Varsity PE?

A Look at Changing Policies for Varsity Athletes
by Becca Heller '08, Copy Chief
and Jackie Corley '10, Staff Reporter

Recently, a few of us have been thinking a lot about Bishop McNamara's Physical Education requirements. Although some people may not know it, the policy for PE has changed within the past few years. Just a couple of years ago, in fact, varsity athletes were exempt from taking a PE class. To us, this policy seemed to make total sense. Not only did it make space for other classes in our schedules, but it gave athletes a break from the constant physical activity that most of them have to deal with. Most varsity athletes have practices or games every day after school, and there are some students who play on club teams on top of that. Any athlete could confirm that this break from sports is extremely important when it comes to staying healthy and uninjured. Furthermore, this old PE policy allowed already-active students to balance out their schedules, giving them an opportunity to explore the many elective classes that BMHS offers. This program seemed like a flexible and balanced approach to Physical Education requirements.

So, we began to wonder why they changed the policy. We went around the school, hoping to get to the bottom of things. Athletic Director Mr. Tony Johnson seemed to have the most answers. When confronting him in the cafeteria about the PE schedule we asked him why the policy had changed. Why do varsity players have to take a PE class? Mr. Johnson started out by giving us some background. "It used to be so that varsity students did not have to take PE -- starting in 2002 -- but that quickly changed in 2006, and then all students were required to take PE again," he said. After hearing this we gave him a puzzled look; why did it change back? He replied simply, "There were a lot of loopholes." For example, he told us that, "one year we had a student who played baseball. He made varsity last year, but he had PE in the fall, so he had to take PE anyway because he was not on varsity for that school year [yet]." This was a very understanding statement, because it would not be fair if a fall varsity athlete was exempt from PE, but then a varsity spring student has to participate in PE just because it was a bad coincidence that their sport just happened to occur when the class was over. On this topic Mr. Johnson told us "it was tough to make sure the proper credit was given."

Upon hearing Mr. Johnson's explanations, we began to understand the system a little better, but we still wanted to hear what students thought about the new policy. There were definitely some mixed opinions on this topic, but for the most part, students seemed to prefer the old policy. Meghan Alger '08, when asked whether she thought PE should be a mandatory requirement, responded, "I think we should be allowed the option." Later, however, she added that, "If you don't take PE, it allows more spaces for other courses." Many people seemed to feel the same way. Joel Harrison '08 gave us a fresh look at things saying, "I liked PE. I would have taken it anyway. It's a stress reliever." Carly Mendiola '08, when asked which she preferred, admitted, "I liked how accommodating the old PE policy was, but I understand why they changed it." It seems like many students feel the same way. We wish that there was some way to return to the old policy because it made life easier for so many students. At the same time, however, we want to preserve academic credits and keep things fair. So the question will remain -- is there a better way?

By Bishop McNamara HS |  May 22, 2008; 9:03 AM ET Editorials , Editorials
Previous: The False Dichotomy of Democracy | Next: Wockley Retires

The comments to this entry are closed.