Argumentative Essay: Should Schools Get Paid?

In this community lately, there has been discussion lately on sports possibly being removed from the high schools. Although, they get the most recognition that does not mean that just because one little thing it gets removed and completely forgotten about. In fact, so many people do high school sports in the text “Are High School Sports Good For Kids” it explicitly states “Here in Michigan almost 300,000 young people take part in high school sports every year.” This scene particularly shows that many youth athletes participate in high school sports in only one state alone. On the bright side, if you are getting that many participants and students your high school will eventually get noticed for the talents of these young scholars. In continuation,

Jim trips hits his head and goes to the nurse 's office. Fat Luke is laughed at and mocked while the rest of the students are standing around doing nothing, this sounds a lot like gym these days. Why should children be forced to go through every time they walk through the gym doors? Nothing good ever happens in the gym and that needs to stop. If parents knew what was happening in the gym there would be no gym, if schools realized the zero percent positive effect it had on the students there would be no gym, if children told what happened in and protested gym there would be no gym. Parents and schools need to realize what is actually happening in the gym and why it needs to be cut or changed. The paragraphs below are here to explain that. As shown above, gym should not remain a mandatory subject in schools because gym time does not keep children active, gym time can be better spent on core classes, and gym time hurts children physically and mentally.

In today 's world schools spend too much money on after school sports and might get rid of them. Although many students think getting rid of after school sport is not necessary; schools save much more money now and a more percentage of students pass their classes because the schools use the money for educational purposes. Therefore, districts should get rid of after school sports because they are too expensive, students grades are dropping, and kids are not paying enough attention in class.

Amanda Ripley, author of “The Case Against High-School Sports,” gives an interesting thought to not only how important high-school sports are, but how much money is spent. Her stance on it tends to be that sports are more of a distraction than they are good for. Through the use of examples and relevant data, she was able to effectively establish her stance on high-school sports. However, there were oftentimes organizational and evidence based errors. By looking at the organization, audience awareness, and examples it can be seen that the article is effective but could use some major improvements.

Now let’s go back to the reason that I’m writing this paper, the negatives. First of all, if after school sports were taken away, kids wouldn’t be able to work on their social skills. Next, if after school sports were taken away that would lead to other extracurricular activities would not happen, like cheerleading and pep band. Finally, kids would not be able to get college scholarships for sports. These are just a few more negatives to this, but there are countless more.

Kids every day, of all ages play sports, whether it be a fun game with their friends or organized through their school. Sports themselves are great, they promote countless benefits and encourage players. However, once schools get involved things change. Amanda Ripley in her article The Case against High School Sports states “In many schools, sports are so entrenched that no one- not even the people in charge- relizes their actual cost.” The academic focus of schools can shift to the athletics, with there being too much time and money being poured in it. That effort could be better spent on what the actual focus of school should be, students’ education, not training and games.

Amanda Ripley demonstrates the consequences for having school sports in “The Case Against High School Sports” because schools are spending too much money on their sports and can be solved. The author brings to the reader’s eye that sports cost way too much money and should be cut. I think Ripley is wrong because even though it cost a lot of money, they should still keep the sports. If they cut the sports, then it’s not fair to the students that are graduating because they could of had a chance to get a scholarship. If the schools cut the sports, then there is no chance for the students. Along with, when schools have sports it gives students an escape from school. Some schools don’t have a have a rule about if the student is eligible to play

If you have ever been in sports or school athletics, act fast! Schools are getting rid of their sports and we need to stop it. “Being a student is harder than ever. You are being held to tougher academic standards-and so is your school. The stress can get so intense, it feels paralyzing. That’s why it is important than ever for schools to invest in their athletic programs,” states the sports article “Should Schools get rid of Sports.” Schools should keep their sports programs because they help improve academics, help improve mental and emotional health, and improves social skills like being on a team.

According to " The Case Against High-School Sports" (2013), sports could create some study, health, and time management problems for schools and students. In this post, Amanda Ripley initially shows the benefits when involving in the high-school sports: exercise, sportsmanship lessons, some positive personalities, more fun and staying away from vices. She also writes some tales to inform readers that in the US, students are interested and enjoy in sports more than other peers in other countries. However, she claims that the high-school sports have negative effects on schools and students. Next, she gave some schools ' examples to show the problems when schools and students spent too much time and money in high-school sports. Moreover, she reports

It is true that obesity and physical inactivity can be unhealthy and dangerous for a child; it is the 4 leading cause of death after all (Myer); but banning contact sports wouldn’t necessarily cause obesity or physical inactivity. If contact sports are to be banned children can still choose to play a different sport; there are plenty of other sports like soccer and basketball. In fact, sports are becoming a much more popular thing in the US and more children are getting physically active. According to Terry Adirim : “Half of all children aged 5-18 years in the US are thought to participate in organized sports programs, This nears that an estimated 30 million school aged children children are involved in sports, which represents a substantial increase over the last 20-30 years (Adirim). Now that more and more children are playing sports, obesity and physical inactivity isn’t as high as it once was. Because of this, banning contact sports won’t mean no physical activity; other sports are still available to them and children most likely will go pick a different sport to play. Therefore contact sports should be banned for children under 18.

Every year 300,000 students are participating in sports (Gould 1). The School District has been funding the athletics program, which has been benefiting many of the students’ lives for several years. The discontinuation of high school sports will cause many students to loose the health, social and educational benefits provided by participating in athletics. The School District should continue to fund sports because they benefit students.

From the Friday night lights to the last second goal, school sports are a major part of the high school journey. In fact, according to "Are High School Sports Good For Kids?" by Daniel Gould, Ph.D., over five million students from the United States participate in a school sport. High school sports are a great way for student-athletes to stay healthy, make new friends, and be a part of a team atmosphere. In addition, school sports keep kids off of the streets and lower the athlete's chance of committing a crime.

Auerbach, a journalist, dug through and found “the state and federal funding has dwindled while cost have skyrocketed. That it “hits families hard and kids that wanna play sports can’t. School fees may very well violate the civil rights of student that can't afford to pay them.”kids are suppose to have the opportunity to play sports whenever they feel they want to do it without happening to worry about the fees that come with it. When its suppose to be free. There just supposed to be equality, but my question is that if it is supposed to be equality then how come there are kids out there that can't play a sport because they can't afford it. Some schools are heavy on charges for sports. I’ve seen them charge up to $200 and $300 that's

There has long been the debate for whether kids should be allowed to participate in competitive sports. Most people against say that sports make kids get severely injured, which is true, but only if the kid is unprotected and not in a safe environment, which is not the case with sports these days. In fact, sports promote more of a healthy lifestyle. Sports also promote life skills and help kids later in life Sports should be for all ages and kids.

The last reason, which it the academic benefits, proves that you shouldn’t take away the sports for school. The kids that play sports benefit in the classroom a lot more than regular students. A study shows that “The exercise programs may actually enhance the development of specific types of mental processing known to be important, for meeting challenges encountered both in academics and later in life.” Also, the athletes are improved since high school.