I'd like to start a discussion on district funding of Athletics. This school year the district will have a co-op Hockey team that is fully supported by donations, scholarships and fees, there are no taxpayer dollars going to fund this team.
Is this fair? Is this something we should look at for all our teams? If our sports teams had to be privately funded, would the teams disappear? Should the district at least have a minium number of participants to continue a team? Currently the district does not want to run academic classes if there are less than 15 participants, should the same standard hold for athletics?
I completely believe that athletics plays an important part in an adolescent's life but the question is, when educational institutions continually are cutting their budgets by millions, is the investment in athletics more valuable than the othe programs being cut?
I'd love to hear people's thoughts on the issue.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
It would be interesting to see how much athletics really cost the taxpayer. If there is a breakdown of the costs of each sport, I'd really love to see that. I know for certain that basketball, for instance, is probably a huge SOURCE OF REVENUE for the school district. Add in the amount of private support for the various athletic programs and I bet the numbers would surprise most people.
It has been awhile since I asked for the information (probably 5 years or so) of the "net" cost of athletics -- after ticket revenues were accounted for --- at the time I was told the figure was around $1 million.
Whether individual sports bring in more in ticket revenues than the district spends on them I don't know, though I doubt it unless you are strictly talking about Varsity Basketball and Football -- they might come close. Overall, the district spends over $1M on athletics.
Now don't get me wrong. I know the value of athletics, both my daughters are atheletes. Personally I am willing to pay more in taxes to fund athletics and all the other district programs, but many are not, hence the need year after year to cut programs. I just think when you are talking about cutting actual student classes (like Middle School French) I have a problem with cutting such programs before we cut non-academic areas.
Actually I think athletics is one area a majority of the public would be willing to fund with extra taxes. Of course the only way to find out for sure would be to put it to a referendum to exceed revenue caps to fund athletics and the board isn't going to go there, especially since you would never find a majority of the board that would stop funding athletics if the referendum failed.
If you look at athletics from an educational standpoint, I think it is really hard to argue that athletics improves student learning. The only data I've seen is usually grades but that can be a catch 22--- you need to maintain a 2.0 GPA to play sports, so everyone in sports will have at least a 2.0 GPA by virture of the fact they can't play if they don't.
I would guess basketball is a money maker and football loses money. I don't think the public has any idea the amount of money the supporting clubs donate to the district for athletics. At West for example the OWBC just purchased a score board for the gym for $20,000.00. Parents have purchased warm-up and uniforms. For baseball clubs have buildt the dugouts, concession stands, hitting background, batting cages, infield drainage systems, as well as maintained the fields during the seasons. All at 0 cost to the taxpayer. The same goes for the North baseball fields. I am sure the average citizen has no idea this goes on. Did you?
Let me begin by stating that I believe athletic costs should be reduced commensurately with the cut in academics.
Many high school students perform academically in order to compete in athletics. What would be the COST of losing a number of students be if sports were greatly reduced? Not everyone can achieve academically but athletics keeps many students attending school and exerting at least some effort in the classroom to remain eligible
to compete.
The benefits of athletics are touted by our presidents; the last six or so playing collegiate athletics. I have seen them attribute much of theirconfidence to lead, function under pressure, work with others, recover from defeat, etc.
If Oshkosh were to cut into athletics to the point of eliminating some high school sports parents moving into the Fox Valley would settle in a neighboring district which offers their child the opportunity to experience athletics.
The reason the WIAA was formed and districts join was so the school kept some ownership of the activities. Without such control, traveling teams, who would exist regardless, could be scheduling games at nights and times without limitation which would adversely efect the student-athlete's ability to function in the classroom the next day.
We must realize that athletics are one of many extensions of the curriculum. I don't think they should be the "holy cows" of budget discussions but neither should they be viewed as a side issue with little academic-related value.
Thank you to the posters so far, you have provided a lot of things to think about and have kept the discussion civil... keep it coming.
Post a Comment