Would this policy help public education any?

[Wicked Pilot]

You must make at least a 3.0/4.0 grade point average to play school sports. This GPA will be taken from only core classes. PE will still exist, but it will be classroom work and/or PT only, not play basketball with your buddies.

[Queeb Salaron]

I think the "no-fail" policy is fine. As long as a student isn't really struggling, I don't see why he shouldn't play sports. I mean, I had a 2.7 all the way through high school (and I have a a 4.0 in college, go figure), so if your plan were the case, I wouldn't have been able to play football. I was a B-C (more Cs than Bs, I admit) student, but I wasn't struggling. My school was just largely math / science oriented, and that didn't fit me right. ::Shrugs:: I was still competant.

[Nathan F]

You must make at least a 3.0/4.0 grade point average to play school sports. This GPA will be taken from only core classes. PE will still exist, but it will be classroom work and/or PT only, not play basketball with your buddies.

Agreed. Sports should come secondary to academics, and PE classes and the like shouldn't be given as full credits. And PE classes shouldn't be, as you stated, play basketball with your buddies time. I took one semester of PE, and it WAS PT, as in running, calisenthics, etc. Occasionally we would play a sport, but by far not all the time.

[weemadando]

Heh, I did SCUBA diving and Rock Climbing as year 11 and 12 subjects. They didn't count for anything academically, but they were still subjects that you could take. As were things like Surfing and the majority of other sports in existance.

[Joe]

Are we talking about high school & middle school sports only, or college sports as well? Such a policy would be disastrous for college sports. The alumni associations would never let it go through.

[Hamel]

Make PE an optional summer class, with a big focus on excersize rather than sports

[Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi]

I think a 3.0 GPA or above would be too high, as some good athletes may have a lower GPA than that, but I still think "no fail" policies are too lenient. I'd say nothing below a C average should be accepted. Of course, from my experiences, many of the best athletes were also honors students.

[Anarchist Bunny]

All this would do is increase the easy ride football players get. There are about 6 football players who don't have to do any work, sleep through classes, don't do homework and make good grades.

[Queeb Salaron]

All this would do is increase the easy ride football players get. There are about 6 football players who don't have to do any work, sleep through classes, don't do homework and make good grades.

...wha?

If they're making good grades, that can't be helped.

But how does raising the bar make their ride any easier??

[Joe]

This would also seriously create incentives for cheating. I love college football, it's my game, but it's a dirty, dirty business.

[Queeb Salaron]

This would also seriously create incentives for cheating. I love college football, it's my game, but it's a dirty, dirty business.

True. And also, you'd get guys like Andy Katzenmoyer who majored in Playground Management. His senior-year classes included Billiards and Golf.

I wish I remembered where he went to school. I'd get a transfer in a heartbeat.

[Next of Kin]

You must make at least a 3.0/4.0 grade point average to play school sports. This GPA will be taken from only core classes. PE will still exist, but it will be classroom work and/or PT only, not play basketball with your buddies.

I have witnessed some high school implement a similar policy and it really does crack down on those just looking to play sports and slug it out in the classroom. However, the policy is only going to work if all the high school coaches decide to stick to it and enforce it.

[Queeb Salaron]

I have witnessed some high school implement a similar policy and it really does crack down on those just looking to play sports and slug it out in the classroom. However, the policy is only going to work if all the high school coaches decide to stick to it and enforce it.

You wouldn't make it the coach's decision. It'd be an administrative affair. The administration gets a copy of the rosters of all sports teams, and then puts that roster in the computer. Come midterms, if a student on the roster is below a 3.0, they are forbidden from competition by penalty of suspension until they get a written statement that their GPA has been raised, or until the term ends.

[Howedar]

I think 3.0 is a bit high. 2.0 is supposed to be average, after all. I think a C-average would be fine.

[Wicked Pilot]

I think 3.0 is a bit high. 2.0 is supposed to be average, after all. I think a C-average would be fine.

Perhaps if the student was paying the bill, but I as a taxpayer I am paying to give kids an education, not send them to sports camp. I think athletics are a very worthwhile cause, but when it comes down to priorities, there needs to be no doubt where they stand.

[Darth Wong]

I agree with WP. I also say that all sports scholarships should be eliminated completely. The idea of giving someone a position in a respected university based SOLELY ON HIS ATHLETIC ABILITY is insane. Do people realize that when we do this, we take a position away from some kid who is athletically inferior but in all likelihood, academically superior? Is this university, or sports camp?

Worse yet, it creates incentives for high school students to think (sadly, with justification) that neglecting studies in favour of athletics will get them into a better university.

[Joe]

I agree with WP. I also say that all sports scholarships should be eliminated completely. The idea of giving someone a position in a respected university based SOLELY ON HIS ATHLETIC ABILITY is insane. Do people realize that when we do this, we take a position away from some kid who is athletically inferior but in all likelihood, academically superior? Is this university, or sports camp?

