|
Post by mariner42 on May 10, 2014 10:45:01 GMT -6
Students choose to behave or not. Everyone can behave. They behave for us as coaches because we control PT and conditioning, they care more about PT than grades because they can't see an inch in front of their pecker and don't realize running a 4.5 doesn't mean crap if you can't qualify. If the players respect their coaches and the program they would behave in class, because it directly reflects the program and the coaching staff, and they know that as well as we do. I can assure you my 4th period student with oppositional defiance disorder is not choosing to behave or not. There is no choice for him, he just reacts. The purpose of extra-curricular activities is to provide something EXTRA to your regular CURRICULUM. If that's the thought process, then obviously people see that there's a benefit to doing these things like sports, band, drama, etc. If there's a benefit to doing them, then we should try to include students in those activities, not exclude them. If we're trying to be inclusive, then we should make the standard for participation achievable and meaningful. As I see it, whatever grades are putting them on track to graduate qualify under that criteria.
|
|
|
Post by coacht2210 on May 10, 2014 10:47:32 GMT -6
Lots of good stuff in here....
My old school where I coached (and still teach at) had pretty low standards for eligibility. students must be passing 4 out of 7 classes. We are a city school and I really liked this low standard as it "allowed" more kids to participate in sports and other programs. The only kids that were ineligible were usually those who were absent a ton or literally did nothing in class.
As coaches / teachers we certainly did not make 4 D's and 3 F's the goal. We were always on kids for grades, ran study hall --in season AND out of season for kids with D's and F's. We werent successful with everyone but there were quite a few kids with all D's and F's as freshman that turned things around greatly by the time they were seniors. I DO NOT think this would have happened if these kids were "banned" from football. We saw a major shift in players grades the 5 years we were there.
I teach math and I enjoy it and try to get my kids to aswell. But to MANY kids, they will learn MORE from being part of a well-run football program than they will in algebra class. We can teach kids a lot more if they are part of our program than if they are not. To many kids, extra curricular activities are MORE beneficial than the regular classroom. We hold players to a MUCH higher standard than the our average student. Our "typical" student skates by with D's then goes on to a community college and they're usually done with that by Thanksgiving. They learn how to do the bare minimum to graduate. A good football program will teach its players a lot of values and skills that some kids will not learn at home or in class.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on May 10, 2014 14:37:06 GMT -6
Students choose to behave or not. Everyone can behave. They behave for us as coaches because we control PT and conditioning, they care more about PT than grades because they can't see an inch in front of their pecker and don't realize running a 4.5 doesn't mean crap if you can't qualify. If the players respect their coaches and the program they would behave in class, because it directly reflects the program and the coaching staff, and they know that as well as we do. Are we talking about grades or behavior? Are we talking about kids who run a 4.5 or all kids?
|
|
|
Post by IronmanFootball on May 10, 2014 15:55:14 GMT -6
Students choose to behave or not. Everyone can behave. They behave for us as coaches because we control PT and conditioning, they care more about PT than grades because they can't see an inch in front of their pecker and don't realize running a 4.5 doesn't mean crap if you can't qualify. If the players respect their coaches and the program they would behave in class, because it directly reflects the program and the coaching staff, and they know that as well as we do. I can assure you my 4th period student with oppositional defiance disorder is not choosing to behave or not. There is no choice for him, he just reacts. The purpose of extra-curricular activities is to provide something EXTRA to your regular CURRICULUM. If that's the thought process, then obviously people see that there's a benefit to doing these things like sports, band, drama, etc. If there's a benefit to doing them, then we should try to include students in those activities, not exclude them. If we're trying to be inclusive, then we should make the standard for participation achievable and meaningful. As I see it, whatever grades are putting them on track to graduate qualify under that criteria. He's not the average student, he's an IEP kid and they usually are less than 10% of your school pop. Obviously you can only name 1. They're 20% of my school pop and I won't stand for that crap. Also, they teach coping mechanisms and have behavior specialists for a reason. Obviously I can work with an IEP kid and give him or her an outlet. But, I'm talking about a kid with no IEP that chooses to screw off and ruin classes. 99% of the time behavior in the classroom and grade point average go hand in hand. It's the difference between being intelligent (measurable) and smart (intangible). Smart enough to make grades, stay out of trouble and succeed. a 2.23 with a laundry list of discipline referrals isn't succeeding in my mind.
