Many California high schools are requiring ninth graders to pass a fitness test or take more phys ed, reports the Sacramento Bee.
For the first time, high school freshmen in many districts must pass five of six fitness exams or face the possibility of extra years in physical education classes.
In gym after gym, the pressure is on. Kids are being pressed to run, reach, push, stretch and pull like their bodies and their futures depend on it.
I grew up in Illinois, which required four years of PE in high school. We only had to take three years of English, two years of math, two of science and two of history. But the PE teachers had a strong lobby. I nearly failed to graduate because of my inability to walk on a balance beam.
We had to take some fitness test in high school, and the first time I got a terrible score, and it made me aware of how unfit I was. I started jogging and doing sit-ups and push-ups, and generally getting outside, and a few months later I scored much higher (and was much fitter). So while I think that this is pretty far down the list of priorities for high school graduation, it doesn’t seem pointless.
I have been aware most of my life that I have always had a negative opinion of PE and PE teachers. I think I have some solid basis for that opinion, though it is not a subject I have ever thought deeply about, or want to think deeply about. Suffice it to say that as a kid I had a few bad experiences, nothing really terrible, to be sure, but enough to make me think poorly of my PE teachers. It appeared that they only wanted to be coaches. They didn’t want to teach PE. And they didn’t have much of an idea of how to really teach anything. They had no vision higher than throwing out a ball and providing a minimal level of supervision. That minimal level of supervision was not ever sufficient to make a PE class a place I wanted to be.
So if California wants to demand more in the line of fitness from students, then I would certainly argue that it ought to also think about demanding more, a whole lot more, from physical education itself. Is there any evidence that PE has ever had any beneficial effect on fitness? If so, is that effect sustainable? And at what cost? And is it worth it? Call me a grinch, but I’m not inclined to give physical education the benefit of any doubt.
At the same time that many k-12 students are and overweight and inactive, more of them than ever before are full-time elite athletes. It makes no sense to require everyone to take school-based PE, especially at the middle and high school levels, when that time may be used to prepare for and take more-challenging academic offerings, including AP and IB courses.
All of my full-time athletes started college with sophomore standing, allowing for a combination of early graduation/extra majors/internships/TA positions; all within four years.
Whether it be hockey, tennis, swimming, soccer, gymnastics etc., full-time elite athletes not only do not need more exercise, but PE classes may contribute to over-training and injuries. I have seen it happen and many PE teachers will not accept the validity of parent/club coach concerns,even with evidence.
Is school-based PE supposed to be for the good of the students, or is it a jobs program for PE teachers?
But momof4, wouldn’t all those elite athletes be able to pass the fitness tests, so they wouldn’t be required to take the extra phys ed?
I think Brian has the key question here (in our “scientifically based evidence” world): where is the proof that taking Physical Education causes an increase in student fitness?
This punitive approach to what should be a national goal of personal fitness is typical of the way we have been approaching all educational problems recently–when we identify a need, we mandate a fix, then punish those who aren’t fixed quickly. And it is punitive and humiliating to the kids who can’t pass 5 tests and are forced to take a class that should have been designed for fun and enlightenment, and has now become Special Ed Gym.
If school sports were more about fun and fitness and less about rewarding a top few athletes, maybe more kids would participate. I read an interesting story recently about the dearth of 3-letter, all-around HS athletes. Athletes are being urged to specialize, as early as 6th grade, and get on expensive travel/summer teams, rather than playing many sports. Sports are not about school spirit and fun any more. They’re about crushing the competition and scholarships (although few kids get them, and those who do often have to balance their academic needs against having their tuition paid by Nowhere U).
Maybe this comes from my own experience. While I was fine on the balance beam, I was never a graceful runner. The first time I ran the 50-year dash, my gym teacher, Mrs. Firm (no kidding) asked me, in front of the class, if I had suffered polio as a child. Sheesh.
Don’t worry. The standards to pass the PE test will be “dumbed down” soon enough so that even the most out of shape students will pass the test.
Well, I don’t know about scientific data, but I’m pretty sure that PE helped with MY physical fitness.
Passing the physical fitness tests weren’t that hard for me, except for the flexibility stuff (I always failed the Sit N Reach). We were also required to run 2 miles once a week. Of course, a lot of the students would just walk the entire way and end up failing because they didn’t make it in under the time allowed. And then they’d complain.
Passing the physical fitness tests *wasn’t* that hard for me, I mean. I typez gud English!
Re: elite athletes will be able to pass any fitness test…not necessarily. Just ask US Navy physical therapists. The Navy (and perhaps other services, as well) include flexibility, which tends to increase the scores of women and decrease the scores of men, who end up in the PT department to try to fix the back problems caused by unrealistic flexibility standards. Also, allowing a high number of students to test-pass out of school PE would decrease the need for PE teachers. The teachers’ unions will fight that and they have the money and the politicians in their pockets to win; if not outright, then via the back door.
Even better, remove all non-academic classes, sports, band etc. from the schools and let them all be done through parks/rec departments and/or private clubs. Schools, even the best ones, aren’t doing so well academically that they can take on more distractions. Just because something is a good idea doesn’t mean that it should be done at school.
Well, there’s also the flip side of PE, which is when you’ve got poorly trained teachers and poorly maintained facilities, it’s a recipe for trouble. Personally, that combination resulted in three knee surgeries, including a near total reconstruction on one, due to repeated injuries. First time, coach thought it wasn’t “that bad” and told me to walk it off, then when I wanted to go home, he told me to walk to the office. Turns out that the more competent folks in the emergency room figured out I was walking on torn ligaments and cartilage. Whoops.
My point is, before this becomes a requirement, somebody’s got to make sure that the PE teachers and facilities are up to the task. Considering the way most public schools are run, I truly doubt it.
I was in school when the first big changes happened in response to Title IX.
In 7th grade, we had boys PE and girls PE, and boys PE involved a half-mile run, followed by playing basketball or flag football, with twice-a-month fitness tests. It worked very well for getting in shape. Girls had a similar regime; the only difference is they did their run at the end so the classes could use the track separately.
In 8th grade, our school did Title IX reforms and integrated PE. For some reason, they massively watered it down and it was no longer much of a workout.
I’m all for better academics, but you do need some break during the day when you go outside, breathe fresh air, and work up a sweat. Imprisoning kids in classrooms all day grinding on pencil-and-paper sounds awful, and will probably cause even more kids, especially boys, to hate school.