Denver Business Daily

Should public schools do what some universities do and shift money away from athletics to academics?

Some universities have reduced or altogether eliminated sports programs in order to save money and/or shift money to academic programs. Public schools have many needs academically as well as limited class sizes, more schools, newer equipment, higher teacher salaries, etc. Is following the lead of these universities a viable option. If not, why not?

Public Comments

1. Schools have shifted money almost completely. Sports are now relying on school council fundraising to help fund the sports.
2. Yes, they should, but no they never will.
3. That'd be a real shocker where I live...the high school football stadium is larger than that of most universities, and the "best" school districts are judged on how often they take state. Elementary kids around here who show a talent for sports are voluntarily held back at least one year (requested by the district, approved by the parents) not for academics, but to groom them for varsity sports...that way, they're a year older and bigger when they hit the hs team. The school in our district, an affluent football school, has on average a 20% dropout rate...funny how the sports kids stay till graduation, though. (Which, by the way, is part of the reason my son is homeschooled, but anyway...) Yes, I think they should. Sports are important, my son plays sports and will through high school, but they are not nearly as important as academics. No business is going to care if you were the star quarterback...they are going to care if you have the responsibility and skills to do your job well. No political decisions should be made on the basis of sports playbooks...they are made on the basis of logic, understanding of world events, and on the basis of economic strategies. Sports are important, and they are good, but given the choice, academics should win out every time.
4. They absolutely should, but it doesn't necessarily mean they will does it? Sports are just extracurricular, they are fun, they build focus for the physically active students, but the academics are still the primary objective to any student’s success. I also believe that if athletes like sports it should come out of their pockets, or through fundraising. It’s only superfluous after all; it isn’t supposed to be the main focus of a school system anyway.
5. I think it's a great idea. In some states, the public schools are so underfunded anyway. Check out www.corridorofshame.com
6. Public schools have to prioritize their needs. Would students benefit more from having books or having equipment for sports? Is not that students don't need both, it's just that if only given money to purchase one, well academics has to come first. Schools are here to primarily educate children and everything else is secondary. It all starts from the top (government). We can spend billions of dollars fighting wars for other countries, but we don't have enough money to purchase equipment for good 'ol baseball and football. It doesn't make sense.
7. I don't know about all schools, but Western University should shift money out of the junk food it sells and place it somewhere to help students!