|
|
|
Post by blb on May 10, 2014 16:07:47 GMT -6
He's not the average student, he's an IEP kid and they usually are less than 10% of your school pop. Obviously you can only name 1. They're 20% of my school pop and I won't stand for that crap. Also, they teach coping mechanisms and have behavior specialists for a reason. Obviously I can work with an IEP kid and give him or her an outlet. But, I'm talking about a kid with no IEP that chooses to screw off and ruin classes. 99% of the time behavior in the classroom and grade point average go hand in hand. It's the difference between being intelligent (measurable) and smart (intangible). Smart enough to make grades, stay out of trouble and succeed. a 2.23 with a laundry list of discipline referrals isn't succeeding in my mind.
Please post the link to where you got the research showing 99% link between GPA and behavior.
Big of you to be willing to work with Resource Room (IEP) kids.
But not kids who have problems arising from other issues in their lives.
|
|
jmg999
Junior Member
Posts: 263
|
Post by jmg999 on May 10, 2014 16:26:17 GMT -6
A highly organized, disciplined, team activity like Football can be just the thing some kids who don't have structure in their lives or value school-education need to turn them around.
jmg, frankly you come off as if you don't want to be bothered dealing with kids who have had difficult lives-upbringings and want someone to cut them for you so you only have to work with the pre-packaged model citizens of your world. This is not at all what I've said. You seem to be at least the second commenter to assume that I am referring to only low-SES students. There are plenty students from across the board SES households that will refuse to work in the classroom. I'm saying that they should all be held to the same standard in this model. Make no mistake. Public education in this country is far from perfect, but given that it's what we're talking about, there are certain protocols that are to be followed. One of those is maintaining grades in order to take part in extra-curricular activities. I would expect just as much from a kid w/ a difficult upbringing as I would w/ a kid from a family that provided everything he could ever want. In fact, when you think about it, the kid from the difficult upbringing should have more experience in working for what he wants/needs than a kid, who has handed everything handed to him his entire life. If a student is simply there to take up space, and they don't want to earn the right to participate in extra-curricular activities, I don't believe that it should just be given to them.
|
|
jmg999
Junior Member
Posts: 263
|
Post by jmg999 on May 10, 2014 16:37:39 GMT -6
Except that it's completely relevant here. When we let students play football, when they haven't earned the right to play by doing what's required of them in the classroom, we're telling them that they can enjoy the privileges of life without having to work for them. The lesson learned is that they are entitled to the fruits of their labor w/out the actual labor. Unless I'm the one misinterpreting things, I don't think anyone is saying this at all. I think the gist of this discussion is that the punishment should fit the crime. No one is saying football should just be given to kids. However, having a low GPA doesn't seem dire enough to suspend a kid for an entire academic year or calendar year. In fact, it would have the exact opposite effect. Kids with low GPAs probably need all the support and structure they can get and what is being described here removes a large part of that support and structure. A 2.0 GPA has been created as the standard for maintaining eligibility for extra-curricular activities (ECA). What I'm reading here is that regardless of whether football players maintain this GPA, they should be allowed to play (for whatever reasons being provided). I freely admit that there have been studies that support the hypothesis that ECAs keep at-risk students engaged in school and prevent them from dropping out. However, these same studies have not supported the hypothesis that their grades will improve. In other words, they are just hanging around in order to participate in ECAs. I believe that this teaches them that they don't have to work at the hard stuff in order to participate in the fun stuff.
|
|
|
Post by fantom on May 10, 2014 16:58:55 GMT -6
A few thoughts:
1. Having eligibility standards is one thing but a full year of ineligibility is too much. If the idea is to get players to work harder at least give them a chance to get their grades up.
2. Some are still equating poor classroom performance with disruptive behavior and that's not always the case.
3. If it's really that easy to get a 2.5 in your school then boy, do we teach in different schools.
|
|