2008.06.01
Athletes' GPA rule should be slam dunk
A few years back, when he was principal at Noel C. Taylor Learning Academy, George Miller was asked to accompany 10 high school students to a football tryout at St. Paul's College in Lawrenceville.
The students six from William Fleming and four from Patrick Henry were standout athletes and wowed the college coaching staff. The Division II school was interested in all of the young men.
"Everybody was happy," recalled Miller, now Roanoke schools' athletic director. Crosstown rivalries faded as guys from Fleming and Patrick Henry talked about rooming together at St. Paul.
Then the phone call came.
St. Paul's coach, a friend of Miller's, told him that only two of the 10 young men were academically eligible.
There should be no debate over whether the Roanoke school board should require athletes to maintain a 2.0 grade point average to play sports. And the fact that there is one is disappointing.
As exciting as sports are as a component of the high school experience, the community has an obligation to help student athletes understand that education is a necessity rather than a nuisance.
Some athletes can dunk a basketball with the power to rattle a backboard. Others are blessed with the blinding speed that leaves defenders clutching at air. But too many of these same on-field phenoms are sub-par in the classroom.
School divisions -- Roanoke is not alone -- must stop using athletes and then tossing them aside when the season is over. Foremost, these kids are in school to get an education. If they catch the eye of a college recruiter, all the better.
Besides, by requiring a 2.0 GPA on a 4.0 scale, the school board isn't demanding they exert themselves to the full academic limit.
Yet, without a basic educational foundation that will brighten their prospects after high school, they can end up riding the bench in the game of life.
Critics have said that a higher academic standard may be too onerous for some students. It would discourage them, eventually causing them to lose interest in school and quit.
I'm not buying that.
If these students can read defenses and change plays at the line of scrimmage, then they have the ability to perform at a higher standard in class if someone demands it.
Athletes give local sports fans countless hours of excitement and enrichment. As a community, we should give them something in return -- a chance to be productive citizens when their playing days are over.
Shana - You are a breath of fresh air in Roanoke! Talk about low expectations - the school board should be looking for a new principal at Fleming!
None of the teachers I had or my Mother, who taught in Roanoke for many years, would have accepted such stupidity and shortsightedness.
Self esteem is not something your are given, it is something you earn by accomplising meaningful things.
It was a shock to move back from New Orleans and find that the Roanoke Schools had sunk to the same extremely low level. If you have no skills and no education there will be only low paying jobs and little future regardless of who promises otherwise.
Comment by Andy Stone — June 1, 2008 @ 2:17 pm
Ah yes, such a breeze of hot air indeed. Andy must have been in NO when the school system had the opportunity to "acquire" 14 million for capital improvements and the good ole RT's, including the breezy one, pushed for the construction of athletic facilities over educational facilities. Who cares about good jobs? Roanokers want those pro football players! I would have thought it to embarrassing to produce such an article in view of past support for athletics.
Geez, Al, is the bug up your butt me or the schools? The only time I hear from you is when I write about schools, and your comments are always derogatory. Taking a shot at me is OK, because I get it everyday. But what is your animus against the schools? That aside, if I understand your point, you're against 2.0 gpa requirements. You'd prefer dumb athletes, right? My interpretation is a stretch, isn't it? That's what I think about your logic as well.--s
Comment by Al — June 2, 2008 @ 5:46 am
Just curious, How come you are not bringing up the state championships, regional championships and district championships that some wise individual has also decided will be required. On one hand you are holding hands singing KUM BAH YAH, and at the same time turning your head saying "JUST WIN". Has anybody checked up in PA to see if this worked where the Asst. Sup came from. (But then again, anybody STUPID enough to hire somebody and allow them to live hours away in a different state deserves this.)If you want to play by these rules, make them for ALL EXTRACURICULAR ACTIVITIES, not just Athletics. Also, allow a year to get it going, pretty hard to tell people now, school is out for the summer and we are changing the rules. Nobody is denying the academics, but the way you are blasting athletics shows your lack on knowledge on the entire picture. This is somebody's pet project that has been railroaded behind closed doors and local coaches and teachers are afraid to say anything because of people like you saying they need to be replaced. The only people needing replacing are the District AD, and the Asst. Sup who resides in PA. (Maybe the people who actually hired the Asst Sup)
The rule would go into affect in the 2009-10 school year. The school is setting aside $50,000 for tutoring for athletes in the upcoming 2008-09 school year to get their grades up, so they'll be eligible when the requirement kicks in.--s
Comment by Mike — June 2, 2008 @ 7:41 am
I love when people come on here and tell you, Shana, that something you've said shows "your lack of knowledge" only for you to remind them that, as a journalist, you deal in facts and are required to know as much about the subject as possible before you speak on it. I do not always agree with you, but how can anyone complain when you champion a standard as low as a 2.0 being set and followed to keep our kids from becoming stupid adults???? I know grown men in their late twenties who can barely read this commentary and that makes me want to cry. Someone has to push these kids because they don't know how bad it will be for them after football with no education, and, yes, there is life after football (God willing).
