Several years back a group held a press conference in Washington, D.C. to issue a youth sports national "report card." The Citizenship Through Sports Alliance gave out the following "grades": Child-Centered Philosphy: D; Coaching: C-; Health and Safety: C+; Officating: B-; and Parental Behavior & Involvement: D
As the Alliance report card shows, almost all aspects of youth sports are getting poor grades. If your child brought home these grades, you would call his teacher and quickly come up with a plan to improve them.
Because parents come and go, because change at the national level is unlikely, the path towards fundamental change in youth sports will only be accomplished at the grass roots, community level. It is here that concerned mothers - and fathers - can make youth sports about having fun, make sports safer for our children, to include every child who wants a chance to play.
Here are some of the things parents can do in their own community to improve youth sports:
Listen to what children want. Studies repeatedly show that the vast majority of boys and girls, when asked what they would like to see changed about youth sports, say they would like to see less emphasis on winning. We need to start listening to what our children tell us they want.
Have the courage to speak up! Most parents in this country want a youth sports system that serves the interests of children. They represent a vast silent majority who just need the courage to stand up and band together to fight those who want to preserve a status quo serving the interests of adults. Perhaps the Wisconsin Interscholastic Athletic Association said it best: "Carrying the torch for less pressure and more perspective in youth programs may not be a popular position. Those who demand more games, more wins, more trophies, more travel and more of everything can talk the loudest and sound convincing. It's up to all of us to have the courage to be just as passionate on the side of balance."
Push to reform school athletic programs and PE. As John Gerdy writes in his book, Sports in School, "our sports programs are elitist and exclusionary, neither designed nor conducted with the health benefits of participants in mind." He argues that "If we were interested in deriving the greatest health return on dollars spent on athletics, more resources would be spent on broad-based, participatory intramural, club and physical education programs than on the current programs designed to cater to a small population of elite athletes."
Fundamentally altering the outmoded model that most schools follow for interscholastic sports will be a monumental undertaking. It will require the effort of a large and vocal group of committed parents. But it can be done. First, try to eliminate cutting at levels below high school varsity.
Second, accommodate the interests of those students not playing competitive team sports but who want to continue to engage in some form of physical exercise or sports in a non-competitive setting, by reforming and expanding school-based physical education programs and by developing and funding after-school programs offering aerobics, dance, exercise walking, self-defense, yoga, pilates, strength training, flag/touch football, and Ultimate Frisbee.
The Women Sports Foundation's 2008 survey, Go Out and Play: Youth Sports in America, supports this recommendation. It reports that many of the nation's schools "have cut back on physical education offerings or stopped requiring 'gym classes' entirely. One in five U.S. schools does not offer physical education (PE) at all, and despite Centers for Disease Control recommendations, only handfuls of elementary, middle and high schools offer daily PE classes (i.e., 4%, 8% and 2%, respectively)."
The Women Sports Foundation report contains a number of important recommendations:
- Nationally and regionally scaled steps should be taken to counteract the downturn in physical education attendance among high school girls.
- Local, state, and federal health planners need to further invest in physical education and youth sports as key elements of preventive health policy. Guidelines and practices should be developed to close the gap in physical education between girls and boys, girls of color and Caucasians, and schools in poor communities and more affluent communities.
- School boards can reverse the cuts in PE offerings, make PE mandatory, and broaden the curriculum to appeal to the wide range of girls' interests in exercise and physical activities. Increasing opportunities for exercise in PE classes are also likely to be a highly effective mechanism for infusing exercise into the lives of children who do not like sports.
- School officials can seek grants to initiate, expand, and improve their physical education programs for K-12 students through the Carol M. White Physical Education Program (PEP). For information on how to apply, click here.
- Schools and communities can seek information and resources in order to enhance their existing health and physical education programs.
Third, ask schools to consider returning to same-sex PE. Co-ed physical education, while it has obvious advantages, also has some significant downsides for both boys and girls. A study of South Carolina middle and high school girls reported in the September 2005 issue of the American Journal of Public Health found that girls taking girls-only PE exercised substantially more than girls in co-ed programs. As for boys, those who support the current shift in the physical education curriculum away from traditional competitive sports, often involving an aggressive component, towards aerobic activities such as riding a stationary bicycle or jogging, argues Dr. Leonard Sax, are ignoring the fact "that many boys need the aggressive element found in sports such as basketball and soccer" and that the result "is that boys who aren't athletic enough to make the team now have no socially acceptable outlet for their aggressive impulses."
