Eliminating high school PE requirement if you play on a high school team sport?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you do it for some, do it for all. Don’t give one group an advantage the others don’t get.

What does this mean? My proposal is that anyone who plays a high school team sport gets a semester credit for PE. But if you don't play a high school team sport you have to take PE. Do you have a problem with this?

(Why so aggressive?)

“Kid would rather take a different elective.”

Taking a different elective like another AP class that strengthens their college applications? Like that?

How many kids do you think would rather take a different elective? How many do you think are involved in sports and other extracurriculars outside of school?

Why should the basketball/football/whatever team get the opportunity take a different elective? What makes them special?

If someone can successfully complete a full courseload, a varsity/JV sport, and then (by opting out of PE) an additional AP class? More power to them, I say.

But this is DCPS, and if people star squawking about fairness, it will never get done.

Would you be satisfied if the kids could get the PE credit but not enroll in another class — i.e., do study hall or something? Students on varsity/JV sports spend a lot of extracurricular time doing it, which obviously cuts into time that they could spend on homework or other pursuits. A system like this could give them at least some of that time back, by freeing up their duplicative PE period. Which would make things more fair!

“Squawking about fairness”? Fairness is bad? (Ignoring the part where you “squawk about fairness”.)

Students on varsity/JV sports *choose* to spend a lot of time doing it. There is no requirement. Other kids choose to spend a lot of time doing something else, like another non-school sport or music. Some students spend a lot of time doing something they don’t choose to do like baby-sitting a younger sibling, etcetcetc. Why should the kids on the school teams get some of that time back but no other students? What makes them special?

If someone can carry a full load, including an extra AP instead of PE PLUS work that part-time job or take care of family, even more power to them.

I think they should eliminate the PE requirement entirely. Students on sports teams could take whatever they want (incl study hall) and so could every other student.

[Anonymous]

Why doesn’t the OP go to a school board meeting or speak to an administrator and ask if this was ever considered in your district? Posting on DCUM is pointless.

[Anonymous]

Does DCPS offer any of these "required electives" (oxymoron intended) in summer school?

One semester each of PE and wellness were graduation requirements when I was a teen. My public magnet high school didn't offer either of them (or have any sports) so all of us had to take the classes in summer school at a neighborhood high school (four hours a day for three weeks). It did free us up to use more class time during the school year for subjects we wanted to take.

[Anonymous]

bro, do you even lift?

[Anonymous]

I can understand for a nationally ranked gymnast who spends 8 hours a day on their sport. Otherwise, just take the class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can understand for a nationally ranked gymnast who spends 8 hours a day on their sport. Otherwise, just take the class.

I think those kids are doing alternative schooling anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you do it for some, do it for all. Don’t give one group an advantage the others don’t get.

What does this mean? My proposal is that anyone who plays a high school team sport gets a semester credit for PE. But if you don't play a high school team sport you have to take PE. Do you have a problem with this?

(Why so aggressive?)

“Kid would rather take a different elective.”

Taking a different elective like another AP class that strengthens their college applications? Like that?

How many kids do you think would rather take a different elective? How many do you think are involved in sports and other extracurriculars outside of school?

Why should the basketball/football/whatever team get the opportunity take a different elective? What makes them special?

If someone can successfully complete a full courseload, a varsity/JV sport, and then (by opting out of PE) an additional AP class? More power to them, I say.

But this is DCPS, and if people star squawking about fairness, it will never get done.

Would you be satisfied if the kids could get the PE credit but not enroll in another class — i.e., do study hall or something? Students on varsity/JV sports spend a lot of extracurricular time doing it, which obviously cuts into time that they could spend on homework or other pursuits. A system like this could give them at least some of that time back, by freeing up their duplicative PE period. Which would make things more fair!

“Squawking about fairness”? Fairness is bad? (Ignoring the part where you “squawk about fairness”.)

Students on varsity/JV sports *choose* to spend a lot of time doing it. There is no requirement. Other kids choose to spend a lot of time doing something else, like another non-school sport or music. Some students spend a lot of time doing something they don’t choose to do like baby-sitting a younger sibling, etcetcetc. Why should the kids on the school teams get some of that time back but no other students? What makes them special?

If someone can carry a full load, including an extra AP instead of PE PLUS work that part-time job or take care of family, even more power to them.

I think they should eliminate the PE requirement entirely. Students on sports teams could take whatever they want (incl study hall) and so could every other student.

It's not so much that it "makes them special" as that they are already doing the physical activity (usually much more intensely than they would in a PE class) that is the whole point of the PE requirement. They're not getting out of the requirement — they are satisfying it.

