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
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.
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
However, students show commitment in staying on the team so they try to focus on their grades too. In fact, the university of Chicago, becoming a man-sports edition creates lasting improvements in the boys study habits and grade point averages. This evidence clearly shows that there is no harm into the student’s grade. The most convincing reason why high school sports are beneficial is that being in a school sports shows and improves social and participation around others.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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).
Sports will not help a person in life. Education can take a person farther than sports will. Athletes are playing sports more than they are paying attention to education. While parental want their child to be a star in high school they will be nothing out of school. But the decision is up to the players.
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.
The conclusion from the study was quite simple and to the point: high school athletes in Kansas during the 2008-09 school year reported higher grades, higher test standardized test scores, higher graduation rates, and lower dropout rates than non-athletes. The research shows that there are “clear and striking differences” between the performance of athletes and non-athletes in those academic measurements, and that in almost every area it was abundantly clear that athletes outperformed non-athletes. (Lumpkin, 2012, p. 54) The authors mention that their findings cannot ascertain any kind of causal relationship between athletic participation and better academic performance. However, they do state that their study shows that partaking in athletics in high school does at least seem to improve academic performance rather than detract from