<p>“Sports are not the reason for Public Schools, education is, sport is optional and very much available in other settings.”</p>
<p>I don’t think the OP shared this story to open a debate on which is more important: education vs. sports/extra curriculars. </p>
<p>I live in a nearby school district in Central Ohio. My heart goes out to ALL the families that are affected by SWCS’s failed school levy. Academics are (and always have been) our childrens top priority. Athletics and extra curriculars (school and non-school sponsored alike) are equally important in the development of well rounded citizens. All of life’s lessons are NOT taught in a classroom. </p>
<p>Our school district instituted “Pay to Participate” fees more than six years ago. A family cap was not part of the distric’s plan. My husband and I never complained having to pay for three boys fees each of three sports seasons. In fact, my husband’s attitude is “It’s cheaper than bail!” Currently, Junior High fees are $165 per student/per sport season while the HS fees are $190 per student/per sport. I believe Marching Band has a slightly different fee schedule due to uniforms and an extensive travel and competition schedule. </p>
<p>In addition to the Pay to Participate fees, our school district also instituted random drug testing for all students involved in any extra curricular activity. If a student violates the policy, sanctions from one academic year do carry over into the following year.<br>
It is not a fool proof system. There are violaters that do not get caught. Personally, I feel those students are only hurting themselves. My priorities are focused on helping my boys become strong men of character. A few years ago, a senior athlete qualified for the State Finals in his event. This student failed a random drug test (chewing tobacco) and was not allowed to compete in the State Meet. That is one tough life lesson that was not taught in the classroom. It was an eye opener for many students to think twice about their own actions.</p>
<p>Sports and activities should play a reasonable part in any education program. The defining word is, however, reasonable. When programs are given too much importance and cost enough to cause a taxpayer’s revolt, you know someone crossed the line a long time ago. </p>
<p>This is simply a telling sign that the days of unchallenged budgets and excesses are FINALLY over. Schools should --and can-- do quite well without a football program or a marching band. </p>
<p>No matter how we look at it, the programs that are cut and supposedly now “hurt” many were probably prone to excesses in the first place. Perhaps, it would be wise for the schools to refocus their efforts on educating the mind, and let others (read clubs and sport leagues) address the body.</p>
<p>Regarding EC band activites- I can’t believe band can be entirely extracurricular- the kids had to learn to play their instruments before HS. I was in a band program- concert band plus marching and sports playing. I see no problem with cutting out the marching uniforms and travel costs and having the band members do other music- being able to perform competitive routines isn’t as important as the musicianship aspect.</p>
<p>Just an FYI…at our school, playing in the band isn’t exactly a freebie. Students pay a uniform usage fee, a summer music band camp fee, and either have to own their own instruments OR pay a rental fee to use one that belongs to the school. These fees are paid annually.</p>
<p>IMO - Many voters in the South-Western City School District voted down the school levy three times because the elected school board refused to institute a “Pay to Participate” policy.</p>
<p>That is hysterical. I will be using that when I reference paying our club soccer fees :-).</p>
<p>thumper1, I can remember my jaw dropping at the end of 6th grade when the band teacher told me we needed to spend $2500 for a trumpet (6th graders rent cornets)! We defied the teacher, bought a $1000 version on ebay and I plan to list it for resale (2 years later) and try to recoup some of that back. Band is by NO means free.</p>
<p>xiggi–given the obesity epidemic in the US and how much that is costing us? Sports should be as mandatory as academics, frankly. I feel sooo sad for those kids. It can’t be good for the community to have that many kids with nothing to do in the afternoons. And teenagers! Sad.</p>
<p>I believe you’re confused about my position. I wrote that sports and physical should be part of our education system. This is quite different from discussing the “excesses” and the activities that have grown past every sensible control. </p>
<p>In the meantime, if you worry about kids doing “something” in the afternoon, may I suggest a bit more studying IN SCHOOL, a bit of service activities, and perhaps after that a reasonable participation in sporting activities that are available outside a system that should focus on education. </p>
<p>And, fwiw, I am not sure if the elimination of a football program and a “marching” band will necessary increase the obesity problem in high schools. A cynic might point out that the O-line might as well stand for Obesity Line! </p>
<p>PS Despite my position on this, please rest assured that I am huge supporter of sports and physical activities. I just happen to think that schools should focus more on education, increase learning time, and stop wasting so much time and resources just because … they can.</p>
<p>I think if you believe that education is just for book learnin’, you’ve missed at least part of the point. I can’t even begin to list all the life skills that are developed in a variety of extracurricular activiites! What I can tell you is that without programs available, kids will get into things that kids should not get into.</p>
