In Defense of High School Sports

[theski]

Here is some more studies on Sports and GPA's... Gosh Sanchez.. we seem to be ones with any emperical data...

High School Students

Soltz (1986) found statistical significance in the higher GPAs of athletes compared to nonathletes, whereas Durbin (1986) and Silliker and Quirk (1997) reported that athletes actually excel during their season of competition. A study by Stegman and Stephens (2000) revealed that high-participation athletes (at least one sport each year of high school) outperformed low-participant athletes in class rank, overall GPA, and math GPA. Both female and male athletes in the high-participant group outperformed their low-participant counterparts, but the differences were only statistically significant for the female athletes. Not only did the high-participant female athletes outperform the low-participant female athletes, but they also had higher GPAs and GPA-based class ranks when compared to low-participant and nonparticipant males and females? These results enhance Lederman's (1989) finding that 78% of female athletes competing in Division I basketball had a B or better average in high school.
Middle Level School Students

Buhrmann's (1972) findings for students in grades 7, 8, and 9 were similar to Stegman and Stephens (2000) findings for high school students. The athletes who participated in interscholastic sports for many seasons and many years had a higher level of scholarship than the athletes who competed in only a few seasons or for only one year. He found the same relationship to be true between athletes and nonathletes.

Two convincing studies of middle level school students used data from the National Educational Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), a long-term project sponsored by the U.S. Department of Education's National Center for

Educational Statistics (NCES). The NCES used questionnaires, cognitive achievement tests, and other sources to obtain data from 10,944 nationally represented students in grade 8. Prior to NELS:88, several researchers questioned the validity of studies that did not include factors such as race, gender, and socioeconomic status (SES). Because NELS:88 incorporated these factors, the results of prior studies were validated. Gerber (1996) found that SES was significantly related to achievement for both African American and White students in grade 8. She also found the relationship of achievement to gender was even more significant than the relationship to SES. Even after eliminating the effects of SES and gender, Gerber's analyses showed a significant relationship between cocurricular participation and academic achievement. Interestingly, the effect was strongest in mathematics. Furthermore, school cocurricular activities showed a stronger relationship to achievement than did outside cocurricular activities.

SPORTS

[Big Phil]

Thanks for the study references there bubba.

Here's another few articles and studies I found this morning:

http://www.apa.org/releases/sportinvolvement.html
http://www.usafootball.com/articles/17- ... sports.php
http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/research_dat ... hsprt1.htm
http://www.virtualsalt.com/motivate.htm
http://www.dailytargum.com/media/paper1 ... targum.com

[Medic]

snip

Sports gives student athletes a reason to give a fuck through academic eligibility requirements and perhaps just motivation enough to learn what they can while in school. Obviously though, not everyone is gonna be on the [insert sport] team.

At the end of this thread, the US is still falling behind in education compared to other industrialized nations for whatever reason. Sports aren't necessarily wasteful, but a school's primary role and the nation's responsibility should be to teach it's citizens to a reasonable standard (considering the amount of money we have and still do throw at the situation). The status quo's broken.

[Big Phil]

snip

Sports gives student athletes a reason to give a fuck through academic eligibility requirements and perhaps just motivation enough to learn what they can while in school. Obviously though, not everyone is gonna be on the [insert sport] team.

At the end of this thread, the US is still falling behind in education compared to other industrialized nations for whatever reason. Sports aren't necessarily wasteful, but a school's primary role and the nation's responsibility should be to teach it's citizens to a reasonable standard (considering the amount of money we have and still do throw at the situation). The status quo's broken.

You have effect - school is ineffective at teaching - but you are stating that the cause is sports, with ZERO proof that this is the case. Can you provide evidence supporting your claim?

You are also applying a motivation to all student athletes that is complete hogwash and nothing more than opinion. I was an athlete in high school - I didn't breeze through classes expecting the teachers to pass me no matter what. Can you support your opinion that student athletes are lazy fuckers breezing through school as well?

[Surlethe]

snip

Other than sitting back and saying "prove this, now prove that, blah blah blah" you haven't done much. I've already shown you the benefits of sports in school, from multiple sources and provided multiple examples. I've even gone so far as to find sources that DON'T agree with me.

It's because I'm supporting the negative claim: I don't have to do anything.

I took the step, in spite of the fact that I don't have to prove diddly, of showing why sports in school are valuable.

Despite your claims to the contrary, the burden of proof still lies with you, asshole.

Since you are unable to do much other than demand evidence that isn't available to me, and certainly haven't provided any damning arguments of your own, I'm going to fall back to status quo and let you take it from here. Status quo being - sports in school.

Unfortunately for you, the status quo is the positive claim, which you still have yet to justify. Do you have anything beyond post-hoc arguments to back yourself up, or will you continue to resort to illogical whining?

