Get moving

All work and no play: Colorado kids losing out on P.E., report finds

Many Colorado educators say funding constraints and the relentless pressure to focus on academics means physical education gets short shrift in schools.

As a result, few kids get the minimum amount of physical education recommended by experts. The problem is compounded by the fact that Colorado is one of the few states that doesn’t require schools to provide physical education classes.

These are among the findings of new report published by PE For All Colorado, a statewide coalition of health and advocacy groups.

Colorado collects no detailed statewide data on the quantity or quality of physical education offered, so getting a clear picture is impossible. However, the report’s authors point to multiple pieces of evidence that kids aren’t getting enough P.E., including the coalition’s research, state health survey data and national statistics showing around half of schools cut P.E. after the passage of the No Child Left Behind law in 2001.

The report argues that the dearth of P.E. is particularly detrimental for low-income students, who are more likely to be overweight and obese, and less likely to get adequate exercise throughout the day.

Drawing on interviews with teachers, administrators and school board members, the report found that many respondents believed personally in the importance of physical education, but said that school districts needed more evidence before making it a top priority.

One respondent said, “If you could show that [requiring a minimum number of P.E. hours] will increase academic achievement, then we would be remiss in not looking at it. To just do it ‘because it’s good for kids’, then no…”

The report highlights research that shows a correlation between physical fitness and better performance on standardized tests. It also cites research showing physical activity improves students’ focus and concentration and reduces behavior problems among young children.

A 2011 state law requires  schools to provide elementary students an average of 30 minutes a day of physical activity — either physical education, recess, brain breaks or something else.

But the law has no teeth and is not enforced. About 15 percent of school districts didn’t meet the requirements of the law, according to 2014-15 data from the state education department.

Only 13 percent of school districts reported having policies requiring or encouraging a certain amount of P.E. time, according to a 2014 health department study of 41 Colorado districts.

The report includes a number of recommendations. Among them:

  • Elementary students should get 30 minutes a day and secondary students should get 45 minutes a day of physical education.
  • Recess and physical activity breaks should not be substituted for P.E.
  • Students should not be withheld from P.E. as a punishment.
  • Students should not be removed from P.E. for academic reasons, such as special education or English language acquisition.
  • The state should adequately fund school districts so quality P.E. programs are attainable in all districts.
  • Policy-makers should offer incentives to schools that meet or exceed Colorado’s physical education standards.

Clarification: A previous version of this story said that Colorado is one of the few states that doesn’t require physical education in schools. While it’s true that Colorado is one of the few states that doesn’t require schools to provide physical education classes, the state does require districts to adopt standards, curriculum and assessment in all areas where the state has standards, including physical education. 

Extra sleep

Two Colorado districts shift to later high school start times — for very different reasons

PHOTO: planetchopstick/Creative Commons

The 22,000-student Greeley-Evans school district in northern Colorado will join the 55,000-student Cherry Creek district in suburban Denver in adopting later high school start times this fall.

But unlike in wealthier Cherry Creek, the change in Greeley was not the result of a lengthy process to review research and solicit community feedback. Instead, the move came out of a very different conversation: How could the cash-strapped district tighten its belt?

After Greeley voters rejected a district tax measure last November, a chronic bus driver shortage loomed larger than ever. With no additional money to beef up driver salaries and more than a dozen driver vacancies, district officials needed to reduce the number of routes. They decided to discontinue busing for most high school students — part of a package of cuts that will save the district $667,000 a year.

That decision divorced the start time debate from the common concern that pushing high school bell times later requires more bus routes and more money.

“We were only able to move the high school start time by seriously limiting — in fact, almost eliminating — bus transportation for our high school students,” district spokeswoman Theresa Myers said.

She noted that all district students are eligible for free transportation on city buses. About two-thirds of district students qualify for free or reduced-price meals, a proxy for poverty.

Later middle and high school start times have gained traction in Colorado and nationally in recent years with mounting evidence that teens are hardwired to go to bed later and wake up later. When school schedules align with sleep patterns, research shows students are healthier, attend school more regularly and do better academically.

Nationally, Seattle Public Schools is one of the largest districts to embrace later start times — pushing high school and most middle school start times to 8:45 a.m. last year, with plans to shift to 9 a.m. this year. Also, in what could be the first statewide start-time mandate in the country, California lawmakers are currently considering legislation that would prohibit the state’s middle and high schools from starting before 8:30 a.m.

