= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Desrtopa comments on Open Thread, January 16-31, 2013 - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (221)
Track and field does do quite a lot to get students in shape; most of the fittest students I knew in high school were track athletes. And it certainly requires considerable discipline.
A large part of the trouble with changing the athletic curriculum though, is that the people who're most in need of basic, safe athletic training to improve their fitness are those who, along with their parents, are least involved in the current system. The people who participate in the system, who have the most power to shape it, are mostly sports practitioners, coaches and enthusiasts, for whom the bottom line is already written.
Not completely. If you go as an adult to a gym they might give you crossfit which is a modern system. They are not likely to tell you to do broad jumps.
Gyms make money by catering to what the clients want. School gyms don't care what the clients want, because the clients are a captive audience. School gyms give kids what the parents and coaches want for the kids.
Suppose that instead of paying to go to the gym voluntarily, all adults were made to go to the gym, and all adult competitive sports practitioners were selected from among gym attendees and encouraged to get into sports based on their gym performance. Gym activities would tend to become highly sports oriented, even if the nominal reason for mandatory gym attendance was to promote fitness.