# data[].attributes.body
Football and Basketball run the top of the charts when it comes to which college sports are the most popular.

# data[].attributes.body
This chart shows the top five high school sports by number of participants in 2014-2015.

# data[].attributes.body
In 2015 there was over 7 million high school students participating in sports.

# data[].attributes.body
In the recent years, youth sports participation numbers have dropped a bit, showing a 5% decline in children between the ages of 5 and 12 participating in team sports.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Coming out of the COVID-19 pandemic, families have greater awareness of the value of physical activity and sports, although more children are moving to the pay-to-play model at younger ages. The trends below come from the Aspen Institute's State of Play 2023 report, informed by interviews with leaders in the youth sports space, data analyzed by the Project Play team, or articles and research produced by other entities.

Children are playing team sports less regularly. This trend started before the pandemic, which may have accelerated the change even more. Core team sports participation (meaning playing on a regular basis) for youth ages 6-17 declined 6% between 2019 and 2022. That translates to 1.2 million fewer youth regularly playing team sports, according to data from the Sports & Fitness Industry Association (SFIA). Total team sports participation (meaning playing at least once in the past year) stayed flat. In other words, kids are trying sports about as much as they did before COVID-19. They're just not playing as frequently.

"If this trend continues with core (participation) going down over time, that would be bad," said Tom Cove, SFIA president and CEO. "But we really believe it's way too early to make any kind of judgment like that. We've never had greater awareness at the child and parent level of the benefits of being physically active and playing youth sports. That's an outcome of COVID."

Cove said elementary-age children's departure from sports was accelerated during COVID-19 due to the inability to convene on teams. Now everybody, including children, has reevaluated how they prioritize leisure time.

"None of us should misunderstand that a lot of kids play sports less because they love a sport and more because they want to be with friends," Cove said. "When you break up a team, a child gets into other routines and doesn't get to be with their friends, so they figure out other ways to be with their friends besides sports."

Core participation declined 5% for kids 6-12 from 2019 to 2022, but total participation increased 3%. The good news: in 2022, 63% of kids 6-12 played sports at least one day (the best rate in a decade) by SFIA's measure. Meanwhile, 36% played regularly (the lowest rate in a decade). Ten years ago, the gap between core and total participation was half of what it is now.

Decline in regular sports participation for kids 6-12 from 2019-2022

For older youth ages 13-17, total and core participation from 2019 to 2022 decreased by 7% and 6%, respectively. When a teenager gets cut from travel or school teams or can't access club sports due to costs and transportation, fewer recreational opportunities exist to play casually.

More children may be turning to other interests like video games, social media or individual adventure activities because the commitment needed to consistently play team sports requires too much time and money, said Jason Clement, CEO at The Sports Facilities Companies, which manages more than 30 youth sports facilities across the U.S. Clement said COVID-19 allowed families to take "a chill pill," and while some didn't want to rush back intensively in sports, they faced fewer quality recreational opportunities.

"There's a limit on time, which is our most important resource," Clement said. "We're finding more families migrating to the pay-to-play model at a younger and younger age. Even the families who say they want to wait until age 10 are getting pulled into it at 8. The collision of rec sports and sports tourism has happened, and sports tourism is winning because parents want what's best for their child's skills and the quality of local leagues is really watered down."

Sports participation is increasing for girls and declining for boys. Boys (40%) still regularly played sports at a higher rate than girls (35%) among ages 6-17 in 2022, according to SFIA data. But the two genders are going in opposite directions. A decade ago, half of boys regularly played sports. Meanwhile, the latest participation rate for girls is the highest since 2013.

Between 2019 and 2022, girls participation for ages 13-17 increased three percentage points while boys dropped one point. Boys still comprise 1.2 million more high school sports roster spots than girls, according to the National Federation of State High School Associations, primarily due to large football rosters. And separate federal government data still shows major gaps by gender through state-by-state data (see further below on this page).

Meanwhile, youth 6-12 from the lowest-income households increased their regular sports participation rate four straight years. It dropped four straight years for the highest-income youth, suggesting declining quality of experiences among kids with the greatest opportunities to play. The gap remains significant - 25% participation for kids in homes earning under $25,000 vs. 39% among those earning $100,000 or more.

Efforts to provide greater access to all children by schools, nonprofits, professional leagues and others may be making a dent at younger ages. However, for youth 13-17, participation from the lowest-income homes keeps declining and was down to 27% in 2022 compared to 38% in 2012. The trend is one reason the Aspen Institute created a School Sports Equity Toolkit, part of its Reimagining School Sports project.

Regular sports participation among Asian youth 6-12 increased to 42% in 2022, up from 35% in 2019 before the pandemic. It's the highest rate for Asian youth since at least 2012. Participation by children of other races and ethnicities dropped two to four percentage points between 2019 and 2022.

High attrition rates remain a problem - and free play offers an opportunity. Churn rate, meaning the percentage of youth who stopped playing a sport each year, often exceeds 40% to 50% for sports tracked by SFIA. Tackle football (27%), flag football (32%) and basketball (31%) had the lowest churn rates in 2022. Track and field (56%), swimming (54%) and lacrosse (54%) had the highest. The more participants a sport loses, the greater need for the sport to recruit new children.

Basketball clearly remained the most-played sport coming out of the pandemic, with nearly 1 in 4 youth playing it at least once in 2022 (total participation). While total participation in most sports decreased or stayed flat between 2019 and 2022, basketball's rate for ages 6-17 increased 15%. Baseball dropped 6% and soccer declined 1%. Basketball had 3.6 million more total participants than the next-closest sport (baseball) in 2022 - an increase of 2 million between the sports since 2019.

Jason Frazier, president of Skyhawks Sports Academy, a youth sports camp franchise across the country, attributes much of basketball's growth to the creative genius of Stephen Curry and the Golden State Warriors. "We first started seeing more interest in northern California and thought this was a local thing," he said. "It spread across the country. We asked people why, and they kept going back to the power of this one team and superstar. It's not the only reason, of course. It's also a sport you can play individually and at a low cost with friends on playgrounds."

Cove said the lesson of basketball's growth is very clear: free play. "We allow them to play by themselves in basketball like everyone else around the world," he said. "There was a time in the 1950s when baseball dominated with free play. Soccer around the rest of the world is always played casually. This country has a tough time meeting that reality. If nothing else, if we could drive kids to self-form their own play and build creativity, we would increase participation."

Basketball's core (or regular) participation rate basically stayed flat between 2019 and 2022. Swimming, lacrosse, wrestling, cheerleading and gymnastics experienced significant declines for core participation. Soccer was the only team sport with a significant increase among kids 6-12 coming out of the pandemic. "We think we're approaching the golden age of soccer in the U.S.," Cove said, citing Lionel Messi in MLS, the 2026 Men's World Cup coming to the U.S., and the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics. "It's also not insignificant that soccer made policy mistakes over 10 years (soccer changed its birth-year registration cutoff limit, preventing kids from playing with friends) that lost 1 million players, so there's room to grow."