Comment by Kia — June 2, 2008 @ 1:45 pm
I completely agree with the requirement for students to maintain a GPA of 2.0 if they want to participate in extracurricular activities...not just sports. There are several resources available for these students if they need to be tutored (I know, because I volunteered to tutor high school athletes when I was in college). When these students get to college, they are going to be held to higher standards also or they will not succeed. I really don't know why anyone would disagree...I mean seriously, who wants to promote ignorance?
Comment by Ky — June 2, 2008 @ 2:05 pm
Kia--All due respect to Shanna, as I find her columns to be well-written, but I find many journalists to be sorely lacking on "facts", "truth", and sometimes even the basic research skills to write an unbiased piece. This is especially true for some subjects more than others, but the basic "take home" is not to trust a journalist's facts as gospel. Always research it yourself.
Shanna, I agree with some other posters that all extra-curricular activities should be contingent upon decent grades. Especially at the grade school level, these activities should be a privilege for those exhibiting passing academic performance. I even feel that grade schools should focus less on their sports teams, and more on their educational performance.
I feel this is even worse at the college level, but that's a story for another day.
Ed, you are not the first to point out that the 2.0 requirement should be expanded to all extracurriculars. I agree. Of course, with space limitations, I didn't not note those points. School officials told me they are "starting" with athletics.--s
Comment by Ed S. — June 2, 2008 @ 6:55 pm
What is up my butt is people who jump on an issue without looking before they leap. Yes, your articles about schools fit that category. I have no problem with education but there is a big difference between "the schools" and EDUCATION. And, you bet your animus that I am opposed to the 2.0 rule. 2.0! How about calling it a "D" average. What will a "D" average get you except a job with a small town hick newspaper, or if your lucky, flippin' burgers? Sports have no place in education at this level and almost no place at any level. Sports will teach nothing outside of physical conditioning, that cannot be introduced in the classroom. What is being taught is that a 2.0 is "good enough" to get by so let's see how low we can aim. BUT, lets get back to the bigger issue. Why were the staff of the RT's, including yourself, not supporters of getting ALL the VS money for EDUCATIONAL facilities? My answer to that is that you really did not then, and do not now care about education. It's more fun to be a political mover/shaker rather than work for something of value.
Comment by Al — June 7, 2008 @ 7:20 pm
My, my, my... I am new to this forum but I would venture to say that your ole' buddy Al wasn't very athletic in his hay-day and probably isn't now. As for athletics only teaching physical conditioning - are you kidding me!!!???!! How about teamwork, discipline and character? I must say that I'm not as athletic as I use to be and that my son is more the academic type but playing sports helped us with a part of education that simply cannot be taught in the classroom or from any book. The 2.0 requirement is an excellent idea but as many have said, it should be used for ALL activities. Personally I think it should be the way it was in my high school, back in my own hay-day, which was a "C" average in all classes. As far as spending money on athletics... I think it's sad that the two high schools in Roanoke went so many years without a real home field. And as a side note - I hope that WF & PH will also use the facilities to host their graduations each year instead of using the civic center - That's what GW Danville does (as long as it doesn't rain)and it was a great experience to actually graduate at your high school. I couldn't believe it when I moved here 14 years ago and found that wasn't the case. I thought everyone walked graduation at their own high school!
