A Place for Physical Education in Schools?

Physical education being mandatory in schools would be a great way of reducing the prevalence of obesity in the children of our society. I never understood why the physical education courses were drastically cut in the state education programs during the mid-nineties.

It's a difficult question, too, though... since many of the kids who were doing physical education would just be bystanders minimally engaging in the physical part of the class. I liked physical education and enjoyed the various activities we were assigned; but I also recognize that it was hard to get all the children to want to actively participate in gym.

I recall my parents' stories from their youth and how they had physical education every day while they were in school: health class for part of the week, and gym class for the other part. That would have served a couple of nice functions: (1) the physical activity would be good for the body; (2) it would be a nice change of pace from being an inactive participant in the learning process (i.e., just sitting and listening/writing notes); (3) physical education or health classes would be a great way of informing our youth of the benefits of maintaining good health habits.

For public school boards to claim that the physical and intellectual well-being of our children is of utmost importance, while not making health education and physical education a more important part of the daily curriculum reeks of ineptitude and short-sightedness. It's just like the National Football League Suits wanting to take a 'hard line stance' on Concussions and the health of their players, while still not mandating proven Concussion Limiting technologies for the helmets the athletes use, and also not having a very proactive health care system for the athletes they claim to want to help.

In the same vain, our children are being fed garbage, and the school claims that they are feeding the children 'age-appropriate, finely tuned diets' in their meal offerings, while having flawed ideas about what is 'healthy' and 'healhtful'.

 At a young age, an impressionable youth needs positive health habits to be enforced and reinforced, needs to be told what is good and coaxed to act with that positive behavior in mind. Knowing what it means for something to be a 'good food' or the benefits of being active throughout the day should enable children to harness their knowledge toward life-long positive health decisions.

Really, this shouldn't be a debate, but just like the question of 'should we support the creative arts in our schools' question, schools aren't looking at the benefits of a well-rounded education on their students, but instead how our students rank in the testable subjects of math, science, language, and history. Well-rounded curricula allows for more balanced young adults, and introduces more stimuli to those students. This is a huge positive, as it gives us a more creative, engaged, actively thoughtful community of people who are prepared for the many different types of jobs available in the 'real world'. This is ultimately the big goal, and schools should do well to note that their decisions will alter the path these children will take towards adulthood.

We should recognize that promoting physical education (gym/health classes) in public schools is just as important as preparing the minds of our youth. Tests have shown that we are more likely to think clearly if we are more healthy than if we are less healthy. We are also more likely to think creatively and intelligently if we have a well-rounded education, a more balanced education. Therefore, I wholeheartedly agree that physical education should be mandatory in schools, and also, that the creative arts have just as important a place in the education of our youth.

thanks for reading my ramblings...