Tackle football's core participation rate jumped 7% among children ages 6-12 in 2022, blunting a 13% loss since 2019, according to SFIA. Flag football in that age range was about the same in 2022 as it was in 2019, with 277,000 more participants than tackle. Tackle in high schools experienced a one-year participation increase of 6% in 2022, nearly twice the post-COVID rebound of other sports, according to data from the National Federation of State High School Associations. Football is positioned for future growth with flag being added as an Olympic sport at the 2028 Los Angeles Games, along with baseball, softball, lacrosse, squash and cricket.

Massachusetts and Minnesota lead the way among U.S. states for participation. The federal government set a national goal for youth sports participation to reach 63% by 2030. During the heart of COVID-19, Massachusetts and Minnesota reached that number, with North Dakota, Vermont, Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas and New Hampshire close behind, according to the 2020-21 National Survey of Children's Health (the most recent data available). The national average was 51%. The survey asks parents of children ages 6-17 if their child played on a sports team or took sports lessons in the past year.

% of youth ages 6-17 who played on a team or took lessons (2020 and 2021)
Hover over the map for state specific data

Nevada had the lowest participation rate (42%) from the 2020-21 survey, which is the most recent data available. Southeastern states comprised nine of the 16 lowest participation rates despite many of their governments adopting less-restrictive gathering policies during COVID-19. Seven Southeastern states placed in the bottom 10 for girls' participation, including South Carolina, North Carolina, Mississippi and Tennessee each having a gap of at least 10 percentage points between boys and girls participation.

Six states surpassed the 63% benchmark for boys' participation (Iowa, Kansas, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nebraska and Vermont). Only two states reached 63% for girls (North Dakota and Massachusetts). The percentage of girls who played sports ranged from 65% (North Dakota) to 36% (Nevada). Five states had higher participation rates for girls than boys (Illinois, Massachusetts, North Dakota, Oklahoma and West Virginia).

States (Massachusetts and Minnesota) reached the federal government's goal of 63% sports participation in 2020 and 2021

President Biden's plan allows limits on trans athletes' participation in school sports. In April 2023, the Biden administration proposed a regulation change that would allow schools to block some transgender athletes from competing on sports teams that match their gender identities. The Department of Education proposal would also prevent schools from enacting across-the-board bans. It's the first time that the White House has weighed in on the highly charged cultural and political debate impacting less than 1% of the high school athlete population.

Under the proposal, universities and K-12 schools that categorically bar transgender athletes would be violating Title IX, which prohibits sex discrimination at educational institutions that receive federal funding. But schools would have the discretion to limit the participation of transgender athletes if they conclude it undermines competitive fairness or could lead to sports-related injuries.

The rule would also require schools to "minimize harms" to transgender students who are "limited or denied" because of the application of sex-based criteria, but it stops short of addressing how to accommodate transgender athletes. The Texas attorney general's office sued the Biden administration over its interpretation of Title IX, arguing that noncompliance puts Texas schools at risk of losing federal funding. The Biden plan also angered trans rights activists, who say the plan provides guidelines for how to legally ban trans athletes.

Since 2020, 23 states have passed laws restricting transgender athletes' ability to play school sports in accordance with their gender identity, citing the need to protect sports for girls. Thirteen of those 23 states had girls' sports participation rates below 50% in 2020-21, according to National Survey of Children's Health data. Before state laws were passed, high school associations set their own eligibility criteria for school sports, which still happens in some states.

A larger majority of Americans in 2023 (69%) than in 2021 (62%) said transgender athletes should only be allowed to compete on sports teams that conform with their birth gender, according to a poll by Gallup. In a separate study of adolescents and young adults, 47% felt transgender athletes should be able to participate in sports based on gender identity, 35% felt participation should be based on sex assigned at birth, and 10% believed it should be determined based on the stage of transition, hormone levels, or sport being played.

RESEARCH SOURCES

Sports & Fitness Industry Association (SFIA)
SFIA commissioned an online, nationally representative survey from Sports Marketing Surveys (SMS) that the Aspen Institute annually uses to track sports participation rates and coach training data. In 2022, the most recent year with available data, SMS conducted 18,000 online interviews with people ages 6 and older. Strict quotas associated with gender, age, income, region and ethnicity were followed to ensure a balanced sample.

National Survey of Children's Health (NSCH)
NSCH provides rich data on multiple, intersecting aspects of children's lives - including physical and mental health, access to quality health care, and the child's family, neighborhood, school and social context. The survey is funded and directed by the Health Resources and Services Administration and Child Health Bureau. One question asked of parents: "During the past 12 months, did this child participate in a sports team or did they take sports lessons after school or on weekends?"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Data from parent surveys on youth sports participation.

# data[].attributes.body
High school sports were first adapted in the east back in the 1700's. Boarding schools were the first to have organized sports teams.

# data[].attributes.body
Some statements proving that school sports are having positive impacts on students all around the country, at all ages.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Blaming school sports for academic inattention and bloated budgets is a popular move, but the evidence shows sports have positive effects for students.
Just over half of all high school students in the United States report being involved in school-sponsored sports (Koebler, 2011). It's a curious phenomenon unique to the U.S. public education system. At a basic level, sports and academics don't seem to belong together. Yet it's rare to find a public high school in the U.S. that doesn't have an interscholastic athletics program.

School-sponsored sports became a trademark of U.S. public education during the Progressive Era. A keystone moment for this development was in New York City in 1903 with the establishment of its Public Schools Athletic League. Before this development, youth athletic competition was predominantly student-governed; school-sponsored competitions typically were exclusive to boarding schools (Pruter, 2013). Forming a large, urban, public school sports league symbolized not only a significant development for organized youth athletics but also that sports had become a valuable component of K-12 education.

As compulsory school attendance took hold, public schools had to cater to a greater variety of educational needs, and administrators increasingly felt compelled to create opportunities that were usually reserved for students from more privileged backgrounds (Pruter, 2013). The motivation for integrating sports into schools was primarily rooted in the philosophy of humanistic education that traces back to the Renaissance and was inspired by the ancient Greeks (Cubberley, 1920). An assertion from this more holistic view of education is that sports competition essentially can play a vital role in adolescent character development. However, there was also a much more pragmatic inspiration for this: Poor and working-class adolescents now had more after-school leisure time, and sports were perceived as a good way to keep adolescents occupied (Pruter, 2013).

School-sponsored sports came to a halt with the advent of the Great Depression in response to budget cuts. Youth sports did not disappear altogether, but the primary provider shifted from schools to recreational associations. Pop Warner Youth Football and Little League Baseball, for example, sprang up during this period to address the interest in youth sports. However, since these leagues were not fully, publicly subsidized, less-advantaged children disproportionately lost opportunities to participate (Pruter, 2013).
Sports return
Yet high school sports came back stronger than ever after World War II. As a result of the post-World War II urban migration trends, rural colleges dropping many of their sports programs, and the decline of local, amateur sports teams, high school athletic programs became the pride of small towns across America. One of the most commonly cited and portrayed examples is Indiana high school basketball, which "helped local farm communities find redemption and uplift during a time when their way of life and economy were in decline" (Pruter, 2013, p. 317).

