<p>Using future investments to solve present problems. Real smart…</p>
<p>I’m OK with pay for play for HS sports as long as their is an outlet for those that cannot afford the experience. I don’t think “clubs” need funding, they can have fund-raisers if they want to do something that has an associated cost. Bands, choirs, clubs and those sorts of organizations in our district pay for their own travel, uniforms, etc. through fund-raising, etc. New uniforms were an expense three years ago and I know the number was a real biggie but the kids wrote grants solicited area businesses and the band parents rallied and somehow new uniforms were procurred. We now have ‘club sports’ that are organized and funded by a parent steering committee yet is “school sanctioned,” covered under their insurance and able to use facilities, but they rent charter buses, buy their own uniforms, pay their own coaches. This is a strong, little school district with not huge budgets but we have a fine school system, one of the strongest in the state with a not-unbearable millage and a declining student base to boot. They’ve brought repairs, maintenance and construction in under budget with the help of parents with construction industry experience. We have fine administration. They have budget issues right now that will probably “hurt” next year and announced some changes recently but that, too, will be weathered I have no doubt. It can be done but not without a strong public engagement. We fund our schools through taxes but because it is exactly that, we pay, we should not abdicate responsibility entirely.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Do you pay $20,000 in taxes a year? I think that would go a long ways towards understanding where taxpayers come from.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Our town provides certain athletics outside of the school district. There are fees but they
can be waived based on income. Providing services from the town means that those in
private schools and home schools and even other cities and towns can participate.</p>
<p>The city where I work has city league teams to the same end. It also has parks, fields,
basketball courts, tennis courts, etc.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>There are lots of opportunities for EC outside of school.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>That may or may not be true. But there are other countries that are very, very strong
in science and math for a fraction of what we spend on education where sports are
decidedly not a priority.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>I personally think that the US is quite generous with providing ECs.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>And yet boys and girls clubs are ECs. In my area, the Boys and Girls club gets most of
their contributions from Taco Bell. And then there are lots of local merchants and
private contributions.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>OMG…how about study? Work? Have we really gotten to the point that we have to toss ‘goodies’ like basketball, twirling and football to keep kids ‘interested’ in school? I propose that the taxpayer fund a superb academic opportunity to all children that meets their needs- be it special ed or GT- and have parents and kids fund the ‘extras’. This has been the case for years and years in the US and is the norm in the whole world. I really resent the idea that kids have to bribed with goodies to get stay in school. What a negative and pessimistic view of children.</p>
<p>mimi, the point that is being made is there are channels outside the schools for kids to participate. There are also very strong school districts with good solid extra curriculum activities that are not entirely funded from school budgets. That is the point. When the budgets get tight there are very few educated parents who would argue funding clubs/athletics etc. over funding education. It is absolutely proven that other activities do keep high risk kids in school. Conversely there are many students who are strong at things like choir, music, arts, that are not at risk and benefit from those activities. The words “study” and “work” have many, many different connotations. It’s not just the at-risk football player who studies to keep a minimal GPA and works to make money, the highest achieving cello player studies the instrument and works at practice…as does the physics geek who needs a classroom and lab for “study” and “work”…many variations not B/W</p>
<p>BCEagle- I’ve been working since I was 14. I may not pay 20k/year in taxes, but I do pay a solid 600/year to state, local, etc. I only make about 4k/year, so it’s alot out of my paycheck. As a taxpayer, I totally support ECs for everyone. </p>
<p>mimimom-I work, I study, but I still would really hate to lose my ECs</p>
<p>ECs, especially athletics are critical to young peoples performance in the classroom.
[exercise</a> builds the brain](<a href=“http://www.johnratey.com/newsite/index.html]exercise”>http://www.johnratey.com/newsite/index.html)</p>
<p>[As</a> Girls Become Women, Sports Pay Dividends - Well Blog - NYTimes.com](<a href=“http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/15/as-girls-become-women-sports-pay-dividends/]As”>As Girls Become Women, Sports Pay Dividends - The New York Times)</p>
<p>I reiterate, ECs are EXTRA. I applaud schools where parents and students fund their ECs. Anyone can tell you that when a person has an economic stake in an activity (even a very small one) they tend to appreciate them more. </p>
<p>Has anyone considered that the reason that ECs ‘keep high risk kids in school’ is that they serve to entertain them rather than educate them? I believe we’re doing those ‘high risk’ kids a grave disservice by dazzling them with sports or whatever rather than providing them an appropriate education of math, science, English and history.</p>
<p>How is getting to school two hours early everyday for practice * entertainment*?</p>
<p>How is a football program in an inner city high school that has a GPA requirement to participate and mandatory SAT for every player, frivolous?</p>
<p>ECs provide structure and engagement in a way that classroom activities often do not.</p>
<p>Especially needed in high school, when students will be legal adults soon, with all the rights and responsibilities of adulthood, EC’s allow students to take charge of their time and energy, put the work into something * they choose* and see the results.</p>
<p>You get out of it, what you put in to it, and middle class youth are not the only ones who benefit from extracurricular opportunities.</p>
<p>^^^agree. I totally disagree that high risk kids aren’t getting an education. Often they have a higher degree of attention simply because the vast majority of schools require certain GPAs to STAY in sports. Quite the opposite than the idea of the wonderful trumpet player or the super fast runner or the gridiron hero merely “entertaining” but “failing” school. Frivolous absolutely not. There are many paths to success running along side the classroom. Plenty of data and studies to back it up – otherwise sports, band, music, art, and other non-core curriculum things would have disappeared decades and decades ago.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>I started working at 11 doing yardwork for ten cents an hour.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>You’re paying 15% a year on taxes on $4K for state and local taxes? I know of no
place in the country that has that high a level of taxation for such a small amount.
