Nos. 118332, 118369 (Consolidated)
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS
JEFF GURBA, et al.,
Plaintiffs - Appellees,
V.
COMMUNITY HIGH SCHOOL
DISTRICT 155, et al.
Defendant — Appellant.
On Appeal from the Appellate Court of
Illinois, Second Judicial District,
No. 2-14-0098
There Heard on Appeal from the Circuit
Court of the Twenty-Second Judicial
Circuit, McHenry County, Illinois,
No. 13 CH 1319
The Honorable Michael J. Chmiel,
Presiding Judge
BRIEF AMICUS CURIAE OF THE ILLINOIS ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL
BOARDS, THE ILLINOIS ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS,
AND THE ILLINOIS ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL BUSINESS OFFICIALS
Ares G. Dalianis
Brian P. Crowley
Scott R. Metcalf
FRANCZEK RADELET P.C.
300 South Wacker Drive, Suite 3400
Chicago, Illinois 60606
312-986-0300
Counsel for Amicus Curiae
Illinois Association of School Boards
Illinois Association of School Administrators
Illinois Association of School Business Officials
March 4, 2015
1477576.8
POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
Page
STATEMENT OF INTEREST ..............................................................................................1
105 ILCS 5/23-1 .......................................................................................................................1
ARGUMENT ...........................................................................................................................2
Gurba v. Cmty. High Sch. Dist. No. 155, 2014 IL App (2d) 140098 .......................................2
I.
MODERN PUBLIC EDUCATION IS A STATEWIDE CONCERN
ENCOMPASSING A BROAD ARRAY OF SERVICES THAT REQUIRE
SPECIALIZED AND MULITFACETED STRUCTURES ....................................2
Article X, Section 1 of the 1970 Constitution of the State of Illinois .......................................2
Gurba v. Cmty. High Sch. Dist. No. 155, 2014 IL App (2d) 140098 .......................................3
City of Chicago
V.
StubHub, 2011 IL 111127 ...........................................................................3
105 ILCS 5/1-1 .........................................................................................................................3
105 ILCS 5/27-6
.......................................................................................................................
105 ILCS 5/27-22(e)
.................................................................................................................
4
5
105 ILCS 5/14-8.03 ...............................................................................................................5, 6
105 ILCS 5/14-1.08 ..................................................................................................................6
105 ILCS 5/10-201.19(2) ..........................................................................................................7
105 ILCS 5/10-20.21 a
105 ILCS 5/20.30
......................................................................................................................
105 ILCS 5/10-22.40
105 ILCS 5/16-7
105 ILCS 5/16-8
105 ILCS 5/19-3
...............................................................................................................
................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
147757(;.8
7
7
7
7
7
7
105 ILCS 5/19a-1 ......................................................................................................................7
105 ILCS 5/22-15
105 ILCS 5/22-24
105 ILCS 5/24-24
.....................................................................................................................
7
.....................................................................................................................
7
.....................................................................................................................
7
Angela Lumpkin and Judy Favor, Participation in Interscholastic Sports:
Do the Academic Performances of Athletes and Non-Athletes Differ?,
Journal of Sports Administration & Supervision, Vol. 4, No. 1, May 2012 ............................7
Daniel H. Bowen and Jay P. Green, Does Athletic Success Come at the
Expense ofAcademic Success?, Journal of Research in Education,
Vol. 22, Num. 2, Fall 2012
.......................................................................................................
II.
7
APPLICATION OF LOCAL ZONING ORDINANCES TO SCHOOL
DISTRICTS WOULD FRUSTRATE A SCHOOL DISTRICT'S ABILITY
TO PROVIDE EDUCATIONAL SERVICES .........................................................8
105 ILCS 5/29-3
.......................................................................................................................
Carver v. Bond/Fayette/Effingham Reg'l Bd. of Sch. Trustees, 146 I11. 2d 347
(1992)
.......................................................................................................................................
8
8
Merchant v. Regional Board of School Trustees, 2014 IL App (2d) 131277 ........................... 8
65 ILCS 5/11-13-25 ................................................................................................................10
Dunlap v. Vill. of Schaumburg, 394 I11. App. 3d 629 (1st Dist. 2009) ...................................10
City of Chicago Heights v. Living Word Outreach Full Gospel Church & Ministries,
196 Ill. 2d 1 (2001) .................................................................................................................10
Millineum Maint. Mgmt. v. Cnty. of Lake, 384 Ill. App. 3d 638 (2d Dist. 2008) ...................10
105 ILCS 5/10-22.36 ..............................................................................................................11
CONCLUSION .....................................................................................................................14
ii
1477576.8
STATEMENT OF INTEREST
The subject matter of this proceeding is whether school facilities are subject to
municipal zoning and land use regulations. This is a matter of first impression in Illinois.
The Court's decision in this case will directly impact the ability of all school districts in
the State to construct school facilities. It may also impact existing school facilities that
do not conform to existing zoning regulations. As such, Amici Curiae, and in particular
their membership, will be directly affected by the outcome of these proceedings.
Amici
are uniquely qualified to provide the Court with a valuable perspective on the issues
raised by this appeal, issues which may not be addressed by the other parties.
Amici are the Illinois Association of School Boards, the Illinois Association of
School Administrators, and the Illinois Association of School Business Officials. They
represent the entities and individuals charged with governing and administrating public
schools.
The Illinois Association of School Boards ("IASB") is an incorporated, not-forprofit, voluntary association. It is organized under Article 23 of the School Code (105
ILCS 5/23-1 et seq.) to assist and train school board members in performing their
statutory functions and to promote, support, and advance the interests of public education
throughout Illinois. As the legislatively recognized statewide representative of local
boards of education, IASB currently has 846 members, comprising 99% of all public
school boards in the State.
The Illinois Association of School Administrators ("IASA") is an incorporated,
not-for-profit, voluntary association whose primary goals include fostering the
professional growth of its members to advance the interests of public education
1
1477576.8
throughout Illinois. To this end, the IASA provides resources and professional
development for school administrators, including training in legal compliance areas.
Ninety-five percent of Illinois school districts are members of IASA.
The Illinois Association of School Business Officials ("Illinois ASBO") is an
incorporated, not-for-profit, voluntary association focused on providing professional
development, services, and networking for its members regarding the business, finances,
and operations of schools. Illinois ASBO has 1,427 public school employees as members
and it represents all positions from Illinois superintendents to support staff personnel.
ARGUMENT
Amici concur with the arguments set forth by the Defendants-Appellants. The
purpose of this brief is to highlight that the Appellate Court erred in concluding that
"land-use regulations have no inherent impact upon the substance of public education"
and that "Zoning and land use do not impinge upon any facet of public education."
Gurba v. Cmty. High Sch. Dist. No. 155, 2014 IL App (2d) 140098, ¶¶ 35, 66 appeal
allowed, No. 118332, 2015 WL 427247 (Ill. Jan. 28, 2015) and appeal allowed, No.
118369, 2015 WL 427395 (Ill. Jan. 28, 2015). To the contrary, zoning and land use
regulations have a direct impact on public education and in many circumstances, their
unilateral application by a municipality would frustrate and impede the ability of school
districts to provide public education.
I. MODERN PUBLIC EDUCATION IS A STATEWIDE CONCERN
ENCOMPASSING A BROAD ARRAY OF SERVICES THAT REQUIRE
SPECIALIZED AND MULITFACETED STRUCTURES.
Article X, Section 1 of the 1970 Constitution of the State of Illinois provides that
"The State shall provide for an efficient system of high quality public educational
2
1477576.8
institutions and services." Amici agree with the Appellate Court that as a result of this
provision public education is a matter of statewide concern. Gurba v. Cmty. High Sch.
Dist. No. 155, 2014 IL App (2d) 140098, ¶¶ 27-28.
The Appellate Court drew a distinction, however, "between the abstract concept
of public education set forth in the constitution, which is of statewide interest, and an
individual school district or local board of education, which, while on the front line of
implementing public education, remains rooted in the local community."
Id. at ¶29.
Applying the analysis from City of Chicago v. StubHub, 2011 IL 111127, the Appellate
Court concluded that zoning and land use pertains to the government and affairs of a
municipality and that application of these powers to school districts will not impede the
ability to offer public education because "there appears to be little intersection between
zoning and public education." Gurba, 2014 IL App (2d) 140098, ¶ 86.
Contrary to this conclusion, public education is offered through school districts
that are charged by the General Assembly and Illinois State Board of Education with
providing a broad array of services that would be directly impacted by the application of
municipal zoning and land use regulations. Simply put, educating students requires
facilities, and the Appellate Court's ruling would grant municipalities unfettered
authority over where and whether those facilities are built. As a result, municipal bodies,
which have no statutory jurisdiction over education matters, would, if the Appellate Court
decision stands, have direct authority over the facilities necessary for educating students.
Through the School Code and the Illinois State Board of Education, the Illinois
General Assembly and the State of Illinois charge school districts with providing a wide
array of services and impose extensive regulations on how those services are provided.
3
1477576.8
Nearly all of these services require a building or other facility that, if the Appellate
Court's ruling stands, would be at the mercy of municipal zoning. The length of Section
105 of the Illinois Compiled Statutes, which includes the School Code and other statutes
governing school districts (currently exceeding 800 pages), prevents providing a
complete list of all the services school districts must provide in order to fulfill the
promise of a free, high quality public education. A few examples, however, will make
the point equally well.
Initially, all school buildings require more than just classrooms to educate
children. Elementary, middle and high school buildings have libraries, auditoriums,
gymnasiums, lunch rooms, and playgrounds. Many also have commercial grade kitchen
facilities that prepare student breakfasts and lunches. School campuses also often have
large parking lots for teachers, staff, parents, and buses. High school buildings have
additional features as well such as science labs, performing arts centers, athletic fields,
and tennis courts. Inclusion of these features in a school building is necessary in order
for a school district to provide a public education in the manner prescribed by the Illinois
General Assembly and the Illinois State Board of Education.
A specific example of this is in Section 27-6 of the School Code, which requires
pupils enrolled in public schools to engage in physical education courses. 105 ILCS
5/27-6. In order to comply with this School Code requirement, every elementary school,
middle school or high school must have facilities in which physical education courses can
occur. As a result, nearly all school buildings in the State have a gymnasium. Many high
schools also have a pool or natatorium.
4
1477576.8
Another example involves the courses public high schools must offer in order for
students to meet the prerequisites for receiving a high school diploma. Section 27-22(e)
of the School Code sets forth the current prerequisites for receiving a high school
diploma. In addition to classes in language arts, writing, mathematics, science, and social
studies, the School Code also requires one year of coursework chosen from music, art,
foreign language, and vocational education. 105 ILCS 5/27-22(e) (emphasis added).
While the School Code does not require science classes with a laboratory
component, the admission policies of many public and private universities and other
postsecondary schools require students to have completed science courses containing a
laboratory component. In order to provide a high quality public education that prepares
students for postsecondary institutions, most high school buildings include laboratories.
As part of the instruction in classes from biology to chemistry, these laboratories are
stocked with the chemicals necessary to conduct the experiments that are part of the
curriculum. To provide elective courses in music, high school buildings must include
rehearsal and performance space in which the instruction can occur. As for vocational
education, Section 27-22.2 of the School Code requires vocational education to be
included in any list of courses from which students must elect at least one as a
prerequisite to graduation. 105 ILCS 5/27-22(e). As a result, high school facilities often
include areas dedicated to auto-mechanics, carpentry, and metal work.
School Districts also must provide special education students with a free
appropriate public education, and providing those services in many cases requires special
facilities. Section 14-8.03 of the School Code requires school districts to provide
"transition services" for special education students until the student's 22 'd birthday.
5
1477576.8
105 ILCS 5/14-8.03. Specifically, school districts are required to provide the following
transition services:
a coordinated set of activities for a child with a disability that (i) is
designed to be within a results-oriented process that is focused on
improving the academic and functional achievement of the child with a
disability to facilitate the child's movement from school to post-school
activities, including post-secondary education, vocational education,
integrated employment (including supported employment), continuing and
adult education, adult services, independent living, or community
participation; (ii) is based on the individual child's needs, taking into
account the child's strengths, preferences, and interests; and (iii) includes
instruction, related services, community experiences, the development of
employment and other post-school adult living objectives, and, if
appropriate, acquisition of daily living skills, benefits planning, work
incentives education, and the provision of a functional vocational
evaluation.
105 ILCS 5/14-8.03. Transition services are provided in a variety of settings in order to
maximize the program goals for students. Some high school districts provide transition
services in free standing buildings on the school grounds. These facilities are used to
help students with practical life and independent living skills such as cooking, cleaning,
and the use of household appliances. Other high school districts provide transition
services through programs that resemble small businesses on the campuses of their
schools. The operation of a small diner or a small manufacturing enterprise provides the
students with the employment-related skills required by the School Code. In other
instances, school districts must provide residential placement services for special
education students whose Individualized Education Program (IEP) specifies that the least
restrictive environment is a residential placement. See e.g. 105 ILCS 5/14-1.08. Several
such residential facilities are operated by public school districts or cooperatives
consisting of multiple school districts.
0
1477576.8
Although not mandated, the School Code also authorizes and regulates school
district athletic programs. See 105 ILCS 5/10-201.19(2), 10-20.21a, 20.30, 10-22.40, 167, 16-8, 19-3, 19a-1, 22 -15, 22-24, and 24-24. Rather than being separate from the
provision of a public education, athletic programs are actually an integral part of
providing a high quality public education. Several recent studies establish a link between
participation in athletic programs and higher levels of academic achievement. A recent
study of high school athletes in Kansas, shows "High school athletes earned higher
grades, graduated at a higher rate, dropped out of school less frequently, and scored
higher on state assessments than did non-athletes." Appendix A, Angela Lumpkin and
Judy Favor, Participation in Interscholastic Sports: Do the Academic Performances of
Athletes and Non Athletes Differ?, Journal of Sports Administration & Supervision, Vol.
