Shreya Reddy ’13
To deny the importance of sports is foolish, but to deem Episcopal’s current requirement worthwhile is an overstatement. The Episcopal Academy is built upon the balance of mind, body, and spirit. To argue otherwise is to neglect to acknowledge the school’s very own mission statement. However, there is a crucial difference between a practical sports requirement and an ineffective one.
In theory, the sports requirement seems to benefit the entire student body by providing students with the opportunity to become fit. It also relieves the necessity of gym classes, which many public schools incorporate because few students actually participate in sports programs.
Daniel Clay, a member of the Theater Department, stated, “We’re a sports school, and we do not try to pretend we’re not.” At the same time, as a community we simply need to remember that sports are not for everyone. Clay mentioned the invaluable life lessons that can be learned through sports, including teamwork and sportsmanship. Yet, how is an individual supposed to naturally learn such values when he or she is playing a sport for the sake of obeying a rule?
The Episcopal Academy’s motto is Esse Quam Videri. The sports requirement, however, conflicts with this motto by forcing students to practice sports they are not truly passionate about. One may argue that the school offers opportunities for individuals to contract out of the requirement and thus pursue another sport.
Willow Frederick ’13, a member of the varsity girls’ soccer team, discussed the difficulty in obtaining a contract. Frederick, a softball and soccer player, said, “The sports requirement makes it difficult to hone in on your main sports…The third sports requirement,” she claimed, “throws the focus off your main sports.”
Another drawback of the current sports requirement is its legitimacy. To put it simply: why should we have a sports requirement when there are so many ways to get out of it? For example, an individual can participate in fitness, can manage a team (which does not always require actual physical activity), or can contract out of the requirement. With many ways to avoid athletics, the need for a strict requirement is impractical and, perhaps even a waste of time.
To clarify, I am not completely opposed to the sports requirement; however, I believe it is in dire need of modifications. Clay articulated it best when he stated that “while broadening your horizons is important, so is finding your niche.” The Episcopal Academy should therefore cater to individuals who simply want to follow their passions.
Sports are critical, but the true lessons they offer will not be instilled in participants if these activities are forced upon students. If the policy required that an individual participate in at least two seasons and granted the third season to serve as a break or an opportunity to pursue a different interest, it would allow students to use this extra time to find their calling. In fact, the key to making this requirement more useful is to minimize its exacting nature that impedes students from pursuing their passions.
Another solution to the current sports requirement is based on the idea of intramural sports. Some students want to play a sport lightheartedly, allowing them to play for the mere love of the game all the while learning valuable concepts. The present requisite is clearly outdated, and it is crucial that this requirement be modified so that it appeals to all Episcopal sudents. t is based on the idea of intramural sports. Some students want to play a sport lightheartedly, allowing themselves to play for the mere love of the game all the while learning valuable concepts. The present requisite is clearly outdated, and it is crucial that this requirement be modified so that it appeals to all Episcopal students.