High School sports...what do we need them for? (tradition, America)

[Faint]

From the thread about the Christian club being blackballed on campus, I was wondering whyany other non-academic organizations receive school funding...and whether or not they should.

I can understand supporting the smart kid clubs...these serve the interests of the school by showcasing just how smart their students are (which may in turn generate more prestige and especially revenue) compared to those of other schools. But what about the highly celebrated sports teams? What good do these do for the school? Is it just an elaborate system of selling hot dogs and popcorn at the games? Is it nothing but tradition? It doesn't make sense to say that the sports teams build student self-esteem or promote cooperation (since that only works for the ones who are actually on the team...not the entire student body). It also doesn't make sense to say that they create pride in the school or "school spirit" because most of the people I knew in high school disliked going to class and couldn't care less about the school in general no matter who won or lost the games. And this seems to be common among most teenagers that I've heard of.

So I guess what I'm saying is if schools are going to refuse funding and support for certain organizations on their campuses--why not start with the sports teams?

[Sunstone]

In my experience, the parents and adults in the community are far more interested in the school with a wining team than in a school without one. That is, high school sports are more about getting community support for the school than they are about doing anything for the kids directly.

[Terrywoodenpic]

At the very least they counter the atitude that creates so many fat and overweight
children.
If they continue with sport into later life, they are likely to be healthier and live longer.
It must be worthwhile to teach that to the younger generation.

[Faint]

Originally Posted by Terrywoodenpic

At the very least they counter the atitude that creates so many fat and overweight
children.
If they continue with sport into later life, they are likely to be healthier and live longer.
It must be worthwhile to teach that to the younger generation.

I think these are good points. But if the school was so concerned (as they should be) with exercise and fitness, phys.ed. for ALL students would probably receive more attention/funding. As it is, the sports teams are (1) exclusive, and (2) represent a very small percentage of the students.

Originally Posted by Sunstone

In my experience, the parents and adults in the community are far more interested in the school with a wining team than in a school without one. That is, high school sports are more about getting community support for the school than they are about doing anything for the kids directly.

Any figures to back this up? I'm not challenging the idea, just trying to see if there is any evidence of financial gain for the school from their sports teams. Because I could see an arguement for them if they generate revenue which in turn benefits ALL the students at the school. One might even be able to somewhat justify the jocks' "higher than thou" attitudes.

[Faint]

I found this:

Knocks for jocks - benefits of high school sports debunked
Psychology Today, Nov-Dec, 1994

Ask a high school coach in America about the benefits of school sports, and you'll likely get a list as long as a football field. Sports build character, he'll tell you. They teach self-sacrifice, discipline, and fair play. They keep kids off drugs and reduce the incidence of teen delinquency. And they provide poor kids with a ticket right out of the ghetto.
There's only one thing wrong with this litany: none of it is true. That's the word from Texas Christian University anthropologist Andrew Miracle, Ph.D., and Adelphi University sociologist C. Roger Rees, Ph.D. In Lessons of the Locker Room (Prometheus Books), the duo search the scientific literature for evidence to support the "sports build character" theory - and strike out.
"Generally involvement in any extracurricular activity is a good thing," says Miracle. "But sports are no better than band or chorus. The danger is that the |win at any cost' attitude becomes so significant that the potential positive benefits are overwhelmed."
Most research suggests that scooping up ground balls, kicking goals, or eluding tackles has little influence, positive or negative, on character. And any effects that do turn up tend to be small.
In one of their own studies, Miracle, Rees, and a colleague tracked 1,600 high school boys. Varsity athletes, they found, did have slightly more self-esteem and attached greater value to academic achievement than did nonjocks. But sport participation also increased the students' aggression and irritability, while decreasing their self-control and belief in the importance of being honest.
Canadian research also shatters the character-building myth. The longer boys north of the border play on youth hockey teams, the more likely they are to accept cheating and violence and to use illegal tactics. But studies like these also point up one of the interpretive hurdles that researchers face: does hockey make kids more violent - or do only the violent kids continue playing hockey?
Either way, say Miracle and Rees, we shouldn't expect sports to turn our kids into model citizens. For one thing, a child's personality has largely taken shape by, the time the opportunity to join a sports team arises. Thus even if the promise of an athletic scholarship does occasionally reform a troubled youth, the benefits for the vast majority of us are modest at best.
Miracle, who played football and lacrosse in college, says he's not anti-sport. But if the public wants to fund school athletics at the expense of, say, new textbooks or teacher salaries, it should be aware of the real benefits. "Sport doesn't do most of the things people claim it does," Miracle says. "But it sure is good entertainment."

