It is only human nature to be resistant to change. But as it happens, humans are flawed. Being resistant to a much needed change and using tradition as a shield is a dangerous game, and in the case of gym class, administrators are doing just that. While gym classes do have some merit, their role in future academic schedules needs to be questioned. In-season student athletes must be exempt from taking gym class.
For years, Education Law Section 803 has mandated student participation in physical education. But why? The most common argument among gym class champions (as opposed to gym class heroes) is that gym class promotes valuable physical exercise that translates into better performance in academic courses and exposes students to healthier lifestyles. A popular study from the California Department of Education offers the idea that “3–5 days of moderate to vigorous exercise” per week helps improve brain functions such as memory, concentration, mood, and classroom behavior. Granted, “moderate to vigorous physical exercise” certainly does yield some advantages in the classroom. If the period were offered as a study hall, however, moderate to vigorous studying would improve these qualities to a much higher degree. Student athletes already exceed any physical education standards by far, and their time spent in gym class could be better used to make up for time lost playing sports.
Letting in-season student athletes opt out of gym class will increase grade point averages (GPAs) and create an incentive to play a sport, among other benefits. High-school athletes typically practice five to six days a week for two to three hours a day, leaving little time to study and complete classroom assignments. Obviously, these students are meeting their physical requirements. High-school sports are exponentially more challenging and demanding than activities in gym class, and with the hours that are required to play them, gym class is no more than a burden. Windows of opportunity to complete actual schoolwork are lessened, and gym class remains an unmovable obstacle in athletes’ schedules. The concern that gym teachers would lose their jobs can also quelled by the fact that not all students will be accepted onto sports teams. The only visible change would be shrinking gym class enrollment. Teachers don’t lose their jobs, kids are motivated to join a sports team, athletes can manage their time better, and GPAs are bound to increase.
Tricking ourselves into believing that students are exercising to a level that could even generously be considered moderate to vigorous is a bold-faced lie. More than half of students’ gym grades are based on whether they show up and are dressed appropriately. With an added jog or a kick of a soccer ball, a student’s grade winds up being 100 percent. On paper, that student is meeting the intended goals of the state, or in other words, “exercising moderately to vigorously,” convincing the state that gym class is effective. This is not the case. Gym classes are graded on effort; there is no actual standard that students are expected to work towards. Granted, tests such as the PACER assess students, but a student who scores lower on the PACER will not necessarily receive a lower grade in gym class. Gym class also maintains the reputation of being one of the most widely skipped classes, and for good reason. In a class that is not calculated into GPAs, real-world education is virtually nonexistent, and the fear of bullying and humiliation is imminent, it is not a surprise some students opt out of gym class.
Even with everything considered, districts still consider gym class absences when determining if a student can graduate or not. Outrageously, schools count infractions in gym class against you, but do not count excellence for you, leaving behind a class of unenthusiastic teenagers. It is reckless and embarrassing to our posterity to not significantly change the role of gym classes in the lives of student athletes.
Athletes Should Be Exempt from Gym