[Big Phil]

snip

Surlethe, this is me shaking my head at your Trekkie-like obstinacy. I provided evidence supporting my position, and you've ignored it. I don't know how to overcome the "La La La - Hands over my ears" argument.

[Medic]

snip

Sports gives student athletes a reason to give a fuck through academic eligibility requirements and perhaps just motivation enough to learn what they can while in school. Obviously though, not everyone is gonna be on the [insert sport] team.

At the end of this thread, the US is still falling behind in education compared to other industrialized nations for whatever reason. Sports aren't necessarily wasteful, but a school's primary role and the nation's responsibility should be to teach it's citizens to a reasonable standard (considering the amount of money we have and still do throw at the situation). The status quo's broken.

You have effect - school is ineffective at teaching - but you are stating that the cause is sports, with ZERO proof that this is the case. Can you provide evidence supporting your claim?

You are also applying a motivation to all student athletes that is complete hogwash and nothing more than opinion. I was an athlete in high school - I didn't breeze through classes expecting the teachers to pass me no matter what. Can you support your opinion that student athletes are lazy fuckers breezing through school as well?

I said student athletes are lazy fucks? No, I said they have additional reasons to learn over non-student athletes -- academic eligibility and

perhaps just motivation enough to learn what they can while in school

meaning that for those student athletes who are going through the motions, they may also learn something and value an education in it's own right.

And no where do I explicity state sports are the reason for school's downfall so let me be clear: primary mission of school: fucking teach. That sports can facilitate the learning process for a physically gifted few isn't a fucking learning process in itself. Knowing the schools are failing and knowing sports are extraneous, their funding and other extra-curriculur activities not contributing to getting the nation's numbers back up should be looked at more critically.

[CarsonPalmer]

My question still remains. If we are arguing the status quo, why do we have to prove our case? Don't the ones advocating a change have to satisfy the burden of proof? Or am I totally off base?

[Surlethe]

My question still remains. If we are arguing the status quo, why do we have to prove our case? Don't the ones advocating a change have to satisfy the burden of proof? Or am I totally off base?

You are totally off base. In an argument over a given claim, whether or not the claim is the status quo is irrelevent to whether or not it is valid; and to demonstrate validity, the person arguing the positive must provide evidence. As an example, consider this fact: Christianity is pretty much the status quo in America; however, in an argument over the existence of God, a Christian can't shove the burden of proof onto an atheist because most people are Christian: this is called an appeal to popularity, and is a fallacy.

[Surlethe]

Sorry; I missed this in my last reply.

Thanks for the study references there bubba.

Here's another few articles and studies I found this morning:

<snip>
<snip>
<snip>
<snip>
<snip> damn it, do you not know how to dress links?

It would be nice if you actually made an argument which incorporated those, instead of throwing them out and saying, "These support my position!": it's not my job to find evidence for your position.

Surlethe, this is me shaking my head at your Trekkie-like obstinacy. I provided evidence supporting my position, and you've ignored it. I don't know how to overcome the "La La La - Hands over my ears" argument.

You wouldn't know an argument if you shit it and it bit you in the ass, you retard. I raised two valid points -- one repeated three times, to rebut three times you made the same fallacious argument -- and you refused to address either of them, and only one had anything to do with any evidence you had posted. If you're not intelligent enough to read my posts, then kindly don't argue.

[Uraniun235]

Perhaps because it's an expression of annoyance and disgust, which is clearly beyond you?

You're right, I don't see why one should beat around the bush when you can just say it plain.

Such bitterness is an ungodly waste of time, and I frankly don't give a rip, and nobody else does either.

Oh my god!

There are people wasting their time? On the internet?!

Someone call Al Gore at once!

[Medic]

My question still remains. If we are arguing the status quo, why do we have to prove our case? Don't the ones advocating a change have to satisfy the burden of proof? Or am I totally off base?

The status-quo right now, all of the various activity's that go on in schools -- and neighborhoods and how kids are raised is a factor too, probably but that's another tanget -- isn't working. "Failing" is a strong word but we're the nations most uber superpower but aren't turning out high school and college graduates on par with other industrialized countries.

Apparently, human capitol is a factor in global competitiveness. Imagine that.

If sports do in fact help academic performance, then this sort of demonstrates that that is in fact a minority of a campus's students. Sort of.

"Perhaps that explains why U.S. 12th-graders recently tested below the international average for 21 countries in mathematics and science. About one-third of the fourth-graders and one-fifth of the eighth-graders cannot perform "basic mathematical computations," according to the National Center for Education Statistics."

Oops, well, an upward trend at least.

SDN covered this one very recently. Of all people, our college grads are lacking some expected degree of literacy.

To be frank, I can't remember the number of stories lamenting the status of modern-day American education over the years.

