In my opinion, I think that competitive sports in school have a lifetime of benefits. In this article Kevin Kniffin states that, “Research shows that people who play high school sports get better jobs, with better pay.” In my essay I will be explaining how people who play sports get better jobs and better pay, and how hiring managers expect more out of a former high school student who played sports. In my opposing side I will be explaining how in the worlds smartest countries, school is about learning. However, this minor argument still leads me to the side of Kevin Kniffin.
People who played sports in high school will most likely get a better pay and a better job. For example, people who maybe played football can go into the NFL. As a result, the NFL (national football league) can get you plenty of money that will or could last you a lifetime. In the article, Kevin Kniffin states that, “people who played for a varsity high school team tend to earn higher salaries later in life.” I absolutely agree with …show more content…
I am not being rude but anyone could have guessed that the world’s smartest countries all they cared about was education. I do oppose her views on the other end though because there is no reason that someone can get straight and be a good student but not be in a sport. In her article she says that “…kids’ priorities are shaped.” At the same time I do not disagree with this statement because it is true. Children shape their priorities around sports.
The two articles I wrote about were written clearly enough to get adequate information. These two people although they had different views they were reasonably alike. . However, I still agree with the side of Kevin Kniffin. I personally think that having sports in high school gives students a sense of
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
Although Ripley, Bowen and Hitt, and Sato are all taking about the same subject they mostly share different views. Ripley compared to Bowen and Hitt, as well as, Sato attacks high school sports more than supports them like the other authors do. She uses points such as the international test scores or the excessive cost of sports and all that is involved with them in her argument. Bowen and Hitt counter these but they also talk about the advantages of sports and the good they can bring to high school academics and the students and they are supported by Sato’s blog and his points. Although they all three make good points to support their argument and use a lot of evidence to back them up, the question remains.
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.
Have sports teams brought down America’s schools? Would grades skyrocket if sports were removed from schools? Or would they plummet to the ground? According to the article, “Have Sports Teams Brought Down America’s Schools” by Elizabeth Kolbert we’d be better off leaving sports separate from our schools. Millions of students across the U.S. are involved in some type of sport through their school.
Amanda Ripley, the author of “The Case Against High School Sports,” claims that school sports cause a decrease in pass rates and educational development due to the emphasis placed on the sports. She then concludes that because of these negative effects, sports should be excluded from the school setting and the money saved should be put towards academic purposes. Unfortunately, the amount of money spent on secondary education is not the problem, as only “four countries -- Austria, Luxembourg, Norway and Switzerland -- spend more” on secondary education than the United States (Sherman). Meaning that a lack of money spent on academic endeavors is not the main or even a major contributor to America’s lacking pass rates and educational standards.
Throughout Gould’s article he includes data and research to prove a point that High School sports can be beneficial for the youth through increased educational aspirations and even increase social skills within adolescents. Even though most of the research has a positive outcome there is a chance of it having negative effects. In the third paragraph Gould continues on how the issue concerning winning in the sport participated can cause academic success to be forgotten about. He makes it clear that winning is not unimportant
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.
High School Sports Aren’t Detracting from Academics Amanda Ripley argues in her article, “The Case Against High-School Sports” that athletic programs and schooling should be independent of each other. She argues that school sponsored sports result in lower test scores, draw focus away from academics, and aren’t economically feasible. This infatuation with sports in American schools is harming our economy and our education system in Ripley’s opinion. Ripley offers an in depth explanation and research to back her claims, but she fails to address other factors and variables that are resulting in our nation’s academic mediocrity. Amanda Ripley compares the athletic attitude of America to other countries.
Two percent of high school athletes get a college scholarship to play their sport. The gap between size, ability, work ethic, and dedication is extremely wide for athletes who play college sports compared to high school sports. High schools have players that play offense and defensive. Some wide receivers can play quarterback. Their quarter lengths are different.
Competitive sports are on the hotline lately because people are questioning whether it is good or bad for kids to play competitive sports. Some people argue that sports are a team tradition and only the best players should play so that they can make it farther in the finals. Making the team is a honor because it shows that you have the devotion, time and skills to play. Others argue, however, that sports put too much pressure on kids, and that the pressure is being placed on them by coaches and parents. Pressure doubles by starting out at such a young age, and not wanting to drop out because their parents all ready dug deep into their pockets to pay for the season.
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.
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.
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.
This notion is supported by Dr. Daniel Gould, who believes that “Children who participate in sports have increased educational aspirations, closer ties to school and increased occupational aspirations in youth” (1). People against the funding of high school sports think that parents and society are placing more emphasis than ever before and, “[P]ressures athletic personnel to deviate on winning from the athlete- centered educational and personal development mission” (Gould 1). However, athletes strive to do better in class. Michael Lorenc, a high school basketball coach believes that “those who seem to have an overwhelming schedule where they’re playing maybe multiple sports, and high academic schedules, they tend to do better than those who don’t do anything extracurricularly” (Gray). Balancing sports and school makes athletes put more effort into keeping up grades while playing the sport they love.
Sports can enhance the cooperative and strategic strategies. The passage states that, “understanding the competitive process entails an appreciation of the social nature of competition, particularly with regard to the cooperative and strategic aspects of sports and an awareness of the nature of individual roles within a cooperating group.” 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.
This teaches both good work ethic and responsibility because these individuals learn how to productively manage their time. Time management is an essential part of being successful. Exceptional athletes would rather be an hour early than a minute late. This greater supports the argument because down the road this could just as easily be a job interview and because of the habits that have been acculturated through playing sports, they will make a good impression and most likely beat out their competitor. Professional writer, researcher, and lecturer Michael Casey conducted two studies and concluded that “Past participation in high school sports helps youngsters develop a host of crucial skills which give them a leg up as they enter the work world and achieve success for decades afterward” (Casey).