Student participation in school sports has surged over the past half century. The number of secondary student-athletes has nearly doubled since the 1970s (NFHS, 2015). The greatest contributor to this increase was Title IX, which required schools to expand opportunities for female student-athletes. From 1972, the year Title IX was passed, to 1978, the number of high school girls playing school-sponsored sports increased nearly seven-fold to over 2 million from 300,000 (NFHS, 2015).

These historical developments collectively suggest that school-sponsored sports started and grew because Americans believed that:

Adolescents have an inherent, organic passion for athletics;

Sports increase student engagement in school communities; and

Underserved populations would not have access to certain valuable extracurricular activities unless schools provided them.

Despite the perceived benefits and high levels of support from students and parents, interscholastic athletics constantly come under attack. In times of budgetary constraints, funds for extracurricular activities are typically the first on the chopping block, and sports tend to receive a disproportionate share of negative attention for proposed cuts. For instance, in fall 2015, in response to a projected budgetary shortfall, Virginia's Fairfax County made national headlines when it proposed eliminating high school sports (Balingit, 2015).

While difficult decisions and cuts are an inevitable consequence of education budgetary constraints, arguments made against preserving school-sponsored sports typically rely on anecdotal evidence or stereotypes that are often intuitively appealing but rarely backed by sound empirical evidence. What does the evidence say about some of the most common arguments about school sports?
#1. Sports participation has no role in academic development; in fact, sports might undermine academics.
Legendary sociologist James Coleman was one of the first sports critics to raise this concern in the 1960s after embedding himself in the suburban high schools of Chicago. Coleman lamented that academics played second fiddle to athletic achievements among adolescents, especially with boys (Coleman, 1961). The students he surveyed were far more likely to say they would rather be a "star athlete" than a "smart" student who gets "good grades." Coleman concluded that schools had become "adolescent societies" and would remain so until academics could be made as popular as sports.

More recently, journalist Amanda Ripley (2013) has made a strident case against high school sports. As she points out, U.S. high schoolers test far lower in reading and math than students from Finland or Singapore, where participation in sports is not connected to school.

However, if athletics were harmful to academic pursuits, then athletes would perform worse than other students in school as well as later in life. But the most careful analyses to date suggest that student-athletes perform better than their peers. Specifically, researchers have found that student-athletes are significantly more likely to go to college (Shifrer et al., 2015), score higher on standardized achievement tests (Lipscomb, 2007), earn higher wages (Barron, Ewing, & Waddell, 2000), and are more likely to report having positive relationships with school personnel (Broh, 2002). Furthermore, the relationship between participation in athletics and school outcomes has remained fairly consistent over three decades as evinced in the findings from nationally representative datasets (Shifrer et al., 2015).

These studies have limitations. A significant challenge with rigorously assessing the effects of school sports is that it can be difficult to disentangle the extent to which participation produces academic benefits versus the possibility that student-athletes are just naturally higher-achieving students. If we were assessing the effect of a reading program on student outcomes, the best research design would be a randomized, controlled trial. However, randomly assigning students to participate in sports would be neither feasible nor ethical. So researchers must depend on natural experiments or real-world "shocks" that introduce lottery-like randomness into sports participation. The implementation of Title IX provided one such shock.

Title IX was passed in 1972 and required schools to give females the same opportunities to participate in school-sponsored sports that males had. However, because certain states had different student-athlete participation rates before implementation, the effect of the policy on female student-athletes varied substantially across state lines. Therefore, Title IX was a jolt to the provision of school-sponsored sports opportunities, which could be exploited to examine whether changes in providing school-sponsored sports subsequently affected academically relevant student outcomes. A 10 percentage-point growth in female sports participation resulted in a one percentage-point increase in their college attendance rate, which also carried over into a significant increase in labor force participation (Stevenson, 2010).

Why do student-athletes appear to do better in school? One hypothesis is that sports instill values that are important for success in school. But even if this is the case, it does not necessarily mean schools need to offer sports. Students might just as easily benefit from club sports without schools footing the costs. Does something special occur when schools offer sports rather than when they are provided by nonschool organizations (such as clubs)? The evidence seems to suggest that it does.
#2. Adopting European-style sports club programs would enable adolescents to participate in sports while eliminating any negative influences that school-sponsored athletics have on academics.
In Europe, organized youth sports take place completely outside of school. For instance, Ripley does not contend that sports are inherently bad for students. Rather, she makes the case that integrating them into schools is likely to compromise the school's academic mission (Ripley, 2013). This argument has picked up steam as more youth have participated in nonschool club sports and organizations, such as the Amateur Athletic Union (AAU) and soccer club teams (Cook, 2012).

There is appeal behind the argument that isolating sports from schools will improve the focus on academics. However, an alternative argument could be made for school sports. Coaches are in a unique position to hold student-athletes accountable for their academic progress in ways that club coaches cannot. For example, schools can leverage academic eligibility rules that require students to meet certain minimal academic requirements in order to be eligible to play interscholastic sports.

Once again, we examine empirical evidence to assess these claims. Throughout the 1970s, states started adopting and strengthening what are referred to as No Pass, No Play policies. These rules require students to maintain a certain grade point average or to pass a specified number of courses to be permitted to continue playing sports. However, no pass, no play rules differ from district to district and state to state. This means that athletes from different towns face different pressures to perform well in the classroom. The exact stringency of these requirements has provided variation in the expectations placed on student-athletes across the country. The variations in no pass, no play rules approximates a natural experiment.

States that implemented tougher no pass, no play rules saw greater improvements in student-athlete academic results. According to one study, raising no pass, no play eligibility requirements led to significant increases in graduation rates, particularly with males (Vidal-Fernández, 2011). Through these academic eligibility requirements, educators have effectively leveraged opportunities to participate in sports to motivate students at risk of dropping out of high school to stay in school. These types of motivational tools are not available to athletic coaches outside of school settings.
#3. Eliminating school-sponsored sports will increase student participation in other extracurricular activities.
Extracurricular activities across the board come under fire when districts consider budget cuts. Parents and teachers will argue that schools should oversee the provision of extracurricular activities but that there is a hierarchy of activities. When this happens, certain extracurricular activities are held up as superior to others because they are viewed as aligning better with the objectives of K-12 education. This view is reflected in John Gerdy's (2014) argument that K-12 schools replace sports with band:

The fact that a school's culture might shift toward being more academically focused without the distractions generated by a football program should be no surprise. A subtle but extremely insidious impact of football programs on the culture of an institution, one that is rarely acknowledged, relates to what can be described as an underlying culture of anti-intellectualism that often permeates a football program (p. 154).

In many instances, this type of argument is motivated by self-preservation. If cuts are inevitable, then an arts advocate has good reason to argue that his program is superior to other extracurricular activities. Yet we currently lack rigorous evidence to support or refute the claim that removing sports from schools would bolster support for other extracurricular activities that, in turn, would improve student outcomes.

