools through favorable legislation. For example, the article refers to New York superintendents’ legislation in 1909 to reintroduce football to schools. The second is the colleges, which have the sports atmosphere and services. Students who compete in sports make up the third community. Interactions between all three classes have aided in evolving sports standards and society into what they are today. Interactions between all three types have helped in changing sports standards and culture into what they are today. Without government legislation, the schools would be less favorable for sports and respectively, fewer students would enroll for sports (Sabo & Veliz, 2016).

The Impact of Sports on Education

A major theme that resonates through the article is how sport is changing and how the society relates to school and learning. According to the article sports offers positive sanctions and the education is being affected adversely. For instance, Ripley describes how learning is disrupted during football season. According Ripley (2013), American principals, teachers, and students get totally distracted from academics during the football season. In fact, sports have been seen to affect lesson schedules during such seasons. Sports have been accepted and allowed to schools with a dominant argument that athletics or sports lure students into schools and distract youth away from vises. According to her, this is an old-fashioned notion given that after 50 years the United States still registers poor academic performances.

The society has also been found to accept the prioritizing of sports in regards to financing. According to the article, financing and budgeting is unfairly distributed to schools. These finances are largely spent on sports and clubs while less of it is used on education. This is an alarming trend that needs to be tamed as this could cause significant damage to the education system. Schools need to put restrictions on the spending on sports and their promotions. World comparisons mentioned by Ripley between South Korea and the United States reveal how students are becoming too involved in sports (Sabo & Veliz, 2016). Furthermore, another trend is how teachers double as coaches. The article reveals how some coaches such as the mentioned Richard Russell focus more on sport more than learning and get paid heftily for it. According to Ripley, sports are embedded in the Americans schools than anywhere in the world (Ripley, 2013).

The Cost and Prioritization of Sports in Schools

My first and most critical finding is the cultural relativism in regards to sports. Even though physical fitness is important, sports in schools are threatening studies. The fact that students spend more time in sport than in learning is quite worrying (Cuffe et al., 2017). Another finding is that sports are more expensive than imagined. According to the article, sports not only cost the schools a lot of money but also critical education quality. In regards to money, it was established that some schools spend $328 for a student’s math instructor and $1,348 for a cheerleader. It was also found that the coaches’ salaries were higher than those of ordinary teachers. In regards to education, some schools were found to prioritize sports more than actual learning. For instance, some principals were found to lower the standards of a teacher in order to be able to provide for the high salary of the coaches.

References

Cuffe, H. E., Waddell, G. R., &Bignell, W. (2017). Can School Sports Reduce Racial Gaps in Truancy and Achievement? Journal: Economic Inquiry.

Ripley, A. (2013). The case against high-school sports. The Atlantic, 47-53.

Sabo, D., &Veliz, P. (2016).Surveying youth sports in America. Child’s Play: Sport in Kids’ Worlds. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 23-42.