[Terrywoodenpic]

Originally Posted by Faint

I think these are good points. But if the school was so concerned (as they should be) with exercise and fitness, phys.ed. for ALL students would probably receive more attention/funding. As it is, the sports teams are (1) exclusive, and (2) represent a very small percentage of the students.

The school I went to many years ago, every student had to do two hours sport every day.
what you did was recorded buy prefects every evening.

We did not all make the teams, but we all enjoyed it, and we were all very fit.
There was something to suit every one.

[c0da]

From the thread about the Christian club being blackballed on campus, I was wondering whyany other non-academic organizations receive school funding...and whether or not they should.

I can understand supporting the smart kid clubs...these serve the interests of the school by showcasing just how smart their students are (which may in turn generate more prestige and especially revenue) compared to those of other schools. But what about the highly celebrated sports teams? What good do these do for the school? Is it just an elaborate system of selling hot dogs and popcorn at the games? Is it nothing but tradition? It doesn't make sense to say that the sports teams build student self-esteem or promote cooperation (since that only works for the ones who are actually on the team...not the entire student body). It also doesn't make sense to say that they create pride in the school or "school spirit" because most of the people I knew in high school disliked going to class and couldn't care less about the school in general no matter who won or lost the games. And this seems to be common among most teenagers that I've heard of.

So I guess what I'm saying is if schools are going to refuse funding and support for certain organizations on their campuses--why not start with the sports teams?

Apparently, in the UK, more kids are getting overweight and obese than ever before and it's going to be a pretty serious problem if it isn't tackled. So by introducing sports clubs and teams, it can help get these children lose weight and hopefully make them healthier.

Isn't having the teams with the best sportsmen similar to having clubs with the brainiest kids. Phsyical prowess is just as important as intellectual ability to some, I'm sure, and to arrange matches for the team is just educating them on sports even more.

You did mention about generating revenue by selling hotdogs and popcorn - Considering the amount of people who used to turn up at my high school football matches, trying to sell food wouldn't be much use for my school!

[Shadow Wolf]

I can vouch for high school sports because even the small country school teams get scouts from big universitys watching. My brother, who went to such a small country school, could have went to Notre Dame to play football on a full scholorship if the coach didn't screw him.

[Ryan2065]

Originally Posted by Faint

From the thread about the Christian club being blackballed on campus, I was wondering whyany other non-academic organizations receive school funding...and whether or not they should.

My college didn't have a football team and I know many people who didn't even look at this school simply because it didn't have a football team. On the college level school sports are a way of promoting the school and getting their name out there, and they are a way of bringing the school together for the game.

Originally Posted by Faint

I can understand supporting the smart kid clubs...these serve the interests of the school by showcasing just how smart their students are (which may in turn generate more prestige and especially revenue) compared to those of other schools.

No this doesn't... Just because you have a math club doesn't mean your school is good in math. Now if your school had say a AP math class with all the kids in the class passing the AP test that would be something to showcase.

Originally Posted by Faint

But what about the highly celebrated sports teams? What good do these do for the school? Is it just an elaborate system of selling hot dogs and popcorn at the games? Is it nothing but tradition? It doesn't make sense to say that the sports teams build student self-esteem or promote cooperation (since that only works for the ones who are actually on the team...not the entire student body). It also doesn't make sense to say that they create pride in the school or "school spirit" because most of the people I knew in high school disliked going to class and couldn't care less about the school in general no matter who won or lost the