The first major issue with this type of argument is that, as demonstrated earlier, it relies on "dumb jock" stereotypes that are not grounded in empirical evidence. Another problem is that it presumes the enthusiasm for sports results from supply rather than demand. School-sponsored sports are by far the most popular extracurricular activities because students are eager to play and parents are so supportive of these activities (Eccles & Barber, 1999). Education stakeholders might wish that chess club, debate team, and band were as popular as sports, but participation in extracurricular activities is unlikely to remain at their current levels if school-sponsored sports were eliminated. Parents and students would likely be less engaged with their school communities, and many students would lose the opportunity to play sports altogether.
Conclusion
Undoubtedly, the fervor for school-sponsored sports can get out of hand. For instance, the fanaticism that has been documented with traditions such as high school football in Texas can illustrate many of the undesirable aspects of an unhealthy affection for interscholastic athletics (Bissinger, 1990). However, as cooler, less-colorful examinations demonstrate, these depictions are more the exception than the norm. Anything can be overemphasized. Even reading and math achievement test scores can become an unhealthy obsession. Recent years have provided examples of drill-and-kill teaching, teachers gaming standardized test scores, and narrowing the curriculum (Nichols & Berliner, 2005). All good things should be pursued in moderation.

When considering whether schools should offer sports, remember that interscholastic athletics developed because schools wanted to provide a more holistic education and children lacked other places to play team sports. Schools saw sports as a useful way to keep students out of trouble, and eventually sports became a venue for communities to come together, promoting social capital (Bowen & Greene, 2012).

The debate over school sports is filled with passionate anecdotes, but we have consulted the research. We examined many of the more popular theories about the role of sports in education.

Student-athletes generally do better in school than other students - not worse. Opening high school sports to girls in the 1970s led to a significant and meaningful improvement in female college-going and workforce participation. Tougher academic eligibility requirements that schools place on athletes have decreased dropout rates among at-risk students.

Schools that cut sports will likely lose the benefits that school-sponsored sports bestow. Removing these activities from K-12 education would likely have negative effects on historically underserved school communities. As was the case with the Great Depression, less-privileged families would be less able to afford the expense of having their children participate in organized sports due to the cost of travel and registration fees of club organizations.

We do not contend that school-sponsored athletics are perfect and should be preserved exactly as they are, even in the face of financial constraints. In tough financial times, everything should be scrutinized. Sports are no exception. But when we look at the larger body of evidence, we find that sports are a tradition in U.S. education that has genuinely benefitted students and their school communities.
References
Balingit, M. (2015, August 4). Could one of the nation's largest school districts go without sports, activities? Washington Post. http://wapo.st/1T68KSu

Barron, J.M., Ewing, B.T., & Waddell, G.R. (2000). The effects of high school athletic participation on education and labor market outcomes. Review of Economics and Statistics, 82 (3), 409-421.

Bissinger, H.G. (1990). Friday night lights. Boston, MA: Da Capo Press.

Bowen, D.H. & Greene, J.P. (2012). Does athletic success come at the expense of academic success? Journal of Research in Education, 22 (2).

Broh, B.A. (2002). Linking extracurricular programming to academic achievement: Who benefits and why? Sociology of education, 75 (1), 69-95.

Coleman, J.A. (1961). The adolescent society: The social life of the teenager and its impact on education. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.

Cook, B. (2012, February 13). RIP, high school soccer? Forbes. http://onforb.es/1Qpk32q

Cubberley, E.P. (1920). The history of education: Educational practice and progress considered as a phase of the development and spread of western civilization. Cambridge, MA: Riverside Press.

Eccles, J.S. & Barber, B.L. (1999). Student council, volunteering, basketball, or marching band: What kind of extracurricular involvement matters? Journal of Adolescent Research, 14 (1), 10-43.

Gerdy, J.R. (2014). Ball or bands: Football vs. music as an educational and community investment. Richmond, BC: Archway Publishing.

Koebler, J. (2011, September 2). High school participation increases for 22nd straight year. U.S. News & World Report. http://bit.ly/1VOHjdY

Lipscomb, S. (2007). Secondary school extracurricular involvement and academic achievement: A fixed effects approach. Economics of Education Review, 26 (4), 463-472.

National Federation of State High School Associations. (NFHS). (2015). 2014-15 high school athletics participation survey. http://bit.ly/1oW0sAC

Nichols, S.L. & Berliner, D.C. (2005). The inevitable corruption of indicators and educators through high-stakes testing. Tempe, AZ: Arizona State University. http://bit.ly/1LtUJvp

Pruter, R. (2013). The rise of American high school sports and the search for control, 1880-1930. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.

Ripley, A. (2013). The smartest kids in the world and how they got that way. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.

Shifrer, D., Pearson, J., Muller, C., & Wilkinson, L. (2015). College-going benefits of high school sports participation: Race and gender differences over three decades. Youth & Society, 47 (3), 295-318.

Stevenson, B. (2010). Beyond the classroom: Using Title IX to measure the return to high school sports. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 92 (2), 284-301.

Vidal-Fernández, M. (2011). The effect of minimum academic requirements to participate in sports on high school graduation. The BE Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, 11 (1), 1-21.

Download pdf.

Originally published in the May 2016 Phi Delta Kappan 97 (8), 8-12. © 2016 Phi Delta Kappa International. All rights reserved.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
History and evidence show school sports help students win - kappanonline.org

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Blaming school sports for academic inattention and bloated budgets is a popular move, but the evidence shows sports have positive effects for students. Just over half of all high school students in the United States report being involved in school-sponsored sports (Koebler, 2011). It's a curious phenomenon unique to the U.S.

# data[].attributes.body
This covers the movement it took back in 1888 in Boston MA, to create a football league for schools.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Last spring a movement was started by undergraduates of Harvard College to form an interscholastic football association. In former years the various Boston schools had football teams, but they were usually of no account, and it was thought that such an association would bring out many more football men, and that the Boston schools would in time rival with Andover and Exeter in supplying material to Harvard elevens.

Six Harvard undergraduates donated a challenge cup, to be competed for once a year and to be competed for once a year and to be held during the year by the winner in the series. Seven schools joined the association,-the Roxbury Latin, the Boston Latin, Noble's, the Cambridge High and Latin, Hopkinson's, Stone, Nichols and Hale's, and Chauncy Hall. The first year of the association has proved the plan a success. A great improvement is noticeable in this year's teams over last year's, and about twice as many men tried to get on their school teams. The series this fall consisted of one game with each school, the game to be governed by the intercollegiate association rules.

According to the summary below the Cambridge High and Latin School team are winner in the series, with the Boston Latin a close second. The Boston Latin team has protested the Cambridge High and Latin-Boston Latin game on the ground that one of their men was disqualified contrary to rules. At an informal meeting of the donors of the cup, four of the six were present and they decided the protest against the Boston Latin School. The protest will be finally disposed of next Monday.

CLUBS category1, category2, category3, category4, category5, category6, category7, category8

Cambridge H. and L.- 6 22 I8 I8 36 36 I36

Boston Latin, 0 - 8 38 18 36 40 I40

Roxbury Latin, 0 0 - I8 I6 I4 I8 66

English High, 0 0 4 - 0 I0 6 20

Stone Nichols and Hale 0 4 12 0 - 30 0 46

Hopkinson's 0 0 I0 0 0 - 8 I8

Noble's 0 5 0 4 0 0 - 9

Points lost. 0 I5 56 78 52 I26 I08 -

Chauncy Hall forfeits membership by forfeiture of a game. English High admitted instead.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Interscholastic Football Association. | News | The Harvard Crimson

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Last spring a movement was started by undergraduates of Harvard College to form an interscholastic football association. In former years

# data[].attributes.body
The beginning of sports in public schools came after it did for those in private or boarding schools.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The growing prominence of sport

In the early part of the 19th Century, sport and games were of very little interest to the headmasters of the leading public schools. Involvement was sparing, other than intervening when necessary to prevent isolated incidents of violence and brutality between boys or to halt the actions of boys rampaging around land neighbouring the schools.

