As a District 113 parent and teacher, the national media attention regarding Highland Park High School’s girls’ basketball team hits close to home. The questions seem to be: should the team be allowed to play in a tournament in Arizona? Was this choice a political statement or a means to protect children?
Why does a coach or teacher take a group out of town in the first place? Is a plane ride to Arizona going to provide a better basketball experience than one that requires a bus ride? As with all educational activities, educators choose the best options to meet their learning targets. Whether it is a trip to China, Indianapolis, or Disney World, the choice should be in the best educational interests of the students. Yes, this is a basketball team not a class. However, all school activities must have educational worth. As many people will attest, significant learning occurs through participation in athletics.
Taking a group of students out of town is a big deal. Guiding a large group through the airport, managing tickets, medicines, permission slips, and personalities makes trips like this tournament a logistical challenge. The costs add another layer to the complexity. Trips like the proposed Arizona tournament can put financial strain on families.
Why pick Arizona or any other tournament? Why reject it? What are the criteria? The coach must consider the logistics: can families afford to pay the necessary costs? Can we get there and back in time? There are always alternatives: is Arizona a better tournament than any others? What makes one tournament better?
Certainly the level of competition and opportunities for learning should be foremost factors in making this choice. The trip should be attractive to students and it should be worth their time and money to go. Like any other learning activity, it should be a match for the needs and skills of the students.
Are there any factors that would disqualify a choice? Some locations are very expensive. I am concerned when the costs of school sponsored trips become so expensive that they seem to be only for wealthier families. Even with scholarship money, fund raising revenues and educational discounts, it is hard to justify huge price tags for experiences like these trips.
Safety is a key issue too. No school group should go to places that are on the State Department’s travel advisory list. I would wonder about any “extreme adventure” travel destinations with young people. Safety also has different meanings depending on the age of the students. Issues regarding alcohol and other substances must be taken into account.
What if a location is inappropriate or uncomfortable for some students in the group? When I teach a book that deals with a specific social group or issue, I try to be aware of students for whom this topic is personal. No book or travel destination is the be all and end all. There are always alternatives.
Should an educator pick a travel destination that puts a student at potential risk? All travel involves some form of risk. Where is the line? On the continuum, I would want my children going on trips with the least possible risk. If an alterative exists that makes the trip more safe and comfortable for even one child without harming the others, why not take that alterative?
Would any of the players on the Highland Park girls’ basketball team be at risk in Arizona? Would they feel uncomfortable or feel anxious there? Would their families have worries, concerns, or misgivings about the trip? Should the coach and the district take any of these issues into account when choosing where to go?
If there is a suitable alterative to Arizona, why not go there? If the team can have as good an experience, and learn and play together in a place that does not pose these issues, wouldn’t that be a better choice?
Being a good teacher means taking good care of all students. Anxious kids don’t learn well. Distracted and worried kids don’t perform well in the classroom or on the court. Being a responsible educator means making sure kids are in an environment where learning- and playing basketball- can be the primary focus.
Many have been debating if it is appropriate for a school to make a political statement with a trip like this. School representatives have stated that their decision was not politically motivated. Politics have stolen the ball. The team and its needs should be the subject of the debate. If the debate over the Arizona location has shifted the focus that far off the court, then it is clearly not the best choice for these young people and this school.
No comments:
Post a Comment