4, No. 1, May 2012. Another study of high school athletics from Ohio published in the
Journal of Research in Education found that an emphasis on athletic success and
participation is associated with higher scores on standardized tests and higher graduation
rates. Appendix B, Daniel H. Bowen and Jay P. Green, Does Athletic Success Come at
the Expense of Academic Success?, Journal of Research in Education, Vol. 22, Num. 2,
Fall 2012. In order to provide students with the opportunity to participate in high school
athletics, school districts must construct the facilities at which practices and competitions
can occur. As a result, facilities ranging from football, baseball, and soccer fields to
tennis courts, swimming pools, and basketball courts are a standard component of nearly
every high school campus. It is fair to say that most parents will insist that their child's
school provide these facilities for physical education, intramural, and/or interscholastic
athletic participation.
7
1477576.8
In order to provide this wide array of services that comprise public education,
school districts require specialized and multifaceted school buildings and ancillary
structures. As analyzed in the next section, subjecting these structures to local zoning
and land use regulations would frustrate and impede a school district's ability to
implement the statewide mission of providing high quality public education.
II. APPLICATION OF LOCAL ZONING ORDINANCES TO SCHOOL
DISTRICTS WOULD FRUSTRATE A SCHOOL DISTRICT'S ABILITY
TO PROVIDE EDUCATIONAL SERVICES.
Most school facilities are located in or near residential zoning districts. The
reason for this is quite practical. Schools are built near the students they serve. The
importance of the distance between a student's residence and a school is demonstrated in
a number of ways. For example, the School Code requires many types of school districts
to provide free transportation to students "residing at a distance of one and one-half miles
or more from any school to which they are assigned for attendance." 105 ILCS 5/29-3.
Travel times from home to school are also a critical factor in decisions concerning the
detachment of property from one school district and the annexation of that property to
another, with the shorter distance between home and the school being preferred. See e.g.
Carver v. Bond/Fayette/Effingham Reg'l Bd. of Sch. Trustees, 146 Ill. 2d 347, 360 (1992);
Merchant v. Regional Board of School Trustees, 2014 IL App (2d) 131277, ¶¶ 85-98. .
A school building of course has very little in common with a single family home
or apartment building, which are the types of properties a municipal residential zoning
district contemplates. Therefore, it is inevitable that the physical facilities of the school,
including the use itself, will conflict with the local zoning ordinances. Examples of
potential conflicts between residential zoning requirements and the necessities of school
8
1477576.8
facilities include: lot size, lot coverage, setbacks, building height, roof design, pools,
tennis courts and athletic fields, outdoor lighting, signage, auto shops, chemical storage,
and commercial kitchens.
As a result, to comply with municipal zoning and land use regulations a school
district would need to seek some type of zoning relief from the municipality such as a
variance, special use permit, planned unit development, or zoning map amendment.
These types of approvals typically involve extensive municipal staff review, plan
commission and/or zoning board review and recommendations, and village board or city
council review and approval. This process is time consuming and expensive, and will
result in additional architectural and engineering fees for the school districts as well as
the possibility of municipal review fees or permits assessed by the municipality. Further,
it grants municipal bodies with no State mandate to regulate education or expertise in
educational matters the power to regulate education and provides municipalities with veto
authority over the types and locations of facilities and educational programs that will be
made available to students. School districts on the other hand have the educational
expertise to determine appropriate curriculum and facilities for their students, and, in
concert. with the regional office of education, the relevant expertise to decide on the
necessary features, materials, and location for the facilities needed to offer that
curriculum.
Compounding the potential conflict between zoning and land use regulations and
the needs of school districts in constructing school buildings and other facilities, is the
reality that there would be little chance of overturning a municipal decision to deny a
school district's request for a zoning change unless the municipality's decision is
E
1477576.8
arbitrary and unreasonable. The reasonableness of the municipality's decision, however,
will be based on local land use standards and not the curriculum needs of the school
district. Section 11-13-25 of the Municipal Code provides:
Any decision by the corporate authorities of any municipality, home rule
or non-home rule, in regard to any petition or application for a special use,
variance, rezoning, or other amendment to a zoning ordinance shall be
subject to de novo judicial review as a legislative decision, regardless of
whether the process in relation thereto is considered administrative for
other purposes.
65 ILCS 5/11-13-25. "Legislative decisions made by municipalities are subject to review
only for arbitrariness as a matter of substantive due process." Dunlap v. Vill. of
Schaumburg, 394 Ill. App. 3d 629, 640 (1st Dist. 2009) quoting City of Chicago Heights
v. Living Word Outreach Full Gospel Church & Ministries, 196 Ill. 2d 1, 14 (2001); see
also Millineum Maint. Mgmt. v. Cnty. of Lake, 384 Ill. App. 3d 638 (2d Dist. 2008). This
means that municipal decisions regarding requests for zoning changes "will be upheld as
long as they represent a rational means to accomplish a legitimate purpose."
Id. at 646.
Conversely, a municipality's decision on such matters will be overturned only if it is
"arbitrary, unreasonable, and bearing no substantial relation to the public health, safety,
morals, comfort, or general welfare."
Id.
This is troubling should a necessary
educational facility become the object of scrutiny of an unsympathetic municipal board
more concerned about local set back and floor area ratio ("FAR") regulations than
whether the school's science facilities are meeting 21 St century curriculum goals.
Numerous realistic hypotheticals can be provided that exemplify how municipal
zoning regulations could frustrate a school district's ability to achieve high quality
education for students as required by the Illinois Constitution. For example, the addition
of a new science laboratory on a landlocked high school campus may have no feasible
10
1477576.8
location other than an area that slightly infringes on the residential setback regulations.
Or, that same addition may cause the school to exceed the FAR requirements of the local
zoning code. Athletic fields or an auto mechanic shop may not be permitted in the
residential zoning district where a school is located. All of these improvements would be
necessary for a school district to meet its educational obligations to its students, but a
municipality could easily thwart these essential improvements within its legislative
discretion when considering a school district zoning application. Finally, in developing
new schools, school districts are limited in their land choices. School districts need large
tracts of land for a school and the land must lie within the school district's boundaries.
Unlike a big box developer that can move its site to a neighboring municipality if one
municipality requires objectionable conditions to development, a school district has no
such choice. As a result, a municipality would have the ability to deny the construction of
a school in an area that perhaps the municipal comprehensive plan intended for industrial
use. Alternatively, a municipality could impose significant conditions regarding
development, that a school district, with limited leverage, would have no choice but to
accept.
Granting a municipality the authority to exercise its parochial zoning interests
over the educational needs of students is further troubling when considering that many
large school district construction projects are first approved by district wide referendum.
The School Code requires that a majority of voters within a school district must approve
a referendum to construct school buildings and office facilities. 105 ILCS 5/10-22.36. If
the Appellate Court's decision stands, a feasible set of facts could arise where, after a
successful referendum, a school district that serves several municipalities moves forward
11
1477576.8
with either constructing a new school or making significant improvements to an existing
school that is located in one of the municipalities, even though the school serves the
students living in several municipalities. If zoning relief is required for the improvements,
which would be a certainty in most cases should the Appellate Court decision be
affirmed, that one municipal council would have the ability to circumvent the intent of
the voters of the entire school district. That one municipality could deny the requested
zoning relief without any concern of facing the majority of the school district electorate
because most voters would be residents of other municipalities.
The decision of just one municipality to deny a requested change in zoning would
essentially nullify the voters' decision to build and equip a school. One municipality's
decision would thereby reach beyond its borders to impact the taxpayers and voters
located in the other municipalities. The Appellate Court's conclusion that there is no
conflict between municipal zoning and the provision of education is not only wrong, but
if affirmed, would enable a governmental body with no jurisdiction over educational
matters to thwart the will of voters, frustrate a school district's ability to provide
educational services it deems necessary, and favor local land use interests at the expense
of State wide educational goals. The Appellate Court's decision, if left to stand, will vest
the local city or village council with the power of a "super" board of education, thwarting
the will and discretion of the duly elected school board and the citizens who placed that
school board in office.
This extraterritorial threat to a school district's ability to meet the educational
needs of all of its students is not idle in Illinois. For example, Collinsville Community
Unit School District No. 10, in Madison County, serves four different municipalities
12
1477576.8
(Collinsville, Caseyville, Fairmont City and Maryville). Township High School District
No. 214, located in Cook County, covers a 68.45 square mile area and serves the
residents of eight different municipalities, including Arlington Heights, Buffalo Grove,
Elk Grove, Mt. Prospect, Prospect Heights, Rolling Meadows, Wheeling, and Des
Plaines. Its six high school facilities are located in six different municipalities (Arlington
Heights, Buffalo Grove, Elk Grove, Mt. Prospect, Rolling Meadows, and Wheeling).
Similarly, Community Unit School District 300, in Kane, McHenry, Cook and Dekalb
Counties, includes all or part of 15 municipalities (Algonquin, Barrington Hills,
Carpentersville, Cary, East Dundee, Elgin, Fox River Grove, Gilberts, Hampshire,
Hoffman Estates, Huntley, Lake in the Hills, Pingree Grove, Sleepy Hollow, and West
Dundee). Its 27 school buildings are located in nine different municipalities. School
districts like the ones mentioned above would also be subject to an array of different
zoning codes. This can be hugely problematic from a planning standpoint if a school
district wants to customize its school buildings or the facilities that are provided.
The Court's decision in this matter is profound. Not only will the Court's ruling
affect every school district in the State, it has the potential to affect the majority of
existing school buildings in the State. Enforcement of zoning and land use regulations on
existing school buildings and facilities could thereby be devastating.
For example, schools currently out of compliance due to a height, FAR, setback,
or permitted use requirement could be subject to substantial fines with no ability to
comply other than taking drastic measures. Other schools throughout the State have
existed long before the most recent municipal zoning regulations were put in place and
may be legal, nonconforming uses. If those buildings were damaged or required
13
1477576.8
significant renovation, however, in most instances, they would lose their legal
nonconforming status and be mandated to comply with municipal zoning.
One would hope that, in most circumstances, civic cooperation would resolve the
matter. If, however, the far reaching decision of the Appellate Court prevails, a
municipality would have all the leverage and the school district would be left with only
the hope of a reasonable resolution. Municipal zoning and land use regulations will be
unchecked and will supersede over the school board's discretion in educating the children
of Illinois. Such a result would have a drastic impact on the ability of school districts,
most of which are already strained from a budgetary standpoint, to meet their
constitutional obligation to provide high quality public education. To avoid this result,
Amici ask the Court to rule in favor of the Defendant-Appellants.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, as well as those contained in the briefs of DefendantsAppellants and other amici supporting Defendants-Appellants, this Court should reverse
the decision of the Appellate Court, hold that school districts are not subject to municipal
zoning and land use regulations, and grant such other relief as the Court deems just.
Respectfully submitted,
By:
Ares G. Dalianis — ARDC No. 6204078
Brian P. Crowley — ARDC No. 6242732
Scott R. Metcalf — ARDC No. 6293376
FRANCZEK RADELET P.C.
300 South Wacker Drive, Suite 3400
Chicago, Illinois 60606
312-986-0300
14
1477576.8
SUPREME COURT RULE 341(C) CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
I certify that this brief conforms to the requirements of Rules 341(a) and (b). The
length of this brief, excluding the pages containing the Rule 341(d) cover, the Rule
341(h)(1) statement of points and authorities, the Rule 341(c) certificate of compliance,
the certificate of service, and those matters to be appended to the brief under Rule 342(a),
is 14 pages. O
Ares G. Dalianis
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned hereby certifies that three copies of the foregoing Brief Amicus
Curiae of the Illinois Association of School Boards, the Illinois Association of School
Administrators, and the Illinois Association of School Business Officials were served on
the individuals named below, at their identified addresses, by placing the same in the U.S.
Mail by 5:00 p.m. on March 4, 2015, with proper postage prepaid.
Dean W. Krone
Robert E. Swain
Steven M. Richart
Kerry P. Burnet
Hodges, Loizzi, Eisenhammer, Rodick
& Kohn LLP
3030 Salt Creek Lane, Suite 202
Arlington Heights, IL 60005
Michael R. Burney
Schain, Banks, Kenny & Schwartz, Ltd.
70 W. Madison Street, Suite 4500
Chicago, Illinois 60602
Lisle A. Stalter
Lake County State's Attorney
18 N. County Street, 3rd Floor
Waukegan, IL 60085
John L. Cowlin
Cowlin, Curran & Coppedge
20 Grant Street
Crystal Lake, IL 60014
Justin Hansen
Swanson, Martin & Bell
1860 West Winchester Road
Libertyville, IL 60048
Victor P. Filippini, Jr.
Filippini Law Firm
990 Grove Street, Suite 220
Evanston, Illinois 60201
Thomas R. Burney
Zanck, Coen, Wright & Saladin, P.C.
40 Brink Street
Crystal Lake, IL 60014
Ares G. Dalianis
1477576.8
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Angela Lumpkin and Judy Favor, Participation in Interscholastic Sports:
Do the Academic Performances of Athletes and Non-Athletes Differ?,
Journal of Sports Administration & Supervision, Vol. 4, No. 1, May 2012 ...................................... A-2
Daniel H. Bowen and Jay P. Green, Does Athletic Success Come at the
Expense ofAcademic Success?, Journal of Research in Education,
Vol. 22, Num. 2, Fall 2012 ................................................................................................................A-24
A-1
1485780.1
Page 41
Academic Performance of Athletes and Non-Athletes
JS~
COMPARING THE ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE OF HIGH
ATHLETES AND NON-ATHLETES IN KANSAS IN
S 2008-2009
Angela Lumpkin & Judy Favor
Angela Lumpkin is
a professor in the
Department of
Health, Sport, and
Exercise Sciences at
the University of
Kansas.
Judy Favor is
Assistant Dean of the
School of Education
and School of
Professional and
Graduate Studies at
Baker University.