However, as the century progressed there was a growing acceptance amongst the new educators to see value in games and the characteristics its involvement could help develop. Indeed, the Clarendon Commission of 1864 commended the leading public schools, of which Winchester was one, for "their love of healthy sports and exercise." It was felt, despite the severe punishments administered through the fagging system, that games taught Englishmen "to govern others and to control themselves." Such leadership skills were what Thomas Arnold, as Head of Rugby School (1828-1942), identified as fundamental to the development of discipline and morality amongst gentlemen and became essential qualities to foster through the prefect system.

By the middle of the century, games had been formally embraced by headmasters to such an extent that they began to employ masters purely for their ability in games. The emergence of sport as part of the formal school provision in public schools was rapid and within the space of twenty years, schools had gone from having occasional 'hare and hounds' runs to full sports meetings. In 1845, Eton's annual steeplechase commenced, followed by those at Cheltenham and Harrow in 1853, Rugby in 1856 and Winchester in 1857.

Courage and endurance were also essential physical traits which could be developed through games and football was certainly something which actively promoted such virtues. Through more formal instruction, a process of civilising took place, whereby the scrum, or its idiosyncratic derivatives such as the "Hot" at Winchester, became an institution of the public schools.

"Characteristics such as leadership, discipline, team-work, cooperation, resilience and determination are as highly valued now by employers as they were in the late 19th century"

The first record of football being played at Winchester was in 1825 with 25 players on each side, goals were 27 yards away, and were simply a line cut in the earth, there being no crossbar (though no goal could be kicked above five yards high). The game was extremely physical and as dribbling was forbidden one of the main objectives of the game was to charge down the opponent's shots, believed to have been a very painful business. Indeed, according to other sources, football at Winchester was known to be particularly violent with boys regularly taken to hospital with broken bones. Interestingly, such ailments didn't seem to deter their fellow squad-mates who waited to take the place of the injured. This could well be the reason why we still have a five-man substitute bench in XV's today. It was probably the sheer physical pain of playing which prevented its adoption at University but Winchester's football game was probably the model for the field game introduced at Eton.

It was from the memories of two authors (C. Wordsworth and A. Leach) who suggested the rules of the Winchester game were not printed until 1863 and that initially Winchester's football was badly organised until at least 1839, with matches only being arranged the evening before. Nevertheless, by all accounts the prefects were regimentally efficient in their treatment of juniors "insisting that they stand, often shivering, for more than an hour merely to kick the ball back if it went out of play".

Football at the various public schools remained very insular, with boys retaining the distinctive aspects of their game, typified by their often unique and peculiar rules. Unsurprisingly, such games did not lend themselves to contact with external teams or other schools and while it would be false to suggest that footballers at these schools remained distanced from outsiders, very little interaction occurred. This situation slowly began to change towards the middle of the nineteenth century as more open-minded headmasters saw the need to challenge the blinkered elitism of only playing amongst themselves, although there was a still division of sorts. Until the 1840s Harrow only recognised Eton, Winchester, Westminster and Charterhouse as public schools and while there is no evidence of snobbery affecting the interactions between public schools on the football field, it is by no means impossible that it was a factor in determining the selection of suitable opponents.

Contact between public schools on the football field appears to have been first suggested in 1827, when Wykehamists challenged Eton to a match on Egham racecourse. Eton rejected the challenge because Winchester had stipulated that both sides should 'dress in high gaiters and mud boots' (Eton College Magazine vii (5 November 1832).

The real catalyst for a more frequent programme of inter-school fixtures was the formalisation of a codified set of rules. A meeting of representatives from the major public schools met at Cambridge University in 1848 with the stated aim of standardising the games played between them. For several years the various institutions had played each other by sharing the rules of their respective version of football and playing one half with one set of rules and then swapping for the second half. The Cambridge Rules were duly noted and formed the code that was adopted by the football teams of Eton, Harrow, Rugby, Shrewsbury and Winchester. This also ensured that when the students eventually arrived at Cambridge, they all played with the same rules.

# data[].attributes.body
Some key points on either side of the argument for and against youth sports.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Youth sport: positive and negative impact on young athletes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Organized youth sports are highly popular for youth and their families, with approximately 45 million children and adolescent participants in the US. Seventy five percent of American families with school-aged children have at least one child participating…

# data[].attributes.body
In the 1920's youth sports in schools saw an emergence into society.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Youth sports have long been an integral part of American culture. Sports offer countless children the opportunity to engage in physical activity, learn valuable life skills, and form lasting friendships. The history of youth sports in the United States is a story of growth, evolution, and the enduring importance of play. Let's walk through the journey through the past century to explore the fascinating evolution of youth sports in the United States.

Early 20th Century: Humble Beginnings

At the turn of the 20th century, organized youth sports in the United States were still in their infancy. Informal games like stickball, tag, and hopscotch were common pastimes for children. Schools and community centers began to introduce structured sports programs, primarily focused on physical fitness.

1920s-1930s: The Rise of School Sports

The 1920s and 1930s witnessed the emergence of school-based youth sports programs. Interscholastic sports, particularly football, baseball, and basketball, gained popularity. The development of high school sports associations and governing bodies formalized rules and schedules, leading to a more organized and competitive landscape.

1940s-1950s: Post-War Expansion

Following World War II, youth sports experienced significant expansion. The Baby Boomer generation brought an influx of children into schools and communities. The development of Little League Baseball in 1939 marked a turning point, setting the stage for the organized participation of millions of young athletes across the nation.

1960s-1970s: Civil Rights and Title IX

The 1960s and 1970s were marked by social change and progress in the world of youth sports. The Civil Rights Movement brought attention to racial inequality in sports, leading to efforts to desegregate teams and provide equal opportunities for all. In 1972, the passage of Title IX was a monumental moment, prohibiting gender-based discrimination in educational programs, including sports. This legislation opened doors for female athletes and led to the rapid growth of girls' sports.

1980s-1990s: Competition and Commercialization

The 1980s and 1990s saw a surge in the competitiveness of youth sports. Travel teams, private coaching, and specialization became more common as parents sought to give their children a competitive edge. The commercialization of youth sports also accelerated, with the rise of sports apparel, equipment, and lucrative sponsorship deals.

2000s-Present: Concerns and Challenges

As we move into the 21st century, youth sports in the United States face both opportunities and challenges. While the growth of sports specialization continues, concerns have arisen about overuse injuries, burnout, and the exclusion of less affluent families from elite programs. Additionally, the rise of digital entertainment has led to concerns about declining participation rates among children.

What is important in Youth Sports?