youth sports reform
I can attest to the difficulty of changing the status quo of youth sports. My seven year old son plays on a baseball team where the coach plays particular players at specific positions in the infield, every game. For example, the third baseman is there every game. There is no rotation of positions. Keep in mind these players are 7 years old. The children delegated to the outfield never get experience in the infield, nor are they learning any skills. There are no practices once the games start, so the games are their practices in a sense. I addressed this concern at a parent meeting, but unfortunately I was told that they are grooming the players to make better competition. First, I said these are 7 year olds, but continued my argument that all children at this level deserve a chance to learn the fundamentals of baseball and that is what this level is for, that players are more valuable to a team when they can play various positions, and should ALL be given a chance to reach their potential, but the arguments fell on deaf ears. Surprisingly, other parents apparently did not share my passion for helping all these children, especially the ones whose children are playing all the time, and actually sided with the coach. I quoted articles and books that back up my position, and was told by the coach that he played baseball for a bunch of years and he KNOWS baseball. The president of the league even addressed it with him, but he was unreceptive to change. Apparently, he wants to win, period. And apparently, so do the parents, because I had very little support from them, and in fact, have been given dirty looks since I was courageous enough to challenge the status quo. It also doesn't help that I live in a very traditional community where all the coaches are men and women coaches are only in T-ball, where I helped coach for two years. When the kids moved up a level, they had more men vying for the coaching positions and I was not needed. Fortunately, I am an elementary school teacher, so I know a thing or two about young children, but I can tell that if choose to push this, I must be prepared for a challenge.
I commend you for your
I commend you for your courage to stand up and be heard, it does not happen often. I do agree that kids should be given the opportunity to play different positions. There's nothing worse than a kid who grows up only being able to play one position and then not being able to adjust when they get to the high school level.
I will add that I do think coaches who know what they are doing have to be given some lattitue in player positions. I've coached youth baseball and softball at young levels and I've put certain kids only in the outfield for safety reasons. You can't have a kid who daydreams playing third base (otherwise known as the hot corner). Some parents never see this correlation. You don't put a crummy flute player in the first chair just because they play the flute and everyone should be first chair? The other thing is that coaches should stress the need for good outfield play. Many times when baseball programs get to the high school level, they are weak in the outfield because the little league outfielders have quit and the ones who are out for the team have always been infielders.
Good luck!
I commend you for your
I commend you for your courage to stand up and be heard, it does not happen often. I do agree that kids should be given the opportunity to play different positions. There's nothing worse than a kid who grows up only being able to play one position and then not being able to adjust when they get to the high school level.
I will add that I do think coaches who know what they are doing have to be given some lattitue in player positions. I've coached youth baseball and softball at young levels and I've put certain kids only in the outfield for safety reasons. You can't have a kid who daydreams playing third base (otherwise known as the hot corner). Some parents never see this correlation. You don't put a crummy flute player in the first chair just because they play the flute and everyone should be first chair? The other thing is that coaches should stress the need for good outfield play. Many times when baseball programs get to the high school level, they are weak in the outfield because the little league outfielders have quit and the ones who are out for the team have always been infielders.
Good luck!
There is confusion here....
Comparing sports programs and physical education in this manner: “As John Gerdy writes in his book, Sports in School, ‘our sports programs are elitist and exclusionary, neither designed nor conducted with the health benefits of participants in mind.’ He argues that ‘If we were interested in deriving the greatest health return on dollars spent on athletics, more resources would be spent on broad-based, participatory intramural, club and physical education programs than on the current programs designed to cater to a small population of elite athletes." is like comparing an apple and an orange.
There are two distinct and different purposes between physical education and athletics in schools. It is neither appropriate, fair, nor beneficial to lump them into a single category. It is physical education, along with a solid intramural program, that should be educating our youth about healthy choices and exercise benefits. It is within their scope. The goal of a good physical education program, something I have been encouraging for over 30 years, is to give students the knowledge and practical work so as to increase the quality and quantity of their lives now and in their future. This is not the goal of athletics in high school, nor should it be.
Yes it is true that there is an indirect relationship between athletics and physical fitness, most athletes must become physically fit to perform, however, the coach cannot possibly take on the role of a physical educator with all that he or she must do. Two completely different paths, two completely different jobs and most coaches do not have the background or knowledge to accomplish this goal.
It is a common misconception that these two entities are the same. Ask any knowledgeable physical educator, one who teaches with the appropriate objectives in mind, and they will tell you the same. I have worn both hats, taught physical education and coached at beginning through varsity levels, and I can tell you from experience and knowledge that it is important to keep these two entities separate. To not do so will minimize the important teachings of both and water down their positive effects.
I might also add that it is a common failing of education in this country to try to do too much rather then to teach with depth in mind. Putting physical education and athletics in schools on the same plain and with the same objectives is certainly trying to do too much and excludes the conceptual idea of teaching with depth.
Kirk Mango
Becoming a True Champion
Excellent points, Kirk.
Excellent points, Kirk. Physical fitness was pushed aside years ago in the educational system, making it an elective and many kids who need excercise simply didn't take gym classes. In the last 15 years with the explosion of video games and unlimited tv channels, our youth continue, as a whole, to lead unhealthy lives. You could actually make a case that physicial fitness (or lack thereof) will have more of an impact on their lives than upper level math or english classes.