Fairness is fine, but it's a problem if we can never do anything to make anything better for anyone because of the specter of it being "not fair" for someone else. This is a common sense policy that is in place in most states.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you do it for some, do it for all. Don’t give one group an advantage the others don’t get.

What does this mean? My proposal is that anyone who plays a high school team sport gets a semester credit for PE. But if you don't play a high school team sport you have to take PE. Do you have a problem with this?

(Why so aggressive?)

“Kid would rather take a different elective.”

Taking a different elective like another AP class that strengthens their college applications? Like that?

How many kids do you think would rather take a different elective? How many do you think are involved in sports and other extracurriculars outside of school?

Why should the basketball/football/whatever team get the opportunity take a different elective? What makes them special?

If someone can successfully complete a full courseload, a varsity/JV sport, and then (by opting out of PE) an additional AP class? More power to them, I say.

But this is DCPS, and if people star squawking about fairness, it will never get done.

Would you be satisfied if the kids could get the PE credit but not enroll in another class — i.e., do study hall or something? Students on varsity/JV sports spend a lot of extracurricular time doing it, which obviously cuts into time that they could spend on homework or other pursuits. A system like this could give them at least some of that time back, by freeing up their duplicative PE period. Which would make things more fair!

“Squawking about fairness”? Fairness is bad? (Ignoring the part where you “squawk about fairness”.)

Students on varsity/JV sports *choose* to spend a lot of time doing it. There is no requirement. Other kids choose to spend a lot of time doing something else, like another non-school sport or music. Some students spend a lot of time doing something they don’t choose to do like baby-sitting a younger sibling, etcetcetc. Why should the kids on the school teams get some of that time back but no other students? What makes them special?

If someone can carry a full load, including an extra AP instead of PE PLUS work that part-time job or take care of family, even more power to them.

I think they should eliminate the PE requirement entirely. Students on sports teams could take whatever they want (incl study hall) and so could every other student.

It's not so much that it "makes them special" as that they are already doing the physical activity (usually much more intensely than they would in a PE class) that is the whole point of the PE requirement. They're not getting out of the requirement — they are satisfying it.

Fairness is fine, but it's a problem if we can never do anything to make anything better for anyone because of the specter of it being "not fair" for someone else. This is a common sense policy that is in place in most states.

A lot of students are already doing the physical activity outside school.

How would it be a problem to allow all students to “choose their elective”?

[Anonymous]

Should it be something like at least five hours physical activity a week gets you exempt? Unfortunately it gets complicated where you draw the line.

A high schooler who has to stock groceries or move tires in their parents auto repair shop on weekends and after school is arguably getting more exercise than many casual sports where you spend a lot of the practice waiting around and then get a snack.

If you offer PE during the summer, should summer swim count?

Or even chess is a varsity sport in some areas. A wonderful game but it's not doing much for your cardiovascular health.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you do it for some, do it for all. Don’t give one group an advantage the others don’t get.

What does this mean? My proposal is that anyone who plays a high school team sport gets a semester credit for PE. But if you don't play a high school team sport you have to take PE. Do you have a problem with this?

(Why so aggressive?)

“Kid would rather take a different elective.”

Taking a different elective like another AP class that strengthens their college applications? Like that?

How many kids do you think would rather take a different elective? How many do you think are involved in sports and other extracurriculars outside of school?

Why should the basketball/football/whatever team get the opportunity take a different elective? What makes them special?

If someone can successfully complete a full courseload, a varsity/JV sport, and then (by opting out of PE) an additional AP class? More power to them, I say.

But this is DCPS, and if people star squawking about fairness, it will never get done.

Would you be satisfied if the kids could get the PE credit but not enroll in another class — i.e., do study hall or something? Students on varsity/JV sports spend a lot of extracurricular time doing it, which obviously cuts into time that they could spend on homework or other pursuits. A system like this could give them at least some of that time back, by freeing up their duplicative PE period. Which would make things more fair!

“Squawking about fairness”? Fairness is bad? (Ignoring the part where you “squawk about fairness”.)

Students on varsity/JV sports *choose* to spend a lot of time doing it. There is no requirement. Other kids choose to spend a lot of time doing something else, like another non-school sport or music. Some students spend a lot of time doing something they don’t choose to do like baby-sitting a younger sibling, etcetcetc. Why should the kids on the school teams get some of that time back but no other students? What makes them special?

If someone can carry a full load, including an extra AP instead of PE PLUS work that part-time job or take care of family, even more power to them.

I think they should eliminate the PE requirement entirely. Students on sports teams could take whatever they want (incl study hall) and so could every other student.

It's not so much that it "makes them special" as that they are already doing the physical activity (usually much more intensely than they would in a PE class) that is the whole point of the PE requirement. They're not getting out of the requirement — they are satisfying it.