In recent years, efforts have been made to address these challenges. Organizations like the Aspen Institute's Project Play have advocated for a return to multi-sport participation, emphasizing the importance of physical activity for all children. Schools and communities have also promoted inclusivity, ensuring that youth sports are accessible to a diverse range of participants.

The Future of Youth Sports

The history of youth sports in the United States reflects a constant evolution driven by societal changes, technological advances, and a growing understanding of the benefits of sports participation for children. Looking to the future, several trends and challenges are likely to shape youth sports:

Efforts to make youth sports accessible to children of all backgrounds will continue to be a priority, with a focus on addressing socioeconomic disparities.

Specialization Debate:

The debate over sports specialization will persist, with more emphasis on balanced, multi-sport participation for overall physical development.

Technology Integration:

Technology will play an increasingly significant role in youth sports, with the use of data analytics, wearable devices, and virtual coaching becoming more common.

Mental Health Awareness:

The recognition of the importance of mental health in youth sports will grow, leading to increased support for young athletes' psychological well-being.

The history of youth sports in the United States is a testament to the enduring value of play and physical activity in the lives of children. From humble beginnings to the complex landscape of today, youth sports have evolved to reflect the changing needs and aspirations of young athletes.

As we continue into the 21st century, it is essential to prioritize inclusivity, physical well-being, and the development of life skills, ensuring that youth sports remain a source of joy, growth, and opportunity for generations to come.

iSport360 is the only app that does it all for youth sports. For more information on what we do, click . For more posts about the history of youth sports, click here.
About the author:
Amy Masters is a sports mom, coach and club administrator. She has been coaching youth sports for more than 10 years. She started Jr Lions Field Hockey, the youth recreation program for the Hunterdon County community growing it from 40 players in year 1 to 150 players by year 3. A few years later, she saw the love and competitiveness grow then started Omega Field Hockey Club serving NJ and PA players. Prior to coaching, she was a collegiate field hockey player for Lock Haven University. In her spare time (lol), she is head of marketing for iSport360, where she brings her love of sports to a bigger audience.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Century of Youth Sports: Tracing the History in the United States

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Youth sports have long been an integral part of American culture. Sports offer countless children the opportunity to engage in physical activity, learn valuable life skills, and form lasting friendships. The history of youth sports in the United States is a story of growth, evolution, and

# data[].attributes.body
Each state has the control over its high schools' sports organizations, leagues and rules.

# data[].attributes.body
This is the association that runs all rules and regulations for interscholastic sports in Massachusetts.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
MIAA - Massachusetts Interscholastic Athletic Association

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Fall Sport Officials Appreciation Week is taking place October 17-21, 2022! Participation can be as simple or as extravagant as schools want it to be. Schools could get their teams involved or ask other groups that serve as ambassadors to your school and community.

# data[].attributes.headline
Youth sports organization have governance as well

# data[].attributes.subject
Youth sports organization have governance as well

# data[].attributes.body
Leagues and organizations are the core to all of the organized sports that kids play all around the country.

# data[].attributes.body
The NFHS is a nonprofit organization that coordinates all things high school sports for all 50 states in the U.S.

# data[].attributes.body
In more recent years the numbers have gone up as far as participants. In 2022 there were over 900,000 high school students playing football in the United States.

# data[].attributes.body
The Young Men's Club of America is the most prominent private organization to promote youth athletics.

# data[].attributes.body
Youth and high school sports require a lot of major roles to be filled by adults in order to function. Some of those roles are paid positions and some are volunteer, but all help youth and high school sports succeed.

# data[].attributes.body
Coaching in high school and youth sports can be both a paid or a volunteer position. There are coaches from around the country that are recognized by the Positive Coaching Alliance for all of the hard work and dedication they put fourth for the kids to reach their full potential.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Positive Coaching Alliance – PCA – Youth Sports Training

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Positive Coaching Alliance is a national nonprofit organization that provides online tools, courses and workshops to assist in giving youth athletes a positive, character building youth sports experience.

# data[].attributes.body
Trainers and Physical Therapists are crucial for youth and high school sports. Schools usually have a certified athletic trainer on site for all games and practices. They play a big role in youth sports and have saved a lot of lives.

# data[].attributes.body
This is an example of some of the adult jobs in youth sports being voluntary duties.

# data[].attributes.body
Refs, umpires, judges, and all other officials are one of the most crucial parts of sports because they are what make the sport organized. If there is an official with eyes on the game or sporting event, then players have to abide by the rules to win.

# data[].attributes.body
NCYS, NFHS, NYSCA .

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
National Youth Sports Strategy
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) developed the National Youth Sports Strategy (NYSS) to unite U.S. youth sports culture around a shared vision: that one day, all youth will have the opportunity, motivation, and access to play sports - regardless of their race, ethnicity, sex, ability, or ZIP code.

Click the NYSS Champion logo to learn more about this important strategy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
National Youth Sports Strategy The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) developed the National Youth Sports Strategy (NYSS) to unite U.S. youth sports culture around a shared vision: that one day, all youth will have the opportunity, motivation, and access to play sports - regardless of their race, ethnicity, sex, ability, or ZIP code.

# data[].attributes.body
State associations organize state championships and competitions in athletics.

# data[].attributes.body
The main focal point of organizations like Little League Baseball is to promote participation to all of the youth that is involved.

# data[].attributes.body
League directors have a bunch of responsibilities. They are in charge of hiring coaches and officials, organizing game schedules and supplying all teams with uniforms.

# data[].attributes.body
Some big corporations use youth sports as a marketing strategy and are able to increase their income by bringing youth sports to them or even sponsoring events.

# data[].attributes.body
There are more than 480,000 student athletes at all levels in NCAA

# data[].attributes.body
Women were not always a part of the NCAA. It wasn't until later that mandates allowed women to participate in college sports.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Women’s Sports Teams Got Their Start (Published 2022)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As the 50th anniversary of Title IX arrives in June, historians are reflecting on the legacy of women’s sports teams and whether it’s time to stop segregating some sports by sex.

# data[].attributes.body
1896 marked the beginning of womens sports in college.

# data[].attributes.body
The NCAA is split into three divisions based on a tier system.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
If you want to know all about the NCAA divisions, you've come to the right place.

According to the NCAA, there are 363 Division 1 schools, 313 Division 2 schools, and 442 Division 3 schools.

How many NCAA divisions exist?

The NCAA has three division levels: Division I, Division II, and Division III.

To give you a better idea of the size and how these college divisions compare, about 187,000 student-athletes compete at the Division 1 level.

More than 124,375 student-athletes compete in Division 2 and Division 3, with just over 186,000 student-athletes on its various rosters. And that's just the NCAA divisions.

There's also the National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA). The NAIA has 250 schools and, of course, many options at the junior college level for high school athletes. All divisions share some similarities, but each has aspects that make them unique.

Student-athletes and parents should note that for the small percentage of high school athletes that end up playing at the D1 and D2 level, only about 57 percent of D1 athletes receive some type of athletics aid and D2 athletes fare just a little better at 60 percent that get athletics aid.

Division I: Your sport, your life

What is a D1 athlete?

A Division 1 (D1) athlete is a student-athlete who participates in a college sports program that is a member of the NCAA Division 1. Division 1 is the highest level of college sports competition in the United States and includes many of the largest and most well-known universities and athletic programs.