They wish to
acknowledge the
Abstract
The academic performance of students in grades 9-12 who did or did not participate in high
school sports in Kansas during the 2008-2009 school year was analyzed. In addition to
overall comparisons between athletes and non-athletes on GPAs, graduation rates, number
of dropouts, ACT test scores, and state assessments, some gender, ethnicity, and grade
comparisons were made. High school athletes earned higher grades, graduated at a higher
rate, dropped out of school less frequently, and scored higher on state assessments than did
non-athletes; results on the ACT were mixed. Differences between athletes and non-athletes
were found for males and females across all academic performance measures, with females
contributing more to the differences between athletes and non-athletes on GPAs and not
dropping out of school. Whites contributed more to the differences between non-athletes and
athletes than did the other racial categories for GPAs, graduation rates, and not dropping
assistance of Gary
Musselman at the
Kansas State High
out of school.
School Activities
Association and
Sherrill Martinez and
Michael Wallis at the
Kansas State
Department of
Education for
providing the
information used in
this research project.
Keywords: High school, Athletes versus non-athletes, Academic performance.
Lumpkin, A., & Favor, J. (2012) Comparing the academic performance of high school athletes and non-athletes
in Kansas in 2008-2009. Journal of Sport Administration & Supervision 4(1), 41-62. Published online
May, 2012.
Introduction
Over 7.5 million high school students participate in interscholastic athletics each year
(National Federation of State High School Associations, n.d.). Proponents of high school
sport programs believe these activities contribute to the overall education of students. The
mission statement of the National Federation of State High School Associations (NFHS)
supports this belief by stating that it serves "...students by providing leadership for the
administration of education-based interscholastic activities, which support academic
achievement, good citizenship and equitable opportunities" (National Federation of State
High School Associations, n.d.). In fact, in "The Case for High School Activities," the
National Federation of State High School Associations (2008) emphasizes that students who
participate in high school sports make higher grades. Even the National Association of State
Boards of Education (2004) claims the purpose of high school sports "...is to enhance the
whole school experiences for all students. Academic achievement must always be considered
the priority" (p. 5).
© 2012 Journal of Sport Administration & Supervision
A-2
Vol. 4, No. 1, May 2012
Page 42
Lumpkin & Favor
To encourage students to achieve on their school work, academic eligibility standards have
been enforced in many high schools to stress that extracurricular activities including
participation on sport teams is an earned privilege, not a right. Since the primary purpose of
schooling is to learn, students must achieve academically as a prerequisite to participating in
extracurricular activities and playing on a team. Bukowski (2010) found that 48 state athletic
associations recommended some form of academic eligibility requirements for student
participation in high school sports, with requirements ranging from being enrolled in a
minimum number of courses to a combination of a minimum number of courses, passing all
courses, a minimum grade point average, and an attendance policy.
According to Callari (2002), the three most commonly used academic eligibility standards
include pass-to-play, a minimum grade point average, and a requirement that allows only a
specified number of failing grades. These standards have resulted in some students having
higher grades, higher attendance rates, fewer disciplinary problems, and lower dropout rates
(Jansen, 1992; National Federation of State High School Associations, 2008). Proponents of
"no pass, no play" supported the requirement that students must pass all courses to earn the
right to participate in extracurricular activities because these activities were secondary in
importance to academic work (Burnett, 2000). If students took their studies seriously, it was
believed they would earn better grades. Burnett added that participation in extracurricular
activities was the driving force behind some students' interest in attending school.
Several studies have documented the effect of extracurricular activities on academic
performance. For example, Camp (1990) investigated the effects of participation in
extracurricular activities on students' grades, while controlling for gender, family
background, and academic ability. He found females participated in more student.activities
and made better grades than did males, and academic achievement was enhanced by student
participation. Camp's findings raised questions about the rationale behind rules excluding
academically marginal students from participation in extracurricular activities.
Kilrea (1998) also argued against denying academically deficient students an opportunity to
participate in extracurricular activities. In his study examining relationships between
participation and number of seasons in extracurricular activities and academic achievement
on ACT composite scores of 186 high school seniors, 103 of whom had participated in at
least one extracurricular activity during four years of high school, ACT composite scores
were significantly related to two academic, six non-academic, and eight student participation
variables. Kilrea concluded that restricting academically deficient students from participating
in extracurricular activities could further contribute to a student's academic difficulties. Also,
his results supported the value of extracurricular participation on the academic achievement
of students.
In the current economic climate, the debate over whether participation in high school
extracurricular activities including sports enhances or detracts from the educational
achievement of participants has resurfaced. Proponents of extracurricular activities and sports
believe these opportunities enhance academic performance, especially when students must
meet specific levels of academic achievement to maintain eligibility. Unfortunately, school
districts across the country have encountered major reductions in state and local funding,
forcing administrators to identify areas for budget reductions and opening the door for
opponents who might target extracurricular activities as easy choices.
© 2012 Journal of Sport Administration & Supervision
A-3
Vol. 4, No. 1, May 2012
Page 43
Academic Performance of Athletes and Non-Athletes
In Kansas, a state that has encountered significant reductions in state funding since 2008,
over 139,000 students participated in high school sports in 2008-2009, according to the
Kansas State High School Activities Association (KSHSAA). Although the KSHSAA
emphasizes in its mission statement that participation in high school activities promotes
student academic achievement, no empirical evidence supports this claim.
The purpose of this study was to examine the academic performance of Kansas high school
athletes in grades 9-12 in 2008-2009 to determine if participation in athletics helps or hinders
academic achievement. Self-reported grade point averages (GPAs), graduation rates, number
of dropouts, ACT scores, and state assessment scores were examined to identify differences
between athletes and non-athletes as a group as well as by gender and ethnicity.
The literature review begins by examining previously found relationships between
participation in all extracurricular activities and academic performance. A review of research
that specifically compared high school athletes and non-athletes
various academic
measures follows. The final section discusses studies that have reported on school dropout
rates for athletes and non-athletes.
on
Review of the Literature
Participation in Extracurricular Activities and Academic Performance
In the 1978 Phi Delta Kappa/Gallup Poll of attitudes toward public schools, 45% of
respondents reported that extracurricular activities play a very important role in schools. In
subsequent years, this percentage dropped to 31% in 1984, then increased to 39% in 1985,
before spiking at 63% in 1997 (Rose, Gallup, & Elam, 1997). This dramatic increase in
public perception might be associated with several studies conducted in the 1990s that found
that participation in extracurricular activities enhanced academic performance and the overall
educational experiences of students. For example, data from public high school seniors in
the National Education Longitudinal Study of 1992 Second Follow-up indicated that
participation in extracurricular activities increased students' engagement with and attachment
to their schools and contributed to a more well-rounded education (O'Brien & Rollefson,
1992). Additionally, these authors reported that 50.4% of participants had no unexcused
absences, 50.7% never skipped a class, 30.6% had a GPA of 3.0 or above, and 29.8%
achieved in the highest quartile on a composite math and reading assessment. Percentages for
non-participants on these same measures were 36.2%, 42.3%, 10.8%, and 14.2%
respectively.
Marsh (1992) found a small but statistically significant, positive relationship associated with
extracurricular activity participation during the last two years in high school and academic
achievement. Neish (1993) that found positive correlations between high, medium, or low
levels of involvement in extracurricular activities and students' GPAs and involved students
attained higher GPAs than did students who were not involved. Klesse (1994) found a
positive direct effect of participation in extracurricular activities on academic achievement,
suggesting that the lack of participation in extracurricular activities negatively affected
students' success in school.
Several larger-scale studies have reported academic benefits associated with participating in
extracurricular activities. McCarthy (2000) compared GPAs and school attendance of
participants and non-participants in school-sponsored activities in 16 high schools in
Colorado's largest school district in 1997. Participants had significantly higher GPAs and
© 2012 Journal of Sport Administration & Supervision
A-4
Vol. 4, No. 1, May 2012
Page 44
Lumpkin & Favor
JSI1S
significantly lower absenteeism than did non-participants. Overall, female students had
higher GPAs than did male students; both female and male participants had higher GPAs
than did non-participant comparison groups. Similarly, in a study of 1100 students in a large
metropolitan high school in 2001-2002, Branch (2003) found significant differences between
the academic achievement of students who did and did not participate in school-sponsored
extracurricular activities. Students who participated in extracurricular activities had the
highest GPAs, followed by athletes as a sub-group. After controlling for cognitive ability,
gender, and socio-economic status, VanDuyne (2004) found a positive correlation between
participation in extracurricular activities and academic achievement on the Indiana Student
Test of Educational Progress.
Other researchers have reached similar conclusions. Zaff, Moore, Papillo, and Williams
(2003) used longitudinal data for students in grades 8-12 and found that over time students'
participation was linked with higher levels of academic achievement. In a sample of 492
graduating high school seniors in a large Midwestern high school, Streb (2009) reported that
participants in extracurricular activities had significantly higher GPAs and ACT scores than
did non-participants. Corbett (2007) found uniformly positive benefits associated with
participation in school-sponsored extracurricular activity participation (EAP) and encouraged
educational leaders to get students engaged in extracurricular activities, "The results of this
study, and the, vast majority of the EAP research, regarding standardized test scores clearly
demonstrates the value added by extracurricular participation" (p. 92). Feldman and
Matjasko (2005) agreed with Corbett, concluding that structured activity participation was
linked to many positive academic, behavioral, psychological, and young adult outcomes.
In summary, findings from several studies have linked participation in extracurricular
activities to many positive academic performance indicators. The next section examines the
academic performance of students who participated in one particular type of extracurricular
activity—high school sports.
Participation in High School Sports and Academic Performance
In some early studies, participation in high school sports was not associated with higher
grades. For example, Lueptow and Kayser (1973) investigated the relationship between
athletics and academic achievement among 3461 seniors in 20 public high schools in 1964
and found no differences in grades between athletes and non-athletes during the high school
years. A few years later, Hauser and Lueptow (1978) reported that athletes had higher GPAs
at the end of their high school years than they did at the start, but their academic gains were
not as high as for non-athletes over the years. Students who chose to participate in high
school sports were better students initially and experienced a relative decline in academic
achievement, leading them to conclude, "The results of this study and of the Lueptow and
Kayser study do not support a causal interpretation of the relationship between athletics
involvement and academic achievement" (p. 308).
Later studies also failed to find specific differences between athletes and non-athletes'
academic performance. Marsh (1993) suggested that participation in high school sports had
no negative effects, Jefferson (1999) found no differences between the GPAs of athletes and
non-athletes in two rural high schools in Mississippi, and Stencel (2005) found no
statistically significant relationship between participation in athletics and academic
achievement. Crosnoe (2002) analyzed students in 9 California and Wisconsin schools in
1987 and 1990 and concluded that even though athletes were high achievers and athletic
© 2012 Journal of Sport Administration & Supervision
A-5
Vol. 4, No. 1, May 2012
Academic Performance of Athletes and Non-Athletes
Page 45
participation promoted academic achievement, the academic achievement of athletes neither
increased nor decreased over time. Instead, it maintained a successful academic trajectory.
Several other studies, however, have supported the connection between participation in high
school sports and higher grades and other indicators of academic achievement (Broh, 2002;
Fejgin, 1994; Feldman & Matjasko, 2005; JacAngelo, 2003; Kaufmann, 2002; Overton,
2001; Stegman & Stephens, 2000; Whitley, 1995). For example, Fejgin (1994) examined
longitudinal data from a nationally representative sample of 10 th graders (i.e., National
Educational Longitudinal Study of 1988 First Follow-Up) and found that students who were
more involved in high school sports had small but statistically significant higher grades and
fewer discipline problems in school. She suggested that participating in high school sports
may reflect a deeper commitment by students to comply with school rules and adhere to
basic values. That is, increased disciplined behavior may lead to greater effort and higher
grades.
Using 8th grade student data (N = 24,599) from the 1998 National Longitudinal Study with
follow-ups in the 10th and 12th grades, Broh (2002) found that high school sports
participation was positively and significantly associated with improved math and English
grades, including after controlling for the selection of higher-performing students into sports.
He concluded that participation in high school sports had a greater influence on student
achievement than did other extracurricular activities.
Stegman and Stephens (2000) investigated the relationship between participation in high
school sports and academic achievement at one high school in Omaha, Nebraska. The high
participation group achieved higher academic achievement in three measures: class rank,
overall GPA, and math GPA. Females in the high participation group significantly
outperformed females in the low participation group. Kaufmann (2002) used final GPAs,
attendance, highest level of mathematics achieved, and ACT composite scores to examine
relationships between athletic participation and academic performance with high school
athletes in two suburban high schools in a major metropolitan area and found a positive,
significant relationship between athletic participation and academic success. JacAngelo
(2003) collected data from 1081 female and male athletes and 1000 non-athletes in 10 public
high schools in the Miami-Dade school district in Florida in 2002-2003 and found
statistically significant differences with athletes earning higher cumulative GPAs and
achieving higher test scores on the 10 th grade Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test in
reading and mathematics than did non-athletes.
In a large study in North Carolina (N = over 125,000), Overton (2001) found that high school
athletes outperformed non-athletes on mean GPAs and mean scores on end-of-course testing
in algebra and English from 1993-1996. Additionally, athletes had a significantly lower
average number of absences, a lower percentage of disciplinary referrals, and were more
likely to graduate than were non-athletes. Overton's findings confirmed Whitley's (1995)
earlier findings in a study comparing high school athletes with non-athletes in North
Carolina.
In summary, results from more recent studies suggested that participation in high school
sports was positively related with higher grades, higher graduation rates, and higher scores
on ACT tests and state assessments for athletes when compared to non-athletes. The
relationship between participation in high school sports and dropping out of high school is
examined in the next section.
© 2012 Journal of Sport Administration & Supervision
A-6
Vol. 4, No. 1, May 2012
Page 46
Lumpkin & Favor
Participation in High School Sports and Dropping Out of School
J'
j '
11.