In Colorado, the move to later start times has been relatively slow. Until March, when both the Cherry Creek and Greeley-Evans school boards voted on the schedule changes, only a few smaller districts had made the switch. They include Montezuma-Cortez in southwest Colorado and Harrison in Colorado Springs.

Both Denver Public Schools and Boulder Valley considered later high school start times in the last couple years, but ultimately shelved the idea. Boulder Valley officials said the prospect of increased transportation costs was one of the reasons they didn’t move forward.

In Denver, which currently doesn’t provide district busing to most high school students, administrators expressed concern about complicated transportation logistics, after-school sports schedules and conflicts for students with after-school jobs.

Cherry Creek officials say the change in start times this coming year won’t cost the district more money.

In both Cherry Creek, the state’s fourth-largest district, and Greeley-Evans, the 13th largest, high school start times will shift 45 minutes to an hour later this year. In Cherry Creek, high schools will start at 8:20 a.m. and middle schools will start at 8:50 a.m., and in Greeley-Evans, high schools will start at 8 a.m. and middle schools will start at 8:30 a.m.

Other changes in Greeley-Evans include greater walk distances for students at all levels. That means high-schoolers won’t qualify for busing unless they live more than three miles from school, middle-schoolers won’t qualify unless they live more than two miles from school, and elementary kids won’t qualify unless they live more than 1.5 miles from school.

Myers said the new start times haven’t caused much consternation among parents.

“It’s more the transportation issue (that’s) causing some angst for some of our families,” she said. “We’re really going to watch and see how this impacts attendance and tardiness at our schools.”

shot down

Boys & Girls Clubs unlikely to open soon in Memphis schools as SCS funding plan collapses

PHOTO: Boys & Girls Club
The Boys & Girls Club provides after-school programs for children and teens.

If there’s a downside to the improved financial condition of Shelby County Schools, it’s the challenge of getting additional funding for a new initiative, even if everyone agrees it’s a good idea.

That scenario played out this week as some county commissioners balked at a request for an extra $1.6 million to open Boys & Girls Clubs inside of three Memphis schools.

The decision was close, just one vote shy of approval, demonstrating the tension among commissioners wrestling over how to invest in a community with big needs, limited resources and a desire to keep property taxes in check.

In many ways, the proposal to open school-based clubs felt like a slam-dunk. Boys & Girls Clubs have programming. The district has empty space. Neighborhoods near schools have young people in need of enriching afterschool activities.

“We talk everyday about crime, and this is a safe haven,” Chairman Melvin Burgess told his fellow commissioners on Monday in arguing for the investment. “What people don’t know is that an afterschool program is a place for kids to go instead of an empty home.”

But even as the district’s $985 million spending plan sailed through the board, several commissioners questioned the need for anything extra.

“I really support Shelby County Schools spending their own money to do it,” said Commissioner David Reaves. “They have $80 million sitting in a savings account, and we gave them a huge bump last year. Here’s the reality: I was on the school board and I know how it works. They need to spend their own money.”

The decision kicks the proposal back to district leaders, who have been in talks for months with Boys & Girls Club of Greater Memphis.

A district spokeswoman said Wednesday that Shelby County Schools has no plans to fund the initiative at this time.

Keith Blanchard, the president and CEO of the Boys & Girls Clubs, agreed that it’s now unlikely for new clubs to open inside of Dunbar Elementary, Riverview School and Craigmont High by 2018.

“This process has drug out so long, we don’t know what next steps will be yet,” he said. “If we can secure funding at this point, maybe we start in just one school in the fall. Maybe we try again next year. We’re not giving up.”

Shelby County Schools began its 2017-18 budget season without a shortfall for the first time in years, allowing the district next year to provide teacher raises, hire new guidance counselors and behavior specialists, and make new investments in struggling schools.

But Superintendent Dorsey Hopson says the school system still doesn’t have enough money to propel students to academic success in a community challenged by high poverty and mobility.

Such concerns are among the reasons that school-based investments in Boys & Girls Clubs made all the more sense, according to the idea’s backers.

“(The commission vote) was really disappointing,” said Blanchard. “We thought we had the votes going in. I think it was most disappointing for the students who were there, and for them to have to listen to the reasons why this didn’t pass.”