What is D1?

D1 is short for Division 1. Division 1 programs offers the highest level of competition between the NCAA's three divisions. Most Division 1 programs are found at large schools with big athletic budgets.

How many D1 schools are there?

There are 363 NCAA D1 schools across the U.S. Division 1 schools have the largest athletic budgets and provide more scholarships compared to the other division levels.

There are many reasons athletes try for Division 1 colleges. Who wouldn't want to compete at a large university in front of big crowds against some of the best athletes in their sport?

But playing in a D1 sport is not all glory. Training and practices take up most of your time. You won't be able to have a part-time job, an internship, or vacation during spring break. You may even be volunteering when you're not training, practicing, or studying.

Every moment of your day is accounted for. Many athletes stay on campus during the summer and take their most challenging classes then because they can devote more time to them. Some student-athletes feel separated from their classmates because they aren't training as heavily as they are.

You live, breathe, and sweat your sport because that is what it takes to compete at the D1 level.

If you're interested in D1, view NCSA's list of the Best NCAA Division 1 College for student-athletes.

What does D1 mean?

D1 stands for Division 1. It is the toughest division to get into and compete in. If you are on the roster of a Division 1 team, you are a Division 1 athlete.

It's considered the most challenging division because you spend most of your time training at the gym or practicing. You take classes and study, but never as much as you train and practice.

Division I and the Ivy League 8

Some of the country's oldest and most prestigious schools make up the Ivy League. They are:

Brown University

Columbia

Cornell

University of Pennsylvania

Harvard

Princeton

Yale

Dartmouth

They rank among the top 20 NCAA Division 1 schools within the NCSA Power Rankings. And according to the NCAA, more than 8,000 student-athletes compete every year for these schools.

Most choose the Ivy League for its ultra-high level of competition in both athletics and academics. If an Ivy League school is on your target list, note that these schools do not award academic or athletic scholarships.

Financial aid is based on needs determined by the financial aid office at each school. Some schools will change their financial aid options yearly based on your grades and sports performance.

Division II: A more balanced approach

If you want a more balanced approach to college, consider a D2 program. Being a Division 2 athlete also requires a lot of training and practice, but less than D1.

There are still the demands all student-athletes face, but it is not as intense and rigorous as the year-round total commitment of a D1 athlete.

Additionally, you're more likely to be rewarded with aid. 60% of D2 athletes receive athletic aid.

If you're interested in D2, view NCSA's list of the Best NCAA Division 2 College for student-athletes.

Division III: A well-rounded college experience

If you want to focus on academics as much as your sport, a D3 program is your best bet. This doesn't mean you don't train or practice. But it's less demanding and intense than it would be at a D1 or D2 school. Academics are just as important as athletics in a D3 school.

A D3 program offers you a more well-rounded college experience. You'll have a better chance to make friends outside your sport and feel more connected to your classmates.

View NCSA's list of the Best NCAA Division 3 Colleges for student-athletes.

The surprising D3 differences

D3 is slightly different from D2 and D1. One difference is that all D1 and D2 athletes must meet specific eligibility requirements set by the NCAA. Each school sets Division 3 eligibility requirements instead of the NCAA.

Regarding scholarships, D3 students receive non-athletics aid through grants and needs-based scholarships. But that doesn't mean they don't do well. Approximately 87% of D3 athletes graduate from college within four years. See what D3 colleges offer full scholarships.

Watch the video below to compare all divisions.

Is there a NCAA D4?

Currently, there is no Division 4. In 2013, there was talk of adding a fourth division. CBS reported what D4 could have been like. It's unknown why the plans for a fourth division didn't move beyond talks.

Why an NAIA school might be your best bet

It may surprise some, but the National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA) has been around longer than the NCAA. With 250 primarily private, smaller schools, more than 60,000 student-athletes compete at NAIA colleges in various popular sports for the 2022-23 academic year.

Many consider NAIA to be on par with NCAA D3 schools regarding life/sport balance and level of competitiveness. The NAIA awards close to $800 million in athletic scholarships every year. That, along with more aggressive recruiting, is driving more talent to these schools and increasing competition. Today, top-level NAIA schools are like competing on an NCAA D2 team in terms of competition level.

If you want to play sports and have a chance to do well in college, the NAIA may be your choice. Learn more about the NAIA and how it differs from the NCAA below:

Don't ignore junior colleges

Between the three NCAA divisions and NAIA schools, it's easy to overlook junior college athletics as an option. But junior college is a good choice, too. According to the National Junior College Athletic Association (NJCAA), about 60,000 student-athletes participate in 28 different sports at 500+ schools nationwide every year.

Many don't consider a junior college because there are some common misconceptions about what junior colleges can offer student-athletes. However, today's junior colleges have a lot to offer, especially regarding scholarships and other cost savings.

Junior college is the best path to getting a four-year college roster for some athletes. For others, it's a chance to stay close to home, earn college credit, and continue their athletic career. Here are four reasons why junior colleges can be an excellent option for student-athletes:

Looking for more reasons to consider attending a junior college or pursuing junior college athletics? Here are a few more advantages of a junior college that other division levels may not have.

They're more affordable

Junior colleges are less expensive than public and private four-year colleges and universities. This is due to a few factors. One has to do with the fact they are two-year schools which are cheaper to run. Another is that they often don't have dorms to upkeep.

Junior colleges also tend to be more generous with academic and athletic scholarships. Plus, you have more time to save for a four-year school.

It's more practical than taking a year off

It is tough (if not impossible) to get recruited to play at a four-year college after taking even one gap year between high school and college.

But junior colleges offer remedial classes, which can get you up to speed on some of the basics and make four-year college courses easier.

Every major requires history classes, math, science, and English. You can knock those out in junior college. That way, you'll be ready to tackle the major-related courses at your transfer university.

Recruits can make an impact right away

Junior college athletics coaches look for players that can hit the ground running and may even recruit for starting roles. They know that since you've been a student-athlete at a junior college, you know what it takes to compete.

You won't be a benchwarmer. You'll be hitting the field hard.

Increase your chances of getting recruited at a four-year college

College coaches like to recruit JUCO athletes because they're a safer bet than their high school counterparts. Coaches know these athletes have a track record of balancing college academics and athletics while maintaining their eligibility.

While nearly everyone starts out with D1 as their goal, it comes down to what type of college experience will suit your child. The good news is that with four NCAA divisions, NAIA schools, NCCAA schools, and junior colleges, there's something for every type of student-athlete.

NCCAA: Christian Schools

The National Christian College Athletic Association (NCCAA) was founded in 1968 and has nearly 100 schools with over 23,000 student-athletes competing in 26 different sports. About 50% of member schools are dually affiliated with D2, D3, or NAIA, giving their student-athletes the benefits from those organizations along with a Christ-centered experience and competition opportunities within the NCCAA.

Earn a degree from an institution that can help your spiritual journey. NCCAA schools incorporate Biblical educational components and provide chapel opportunities.

How to gauge your talent to find your best division

One of the first steps in the recruiting process is to accurately gauge your talent level and get an understanding of the divisions you might be suited for athletically. However, each day, we talk to athletes who don't have a good grasp on what's realistic for them.