Participation in extracurricular activities, in general, appears to minimize the risk of dropping
out of school (Davalos, Chavez, & Guardiola, 1999; Jansen, 1992; Zaff et al., 2003) and
participating in high school sports may be particularly effective in keeping students in school
(National Federation of State High School Associations, 2008). In North Carolina, Whitley
(1995) found lower dropout rates for athletes than for non-athletes, and Overton (2001)
reported that 0.6% of high school athletes dropped out of school, compared to 10.32% of
non-athletes.
Some researchers have suggested that involvement in extracurricular activity may enhance
the feeling of belonging and therefore reduce school dropout. Mahoney (2000) and Mahoney
and Cairns (1997) suggested that the development of social networks and increased
engagement within schools deterred students from dropping out. This social integration with
peers on a team might significantly reduce athletes' likelihood of dropping out of school
(McNeal, 1995).
These studies provide some evidence that high school athletes dropped out of school at lower
rates than did non-athletes. Becoming engaged with teammates and coaches may help
athletes feel more connected with their schools and minimize the risk of dropping out.
However, more empirical evidence is needed to support the claims that participation in high
school sports contributes to staying in school.
Methods
This study used athletic data from the KSHSAA master roster of students who participated in
high school sports during the 2008-2009 school year and academic data from the Kansas
State Department of Education (KSDE). Students on this KSHSAA master athletic
participation roster were matched with academic-related data available in the new KSDE data
warehouse by a KSDE staff member. In addition, results from seniors who took the ACT
college entrance examination were provided to KSDE along with results from the ACT
optional questionnaire that included self-reported GPAs. (GPAs were not available through
the KSDE data warehouse.) Matched data for all Kansas high school students in grades 9-12
were analyzed to identify differences in academic performance between athletes and nonathletes. Because only self-reported GPA ranges from the ACT were available, simple
comparative analyses were made between non-athletes and athletes. Similar analyses were
completed for graduation and dropout rates.
To examine differences between performance of non-athletes and athletes on the five ACT
measures, several one-way multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) tests were
conducted. On all follow-up analysis of variance (ANOVA) procedures, the Bonferroni
approach was used to control for Type I errors with each ANOVA tested at the p = .01
significance level (.05/5). Differences in performance between non-athletes and athletes on
the Kansas State Assessments were examined using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA)
procedures tested at the .05 significance level. Human subjects approval was obtained for this
study, although only composite data were reported with no identifiable connection with any
student.
Results
Based on matched data from KSDE and KSHSAA, there were 139,349 students enrolled in
grades 9-12 in Kansas high schools during the 2008-2009 school year. Of these, 62,297
© 2012 Journal of Sport Administration & Supervision
A-7
Vol. 4, No.1, May 2012
Page 47
Academic Performance of Athletes and Non-Athletes
(44.7%) were athletes, 67,651 (48.5%) were females, and 103,493 (74.3%) were White. The
numbers and percentages of non-athletes and athletes by gender, ethnicity, and grade are
provided in Table 1.
Table 1
Non-Athletes and Athletes in Grades 9-12 in Kansas High Schools in 2008-2009
Total
Non-Athletes %
Athletes %
Gender
71,698 51.5%
Male
37,129
51.8% 34,569
48.2%
41%
39,923
59%
27,728
67,651 48.5%
Female
Ethnicity
74.3%
53,073
51.3% 50,420
48.7% 103,493
White
28.1%
15,095
10.8%
Hispanic/Latino
10,853
71.9% 4,242
8.3%
63.2% 4,265
36.8%
11,595
Black/African American 7,330
29.2%
3,086
2.2%
2,186
70.8% 900
Asian
1.4%
1,160
60%
773
40%
1,933
American Indian
41.4%
2,920
2.1%
1,710
58.6% 1,210
Multi-racial
1,227
0.9%
740
60.3% 487
39.7%
Unknown
Grade in 2008-2009
49.8%
37,221
26.7%
9th grade
18,703
50.2% 18,518
46.5%
35,548 25.5%
10th grade
19,030
53.5% 16,518
43.5%
33,746 24.2%
11 th grade
19,070
56.5% 14,676
38.3%
32,834
23.6%
12th grade
20,249
61.7% 12,585
Note. Multi-racial includes all students who marked more than one ethnicity.
Among athletes (N =9,347) who reported their GPAs on the ACT questionnaire, 80.1%
reported a GPA of 3.0 or higher, as compared to 70.5% of non-athletes (N = 9,221) who
reported a 3.0 GPA or higher. Additionally, 51.8% of athletes reported having a GPA of 3.5
or above, while 39.8% of non-athletes reporting this level of performance. Comparisons for
self-reported GPAs of 3.0 or above and 3.5 and above by gender and ethnicity are shown in
Table 2.
© 2012 Journal of Sport Administration & Supervision
A-8
Vol. 4, No. 1, May 2012
Page 48
Lumpkin & Favor
Table 2
Comparison of Self-Reported GPAs of 3.0 and above and 3.5 and above from Non-Athletes
and Athletes
Athletes
Non-Athletes
3.0 GPA 3.5 GPA
N
N
3.0 GPA 3.5 GPA
or above or above
or above or above
Gender
74%
43%
5,017
34%
3,674
64%
Male
62%
4,330
87%
44%
5,547
75%
Female
Ethnicity
37%
56%
6,626
26%
45%
5,318
White
32%
390
66%
26%
60%
638
Hispanic/Latino
20%
54%
503
22%
52%
615
Black/African American
60%
91%
138
51%
79%
329
Asian
45%
76%
24%
94
110
60%
American Indian
40%
72%
136
34%
153
64%
Multi-racial
37%
69%
58
46%
68%
84
Unknown
Note. Based on self-reported GPA ranges from ACT questionnaire.
Of the 17,249 non-athletes for whom data were available, 88.1% graduated with 2,323 failing
to graduate. Of the 12,218 athletes, 97.6% graduated and 303 failed to graduate. Table 3
provides graduation data by gender and ethnicity. The number of students who dropped out
of Kansas high schools in 2008-2009 was 2,016 across grades 9-12; 94% were non-athletes.
The numbers and percentages of non-athletes and athletes by gender, ethnicity, and grade
who dropped out are provided in Table 4.
Table 3
Number and Percentage of 12`h Grade Non Athletes and Athletes Who Graduated in 20082009
Athletes
%
Non-Athletes
Gender
97.5%
7,019
86.4%
7,823
Male
97.7%
5,199
89.4%
9,426
Female
Ethnicity
98%
10,154
90%
12,849
White
95%
716
85%
1,854
Hispanic/Latino
97%
760
79%
1,375
Black/African American
91%
182
88%
487
Asian
98%
144
81%
246
American Indian
96%
178
84%
286
Multi-racial
95%
84
89%
152
Unknown
Note. While 32,834 students were enrolled in 12 th grade in 2008-09, only 32,093 of these
students had complete graduation data.
© 2012 Journal of Sport Administration & Supervision
A-9
Vol. 4, No. 1, May 2012
Page 49
Academic Performance of Athletes and Non-Athletes
Table 4
Number and Percentage Out of the Total Number of Students ofNon-Athletes and Athletes
Who Dropped Out in 2008-2009
%
Athletes
Non-Athletes
%
Gender
.26%
34,569
2.9%
37,129
Male
.13%
27,728
2.2%
39,923
Female
Ethnicity
.16%
50,420
2.4%
53,073
White
.52%
4,242
2.9%
10,853
Hispanic/Latino
.30%
4,265
2.9%
7,330
Black/African American
.10%
900
1.2%
2,186
Asian
.26%
773
3.2%
1,160
American Indian
.25%
1,210
1,710
2.7%
Multi-racial
0%
487
2.4%
740
Unknown
Grade in 2008-2009
.09%
18,518
1.8%
18,703
9th grade
th
16,518
.17%
2.6%
19,030
10 grade
1th
.30%
14,676
3.0%
19,070
1 grade
.28%
12,585
2.6%
20,249
12th grade
.
The first MANOVA evaluated differences between all non-athletes and athletes who had
taken the ACT. Table 5 shows the mean scores and standard deviations for each of the two
groups on the five dependent variables. Small, significant differences were found between
the two groups on the dependent measures, according to Wilks's A = .98, F(5, 19,225) =
88.54, p < .01, 1 2 = . 02. ANOVA tests were conducted as follow-up tests to the MANOVA
and showed that athletes significantly outperformed non-athletes in mathematics F(1, 19,229)
102.55, p < .01, 1 2 = . 01 and science F(1, 19,229) = 53.85, p < .01, r12 = . 003; non-athletes
outperformed athletes in reading F(1, 19,229) = 28.30, p < .01, 1 2 =.001.
Table 5
Mean Scores and Standard Deviations
Non-Athletes
M SD
ACT Scores
21.33 5.98
English
21.31 4.86
Mathematics
21.53 4.69
Science
*22.56 5.96
Reading
21.81 4.81
Composite
Non Athletes and Athletes on the ACT
Athletes
M SD
21.12 5.58
*22.01 4.83
*22.01 4.42
22.12 5.62
21.94 4.55
Note. N = 9,620 non-athletes; N = 9,611 athletes. *p < .01.
A second MANOVA was conducted to determine if there were significant differences in
ACT test scores between male non-athletes and athletes. Wilks's A = .98, F(5, 9,054) =
© 2012 Journal of Sport Administration & Supervision
A-10
Vol. 4, No. 1, May 2012
Page 50
Lumpkin & Favor
31.16, p < .01, 12 = . 02 indicated significant differences between male non-athletes and
athletes. ANOVA tests showed that male non-athletes scored significantly higher on ACT
tests than did male athletes in English F(1, 9,058) = 45.50, p < .01, r12 = . 01; reading F(1,
9,058) = 62.34, p < .01, ,f = .01 and on the composite score F(1, 9,058) = 22.09, p < .01, r1 2
= .002. Table 6 shows the mean scores and standard deviations for male non-athletes and
athletes for each of the ACT scores.
© 2012 Journal of Sport Administration & Supervision
A-11
Vol. 4, No. 1, May 2012
Page 51
Academic Performance of Athletes and Non-Athletes
JSS
Table 6
Mean Scores and Standard Deviations for Male Non-Athletes and Athletes on the ACT
Male Non-Athletes Male Athletes
SD
M
SD
M
ACT Scores
5.59
5.91
20.52
*21.34
English
22.35
5.00
22.29
5.09
Mathematics
4.61
4.91
22.31
22.44
Science
6.06
21.97
5.76
*22.95
Reading
21.91
4.70
4.93
*22.39
Composite
Note. N = 3,871 male non-athletes; N = 5,189 male athletes. *p < .01.
The third MANOVA evaluated differences between female non-athletes and athletes on the
ACT. Mean scores and standard deviations for these two groups are shown in Table 7.
Significant differences were found between the two groups, according to Wilks's A = .98;
F(5, 10,165) = 45.39, p < .01, 1 2 = . 02. Follow-up ANOVAs showed that female athletes
scored significantly higher on the ACT than did female non-athletes in English F(1, 10,169)
= 18.49, p < .01,12 = . 002, mathematics F(l, 10169) = 113.63, p < .01,12 = . 01, science F(1,
10,169) = 73.95, p < .01, = .01, and on the composite score F(1, 10,169) = 36.12, p < .01;
r12 =.004.
Table 7
Mean Scores and Standard Deviations for Female Non-Athletes and Athletes on the ACT
Female Non-Athletes Female Athletes
M
SD
M
SD
ACT Scores
*21.82
5.49
6.03
English
21.33
4.58
*21.62 4.60
Mathematics
20.64
4.15
4.42
*21.65
Science
20.91
22.30
5.46
22.30
5.87
Reading
4.68
*21.97 4.38
21.44
Composite
Note. N = 5,749 female non-athletes; N = 4,422 female athletes. *p < .01.
The next MANOVA evaluated differences in ACT test scores among male and female
athletes. Mean scores and standard deviations for male and female athletes are shown in
Table 8. This analysis found significant and larger differences between male and female
athletes than existed with previous measures, according to Wilks's A = .92, F(5, 9,605) _
173.95, p < .01, 1 2 = . 08. Follow-up ANOVA analyses showed that female athletes scored
significantly higher than did male athletes on the ACT in English F(1, 9,609) = 131.41, p <
.01,112 = . 01 and reading F(1, 9,609) = 8.34, p < .01,11 2 = . 001. Male athletes scored
significantly higher than female athletes on the ACT in mathematics F(1, 9,609) = 53.99, p <
.01,112 = . 01 and science F(1, 9,609) = 54.88, p < .01,11 2 = . 01.
© 2012 Journal of Sport Administration & Supervision
A-12
Vol. 4, No. 1, May 2012
Page 52
Lumpkin & Favor
Table 8
J1
Mean Scores and Standard Deviations for Male and Female Athletes on the ACT
Male Athletes Female Athletes
M
SD
M
SD
ACT Scores
20.52 5.59
*21.82 5.49
English
21.62 4.60
Mathematics
*22.35 5.00
*22.31 4.61
21.65 4.15
Science
21.97 5.76
*22.30 5.46
Reading
21.97 4.38
21.91 4.70
Composite
Note. N = 5,189 male athletes; N = 4,422 female athletes. *p < .01.
The final two MANOVAs examined differences between non-athletes' and athletes'
performance on the ACT by ethnicity. The first MANOVA compared White non-athletes and
athletes on the five ACT scores. Means and standard deviations are shown in Table 9.
Wilks's A = .97, F(5, 15809) = 87.98, p < .01, 1 2 = . 03 indicated significant differences
between the two groups. ANOVA analysis found that White non-athletes performed
significantly better than did White athletes in English F(1, 15813) = 13.6'7,p <.01,1 2 = . 002
and reading F(1, 15813) = '70.42,p < .01,i = .004; White athletes outperformed White nonathletes in mathematics F(1, 15813) = 60.80, p < .01,11 2 = . 004 and science F(1, 15813) _
17.66,p<.01, q 2 =.001.
