<p>
</p>
<p>By who? This isn’t a shot at you, but I haven’t heard of a band or chorus who wasn’t “top notch.”</p>
<p>By clinicians and adjudicators from outside the school. By the community. </p>
<p>Music programs are a small community. You know who has a strong program and who doesn’t. Believe me, when a school doesn’t have a strong program, even the most untrained ear can pick up on it.</p>
<p>As far as a band/chorus who isn’t top notch. When D1 was in band and chorus in middle school, the programs were phenomenal - there were two teachers that reminded me of Mr. Holland from Mr. Holland’s Opus. These kids would do anything to please these teachers, and it showed in the quality of music they produced. One teacher moved on to teach at the high school level, and the other moved out of state. This all happened just as D2 was entering the programs; all I can say is it became painful to attend concerts when I knew what the kids were capable of. Their scores at competitions were embarassing and most parents did not get excited about attending concerts. Unfortunately, those two newer teachers are still there, and I will say without qualification that it is NOT a top notch program - and I’m referring to my own elementary school district. </p>
<p>I also know that since the teacher transition, the kids from that middle school coming into the high school have not been as well prepared for the level that the high school director challenges them with. </p>
<p>We know what other communities are saying about our music programs; when I’d be out in other communities and would be asked what school my kids attend, and told them, they’d know the reputation of our music program. Just like many of our choral kids go off to college (often in neighboring states) and as they meet new friends and learn where they’re all from, kids will have heard of our high school’s music program. Not to say that our kids aren’t also aware of other high school music programs, but those programs truly are top-notch, too. Once you know more about music, you can discern which groups tackle the most challenging music with the most success. You can pick out the ones that sound professional vs. the ones you wished you’d had your ear plugs for. It all goes back to the value the community and school places on music education and the resources it allots for it. Up until several years ago, our school had one band teacher, and one choral teacher. The program’s reputation for excellence created a problem… too many students wanting to participate and not enough teachers. We now have two full-time band teachers and two full-time choral teachers. And the class sizes are still huge.</p>
<p>Ask any parent (especially one who also has some sort of music background themselves) which schools in their community have top notch music programs and they’ll tell you which ones they’d pay to go see, and which ones they wouldn’t go see for free.</p>
<p>“I don’t see the difference between sports and music…”</p>
<p>As the mother of two triple sport athletes, I’d like to point out that being in the marching band/orchestra, etc. involves a whole lot more than marching in place and pushing a bunch of buttons on an instrument. Reading music, understanding music theory, etc., are also intellectual in nature and we have never had a problem with the fact that a music student would get academic credit at our school vs. what my daughters get for being in sports (nada). My daughters have nothing but respect for the time/effort the band kids put in, as well as the abilities in music those kids display. I’ve always wished I could play an instrument well, and after taking piano lessons as an adult, I found that my brain is just not wired for it. I found many of the music theory concepts to be somewhat difficult to comprehend. It’s definitely an academic pursuit.</p>
<p>Way back in the 70’s where I went to college (large state u), P.E. credits were required in order to graduate. I took golf, swimming and a survey course on the rules of sports. I received a grade in each one. I don’t know how many u’s require this anymore, but perhaps because of my experience I don’t think it is at all odd that high schools should give course credit for sports.</p>
<p>Re Post 33:
It’s amazing that some people put serious musicians in the category of school chorus or school marching band. Amazing.</p>
<p>Hello. Try being in a touring youth orchestra (pre-professional level) with long weekly rehearsals, additional sectionals, combined with chamber orchestra, combined with advanced private music lessons. Then add to that a different performing art such as drama or competitive dance, each with daily practice of 1-3 hours, and frequent all-day competitions on weekends, with (like sports) considerable travel involved.</p>
<p>This conversation has been had previously on cc. What became apparent to me is how circumscribed some people’s understanding of the performing arts world is, its training, its time commitments, its discipline. It is not uncommon for such students to begin their homework about 10 pm on any given night.</p>
<p>Nobody denies the time investments needed to be a top athlete, a top musician, or a high level performer in a number of activities. </p>
<p>The question is really about how much a part of a school curriculum ECs should have. I maintain that none of the EXTRA CURRICULAR activities should exceed two hours per week or a similar number of hours dedicated to PE. </p>