Fairness is fine, but it's a problem if we can never do anything to make anything better for anyone because of the specter of it being "not fair" for someone else. This is a common sense policy that is in place in most states.

A lot of students are already doing the physical activity outside school.

How would it be a problem to allow all students to “choose their elective”?

I don't see a problem with this. If the point of three semesters of required PE is to combat the obesity epidemic and make sure kids know how to engage in physical activity . . . then proof/evidence of such/similar physical activity (team sport with or outside of school) should allow a kid to waive the requirement. I like Latin's view on this - DCPS should follow suit. Who would be the DCPS administrator to contact about this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you do it for some, do it for all. Don’t give one group an advantage the others don’t get.

What does this mean? My proposal is that anyone who plays a high school team sport gets a semester credit for PE. But if you don't play a high school team sport you have to take PE. Do you have a problem with this?

(Why so aggressive?)

“Kid would rather take a different elective.”

Taking a different elective like another AP class that strengthens their college applications? Like that?

How many kids do you think would rather take a different elective? How many do you think are involved in sports and other extracurriculars outside of school?

Why should the basketball/football/whatever team get the opportunity take a different elective? What makes them special?

If someone can successfully complete a full courseload, a varsity/JV sport, and then (by opting out of PE) an additional AP class? More power to them, I say.

But this is DCPS, and if people star squawking about fairness, it will never get done.

Would you be satisfied if the kids could get the PE credit but not enroll in another class — i.e., do study hall or something? Students on varsity/JV sports spend a lot of extracurricular time doing it, which obviously cuts into time that they could spend on homework or other pursuits. A system like this could give them at least some of that time back, by freeing up their duplicative PE period. Which would make things more fair!

“Squawking about fairness”? Fairness is bad? (Ignoring the part where you “squawk about fairness”.)

Students on varsity/JV sports *choose* to spend a lot of time doing it. There is no requirement. Other kids choose to spend a lot of time doing something else, like another non-school sport or music. Some students spend a lot of time doing something they don’t choose to do like baby-sitting a younger sibling, etcetcetc. Why should the kids on the school teams get some of that time back but no other students? What makes them special?

If someone can carry a full load, including an extra AP instead of PE PLUS work that part-time job or take care of family, even more power to them.

I think they should eliminate the PE requirement entirely. Students on sports teams could take whatever they want (incl study hall) and so could every other student.

It's not so much that it "makes them special" as that they are already doing the physical activity (usually much more intensely than they would in a PE class) that is the whole point of the PE requirement. They're not getting out of the requirement — they are satisfying it.

Fairness is fine, but it's a problem if we can never do anything to make anything better for anyone because of the specter of it being "not fair" for someone else. This is a common sense policy that is in place in most states.

A lot of students are already doing the physical activity outside school.

How would it be a problem to allow all students to “choose their elective”?

I see the merit of a PE requirement, especially considering the general state of American health/fitness. So I support that being required.

If a student participates in rigorous athletics, it makes sense to consider that requirement satisfied. It seems administratively easiest to limit it to school JV/varsity sports, but many school systems have come up with reasonable guidelines for outside sports activities as well (number of hours per week, coaching, etc.). Whatever policy is decided on may not capture student X who jogs every morning, but student X isn't any worse off than she was before, so who cares.

If "a lot of students" are doing sufficiently rigorous sports to waive the PE requirement, then waive it for a lot of students. Who cares what the number is.

[Anonymous]

I think this is actually a great idea, but I do believe Heath should still be a requirement.

[Anonymous]

Not in DCPS. My son is on two high school sports teams. It always boggled my mind that it wouldn’t count for PE. His school does offer online PE, which is just logging exercise and doing a very minimal amount of coursework. That’s what a lot of the athletes have started taking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not in DCPS. My son is on two high school sports teams. It always boggled my mind that it wouldn’t count for PE. His school does offer online PE, which is just logging exercise and doing a very minimal amount of coursework. That’s what a lot of the athletes have started taking.

What school is this (that offers online PE)? At a minimum if we could make this an option at all DCPS high schools .. . . such a colossal waste of time to require three semesters of PE! (fine, if that is what kids want to do with their electives - but don't make everyone else do it if they are already doing sports!)

[Anonymous]

I would support this. I think the first question that needs to be asked is why is PE required?
It is required for numerous reasons, mostly because physical activity improves overall health and physical activity improves academic success. If they are getting that physical activity playing an organized sport, I think that should count.
Unfortunately, some parents view this as letting the student-athlete get out of something and giving them an unfair advantage. The reality is every student has advantages or disadvantages, and there’s no way to account for every single one of them.