Recently, Dysart Unified School District discussed its “Pass to Play” expectations for students participating in athletics and the arts. The numbers presented should start an important conversation about what we expect from our students not only in Dysart but all Arizona schools
Under current expectations, approximately 20% of students participating in athletics and 32% participating in the arts are already academically ineligible. If Dysart raised the standard from a D to a C, those numbers would increase significantly—approximately 43% of athletes and 49% of students in the arts would initially be affected.
Those numbers may sound alarming. I see them differently.
One statement during the presentation caught my attention: “These are the numbers under the current expectations.”
I took that to mean something important: If expectations change, perhaps student performance will change with them.
At the risk of sounding like a boomer, when I was in school, my parents would not accept anything less than a B. I played basketball and volleyball, ran track, and participated in drill team.
Extracurricular activities were a privilege, and academics came first.
Somewhere along the way, we lowered the bar.
Today, a D can be considered a passing grade for purposes of athletic eligibility. Arizona’s basic eligibility framework generally focuses on students passing their classes, while districts can establish stronger academic expectations.
I believe Dysart should raise the bar.
If we continually set the bar at the bare minimum, we shouldn’t be surprised when some students rise only to the bare minimum. Extracurricular activities can be one of the most powerful incentives schools have. Students want to play football, basketball, volleyball, perform in band, participate in theater, and represent their schools. Why wouldn’t we use that motivation to encourage stronger academic performance?
Interestingly, immediately before the Pass to Play presentation, we heard about efforts that could improve students’ potential ACT performance. We celebrate academic improvement and encourage students to prepare for college and careers—then turn around and essentially say a D is good enough to participate in extracurricular activities.
There is a disconnect, and I know I’m not the only one seeing it.
The data also showed that academic ineligibility is fairly evenly distributed among all four high-school grade levels. This isn’t simply a freshman adjustment problem or a senior-year issue. It deserves attention across the entire high-school experience.
And I don’t want to continue blaming COVID.
Students certainly suffered significant learning disruption during the pandemic, but schools have had years to address those losses. At some point, we have to evaluate whether our current strategies and expectations are producing the results we want.
Arizona’s academic proficiency numbers should make that conversation even more urgent. When only around 40% of students demonstrate proficiency on state assessments—and English language arts proficiency is roughly one-third of students—we have a problem.
Raising the eligibility standard from a D to a C would undoubtedly create challenges at first. If 43% of athletes and nearly half of arts participants would initially fall below the new standard, we shouldn’t ignore that number.
But we also shouldn’t use it as a reason to keep expectations low.
Instead, let’s ask what tutoring, academic monitoring, study halls, teacher support, parent communication, and intervention programs students need to reach a C.
The goal shouldn’t be to remove students from sports or the arts.
The goal should be to help them earn their way onto the field, court, stage, and performance
floor while succeeding in the classroom.
A C is not an unreasonable expectation.
Today, a D can be considered a passing grade for purposes of athletic eligibility.