<p>Don’t make this a sports vs the arts thing of us against them. The line that struck me most was “every day feels like Tuesday.” Seriously, how much fun is that? Do you really think an extra hour studying US History or an afternoon of doing calc problem sets gives kids the same benefits as the arts or athletics. Are we really trying to kill our children’s imaginations? It’s like the beginning (or a flasback) in an ayn rand novel. When you say schools should focus more on academics than EC’s, what does this mean in this particular case? Because I cant see them focusing on anything BUT academics in this case - and, I might add, to the detriment of their student’s overall development. I just think people who don’t see the value of learning from a host of levels don’t know jack about education.</p>
<p>I always paid between 300.00 and 500.00 for sports at the local public HS. We could write a check, take out an ad in the program, sell an ad in the program or, my personal favorite- collect “sponsors”. Ugh, usually I just paid up and listed my relatives and family friends in the program because I was loathe to ask them to chip in for my children’s EC’s. As far I know, drama, band, and cheerleading all had fundraising requirements. It is very sad to see some of the cuts being made because a big part of the HS experience are the activities and friendships that occur outside of the classroom.</p>
<p>“Cheaper than bail!”… I’m glad you can see the humor in that statement. </p>
<p>How many parents of teenagers wish they knew where the kids were at, knew who they were hanging out with and could say with (greater confidence) they knew their kids were not messing around with drugs? Random drug testing is not a guarantee they won’t try drugs or consume alcohol. Our children have blessed us by staying away from peer preasure. The truth of the matter is, they did not have time to get in trouble. Time management is a must. Our district’s HS day begins first period at 7:20 am and ends at 2:10. XC/Wrestling/Track practice begins at 2:30 and ends by 5:30 (M-F) and Sat morning 8-11. XC/Track Tournaments or Invitationals are a full day event. Wrestling takes us all over the state with one or two day contests. After showers, dinner and homework they have (had) little time for TV on a school night. Time on the home computer was permitted only for homework on school nights. Computer games are (were) allowed on weekends. </p>
<p>Two of my boys are in college, leaving my youngest to follow the older brothers examples.<br>
My middle son is a Div. I athlete. His scholarship is entirely merit based. We all sleep well each night knowing an injury will not jepordize his scholarship.</p>
<p>Similar story here Momofthreeboys, but different sports and Daughters in the mix as well. Son always did better academically when having the most on his plate. When he decided not to continue playing football in college I will admit I was concerned about what he would do with the extra time, but SO FAR he has proven himself by getting involved in a host of other EC’s that he was never able to participate in before. So good for him. But to imagine his never having the opportunity to experience any of it in HS? Talk about being unprepared for the college life!</p>
<p>My high school cut sports in the spring term in 1977. I remember it being very strange - I missed running track. When my son’s school district instituted pay to play, I considered that preferable to no sports. He doesn’t care about sports at all, but I like the idea of having that option for those who do. I see the way my state’s school districts just plain waste money & it makes me so angry. We have a different school district every few miles. Each district has its own administrative staff for everything … elementary ed, secondary ed, curriculum development, special ed, transportation, food services, human resources, etc. There is a superintendent in each district, as well as several assistant superintendents and on & on. THEN there is a county intermediate school district that “helps” the individual school districts. IMO, too much duplication of effort & too much money wasted on redundant administrative costs.</p>
<p>Our school has had “pay to play” for as long as I can remember. I think it started out being like $30 per sport; now it’s $45 per sport. BUT there is a cap of $110 per family each year.</p>
<p>Sure it’s not much in the big picture, but it’s something. And if someone has problems paying that, the school is very open about finding a way to work it out.</p>
<p>I had no idea there are school systems without “pay to play.” Learn something new everyday.</p>
<p>I live in a district where the athletics are all self-funded. Sports get NO annual budget. Coaches, equipment, uniforms, busses to away games, field maintence, etc are all paid for with participant fees and Booster fundraising. Works fine. I guess it’s one of the reasons our taxes are (relatively) low, too.</p>
<p>How sad. I’d love to know how many ‘support’ positions, bureaucrat and administrator positions where cut in this district before the EC were. Probably not many.</p>
<p>Activities in high school are important. They are not going to go away. However, it would be nice if the excessive expenses were eliminated. Towns leagues will spring up if high school teams shut down. There will be sports. The only question is how they will be funded. My kids do private leagues so no tax money is used. The parents pay. Simple.</p>
<p>The SWCS District had a large exidous of HS students after the levy failed. Families of Senior students that were being recruited for college level sports or band had to make great sacrafices to enroll in new school districts just weeks before the start of classes. Athletic Directors and Coaches lost their primary jobs and/or supplemental income.
The Ohio High School Athletic Association has had to realign Schools in the League & Conference and redraft the entire fall competition schedule for all sports. </p>
<p>The economic impact of the failed levy has had a ripple effect on the entire community. On the bright side, there are some great deals on homes in the SWCS district. Empty nesters and young families that do not have an immediate need for their local schools can purchase a home far below the market value. </p>
<p>Put yourself in their shoes. What would you do?</p>