And I really don't give a fuck about any curricular activities either, I'm not picking favorites. School doesn't have to be fun, it has a fucking mission, one it's not executing to an acceptable standard. What is the standard? I don't know but the PoTUS addressed a facet of education in the SoTU for Christ's sake.

[Big Phil]

I said student athletes are lazy fucks? No, I said they have additional reasons to learn over non-student athletes -- academic eligibility and perhaps just motivation enough to learn what they can while in school meaning that for those student athletes who are going through the motions, they may also learn something and value an education in it's own right.

And no where do I explicity state sports are the reason for school's downfall so let me be clear: primary mission of school: fucking teach. That sports can facilitate the learning process for a physically gifted few isn't a fucking learning process in itself. Knowing the schools are failing and knowing sports are extraneous, their funding and other extra-curriculur activities not contributing to getting the nation's numbers back up should be looked at more critically.

You're right - my bad. Sorry for my poor reading comprehension.

[Medic]

And after reading Surleth's points, if the links don't make an arguemt by themselves then here it is: United States higher education should be able to provide talented scientists and engineers (and any other technical profession requiring a college degree) domestically to stay globally competitive. Economically, scientifically, across the board. Importing talent won't be an option if burgeoning superpowers China and India improve their standard of living.

[Big Phil]

You wouldn't know an argument if you shit it and it bit you in the ass, you retard. I raised two valid points -- one repeated three times, to rebut three times you made the same fallacious argument -- and you refused to address either of them, and only one had anything to do with any evidence you had posted. If you're not intelligent enough to read my posts, then kindly don't argue.

You posted the following way back when:

Justify your general assertion regarding academic performance. Furthermore, you still haven't produced evidence sports are academically relevant to schools.

To which I posted several different articles and studies that justified my assertion regarding academic performance. I notice you neatly ignored that; I'm not sure why but you did.

Then you said:

Listen up: you can't make a rational decision without cost-benefit analysis. Is that clear? The default position is no sports in school, and you're providing unquantified handwaving to support your position.

Except that you're wrong here. The default position is sports in school, not the other way around. The only way the default position is no sports is by playing rhetorical games. Sports in school is the default - that's reality.

Furthermore, you want a cost-benefit analysis that doesn't exist. In other words, unless I provide non-existent evidence (cost-benefit analysis) to support a position that already exists, I lose, because it's easier for you to take the lazy man's debating position and ask me to provide all the evidence, none of which you will accept because it doesn't meet your undefined standard of acceptible evidence?

[Big Phil]

And after reading Surleth's points, if the links don't make an arguemt by themselves then here it is: United States higher education should be able to provide talented scientists and engineers (and any other technical profession requiring a college degree) domestically to stay globally competitive. Economically, scientifically, across the board. Importing talent won't be an option if burgeoning superpowers China and India improve their standard of living.

Your links were fine, and persuasive, and correct, in my opinion - all I had to do was click on them and read, not really a hard thing to do. Sports in schools and the production of scientists or engineers are two separate issues, however, so I'm not sure how they apply.

[Medic]

And after reading Surleth's points, if the links don't make an arguemt by themselves then here it is: United States higher education should be able to provide talented scientists and engineers (and any other technical profession requiring a college degree) domestically to stay globally competitive. Economically, scientifically, across the board. Importing talent won't be an option if burgeoning superpowers China and India improve their standard of living.

Your links were fine, and persuasive, and correct, in my opinion - all I had to do was click on them and read, not really a hard thing to do. Sports in schools and the production of scientists or engineers are two separate issues, however, so I'm not sure how they apply.

I simply maintain that schools are for education and that since they're not performing as well as they should / could be, extracurricular activities should be cut out to focus on getting graduation and literacy rates up and scientific and mathematical proficiency up.

It's not like the various clubs can't have fundraisers or buy their own equipment. Yeah, all the schools in rich neighborhoods would then have the best sports programs but oh well.

[Surlethe]

You wouldn't know an argument if you shit it and it bit you in the ass, you retard. I raised two valid points -- one repeated three times, to rebut three times you made the same fallacious argument -- and you refused to address either of them, and only one had anything to do with any evidence you had posted. If you're not intelligent enough to read my posts, then kindly don't argue.

You posted the following way back when:

Justify your general assertion regarding academic performance. Furthermore, you still haven't produced evidence sports are academically relevant to schools.

To which I posted several different articles and studies that justified my assertion regarding academic performance. I notice you neatly ignored that; I'm not sure why but you did.

I missed those, and replied to them above: in short, I'd like you to tell me how articles about smoking and environmental differences apply to academic performance.

Then you said:

Listen up: you can't make a rational decision without cost-benefit analysis. Is that clear? The default position is no sports in school, and you're providing unquantified handwaving to support your position.