Table 9
White Non-Athletes and Athletes on the ACT
Mean Scores and Standard Deviations
White Non-Athletes White Athletes
SD
M
SD
M
ACT Scores
21.60
5.44
English
*22.12 5.71
*22.39
4.75
21.80 4.77
Mathematics
*22.36
4.33
Science
22.07 4.52
22.57
5.54
Reading
*23.32 5.76
4.44
22.46 4.59
22.35
Composite
Note. N = 7,582 white non-athletes; N = 8,233 white athletes. *p < .01.
The last MANOVA examined differences in ACT performance between minority nonathletes and athletes. Means and standard deviations are shown in Table 10. Wilks's A = .99,
F(5, 3263) = 6.64, p < .01, 92 = . 01 suggested differences between the 2 groups among the 5
ACT variables, but no significant differences were found with follow-up ANOVAs using the
Bonferroni method to control for errors.
© 2012 Journal of Sport Administration & Supervision
A-13
Vol. 4, No. 1, May 2012
0
Page 53
Academic Performance of Athletes and Non-Athletes
Table 10
Mean Scores and Standard Deviations for Minority Non-Athletes and Athletes on the ACT
Minority Non-Athletes Minority Athletes
M
SD
M
SD
ACT Scores
6.01
18.10
5.50
English
18.30
4.69
19.65
4.64
Mathematics
19.37
4.68
4.32
Science
19.42
19.80
5.80
19.65
19.34
5.30
Reading
19.32
4.76
19.34
4.38
Composite
Note. N = 1,952 minority non-athletes; N = 1,317 minority athletes. *p < .01.
A series of one-way ANOVA procedures were conducted to examine differences between the
academic performance of non-athletes and athletes on Kansas state assessment measures.
Means, standard deviations, degrees of freedom, F values, and r1 2 effect sizes for these tests
are shown in Table 11. Since ANOVA analysis on the Kansas state assessments indicated
significantly higher performance for athletes than for non-athletes across all assessments and
grades, MANOVA analyses were conducted to evaluate whether athletes entered high school
with distinctive academic advantages over non-athletes. Because of limited longitudinal data,
only one analysis was conducted. It examined 2006, 2007, and 2008 math and reading scores
for students identified as 9 th graders in 2009. These 9 th grade students would have been in the
6th grade in 2006. Wilks's A = .94, F(2, 31,200) = 1,039.62, p < .01, 112 = . 06 indicated
significant differences between the 2 groups. Using the Bonferroni approach to control for
Type I errors, each follow up ANOVA was tested at the .025 significance level (.05/2).
Results indicated that athletes performed significantly higher than non-athletes in
mathematics F(1, 31,201) = 2,048.62,p < .01, 112 = . 06 and reading F(1, 31,201) = 1,358.86,
p < .01, 1 2 = . 04 in the 6th grade.
© 2012 Journal of Sport Administration & Supervision
A-14
Vol. 4, No. 1, May 2012
Page 54
E Lumpkin & Favor
Table 11
Analysis of Variance Comparisons between Non-Athletes and Athletes on Kansas State
Assessment Tests in 2006-2009
ANOVA Results
Athletes
Non-Athletes
Kansas Assessment
F
df
SD
M
SD
M
*4,823.91
73.39 16.25 1, 90,517
65.32 18.62
Mathematics 2006
*3,316.24
72.74 16.12 1, 61,753
64.71 18.51
Mathematics 2007
*2,512.50
72.05 16.98 1, 37,126
62.69 18.98
Mathematics 2008
*317.39
73.10 13.88 1, 17,760
69.20 15.28
Math. 2009 Grade 10
*224.19
1,
10,921
15.80
15.85
54.15
49.47
Math. 2009 Grade 11
*3,001.59
73.13 16.72
78.70 13.64 1, 90,016
Reading 2006
*2,449.66
73.92 16.66
79.89 13.34 1, 62,052
Reading 2007
*1,506.88
81.03 13.14 1, 46,871
75.74 16.21
Reading 2008
*84.23
8.23
1, 10,984
9.32
82.41
80.87
Reading 2009 Grade 10
*422.36
79.58 12.65 1, 18,767
75.31 15.26
Reading 2009 Grade 11
*915.54
62.10 16.46 1, 30,510
56.11 18.03
History/Govt. Grade 8
*238.28
61.47 14.31 1, 27,975
58.60 16.02
History/Govt. Grade 11
*356.55
1, 17,997
3.64
.73
3.42
.79
Writing 2009 Grade 11
*470.00
59.24 15.13 1, 28,730
55.11 16.41
Science 2008
*496.76
61.43 17.15 1, 24,448
56.38 18.27
Science 2009 Grade 11
112
.05
.05
.06
.02
.02
.03
.04
.03
.01
.02
.03
.01
.02
.02
.02
Note. *p<Ø1
Discussion
The purpose of this study was to examine the academic performance of high school athletes
and non-athletes to determine whether participation enhances or detracts from academic
achievement. Although research in this area is abundant, results have been mixed. Some prior
researchers have reported that participation in high school sports detracts from academic
performance; some have found no positive or negative effects; and some have linked athletic
participation to improved academic achievement. Using data from over 139,000 Kansas
athletes and non-athletes from grades 9-12 in 2008-2009, this study found clear and striking
differences between athletes and non-athletes in GPA, graduation, and dropout rates and
statistically significant differences on performance on the ACT and Kansas State
Assessments by group, gender, and ethnicity. In most areas, athletes clearly outperformed
non-athletes.
Grade Point Average
Athletes in Kansas self-reported higher GPAs than did non-athletes, a finding supported by
the results of Broh (2002), JacAngelo (2003), and others. As a group, 80.5% of athletes
reported having a 3.0 GPA or higher compared to only 69.5% of non-athletes who reported
this same level of academic performance.
Several gender differences were also noted. Female athletes reported GPAs of 3.0 or above at
a 12% higher rate than did female non-athletes. These differences were even more striking at
the 3.5 and above level as 62% of female athletes reported a GPA of 3.5 or above as
© 2012 Journal of Sport Administration & Supervision
A-15
Vol. 4, No. 1, May 2012
Academic Performance of Athletes and Non-Athletes
Page 55
compared to 44% of female non-athletes. Despite that fact that male athletes are often
perceived as putting more emphasis on athletics than academics, 74% of male athletes
reported GPAs of 3.0 or above; only 64% of male non-athletes reported attaining a 3.0 or
above. As with female athletes, this trend was also evident at the 3.5 GPA level as 43% of
male athletes reported a 3.5 GPA or above, compared to 34% of male non-athletes.
Overall, females consistently outperformed males on their GPAs. Among athletes, 87% of
females reported a 3.0 GPA or above compared to 74% of male non-athletes. Female nonathletes also outperformed male non-athletes as 75% of non-athlete females reported a 3.0 or
above GPA compared to 64% of males. These findings confirmed those of Camp (1990),
McCarthy (2000), Stencel (2005), and Stegman and Stephens (2000).
Differences in GPA between non-athletes and athletes were evident by racial category as
well, as shown in Tables 2 and 3. Across all racial groups, a higher percentage of athletes
than non-athletes reported earning a 3.0 GPA or above, with double digit differences among
American Indian (16%), Asian (12%), and White (11%) athletes.
Graduation Rates
In addition to outperforming non-athletes on self-reported GPA, Kansas high school athletes
graduated at a much higher rate (98%) than did non-athletes (88%), which supports
Overton's (2001) and Whitley's (1995) findings for students in North Carolina. Interestingly,
female athletes graduated at an over 8% higher rate than did female non-athletes, but male
athletes graduated at just over an 11% higher rate than did male non-athletes. These data
confirmed that athletes were more likely to graduate than were non-athletes, although being
required to maintain academic eligibility in order to participate in sport may have been a
contributing factor.
Graduation rates by ethnicity revealed that athletes graduated at higher rates than nonathletes in all racial categories. These differences were especially noteworthy among
Black/African Americans (18%), American Indians (17%), and Hispanic/Latinos (10%).
Among Black/African Americans, only 79% of non-athletes graduated compared to 97% of
athletes. Similarly, 81% of American Indian non-athletes graduated while 98% of athletes
completed high school. Finally, 85% of Hispanic/Latino non-athletes graduated, but 95% of
athletes earned their high school diplomas. These findings suggest that participating in high
school athletics may be especially beneficial in helping students who were ethnic minorities
graduate.
Dropout Rates
Several previous studies have reported that athletes drop out of high school less often than do
non-athletes (Davalos, Chavez, & Guardiola, 1999; Jansen, 1992; McNeal, 1995; Overton,
2001; Whitley, 1995; Zaff et al., 2003), and this study supports these findings. Non-athletes
in Kansas were over 15 times more likely to drop out of school than were athletes as 1955
non-athletes dropped out during 2008-2009 compared to only 126 athletes.
Once again, several gender differences surfaced. Male non-athletes were 12 times more
likely to drop out of school than were male athletes. Athletic participation may be even more
important for females as non-athletes were 24 times more like to drop out than were female
athletes. Only 36 female athletes dropped out of school in 2008-2009 compared to 878
female non-athletes. While the factors involved with any high school student's decision to
drop out of school are unknown, these data suggest that participation in high school sports
© 2012 Journal of Sport Administration & Supervision
A-16
Vol. 4, No. 1, May 2012
Page 56
Lumpkin & Favor
can have an ameliorating effect on persistence in school, especially for female athletes. The
fact that female athletes were less likely to drop out could be related to higher levels of
confidence and self-esteem, more positive body image, and higher states of psychological
well-being as claimed by the Women's Sports Foundation (n.d.).
Across all ethnic groups, athletes were much less likely to drop out of school than nonathletes, thus supporting the argument that participating in high school sports is a
contributing factor in retention. Participating in sports may be particularly beneficial in
helping students who were ethnic minorities matriculate. In this study, 213 (2.9%)
Black/African American non-athletes dropped out of school compared to only 13 athletes
(.30%); 37 (3.2%) American Indian non-athletes dropped out compared to only 2 (.26%)
athletes. In other words, Black/African Americans non-athletes are 16 times more likely to
drop out of school than athletes and American Indian non-athletes were nearly 19 times more
likely to drop out of school.
ACT
In 2009, the national average ACT composite score was 21.1 (ACT, n.d.). This study found
that both athletes and non-athletes' mean scores in all areas of the ACT (English, Math,
Science, Reading, and Composite) exceeded the national average. More importantly, several
statistically significant differences emerged. As a group, Kansas high school athletes scored
significantly higher on the ACT mathematics and science tests than did non-athletes.
However, as a group, non-athletes performed significantly better than athletes in reading.
These findings partially supported the findings of JacAngelo (2003) and Kaufman (2002).
There were no significant differences in English or on the composite score.
Unlike the findings with GPA and graduation rates, male athletes failed to outperform male
athletes on the ACT. Instead, male non-athletes scored significantly higher on ACT English,
reading, and composite scores than did male athletes. Among females, however, the findings
were reversed. Female athletes scored significantly higher in English, mathematics, science,
and the composite score than did female non-athletes. These findings suggest that as a group,
male non-athletes may be more serious students than are male athletes. Conversely, female
athletes appear to either be more serious students or have found better methods of balancing
their academic and athletic commitments.
Among athletes, males outperformed females significantly on mathematics and science,
while females scored significantly higher than males on English and reading on the ACT.
These differences on ACT tests seem to reinforce past findings about curricular strengths and
interests by gender.
Since only 25% of Kansas high school students are ethnic minorities, ACT scores were
evaluated using ethnic minorities as one large group. This evaluation revealed no significant
differences between athletes' and non-athletes' ACT performances. However, White athletes
and non-athletes differed on all four of the ACT tests with White non-athletes scoring
significantly higher than White athletes in English and reading and White athletes scoring
higher than White non-athletes in mathematics and science.
Kansas State Assessments
Unlike the ACT where athletes outperformed non-athletes in math and science, but nonathletes performed higher in reading, scores on Kansas state assessments showed that athletes
outperformed non-athletes in all areas and in all years for which data were available. As
© 2012 Journal of Sport Administration & Supervision
A-17
Vol. 4, No. 1, May 2012
Academic Performance of Athletes and Non- Athletes
Page 57
shown in Table 11, athletes scored significantly higher than did non-athletes in math,
reading, history/government, writing, and science each year since 2006.
Overall, this study found that athletes outperform non-athletes in several academic areas. It
is important to note, however, that these findings do not imply that participation in athletics
causes higher academic achievement. This study did not control for factors like socioeconomic status, family background, or years of sport participation which may have
contributed to academic differences prior to participation in high school sports. Therefore, no
causal relationships were established.
There are numerous reasons why participation in high school sports may positively affect
academic achievement. The Kansas eligibility requirement that students must pass five units
of credit each semester to retain eligibility to participate in high school sports may motivate
some athletes to take their school work more seriously. Additionally, coaches and other
educators can be influential in encouraging and helping athletes maintain their eligibility..
Through sports participation, high school athletes may have learned greater self-discipline
and better time management, enabling them to effectively fulfill their academic
responsibilities. Competitiveness in sports may contribute to a similar work effort focused on
achieving at least minimal, and possibly higher, academic goals. Finally, athletes may enjoy
the prominent status attached to being an athlete because they receive more encouragement
and praise for their efforts than do non-athletes. Thus, maintaining athletic eligibility
becomes a priority.
A confounding factor could be that athletes may enjoy academic advantages prior to entering
high school and participating on sport teams, as suggested by Lueptow and Kayser (1973). It
is possible that students who already achieve at higher academic levels choose to participate
in sports. Since athletes' scores on math and reading assessments for the 9th grade (the only
grade level for which three years of data were available) were significantly higher on these
same tests in the 6th grade, it is possible that these better-prepared students chose to
participate in high school sports while under-prepared students chose not to participate. Thus,
differences in academic performance at the high school level may be due to selection bias.
However, Broh (2002) controlled for the selection of higher-performing students into sports
and still found higher grades for athletes.