<p>Academic activities should represent the ENTIRE balance of the school time and all EC activities should be conducted after hours. All of them! The imput of coaches and EC instructors should be placed on the same level as non-school affiliated coaches. </p>
<p>This would mean the end to all this non-sense about credit or not. Wanna play football, waterpolo, bang the drums, or blow into your flute … do it on YOUR AFTER SCHOOL time! Not all competitive activities are part of school programs. Why do we make a difference for sports such as wrestling, baseball or football? </p>
<p>It would not be that bad if the graduating HS students knew how to read, write, and count at a non-remedial level.</p>
<p>If this needs correcting, you Texans feel free to correct me as I may be a few years behind the times. </p>
<p>In public schools in the Great State of Texas athletes take phys ed class with their teammates, some before school and some after school. I’ll cite a few examples. Swimmers come to practice at 5:30 or 6 in the morning and continue with their workouts until the beginning of second period when they head off to math or science. Football players may have p.e. class during the last period of the day and get a bit of a head start on their daily practice. During basketball season, a similar arrangement takes place–perhaps the girls have p.e. first period and the boys have it last period, making for better utilization of gym space. Somebody on the coaching staff of each sport must be certified by the state to teach physical education, so they can grant the credit for the class. A science or English teacher can’t grant phys ed credit (just as she can’t grant music credit); the coach(es) must have proper certification in order to keep the state dept. of ed happy. </p>
<p>All coaches must be a certified teacher in the state of Texas, unlike many other states that allow a local homemaker or businessman (just examples) to come in after school and coach any given sport. Perhaps an English teacher coaches volleyball, for example, and she/he is given a class period to meet the players and begin/conclude their practice. Somebody on the volleyball coaching staff must be certified in h/pe. The rest of the school day, she/he teaches English. </p>
<p>When the athletes aren’t ‘in season’ they are required to follow the physical education curriculum as mandated by the school board and the dept of ed. If the goal of a phys ed curriculum is to promote physical fitness, seems a great idea that the kids who are athletes will get phys ed credit for their efforts in their chosen sport.</p>
<p>Very often, cheerleaders and drill/dance teams are also given a class and phys ed credit.</p>
<p>I know this is foreign to many people from other states, but this explanation may help clarify why the new requirements (yippee for beefing up the requirements!) may be problematic for student athletes.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That would work, but it would make the school day awfully boring. It would also be a shame that so many good educational experiences that might spark a student’s lifelong interest would cease to exist if they were not funded as part of the public education system. No more yearbook, newspaper, student government, art, drama, dance, music, athletics, woodshop, automotive shop, computers, etc. These opportunities would become available only to those who can afford to pay for them.</p>
<p>Post 48 makes a good point.</p>
<p>Also, not all e.c.'s are created equal, or have academic content. At D’s school, journalism has been converted (a few years ago) to an academic class. That’s because it really is a serious learning activity. Now, Yearbook may be too (esp. in terms of visual art, in our case), but yearbook was not converted to an academic e.c.</p>
<p>However, the nuts & bolts of journalism at this school involves all the varieties of critical writing skills as well as research. The paper has earned national recognition more than once in the past, as their standards & product are exceptionally high.</p>
<p>The idea of getting credits for participating on a sports team sure doesn’t happen here. Kids playing varsity sports here still have to take Phys. Ed. classes throughout high school in order to graduate. That means, going to classes from 7:30-2:30 followed by 2-3 hours of practices after school (also practice on Sat.). EC’s take place after the academic school day. In my opinion, this is how the true scholar athlete is born. It’s the student who excels in athletics while growing intellectually during a full academic school day. Isn’t this what school is supposed to be?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Poorly taught “good educational experiences” can also turn into mere distractions and slot fillers. </p>
<p>Activities that take place outside of the regular class schedule could still be funded by merely ensuring that coaches and teachers work all hours they are contracted for. </p>
<p>Could it be time to accept that the 180 days and partial working days are robbing our students the *education *they deserve.</p>
<p>Is post #47 true? Must all coaches in Texas actually be teachers? How can they possibly get enough teachers to agree to putting in that kind of time outside the normal school day?? Can’t imagine that’s accurate! VERY different in my experience in the NE. </p>