Worse yet, it creates incentives for high school students to think (sadly, with justification) that neglecting studies in favour of athletics will get them into a better university.

Good athletics = university revenue. Money talks.

[RedImperator]

This probably would have worked in my high school and a lot of other northeastern suburban high schools, where high school sports are generally ignored by most people in the community unless they have children actually playing. In cases like that, sports are exactly what thier proponents say they are: a way to increase physical fitness, learn teamwork, and build friendships. There's no incentive for the school to give star athletes free rides.

However, in schools where sports ARE important, and especially in small towns where the high school team is more important than the nearest college or pro team, this policy would be an invitation to give athletes Mickey Mouse classes and put pressure on teachers to inflate athletes' grades. Nobody in New Jersey cares if the star quarterback gets benched because he flunked a history test (hell, we won the state championship my senior year and I still couldn't tell you who was the quarterback, and I was friends with guys on the team). In Texas, the teacher who did that would be risking his job.

[Howedar]

I think 3.0 is a bit high. 2.0 is supposed to be average, after all. I think a C-average would be fine.

Perhaps if the student was paying the bill, but I as a taxpayer I am paying to give kids an education, not send them to sports camp. I think athletics are a very worthwhile cause, but when it comes down to priorities, there needs to be no doubt where they stand.

I don't know about your area, but in mine we not only pay to play sports, but we go bust our asses to fundraise.

[Darth Wong]

I agree with WP. I also say that all sports scholarships should be eliminated completely. The idea of giving someone a position in a respected university based SOLELY ON HIS ATHLETIC ABILITY is insane. Do people realize that when we do this, we take a position away from some kid who is athletically inferior but in all likelihood, academically superior? Is this university, or sports camp?

Worse yet, it creates incentives for high school students to think (sadly, with justification) that neglecting studies in favour of athletics will get them into a better university.

Good athletics = university revenue. Money talks.

Using that philosophy, perhaps we should open university casinos and whorehouses and offer scholarships to slutty women with big fake tits and guys who are good at dealing cards.

[Joe]

And Mike, if I'm not mistaken, most athletic scholarships are paid for by the Athletic Association of the University in question, which is paid for by alumni contributions. So it's not exactly ripping off the taxpayers for the sake of athletics.

[Darth Wong]

And Mike, if I'm not mistaken, most athletic scholarships are paid for by the Athletic Association of the University in question, which is paid for by alumni contributions. So it's not exactly ripping off the taxpayers for the sake of athletics.

I occasionally contribute money to my alma mater. I expect it to be used for higher education, not longer field goals. But of course, I'm one of those odd people who thinks that a modern society should embrace the pursuit of science and knowledge and a professional, highly skilled workforce rather than a society which glorifies jocks.

Besides, that's still a position denied to an academically qualified student because some guy could run a faster 50-yard dash.

[Ender]

I agree with WP. I also say that all sports scholarships should be eliminated completely. The idea of giving someone a position in a respected university based SOLELY ON HIS ATHLETIC ABILITY is insane. Do people realize that when we do this, we take a position away from some kid who is athletically inferior but in all likelihood, academically superior? Is this university, or sports camp?

Worse yet, it creates incentives for high school students to think (sadly, with justification) that neglecting studies in favour of athletics will get them into a better university.

Good athletics = university revenue. Money talks.

Using that philosophy, perhaps we should open university casinos and whorehouses and offer scholarships to slutty women with big fake tits and guys who are good at dealing cards.

You make that sound like a bad thing

*practices dealing*

Where are the whores?

[Wicked Pilot]

I don't know about your area, but in mine we not only pay to play sports, but we go bust our asses to fundraise.

How much do you raise exactly compared to coaches' salaries, equipment cost, facilities upkeep, etc. Don't forget to also factor in the wasted cost of education for those who go to school only to play ball.

Again, if you and your teammates are playing sports as a secondary pursuit, with academics as your primary concern, then you will get no critizism from me. More power to you.

[Joe]

And Mike, if I'm not mistaken, most athletic scholarships are paid for by the Athletic Association of the University in question, which is paid for by alumni contributions. So it's not exactly ripping off the taxpayers for the sake of athletics.

I occasionally contribute money to my alma mater. I expect it to be used for higher education, not longer field goals. But of course, I'm one of those odd people who thinks that a modern society should embrace the pursuit of science and knowledge and a professional, highly skilled workforce rather than a society which glorifies jocks.

Besides, that's still a position denied to an academically qualified student because some guy could run a faster 50-yard dash.

*shrug* You may be right, but you have to realize how important athletics, particularly football and basketball, are in America. After Doug Flutie's famous season at Boston College, applications to the BC shot up quite considerably. It attracts a lot of students.