To summarize, this study demonstrates high school athletes in Kansas reported higher grades,
had higher graduation rates, much lower numbers of dropouts, some significantly higher
ACT scores, and significantly higher state assessment scores on all tests than did nonathletes. While no cause-and-effect relationships could be established, several statistically
significant and other double-digit percentage differences support that participation in high
school athletes does not detract from their academic performance. Instead, participation
appears to enhance academic performance.
Conclusions
Across the nation, high school sports have faced renewed scrutiny as reduced federal, state,
and local financial support has forced school administrators to find ways to reduce budget
deficits. Some school districts in Kansas, Arizona, and Florida have already eliminated sport
programs and coaches (Carlyon, 2011; Hardy, 2001; Whetten, 2011). Other district
administrators continue to evaluate eliminating sport programs as they search for ways to
reduce expenses and minimize deficits (Iorizzo & McGuire, 2011).
© 2012 Journal of Sport Administration & Supervision
A-18
Vol. 4, No. 1, May 2012
Lumpkin & Favor
11
Page 58
As an alternative to eliminating sport programs, many high schools have either already
implemented or are considering implementing pay-to-play fees (Campbell, 2011; Canyon,
2011; Iorizzo & McGuire, 2011; Whetten, 2011). While this may seem like a reasonable
alternative to eliminating sport programs altogether, it discriminates against students who do
not have the financial means to pay for membership on a high school sports team. Pay-toplay may be especially harmful to urban students, many of whom may also be ethnic
minorities. In this study, athletes from ethnic minorities graduated at much higher rates,
dropped out much less frequently, and reported much higher GPAs than did non-athletes.
Holloway (1999/2000) suggested that instead of cutting extracurricular activities during
tough budgetary times, school administrators should financially support these activities
because they helped students stay in school and succeed academically. This large-scale study
supports Holloway's findings. In Kansas, participation in high school sports is definitely not
detracting from academic performance. Kansas high school athletes in 2008-2009 earned
higher grades, graduated at higher rates, were less likely to drop out of school, and scored
higher on state assessments and some areas of the ACT than did non-athletes.
According to the NFHS (n.d), high school sports and other extracurricular activity programs
typically account for only 1-3% of a school's overall budget. As coaches, administrators, and
supporters of high school athletics battle for funding in a challenging economic climate, they
now have recent empirical evidence that can be used to help substantiate and quantify their
arguments for the overall cost-benefit of funding high school sports.
Limitations and Recommendations for Future Research
This study was limited by the data currently available in the KSDE data warehouse. As a new
state initiative, the KSDE is just beginning to collect and make available extensive academic
performance data on Kansas students. As increased data become available, future studies can
provide a more extensive perspective of the academic achievement of athletes and nonathletes. For example, longitudinal ACT test scores and state assessment data are needed to
more fully examine the academic performance of non-athletes and athletes including by
gender and ethnicity. Additionally, within the next few years the KSDE data warehouse will
include specific GPAs for all students rather than the self-reported GPA ranges used in this
study. As the availability of data increases, researchers can more confidently and
conclusively determine whether participation in high school sports leads to higher levels of
academic performance across a variety of measures. Despite limited data in some areas, this
study provides baseline information for subsequent studies in Kansas and other states.
How much influence participation in high school sports has on the academic achievements of
participants versus how much is attributable to other factors is unknown. Additional research
is needed to answer this important question. Future researchers are encouraged to control for
factors such as academic ability, family background, and socio-economic status that may
influence higher-performing students to self-select into sports. Controlling these types of
variables would help confirm or refute a causal relationship between participation in high
school sports and higher academic achievement. The impact of eligibility requirements on
academic performance should also be examined. Are more high school students motivated to
achieve at least at the minimal academic level so they can participate in sports, or do more
students choose to drop out of school, and thus lose the benefits associated with participation
in high school sports, because they are unwilling or unable to meet minimum academic
requirements? Examining the positive and negative outcomes associated with meeting
© 2012 Journal of Sport Administration & Supervision
A-19
Vol. 4, No. 1, May 2012
Page 59
Academic Performance of Athletes and Non-Athletes
JSS
academic eligibility requirements to participate in high school sports would be helpful in
establishing eligibility policies.
References
ACT. Facts about the ACT. Retrieved from http://www.act.org/news/aapfacts.html
Branch, J. L. (2003). Extracurricular activities and academic achievement (Doctoral
dissertation, University of Southern Mississippi). Retrieved from ProQuest
Dissertations and Theses.
Broh, B. A. (2002). Linking extracurricular programming to academic achievement: Who
benefits and why? Sociology of Education, 75, 69-91.
Bukowski, B. J. (2010). A comparison of academic athletic eligibility in interscholastic
sports in American high schools. The Sport Journal, 13(2). Retrieved from
http://www.thesportjournal.org/article/comparison-academic-athletic-el igibilityinterscholastic-sports-american-high-schools
Burnett, M. A. (2000). "One strike and you're out": An analysis of no pass/no play policies.
High School Journal, 84(2), 1.
Callari, M. (2002). Academics vs. athletics: Eligibility requirements for interscholastic
athletic participation. Interscholastic Athletic Administration, 29(1), 4-7.
Camp, W. G. (1990). Participation in student activities and achievement: A covariance
structural analysis. Journal of Educational Research, 83, 272-278.
Campbell, M. (2011, April 11). Shawnee Mission budget cuts include teachers, coaches, and
cleaning. The Kansas City Star. Retrieved from www.kansascity.com/2011/04/11/vprint/2793 882/shawnee-mission-budget-cuts-include.html
Canyon, H. (2011, March 11). No money available for Duval high school sports, says board
chairman. The Florida Times- Union. Retrieved from
http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2011-03-12/story/no-money-available-duvalhigh-school-sports-says-board-chairman
Corbett, M. (2007). To participate or not participate: The relationship between school
sponsored extracurricular activity participation and student outcomes (Doctoral
dissertation, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey). Retrieved from ProQuest
Dissertations and Theses.
Crosnoe, R. (2002). Academic and health-related trajectories in adolescence: The intersection
of gender and athletics. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 43, 317-336.
Davalos, D. B., Chavez, E. L., & Guardiola, R. J. (1999). The effects of extracurricular
activity, ethnic identification, and perception of school on student dropout rates.
Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 21, 61-77.
Fejgin, N. (1994). Participation in high school competitive sports: A subversion of school
mission or contribution to academic goals? Sociology of Sport Journal, 11, 211-230.
© 2012 Journal of Sport Administration & Supervision
A-20
Vol. 4, No. 1, May 2012
Lumpkin & Favor
Page 60
Feldman, A. F., & Matjasko, J. L. (2005). The role of school-based extracurricular activities
in adolescent development: A comprehensive review and future directions. Review of
Educational Research, 75, 159-210.
11
Hardy, K. (2010, December 26). Budget cuts a way of life for Kansas school districts.
Hutchnews.com . Retrieved from http://hutchnews.com/Print/Ed-Day-2-Sider--2
Hauser, W. J., & Lueptow, L. B. (1978). Participation in athletics and academic achievement:
A replication and extension. Sociological Quarterly, 19, 304-309.
Holloway, J. H. (1999/2000). Extracurricular activities: The path to academic success?
Educational Leadership, 57(4), 87-88.
Iorizzo, P. & McGuire, M. (2011, April 11). Hard times force rethinking of high school
sports. Times Union. Retrieved from http://www.timesunion.com/sports/article/Hardtimes-force-rethinking-of-future-of-high-13 3 0487. php
JacAngelo, N. P. (2003). The relation of sports participation to academic performance of
high school students (Doctoral dissertation, Florida International University).
Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.
Jansen, P. (1992). High school sports: Making magic: Sports build leaders. Athletic Business,
16(3), 14.
Jefferson, C. (1999). Educational performance of athletes and nonathletes in two Mississippi
rural high schools (Doctoral dissertation, University of Southern Mississippi).
Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.
Kansas State High School Activities Association. (n.d.). Mission statement. Retrieved from
http://www.kshsaa.org/Public/General/MissionStatement.cfm
Kaufmann, A. M. (2002). Interscholastic sports participation as a predictorof academic
success for high school students (Doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin).
Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.
Kilrea, T. B. (1998). A study of the relationship between extracurricular activity
participation and the academic achievement of high school students (Doctoral
dissertation, Illinois State University). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and
Theses.
Lueptow, L. B., & Kayser, B. D. (1973). Athletic involvement, academic achievement, and
aspiration. Sociological Focus, 7, 24-36.
Mahoney, J. L. (2000). School extracurricular activity participation as a moderator in the
development of antisocial patterns. Child Development, 71, 502-516.
Mahoney, J. L., & Cairns, R. B. (1997). Do extracurricular activities protect against early
school dropout? Developmental Psychology, 33, 241-253.
Marsh, H. W. (1992). Extracurricular activities: Beneficial extension of the traditional
curriculum or subversion of academic goals? Journal of Educational Psychology, 84,
553-562.
Marsh, H. W. (1993). The effects of participation in sport during the last two years of high
school. Sociology of Sport Journal, 10, 18-43.
© 2012 Journal of Sport Administration & Supervision
A-21
Vol. 4, No. 1, May 2012
Academic Performance of Athletes and Non-Athletes
Page 61
McCarthy, K. J. (2000). The effects of student activity participation, gender, ethnicity, and
socio-economic level on high school student grade point averages and attendance.
Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED457173.pdf
McNeal, R. B., Jr. (1995). Extracurricular activities and high school dropouts. Sociology of
Education, 68, 62-81.
National Association of State Boards of Education. (2004). Athletics and achievement: The
report of the NASBE commission on high school athletics in an era of reform.
Alexandria, VA: Author.
National Federation of State High School Associations. (2008). The case for high school
activities. Retrieved from http://www.nfhs.org/content.aspx?id=3262
National Federation of State High School Associations. (n.d.). Mission statement. Retrieved
from http://www.nfhs.org/content.aspx?id=3264
National Federation of State High School Associations. (n.d). 2009-10 athletics participation
survey. Retrieved from http://www.nfhs.org/content.aspx?id=3282
Neish, M. A. (1993). Student activities and academic achievement at Marysville High
School. Reston, VA: National Association of Student Activity Advisers.
O'Brien, E., & Rollefson, M. (1992). Extracurricular participation and student engagement.
Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
Overton, G. P. (2001). A quantitative analysis of the educational performance of athletes and
non-athletes of 131 high schools in North Carolina- (Doctoral dissertation, East
Carolina University). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.
Rose, L. C., Gallup, A. M., & Elam, S. M. (1997). The 29 th annual Phi Delta Kappa/Gallup
poll of the public's attitudes toward the public schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 79(1), 4156.
Stegman, M., & Stephens, L. J. (2000). Athletics and academics: Are they compatible? High
School Magazine, 7(6), 36-39.
Stencel, J. R. (2005). A study of the relationship between interscholastic athletic
participation and academic achievement for a group of Tennessee high school
students (Doctoral dissertation, Union University). Retrieved from ProQuest
Dissertations and Theses.
Streb, A. G. (2009). A study of the association between high school participation in cocurricular activities and academic achievement (Doctoral dissertation, University of
Missouri—St. Louis). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.
VanDuyne, D. W. (2004). The effects of extracurricular engagement on students' academic
achievement (Doctoral dissertation, Purdue University). Retrieved from ProQuest
Dissertations and Theses.
Whetten, B. (2010, August 18). Elimination of junior high programs sparks jump in local fall
leagues. Douglas Dispatch. Retrieved from
http://douglasdispatch.com/articles/2010/08/1 9/sports/doc4c6b 1260959e7668359051.
prt
© 2012 journal of Sport Administration & Supervision
A-22
Vol. 4, No. 1, May 2012
Lumpkin & Favor
Page 62
Whitley, R. L. (1995). A comparison of the educational performance of athletes and nonathletes in'133 North Carolina high schools (Doctoral dissertation, East Carolina
University). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.
Women's Sports Foundation. (n.d.). Benefits—Why sports participation for girls and women:
The foundation position. Retrieved from
http://www.womenssportsfoundation.org/Content/Articles/Issues/Body-andMind/B/Benefits--Why-Sports-Participation-for-Girls-and- Women-The-FoundationPosition.aspx
Zaff, J. F., Moore, K. A., Papillo, A. R., & Williams, S. (2003). Implications of
extracurricular activity participation during adolescence on positive outcomes.
Journal ofAdolescent Research, 18, 599-630.
© 2012 Journal of Sport Administration & Supervision
A-23
Vol. 4, No. 1, May 2012
Does Athletic Success Come at the Expense of Academic Success?
Daniel H. Bowen *
Jay P. Greene
University of Arkansas
Abstract
Claims are often made about the impact of high school athletics on academic achievement
without reference to empirical research on the issue. In this paper we empirically examine the
relationship between the extent to which high schools have winning sports teams, offer a variety
of sports options, and facilitate student participation in athletics on schools' overall student
achievement and attainment. We find that high school athletics do not appear to detract from
academic success. In fact, based on the data we examined from Ohio high schools, an emphasis
on athletic success and participation is associated with higher scores on standardized tests and
higher graduation rates.
Introduction
Do successful high school athletics programs come at the expense of academic success?
In this article we attempt to address this question empirically. In particular, we study the
relationship between the athletic record of high schools in Ohio and the student achievement in
those high schools, controlling for other characteristics.
Our expectations for what we would find are ambiguous. On the one hand, we might
think that resources are finite and that investments in producing success in one arena necessarily
would have to reduce the investment in success in another. Schools have limited budgets, a
limited supply of talented personnel, and a limited capacity to convey priorities to students. If
A-24
schools devote those scarce resources to their football or basketball programs, academics would
have to suffer.
On the other hand, there is the potential for synergies in education. Perhaps students learn
important skills about self-discipline and delayed gratification from athletics that also produce
benefits academically. And more broadly, perhaps schools that have successful academic
programs are more likely to attract the interest and involvement of parents and the community.
As parents gather for sporting events, they also discuss academic issues, which may help them
organize and coordinate to pressure schools to improve their academic quality. More parental
and community support may also make it easier to pass essential bond initiatives or increase
levies so that schools have sufficient fiscal resources for their academic programs.