Do you get that money back when you file your tax returns?</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Your perspective in paying income taxes is not the same as in paying property taxes
for the place where you live. Furthermore, you are subsidized by your parents for
room and board.</p>
<p>I personally think that working a job makes for an excellent EC and maybe more useful
for finding professional employment.</p>
<p>You misunderstand me- I believe that ECs are fun, entertaining, a learning experience, valuable, etc. I also believe that the parents and students should fund them. When faced with a funding crisis in the public schools- and we’ll see that more and more- those are things that should go, not academics. </p>
<p>No one has adressed the point that up to 30 years ago, there were no taxpayer funded ECs and kids did just fine- better, in fact! In my opinion, kids don’t spend enough time on the hard academics to master them. In not mastering basic skills, they don’t do well and become unmotivated, thus turning to gangs, streetcorners and the like. So many kids have undiagnosed learning disablities, and instead of adressing those, and tailoring academics to them, we encourage them to play sports as a way to ‘keep them in school’. Minimum GPAs are easily manipulated by stat driven coaches under pressure to perform.</p>
<p>If you look at some of the charter schools that are doing well, they are going back to the basics. Extending the school day, not to add another music appreciation class (important and valuable, but not essential if you can’t read on grade level!) but to spend more time on the basics. Once those are mastered, then there is room for ECs, as long as there is room in the budget. </p>
<p>Again, ECs are valuable and wonderful learning opportunities. I just don’t think they should be taxpayer funded in lieu of academics.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Oh, good grief, BCEagle91. It’s bad enough that you’re nit-picking apart rocket’s posts. But, do you really have to resort to this kind of one-upping? :rolleyes:</p>
<p>*> I’ve been working since I was 14.</p>
<p>I started working at 11 doing yardwork for ten cents an hour.*</p>
<p>I pulled dandelions at eight years old for a penny a piece- big whoop.
I picked fruit in middle school to pay for my school clothes. ( & I worked in a kitchen of a retirement facility in high school- however, because my work didn’t end till 10 pm, nd because I didn’t have enough money for a car/ins, I walked the 3 miles home every night and as a result was often too tired in the morning to get to school on time)</p>
<p>Students should have a choice of extra curriculars- volunteer activities, sports, arts & paid work. It should not only be students whose parents can bankroll private cars who receive transportation, and not only students whose parents/schools cover enrichment activities who can benefit from them.</p>
<p>^^ not sure I followed the whole post, but you bring up a great point.</p>
<p>“ECs” can be so many things. If I were a college admin, I would be much more impressed by a kid who worked a job to fund summer camp, etc. as opposed to one who did not. In general, I think paid work is much more interesting to colleges than captain of the ---- team. I made sure my DD did both- she worked fast food (sandwich making) last summer, it was an amazing experience for her. The best part was she learned how long someone had to work to pay for the jeans that she leaves lying on the floor of her room. ;)</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>We didn’t have a working automobile. We didn’t have all of these sorts of things when
I grew up but there were other things to do which weren’t so bad. ECs are luxuries in the context of people that can barely afford their homes.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>It is a big whoop.</p>
<p>I’ve been working since I was 11 and each successive job was easier to get because of previous work experiences.</p>
<p>I’ve been working since I was 11 and each successive job was easier to get because of previous work experiences.</p>
<p>I can appreciate that- however- if you are not able to complete your education because of work obligations, that limits subsequent work opportunities.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Ellison, Gates, Dell, Jobs, Lauren. Five billionaires that dropped out of college for work opportunities.</p>
<p>I was hired into industry after a year of college. I had some absolutely wonderful opportunities to learn a variety of business systems, work in consulting in a bunch of different settings and start a company with a friend of mine. I later joined a company that paid for my undergraduate and graduate degrees.</p>
<p>If I had completed my degree, would I have had these opportunities? Back then a degree wasn’t that important in my line of work and experience generally trumped a degree. The nice list of jobs also showed a strong work ethic and provided the intangible skills of working with all sorts of people in the workplace.</p>
<p>There’s an interesting article from Forbes in 2003 that had the percentage of the Forbes 400 without a college degree at 33%.</p>
<p>BCEagle-I did get 200 of it back in a tax return, but still. I do pay taxes</p>
<p>^^My husband and I started working summers at age 13. These days no one wants to look at the kids until they are 16 so we make work for the kids on our rentals. Work is good. More often than not as our two oldest went through the college interviews they were always asked about their work history which is pretty mundane stuff. It also gives the kids something to whine about to their friends who get allowances without having to work for pay. One or two ECs good. Some work experience good. Education good. College good if wanted/desired/necessary for what one wants to do in life. If my third wanted to build houses, be a plumber or an electrician or an auto mechanic I’d be totally and 100% supportive. He’s smart, he’s agressive and he’ll do fine at whatever he chooses and I’m going to make sure as a taxpayer that he gets the best darn K-12 public education I can possibly support even if he has to give up football, lacrosse and every other thing he’s involved in to ensure the education component is in place.</p>