<p>Xiggi, I know you mean well and are knowlegable in matters reltated to education; but I can’t imagine a school day without all the things that make school FUN! How many of journalists or artists or Senators or musicians or teachers got their start dabbling in ECs during the school day. Agree with you, Bay!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s true that all coaches working in public education must have teaching credentials. This, however, does not mean that they have to work as teachers and coaches at the same time. And, putting “that” kind of time outside the normal school day is obviously a very variable metric depending on one’s view on what a normal school day should be and what a normal work day should be for educators and coaches.</p>
<p>rutgersmamma, there’s a lot on here that’s in conflict with my experience as the mom of a varsity athlete in Texas!</p>
<p>I think what panhandlegal wrote is true that our coaches must be certified teachers, but that doesn’t mean that their primary responsibility is teaching. In our district, each HS has an athletic director who normally is the head football coach and oversees the entire sports program at the school. He might be a certified teacher but now, as AD, he’s not spending his time teaching AP Physics. Maybe he’ll have a PE class, like weightlifting. But when he first started his career, he was an asst. coach for a sport and had a larger classload. As you work your way up, you have more sports responsibilities and fewer classroom ones.</p>
<p>Some regular classroom teachers get drafted to coach a lesser sport (usually NOT football in Texas :)), but they aren’t expected to do it for free. They receive stipends for their afterschool coaching.</p>
<p>nrdsb4 - I completely agree with your observation. The undisputable truth here is that learning music (not just listening) is an academic pursuit that has been studied and shown to improve a child’s academic performance in school.</p>
<p>When someone can prove that a sport can dramatically enhance children’s intellectual development in abstract reasoning skills (capacities necessary for learning in math and science), then maybe schools should redefine what’s academic and what isn’t in the budgeting of programs.</p>
<p>By the way, for years I’ve been thinking I’d like to take piano lessons as an adult, but after reading your experience, I’m having second thoughts. Ugh</p>
<p>[Sports</a> Provide Far-Reaching Benefits](<a href=“Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute |”>Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute |)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t understand why athletics is so underappreciated. I don’t advocate sports above all else, but I certainly think the student athlete benefits from playing sports and that tax dollars that support athletics is money well- spent. If nothing else, the physical fitness benefits warrant appreciation. There’s enormous praise for music and all it has to offer, the benefits associated with music participation, including the development of abstract thinking skills. For a variety of reasons music advocates resent those of us who appreciate sports. Music programs in our schools are alive and well and deserve to be supported. </p>
<p>Why not give kudos to something that might actually strengthen the heart muscle, prevent obesity, avoid osteoporosis and extend the quality of ones life? Things like the development of leadership skills, boosting mental health, (and self-confidence/esteem), reducing dropout rates, being academically challenged to go on to college—these benefits are no small potatoes. </p>
<p>Clearly, we have misplaced priorities in this country–pro athletes making way too much money/being worshipped by young people–but the high school athlete works damn hard and their athletic programs should be supported. Reminds me of that NCAA commercial that says most college athletes go on to major in other things after college…medicine, law, education, business and industry…</p>
<p>Teacher/coaches get paid extra stipends for their coaching duties in addition to their teacher salary.</p>
<p>beil1958 - as someone who played a sport in high school, I think it’s a huge plus… it especially was for me. Some days, it was the only thing that got me excited about going to school. I believe there is a place in schools for athletics. </p>
<p>However, when posters write: “There’s no pressure what-so-ever about band or chorus…”, I feel impelled to educate those who believe this, and to point out that there is a strong academic component to music programs.</p>
<p>I would say that students involved in music programs can claim four of the six benefits listed in #56 also, in addition to the academic opportunities.</p>
<p>By the way, I know that to participate in our upper most music programs, the cost to the parents is probably double what an athlete pays in their fees to play a sport. Also, if an athlete is involved in more than one sport at our school, there’s a cap on how much the family has to pay. The difference comes from the activities fund, of which every parent pays into, whether their child plays a sport or not.</p>
<p>“For a variety of reasons music advocates resent those of us who appreciate sports.”</p>
<p>That may be true for some, not true for me. No resentment whatsoever. But, like teriwtt, I feel I need to illuminate the playing field, so to speak, regarding the time demands & physical demands & discipline demands of the performing arts. (That actually came out to be kind of a cute, unintended pun.) As I said on another thread probably a year ago, they are different kinds of activities. Athletics and the arts have some parallelisms, if I can corrupt the word. I don’t see them as a hierarchy.</p>