Except that you're wrong here. The default position is sports in school, not the other way around. The only way the default position is no sports is by playing rhetorical games. Sports in school is the default - that's reality.

You're so full of sophistry it's oozing out your motherfucking ears. Is it possible you're stupid enough not to understand the difference between the status quo and the burden of proof in an argument, you gibbering retard? If you went back in time to the Middle Ages, would you argue that I needed to prove God didn't exist, since the status quo assumption was that God existed, jackass?

Furthermore, you want a cost-benefit analysis that doesn't exist. In other words, unless I provide non-existent evidence (cost-benefit analysis) to support a position that already exists, I lose, because it's easier for you to take the lazy man's debating position and ask me to provide all the evidence, none of which you will accept because it doesn't meet your undefined standard of acceptible evidence?

If you can't provide a decent cost-benefit analysis of football, then have you considered conceding the point? For any activity, there are costs, and there are benefits; the rational way to make a decision -- obviously a method which which you have little acquaintance -- is to evaluate the costs and benefits, and decide whether the benefits outweigh the costs. Admitting no analysis exists is tacitly admitting you have no evidence for your assertion.

[mingo]

Having been the geek target of high school jocks, fuck em. do away with there little fifedom and make them learn for a change.

[XPViking]

SPORTS

I hate to wade directly into an already heated debate, but I think what is telling is that this study (on p.2) has two significant (in my mind) limitations: sample size and "lack of control for SES".

As well, just to throw this out there, would an increase in PE time accomplish the same goals, that is a higher level of overall physical fitness and an appreciate for physical education would be more beneficial for students?

[theski]

Having been the geek target of high school jocks, fuck em. do away with there little fifedom and make them learn for a change.

Well at least someone is honest about why they hate jocks..

[ClaysGhost]

In the UK I and many of my friends found school sports of great benefit. The games teachers are excellent at working out who is athletic or well-coordinated and who is not, and usually ignore the inept - free time! The only time this changes is when everyone not picked for the rugby/football/cricket teams is herded around the hills in a cross-country run, at which point the games department's ability to detect wrong-doing and the surreptitious use of shortcuts becomes very great. They see you then all right.

In my school the students tended to do their own team selection, and just like in any other area of education the competent do not like playing/working with the incompetent, so the upshot is that unless you really enjoyed sports and were good at them, you were at little risk of being drafted except to perform a cross-country run once a week; the games teachers stopped timing after the first twenty, so really it was an hour's walking holiday every week.

[Pick]

Having been the geek target of high school jocks, fuck em. do away with there little fifedom and make them learn for a change.

Well at least someone is honest about why they hate jocks..

"Anyone who disagrees with me is either ignorant or hiding a DEVIOUS AGENDA!"

[theski]

Having been the geek target of high school jocks, fuck em. do away with there little fifedom and make them learn for a change.

Well at least someone is honest about why they hate jocks..

"Anyone who disagrees with me is either ignorant or hiding a DEVIOUS AGENDA!"

Right.. thats what I think.. nice putting words in my mouth

[theski]

How about more data ....

In a comprehensive, statewide study of the academic performance of high school student-athletes in North Carolina over a three-year period, the North Carolina High School Athletic Association found significant differences between athletes and non-athletes. Five criteria were used, including grade-point average, attendance rate, discipline referrals, dropout rate and graduation rate, for the 1994-95 academic year.

Athletes Non-athletes
Grade-point average 2.86 1.96
Average number of absences per 180-day school year 6.52 days

12.57 days


Discipline referrals 30.51% 40.29%
Dropout rate 0.7% 8.98%
Graduation rate 99.56% 94.66%

The Alberta Schools’ Athletic Association (ASAA), in conjunction with the Metro Edmonton High School Athletic Association and the Alberta Centre for Well-Being, completed a survey of 883 students. The survey, completed in November 1997, was undertaken to assess the potential impact that high school athletics has on the lives and attitudes of students in Alberta.

Findings showed student-athletes are less likely to smoke (30 percent versus 44 percent), and if they do smoke, they are less likely to smoke heavily. Overall, 35 percent of students reported they currently smoke cigarettes. The survey findings indicated student-athletes (9 percent) are less likely to report drinking more than once a week in comparison to non-athletic students (20 percent).

"The results of this survey suggest that students who participate in school-based sport programs are good school citizens and may be even better school citizens than their non-sport peers," said John Paton, executive director, ASAA. "School athletes demonstrate positive lifestyle behaviors, such as less smoking and less drug use when compared to non-sport students."

Paton also indicated that if administrators, teachers or parents are concerned that school sport programs compete for students’ attention and participation with other cocurricular activities, the study disputes these concerns. Student-athletes tend to participate at a greater rate in other school activities, and they have a more positive perception of their school.

SPORTS AND GPA