Comment by ML — June 8, 2008 @ 6:10 am
Hey Kia..being a journalist doesnt mean that you have your facts strait...If youve ever had personal knowledge of an event later reported in the paper...the reporters are invariably wrong..And Shanna is living proof that you can always be wrong..and still work for the pathetic Roanoke Times
Comment by Tony — June 8, 2008 @ 12:48 pm
My my my my my, ML. Like most who are not up to the task, you made some incorrect assumptions and, as might be expected, when you cannot address the topic, you attack the author. Had you ever attended a class you might know everything you mentioned is easily taught off the field, so to speak. But then maybe you are right. Spending over 8 million for a place to hold graduation for City students might be better than renting the civic center for an afternoon. The real issue remains. Roanoke city, as is the case in so many schools throughout the country, is doing a poor job of educating the kids AND they are being stresses to come up with funds to accomplish basic things critical to their primary role (which is NOT sports). And given the economic trends showing up in the country today, things are going to get much worse. Just like practices taught in Econ 101, (which you probably never took) you cannot fund all programs when the revenue does not support them.
If money were no issue, get those boys and girls gold plated bats or silver cleats on their track shoes for all I care (as long as they are progressing with their education in the process).
BTW, for all out there who think the city school board initiated this plan from grass roots thinking, you might be surprised to discover that one of the current trends in Virginia educational districts now is this very same topic. It's happening all over the state. I actually think there will be a movement in the near term to significantly reduce the athletic programs due to financial considerations AND due to the fact that it contributes nothing to EDUCATION.
Comment by Al — June 8, 2008 @ 6:20 pm
Actually Al I did take ECON 101 & 102 for that matter. And I had to wait until I was an adult to pay for it. So you as well have made some incorrect assumptions. I'm all for spending more money (or more evenly spreading it around) for all activities and education. I am also for giving the teachers back control over the classroom but that is a whole different subject. I was more than upset that the WF drama department (another way to build teamwork, etc) lost almost all of it's funding last year. Thank goodness for parents who think drama has something to teach. You say that you can "learn" the traits I mentioned off the field which may be true but I stand by my statement that they cannot be taught in the classroom. It is not just sports that can build character but a host of other activities as well. I want our children to have a place where they can get the education needed to excel in this world AND have activities available such as sports, BETA, Drama and band that will teach them as well as give them a sense of school pride. I agree that our school systems are doing a poor job (I am not a fan of the SOL's) in all areas and big changes need to be made - I just don't think cutting out sports and the like is the answer. As far as the economic woes, have you looked at how much it costs to send a kid to college these days? I have considering in exactly one year that's what I will be doing. Some of our youth wouldn't be able to go to college at all if not for sports or band or any other of thoses "costly" activities. Believe me - I came from a town where if you didn't play sports or excel in music you had two choices: Join the military (my ticket out) or work in the mill for the rest of your life (like my parents did). It really didn't matter if you had good grades because if you came from a family that was considered "middle class" (another joke) you couldn't get enough money to go to college. And isn't WF pretty much building an entire new school? So the money is not just being spent for sports. Fleming will be a better school all around. Oh by the way, I forgot to mention - the kids in Danville don't even have the mill option anymore! If you took your ideas about sports in schools 90 miles south you would be run out of town very quickly.
Comment by ML — June 9, 2008 @ 12:48 am
Very traditional points that simply do not fit todays world and have not fit for several years. Just like getting a new gas suckin' supersized SUV. And it is this traditional thinking that will be the complete undoing of public education. Public universities are next on the list as well. Funny how we just do not value that which is free and once the "getting" is easier we want more, but of course it too must be free. I too am sticking my my main and only point. Roanoke City schools cannot afford these programs. Make participants PAY for it (new point) or drop it.
Comment by Al — June 9, 2008 @ 7:05 am