Collecting and analyzing evidence to adjudicate between these two competing, plausible
hypotheses is particular important at this time. High school sports continue to attract more public
attention and to consume greater public resources while school budgets have become very tight.
Editorial page writers and local activists have been making a more forceful case that the attention
and money devoted to high school athletics is a waste and distracts from the primary
responsibility of schools to improve academic achievement (see for example Katz, 2010;
Weaver, 2011). But supporters of high school athletics respond that critics lack evidence for their
arguments and that sports play a critical role in the growth and development of students (see for
example Brooks, 2011; Green, 2009; Strauss, 2011).
Bringing more evidence to bear on these debates is important because too many
education policy discussions occur in the absence of empirical evidence. The research presented
here could help make those discussions be more productive and data-driven.
II. Literature Review
A-25
There is a significant body of research that examines how students who participate in
high school athletics are affected academically. The general consensus of this literature is that
students who are involved in high school athletics tend to have higher academic achievement and
better earnings later in life (see for example Broh, 2002; Guest & Schneider, 2003; Lipscomb,
2006; Marsh, 1992; and McNeal, 1995). In these studies, outcome measures included students'
grades and standardized test scores, homework completion rates, school dropout rates, and
students' stated educational expectations (e.g. intent to enroll in a postsecondary institution).
High school students that participate in sports have higher grades and standardized test
scores in mathematics and language arts courses (Broh, 2002). McNeal (1995) found that student
athletes were 1.7 times less likely to drop out of school. High school student athletes have also
self-reported higher education aspirations, diligence in homework completion, and lower
absenteeism, compared to students that do not participate in sports (Marsh, 1992). When
applying student fixed effects to measure changes in students' levels of participation, Lipscomb
(2006) estimated that athletic participation is associated with a 2% boost in math and science test
scores. Meanwhile, student participation in other extracurricular participation (e.g. yearbook,
drama club, etc.) was also associated with significant increases, though effect sizes were only
half as large. Finally, while associated with positive outcomes across populations, Guest and
Schneider (2003) have also found that this positive athletic-academic association was even
stronger for students attending schools serving more disadvantaged populations.
While these findings would suggest a positive relationship between successful high
school athletic programs and overall academic achievement at those schools, these studies are
addressing a slightly different question than the one we are examining here. These studies only
tell us about the effects of athletics on students directly involved in high school sports, but it is
A-26
quite possible that the larger portion of students who are not on sports teams are harmed
academically even if the students on the teams are helped. If this were the case, the overall effect
of high school athletic programs on academic achievement could be negative even if
participating in sports improves the education of those students who do participate.
Our research question is somewhat different from the one addressed by the bulk of
research on high school athletics. We want to know the overall effect of high school athletics on
academic success for students who participate as well as those who do not. On this question there
is considerably less research and no consensus on the answer. In general, there are two theories
about how athletics programs affect academic achievement in high schools: the social capital
theory and the resource tradeoff theory.
Strangely, both theories originate from different works by the University of Chicago
sociologist, James Coleman. Coleman (1990) helped pioneer the concept of social capital, which
refers to the strength of social networks and connections in helping people to achieve their
collective goals. While Coleman did not focus on the way in which high school athletics
contribute to the formation of social capital, other scholars have extended his work on social
capital to that issue. The general hypothesis is that sports provide a medium that can enhance a
school's sense of community. In other words, Friday night high school football games are more
than just gatherings where spectators watch sports. These games can also serve as venues where
parents, students, faculties, staffs, etc. come together, interact, and, subsequently, form tighter
social networks (Fritch, 1999). This sense of community, in turn, serves as a source of "social
control" or reinforcement of "school/community norms" where stakeholders serve as
collaborators in the development of students (Broh, 2002).
A-27
Fritch (1999) provides empirical evidence for this hypothesis, finding that a substantial
number of high school parents often initially meet other parents at sporting events. Additionally,
76-91% of parents report that they were very likely to discuss what is going on at the school at
these events. There is also evidence that the development of social capital positively influences
the future community involvement of student athletes. Perks (2007) concludes that participation
in athletics strongly correlates with becoming more involved members of one's community.
Adults that participated in sports early in life are more likely to volunteer, follow the news, keep
up with community affairs, etc. Whether social capital is strengthened by students directly
participating in high school sports or by parents and community members gathering at the
games, the social capital theory holds that athletics contributes to academics by contributing to
the formation of social capital. Parents, students, and other members of the community can more
effectively work to improve school quality because of their improved connections to each other
(Parcel & Dufur, 2001).
The resource trade-off theory also originated with the work of James Coleman. Schools
have a finite amount of money, talented personnel, and ability to establish priorities for students.
The more these resources are consumed for athletics, the less there is available for academics.
Coleman was most concerned with the limited ability of schools to convey priorities to students.
Attention given to high school sports distracts schools from their core mission of improving
academic achievement. Mission coherence, according to this view, is an essential part of
organization success and athletics diverts schools from having a coherent scholarly mission.
In an extensive case study of ten schools in Chicago, Coleman (1961) observed instances
where athletics were possibly responsible for altering or "swamping" the value systems of
schools. Coleman argued that athletics and academics seem at odds in a zero-sum game, where
A-28
increasing dedication towards one aspect will come at the expense of the other. Even when
schools try to strike a balance with their academic and athletic successes, Coleman believed that
they would never become "highly academically oriented" (p. 278).
It is interesting that Coleman was so critical of high school athletics given how important
he considered social capital in contributing to academic success. Coleman (1988) concluded that
higher levels of community and social networking amongst key stakeholders produced greater
levels of student academic achievement as well as attainment. And Coleman (1987) attributed
the successes of private, religious schools to the fact that shared mission and networking at
religious services provided natural venues for the growth of social capital; "In effect, this churchand-school community, with its social networks and its norms about what teenagers should and
should not do, constituted social capital beyond the family that aided both family and school in
the education of the family's children" (p. 36). Higher levels of social capital produce greater
levels of trust within a community, and a community with greater trust is able to accomplish its
mission better than a similar community without that same level of trust (Coleman, 1988). But
for some reason Coleman never considered how high school sports, like religious services
associated with private schooling, could be significant contributors to social capital formation.
Sporting events actually seem very comparable to the religious services of private,
religious schools. Others have observed this similarity. For example, with regard to football in
Texas, Glanzer (1998) states, "I do not wish to make the case, although others might like to, that
courts should declare football in Texas an unconstitutional establishment of religion" (p. 220).
Arnold Mandell (1974) also attested to the view that football is more than just a sporting event:
"Football is not a game but a religion, a metaphysical island of fundamental truth in a highly
verbalized, disguised society, a throwback of 30,000 generations of anthropological time" (p.
A-29
12). More importantly, aside from the possibility of instilling a religious-like fervor in
supporters, sporting events can facilitate the development of social capital in a community
(Uslaner, 1999). Since public high schools often encompass a broad geographic area and draw
their students from a broad diversity of religious and cultural backgrounds, sporting events may
provide the only practical venues where parents, faculties, staffs, etc. can congregate, network,
and, subsequently, build social capital. Sport may be to public schools what church is to Catholic
schools.
III. Data and Methodology
To test these competing theories about the relationship between high school athletics and
school-wide academic achievement, we collected information about high schools in Ohio. To
measure the emphasis given to athletics, we collected information about the athletic success of
high school programs in winning games. Schools that win more often presumably have a culture
in which athletics are given a higher priority. In addition, schools that offer more sports or that
have more students directly involved in sports teams are also thought to have a greater emphasis
on athletics. For academic outcomes we used measures of achievement as well as attainment. In
addition, we collected other information about these high schools, such as their per pupil
spending, size, and the demographics of their student body, to serve as control variables.
In particular, we run multiple regressions using ordinary least squares (OLS). We
examine two different dependent variables over a five year period (2004-05 through 2008-09):
percentage proficient or above on the Ohio State standardized test as a measure of achievement
and cumulative promotion index (CPI) as a measure of attainment. CPI is an estimate of the high
school graduation rate (Swanson & Chaplin, 2003). Since the conditions of this study do not
allow for a pure experimental design, we control for other school characteristics that typically
A-30
influence educational outcomes. The controls used in the regressions are schools' district per
pupil expenditures (PPE), percentage of economically disadvantaged students, percentage
minority, percentage male, and average daily memberships (ADM). The independent variables of
interest for this study are the schools' five-year cumulative winning percentage and the number
of sports offered as a proxy for school-wide participation in sports. Multiple models are designed
and tested to assess the robustness of findings.
Data were gathered from three sources: the Ohio Department of Education's (ODE)
interactive Local Report Card (iLRC), MaxPreps.com , and the Ohio High School Athletic
Association's (OHSAA) membership directory. The ODE data provide school demographics as
well as the data needed for both dependent variables for this study. In addition, the ODE
determines the percentage proficient for each school through performance on the state's
standardized test. CPI, the other dependent variable, is an index that is an average percentage of
students promoted to the next grade. A given year's CPI is calculated by dividing the number of
students for a year and grade by the enrollment of the preceding grade from the prior year and
then multiplying across the four high school cohorts: 10 th grade current / 9 th grade prior *
11th
grade current / 10 th grade prior * .... CPI for this study is calculated with the use of ODE's iLRC
data.
The final sample size for this study is 657 public high schools in Ohio after excluding
schools that did not offer at least one sport. The winning percentages for schools are calculated
by going through MaxPreps.com and manually entering the win-loss records for each school's
varsity football, boys' basketball, and girls' basketball teams. Almost all high schools offered
and had records available on these three sports teams. Information on other high school sports,
such as baseball, softball, and golf, was often unavailable, either because the schools did not
A-31
offer these sports or the winning records were not provided to MaxPreps. As a result, we
confined our analyses to football and boys' and girls' basketball for which we had more
complete information.
Schools' sports participation rates were calculated in two ways. The OHSAA maintains a
directory of all high schools and the sports that they offer. We manually recorded which sports
were offered by each high school. To estimate the total number of students participating in these
sports, we weighted each sport according to the OHSAA minimum number of participants
required for the school to offer the sport (e.g. basketball = 5; baseball = 9; football = 11; etc.).
After controlling for schools' student enrollments, both the number of sports and the minimum
number of participants required for a team for all the sports offered at the school were used as
proxies for measuring the extent to which the entire school is directly involved with athletics (i.e.
weighted sports offered).
All of these measures are averaged over a five year period in order to reduce their
volatility. The winning percentage for high school sports teams can vary significantly from year
to year. But their average winning percentage over a five year period may better capture the
overall priority given to high school athletics at each school. In addition, academic achievement
and graduation rates can vary from year to year. Smoothing everything over a five year period
should give us a clearer picture of the general relationship between athletic and academic
success. See Table 1 for descriptive statistics on all variables used in our analyses.
<<Table 1>>
IV. Results
Controlling for school demographics and characteristics that are normally associated with
school performance, a school's commitment to athletics is positively related to academic
A-32
performance. This finding is statistically significant and robust to multiple specifications. With
regard to attainment, a 10 percentage point increase in a school's overall winning percentage is
associated with a 1.3 percentage point improvement in its CPI, which is an estimate of its high
school graduation rate (see Table 2). To examine whether a specific sport was driving the results,
each sport was examined independently (see Columns (3), (4), and (5)). While football produces
the largest impact, each sport independently produces a positive, significant effect (all at p <
0.01).
<<Table 2>>
The number of sports offered by a high school as well as the number of students directly
involved in sports teams are also positively related to educational attainment. The addition of one
sport increases the estimated graduation rate by 0.3 percentage points (an increase of .003 in the
CPI). This positive effect on attainment is statistically significant. When high schools have more
students directly participating in sports, we also observe a higher CPI score. The addition of 10
students directly involved in sports raises CPI by 0.004, which is a .4 percentage point increase
in estimated high school graduation rate (though this effect falls short of statistical significance)
(see Table 3).
However, the use of the total number of sports offered or our estimate of the total number
of students directly involved on sports teams for the entire year may bias estimates. Since the
information on exactly how many students are participating in athletics is not available, this
proxy for participation remains susceptible to multi-sport athletes biasing schools' participation
rates. Looking at sports offerings and minimum number of participants for a given season helps
to reduce this bias by eliminating the possibility that the same students may play on multiple
teams during the course of the full year.
/_13*3
Examining a single season does have the advantage of using a school's absolute
minimum level of participation. Minimum participation levels in Ohio do however provide the
advantage of reflecting a greater variance across school participation levels. The winter sports
season was chosen due to the fact that it has the largest number of sports offered of any season,
allowing the possibility to increase variance in participation across schools. When we only
examine winter sports, an increase of one sport improves CPI by 0.01, which would be a I
percentage point increase in the high school graduation rate. For the winter, the addition of 10
students directly participating in sports is associated with a 0.015 improvement in CPI, or a 1.5%
increase in high school graduation rate (see Table 3).
<<Table 3>>
We observe similar positive and statistically significant relationships between the success
and participation in high school sports and student achievement as measured by the Ohio
standardized test results. A 10 percentage point increase in overall winning percentage is
associated with a 0.25 percentage point increase in the number of students at or above academic
proficiency. (See Table 4) When we examine the effect of winning percentage in each sport
separately, once.again winning in football has the largest effect. Girls' basketball also remains
positive and statistically significant (at p < 0.10), but boys' basketball is not statistically
distinguishable from a null effect.
<<Table 4>>
As for participation and achievement, the addition of one sport increases the number of
students at or above academic proficiency by 0.2 of a percentage point. The addition of 10
students directly participating in a sports team improves the proportion of students at or above
proficient by 0.4 of a percentage point. Both of these results are statistically significant at p <
A-34
0.01. (See Table 5) When examining just the winter season, adding one winter sport increases the
percentage of students performing proficiently by 0.4 of a percentage point, while an additional
10 student able to directly participate in sports during the winter season relates to a 0.6
percentage point increase in students at or above proficiency (see Table 5).
