|
The Star Tribune report on school sports this week mostly
profiled suburban schools. I'm not a fan of school sports and am opposed to
school funding of sports (as a tradeoff to investment in academics). I'm not
opposed to youth sports, I just don't believe schools should be the place and
source of it. I favor community sports, funded by participants and
private fundraising to subsidize the sports on behalf of all kids who want to
play. With that bias acknowledged upfront, the report series is very
disturbing and raises lots of questions for me:
1. What share of Minneapolis district dollars go to
support sports? I understood that school sports were mostly fee based, but I'm
not certain what that means.
2. How does this share compare to that of various
suburban districts?
3. Do corporations sponsor sports in Minneapolis schools
and, if so, how much?
4. Do parents and students
view Minneapolis schools viewed as less competitive than suburban
schools due to lack of athletic opportunities? Is this another
reason Minneapolis schools find it hard to compete with suburban
schools?
5. If there has been a funding disparity between
Minneapolis and suburban athletic programs, what has been the
impact/consequence?
6. Given the high cost of school sports, in both
(parental and student) time and money, are they not another way to divide the
have and have-not kids in our schools?
Does anyone have experience or insight regarding these
issues? More questions/concerns?
Jeanne Massey
Kingfield
|