<<Table 5>>
V. Conclusion
Based on these analyses of Ohio high schools, it appears that there is no necessary tradeoff between emphasizing high school athletics and producing academic success. In fact, the more
that a high school produces winning teams, offers more sports, and expands the number of
students who can participate in athletics, the better a school does academically. These
conclusions hold true across multiple ways of measuring academic success and across multiple
measures of school devotion to its athletic programs.
The addition of these findings to the discussion about high school athletics under tight
budget conditions is especially important because, without these findings, local policy
discussions could take place with little or no empirical evidence to inform them. Without
evidence, advocates for or against high school athletics could rely primarily on competing
theories to make their cases and simply assume that their own plausible theories must be correct.
But the only way to adjudicate among competing plausible theories is with evidence, like
the kind we present here. The fact that theories for and against an emphasis on high school
athletics can both be derived from the work of James Coleman makes our expectations in the
absence of evidence even more uncertain. If we give credence to Coleman's view that social
capital is the key to successful schools and if we recognize how high school sports contribute to
social capital formation in public schools (like church is to Catholic schools), then we would
A-35
expect an emphasis on athletics to increase student achievement. However, if we believe
Coleman's argument that schools need to have a mission focused on academics in order to
succeed and that athletics divert schools from that focused mission, then we would expect an
emphasis on athletics to hurt student achievement. The evidence produced in this study supports
the former theory.
Of course, it is difficult for us to be completely certain of the causal relationship between
success in high school athletics and academics. While we control for a number of school and
student characteristics, we cannot be sure that schools with larger and more successful athletic
programs do not also tend to have some other quality that is actually the cause of their academic
success. For example, it is possible that schools with greater organizational competence and
more effective leadership are able to produce both athletic and academic success. If that were
true, organizational competence and effective leadership would be the real causes of higher
student achievement, not athletics. Our control variables allow us to say that, even for schools
that spend the same amount of money per pupil, have similar student demographics, and are of
the same size, having a larger and more successful sports program is associated with higher
academic achievement. But we cannot observe or control for other possible explanations for
success in both athletics and academics.
Additional research could help solidify a causal understanding of the relationship
between athletics and academics. Some areas for future research could include deeper
explorations into the specific roles that sports play within schools. For example, how might
schools channel social capital, accumulated from sports, into higher academic outcomes? Other
opportunities for more rigorous studies could also come about if school budget constraints
become more severe. If budgeting constraints lead to more widespread cuts of school sports
A-36
programs, then examining the impacts of these discontinuities could make it possible to get a
better grasp of the causal relationship between academic and athletic successes.
Even if we cannot be absolutely certain of the causal relationship between sports and
academics, our study provides useful descriptive information on this matter. In general, schools
that are struggling academically are not the ones with the largest and most successful sports
programs. Winning on the field and winning in the classroom tend to go hand in hand. Since we
can be confident that this is an accurate description, it is very unlikely that high school sports are
a major detriment to academic success.
A-37
References
Broh, B.A. (2002). Linking extracurricular programming to academic achievement: Who
benefits and why? Sociology of Education, 75, 69-96.
Brooks, D. (2011, February 28). The new normal. The New York Times. Retrieved from
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/01/opinion/01 brooks.html?_r=1
Coleman, J.S. (1961). The adolescent society: The social life of the teenager and its impact on
education. New York: Free Press.
Coleman, J.S. (1987). Families and schools. Educational Researcher, 16, 32-38.
Coleman, J.S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of
Sociology, 94: S95-S120.
Coleman, J.S. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard
University Press.
Frtich, W.S. (1999). An overlooked role of high school athletics: The formation of social capital
through parent involvement. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American
Educational Research Association (Montreal, Quebec, Canada, April 19-23, 1999).
Glanzer, P. (1998). Religion in public schools in search of fairness. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(3),
220.
Green, R. (2009). Cutting school sports is a bad idea. Hartford Courant. Retrieved from
http://www.hartfordinfo.org/issues/documents/educationfunding/htfd_courant 111209.asp
Guest, A. & Schneider, B. (2003). Adolescents' extracurricular participation in context: The
mediating effects of schools, communities, and identity. Sociology of Education, 76(2), 89109.
A-38
Katz, A.J. (2010). The elephants in the school house: Cutting Saucon Valley sports should be
considered during budgetary review. Retrieved from http://hellertown.patch.com/articles/the e lephants-in-the-school-house
Lipscomb, S. (2006). Secondary school extracurricular involvement and academic achievement:
A fixed effects approach. Economics of Education Review, 26(4), 463-472.
Mandell, A.J. (1974, October 5). A psychiatric study of professional football. The Saturday
Review. Retrieved from http://www.unz.org/Pub/SaturdayRev-1974oct05-00012
Marsh, H.W. (1992). Extracurricular activities: Beneficial extension of the traditional curriculum
or subversion of academic goals? Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(4), 553-562.
McNeal, R.B. (1995). Extracurricular activities and high school dropouts. Sociology of
Education, 68, 62-81.
Parcel, T.L. & Dufur, M.J. (2001). Capital at home and at school: Effects on student
achievement. Social Forces, 79(3), 881-911.
Perks, T. (2007). Does sport foster social capital? The contribution of sport to a lifestyle of
community participation. Sociology of Sport Journal, 24, 378-401.
Strauss, L. (2011). No high school sports lockout, please! The Huffington Post. Retrieved from
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/larry-strauss/no-high-school-sports-lockout please_b_832477.html
Uslaner, E.M. (1999). Democracy and social capital. In M. Warren (Ed.), Democracy and trust
(121-150). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Swanson, C.B. & Chaplin, D. (2003). Counting high school graduates when graduates count:
Measuring graduation rates under the high stakes of NCLB. Washington, DC: The Urban
Institute. Retrieved from http://hellertown.patch.com/articles/the-elephants-in-the-school house
Weaver, D.T. (2011). Op-ed column: Cut school sports before academic programs. Daily
Gazette. Retrieved from http://www.dailygazette.com/news/2011/sep/25/0925_weaver/
A-40
Table 1 - Ohio High School Descriptive Statistics (5 year averages)
Variable
Cumulative
Promotion
Index (CPI)
% Proficient
Overall Sports
Winning
Football
Winning %
Basketball (F)
Winning %
Basketball (M)
Winning %
Total Sports
Offered
Weighted Total
Sports
Observations
Mean
Std. Dev.
Min.
Max.
657
0.82
0.17
0.17
1.24
657
0.87
0.07
0.52
0.95*
650
0.49
0.14
0.00
600
0.48
0.19
0.00
0.95
649
0.48
0.22
0.00
0.92
650
0.48
0.18
0.00
0.92
657
16.7
3.96
4
24
657
116
25.6
18
163
y
0.87
Winter Sports
9
2
4.89
2.05
645
Offered
Weighted
51
10
28.6
12.3
Winter Sports
657
Offered
-_-.----.-District Per
18,789
6,787
1,684
9,225
Pupil
657
Expenditure
Economic
0.97
0.00
0.24
0.19
628
Disadvantaged
1.00
0.00
0.11
0.23
657
% Minority
0.29
0.76
0.51
0.03
657
% Male
Average Daily
2,884
484
73
757
Membership
657
(ADM)
* - Maximum reported % Proficient is capped at 95% by the Ohio Department of Education
A-41
Table 2 - Winning Percentages and Academic Attainment
CPIs
Overall} Winning%
(1)
(2)
(3)
0.0608
0.0768
(4)
(5)
0.1320
(0.0330)***
Football Winning%
(0.0258)**
Basketball (F) Winning%
(0.0250)***
0.0391
0.0581
(0.0235)*
Basketball (M) Winning%
(0.0214)***
0.0438
0.0681
(0.0261)***
(0.0286)
District PPE (x $1,000)
% Economic Disadvantaged
% Minority
% Male
ADM (x100 students)
Constant
0.0047
0.0049
0.0039
0.0037
0.0034
(0.0038)
(0.0040)
(0.0040)
(0.0038)
(0.0038)
-0.3764
-0.3767
-0.3935
-0.3873
-0.3932
(0.0353)***
(0.0371)***
(0.0366)***
(0.0355)***
(0.0351)***
-0.2640
-0.2676
-0.2523
-0.2532
-0.2550
(0.0345)***
(0.0361)***
(0.0357)***
(0.0345)***
(0.0346)***
0.0322
0.0405
0.0383
0.0292
0.0267
(0.0390)
(0.0401)
(0.0402)
(0.0393)
(0.0392)
0.0005
0.0005
0.0008
0.0007
0.0008
(0.0010)
(0.0011)
(0.0011)
(0.0010)
(0.0010)
0.8060
0.7953
0.8384
0.8527
0.8532
(0.0447)***
(0.0475)***
(0.0443)***
(0.0421)***
(0.0423)***
N
621
579
580
620
621
R2
0.5222
0.5202
0.5168
0.5155
0.5152
* - p-value significant at p < 0.10; ** - p-value significant at p < 0.05; *** - p-value significant at p < 0.01
- CPI restricted to CPI < 1.25 due to outliers (e.g. one case where school has a recorded CPI of 497.17); 17
observations are dropped due to this restriction.
* - Cumulative winning percentage for football and boys' and girls' basketball
t
A-42
Table 3 - Sports Participation and Academic Attainment
CPI `
Total Sports
(1)
0.0034
(0.0016)**
Weighted Total Sports
(2)
(3)
0.0105
(0.0030)***
0.0004
0.0015
(0.0005)***
(0.0002)
District PPE (x $1,000)
% Economic Disadvantaged
% Minority
% Male
ADM (x100 students)
Constant
(4)
0.0017
0.0018
0.0010
0.0013
(0.0038)
(0.0038)
(0.0038)
(0.0038)
-0.4119
-0.4122
-0.4054
-0.4070
(0.0350)***
(0.0351)***
(0.0348)***
(0.0349)***
-0.2266
-0.2299
-0.2302
-0.2319
(0.0342)***
(0.0342)***
(0.0337)***
(0.0337)***
0.0281
0.0262
0.0274
0.0259
(0.0396)
(0.0396)
(0.0393)
(0.0394)
-0.0008
-0.0003
-0.0018
-0.0013
(0.0014)
(0.0014)
(0.0013)
(0.0013)
0.8581
0.8641
0.8751
0.8792
(0.0439)***
(0.0448)***
(0.0398)***
(0.0399)***
Winter Season Only
NO
NO
YES
YES
N
628
628
628
628
R2
0.5347
0.5334
0.5406
0.5383
* - p-value significant at p < 0.10; ** - p-value significant at p < 0.05; *** - p-value significant at p < 0.01
A-43
Table 4 - Winning Percentages and Academic Achievement
Pr o fici e n t
Overall Winning%
0/0
(1)
0.0248
(2)
(3)
0.0157
0.0195
(4)
(5)
(0.0104)**
Football Winning%
(0.0078)**
Basketball (F) Winning%
Basketball (M) Winning%
District PPE (x $1,000)
% Economic Disadvantaged
% Minority
% Male
ADM (x 100 students)
0.0027
0.0129
0.0121
(0.0071)*
(0.0067)*
0.0053
0.0096
(0.0086)
(0.0082)
0.0041
0.0038
0.0031
0.0025
(0.0012)**
(0.0012)***
(0.0012)***
(0.0012)***
(0.0012)**
-0.2246
-0.2181
-0.2222
-0.2278
-0.2283
(0.0112)***
(0.0112)***
(0.0110)***
(0.0111)***
(0.0111)***
-0.1168
-0.1347
-0.1314
-0.1162
-0.1146
(0.0108)***
(0.0109)***
(0.0108)***
(0.0107)***
(0.0109)***
-0.0299
-0.0253
-0.0260
-0.0307
-0.0309
(0.0125)**
(0.0122)**
(0.0122)**
(0.0124)**
(0.0125)**
0.0020
(0.0003)***
Constant
(0.0076)***
0.8957
(0.0140)***
0.0020
(0.0003)***
0.8774
(0.0143)***
0.0020
0.0020
(0.0003)***
0.8873
.
(0.0133)***
(0.0003)***
0.9002
(0.0130)***
0.0021
(0.0003)***
0.9063
(0.0132)***
N
636
592
593
634
636
R2
0.7376
0.7617
0.7606
0.7417
0.7358
* - p-value significant at p < 0.10; ** - p-value significant at p < 0.05; *** - p-value significant at p < 0.01
- Cumulative winning percentage for football and boys' and girls' basketball
A-44
Table 5 - Sports Participation and Academic Achievement
Pr o fi c i ent
Total Sports
(1)
0.0023
(2)
(0.0005)***
Weighted Total Sports
(3)
0.0040
(0.0010)***
0.0004
0.0006
(0.0001)***
District PPE (x $1,000)
% Economic Disadvantaged
% Minority
% Male
ADM (x100 students)
Constant
(4)
(0.0002)***
0.0019
0.0019
0.0019
0.0020
(0.0012)*
(0.0012)
(0.0012)
(0.0012)*
-0.2320
-0.2306
-0.2310
-0.2310
(0.0111)***
(0.0111)***
(0.0112)***
(0.0112)***
-0.1015
-0.1014
-0.1069
-0.1071
(0.0108)***
(0.0107)***
(0.0107)***
(0.0107)***
-0.0297
-0.0309
-0.0308
-0.0314
(0.0127)**
(0.0127)**
(0.0127)**
(0.0127)**
0.0007
0.0007
(0.0004)*
(0.0004)
0.8855
0.8802
0.0010
(0.0004)**
0.9043
0.0010
(0.0004)**
0.9050
(0.0139)***
(0.0141)***
(0.0127)***
(0.0127)***
Winter Season Only
NO
NO
YES
YES
N
645
645
645
645
R2
0.7508
0.7523
0.7494
0.7491
* p-value significant at p < 0.10; ** - p-value significant at p < 0.05; *** - p-value significant at p < 0.01
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to:
* Daniel H. Bowen University of Arkansas, Department of Education Reform, 201 Graduate
Education Building, Fayetteville, AR 72701. Corresponding email: [email protected]
A-45