And we get it! It's tough to predict what level you'll be at in three or even two years. The good news: There are plenty of ways to figure out where you stand athletically. The bad news: It's still going to require that you honestly evaluate yourself. Let's check out some of the best ways to get a better understanding of your true athletic talent.

Watch college games at every division level

Watch college athletes closely and compare your current skill level to the competition. If you can, visit local schools and universities and see it live. And be realistic! If you need to improve drastically to get some playing time on a team, check out a game at a different division level and see how you compare.

The head baseball coach at D3 Webster University Bill Kurich explained during a panel discussion,

"Go watch a Division 1, a Division 2, a Division 3, or an NAIA game." He added, "One of the best things I did-I played at Quincy University-I went and watched them play. I sat in the stands and said, 'You know what, I can play here; I can do this.' I also went and saw Illinois State play the University of Northern Iowa when I was in high school, and I thought, 'Well, maybe not.' Not that I wasn't as good, but I wasn't going to play... And I knew I wanted to play every day."

When you're watching a game, ask yourself these questions to help you figure out if this is the right level for you:

Could you compete with these athletes today? If not, are you on track to be at that level as a senior?

Would you get playing time if you joined this team? Is playing time important to you?

Can you picture yourself competing on this team and for this school?

Review rosters of schools at different division levels

There's a lot of helpful information you can get from a college sport's roster. To find it, go to the school's website and find the roster of current team members. Typically, you can find it by searching for the athletic program and then your specific sport. Each athlete will most likely have a short bio that talks about their high school and collegiate accomplishments. Here are a few key things to look for:

Check out the body types of the athletes in your position. How do you stack up to their posted heights and weights?

Are you competing in the same tournaments and showcases as the current athletes?

Review their list of high school accolades (e.g., All-State, All-City, team MVP or captain), and consider how your current compilation of accolades compares.

For individual sports like track & field, swimming, etc., pay particular attention to the athletes' current stats. Compare that to your current numbers

Keep an open mind as you're looking through schools' rosters. If you never imagined yourself competing at a D3 school-but those are the athletes who most resemble you-it's worth it to continue investigating what that division has to offer.

Hint: There are countless benefits to attending a D3 school. Learn more about D3 colleges and universities.

Get evaluated by a third party

In many cases, it can be difficult to objectively evaluate yourself. Especially on something as personal as your athletic talent. That's where third parties come into play. Experts can either evaluate you in person or via your highlight film. Make sure your highlight film is up to date.

You can ask your current high school and/or club coach to evaluate your talent level. Recruiting experts like us can also help. NCSA College Recruiting evaluates athletes in 37 1 different sports. Another avenue to investigate is evaluation camps. As the name indicates, they are camps for camps in which coaches help high school athletes gauge their talent and give them improvement suggestions.

When getting a third-party evaluation, here are a few questions to ask the evaluator:

What level do you think I could compete at right now?

How much would I need to improve to get to the next level?

What are my strengths? What weaknesses should I work on?

Compete against elite athletes

Some high schools and clubs compete against tough teams who notoriously turn out college athletes. For athletes who already compete against the elite, every game is an opportunity to level set and see how they compare to other athletes in their recruiting class.

Some athletes play for smaller teams and don't necessarily get a chance to compete against other college-bound athletes. If that's the case for you, find camps, showcases, summer leagues or club teams to play against the best high school athletes.

How to decide which is best

Getting a better understanding of your talent is a great place to start when figuring out your best school. However, don't forget that a great match is about where you fit athletically, academically, and socially. You may have the talent to compete at the Division 1 level, but that doesn't mean that will be the best fit for you academically and socially. Keep all three factors in mind as you build your target list of schools, visit campuses, and do your research.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The College Divisions Explained (D1 vs. D2 vs. D3) | NCSA

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Learn the differences between the NCAA college divisions and what it means to be a D1, D2, or D3 athlete.

# data[].attributes.body
This is an alternative to playing in the NCAA. Some smaller schools play for other associations.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics, The experts in the business of small college athletics.

# data[].attributes.body
Junior college also has an alternative association to the NCAA.

# data[].attributes.body
Even within division 1 football there is still a separation of top talent and the second best.

# data[].attributes.body
There are 32 different conferences in the NCAA.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Tracking all 32 NCAA men's basketball conference tournaments, auto bids for 2024

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Keep up with automatic qualifiers, schedules, links to brackets and more during conference tournament season in men's college basketball.

# data[].attributes.body
Sometimes there can be conference realignments which make universities change the conference they compete in. This can be caused for many different reasons including expiring television contracts.

# data[].attributes.body
There is a Board of Directors along with this whole governance structure for the NCAA.

# data[].attributes.body
Former Governor of Massachusetts is the President of the NCAA.

# data[].attributes.body
The NCAA supplies a lot of jobs for adults just like high school and youth sports do. At the college level the responsibilities can be greater, which means the salaries are greater as well.

# data[].attributes.body
Some coaches in college sports get recognized for their great careers after they retire.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Tara VanDerveer, NCAA’s winningest basketball coach, retires after 45 years

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Tara VanDerveer announced her retirement on Tuesday night after 38 seasons leading the Stanford women’s team and 45 overall

# data[].attributes.body
The Ncaa is composed of a leadership team.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
At the NCAA's national office in Indianapolis, more than 500 staff members work under the leadership of a team of executives who are granted authority by the NCAA Board of Governors.

Leading the national office team is NCAA President Charlie Baker.

The Senior Management Team is the group of closest advisors at the national office to President Charlie Baker. This group ensures accountability in management and operations as part of a dynamic and inclusive leadership structure. They also provide counsel to key governance leaders within the NCAA membership.

The President's Cabinet includes the Senior Management Team and other vice presidents. The Cabinet meets monthly to report important developments and provide input on issues facing the Association. The Cabinet's charge is to share information between departments and member schools to enhance the service and effectiveness of national office staff.

NCAA President:

Charlie Baker assumed the duties as the NCAA's sixth president on March 1, 2023.

He was hired for the position on Dec. 15, 2022, as he neared the conclusion of his term as the 72nd governor of Massachusetts.

A former collegiate athlete at Harvard, Baker is credited with bringing bipartisan leadership to the state, successfully guiding Massachusetts through an exceptionally turbulent period for government officials. In addition to his two terms as governor, he has brought decades of experience spearheading transformations at high-profile institutions in the private and public sectors.
Learn More

Senior Management Team:

As executive vice president of regulatory affairs, Stan Wilcox oversees all NCAA regulatory functions, including academic and membership affairs, the Eligibility Center and enforcement. Wilcox provides strategic direction while continuing to foster strong relationships with NCAA colleges and universities, ensuring regulatory staffs within the national office work efficiently and collaboratively to best serve NCAA members.

Before joining the NCAA staff in October 2018, Wilcox oversaw the strategic planning and management of 20 varsity sports with more than 500 student-athletes at Florida State, where he was hired in 2013 as director of athletics and was promoted to vice president in 2016. Before his time at Florida State, he served in senior positions at Duke, Notre Dame and the Big East Conference.

Wilcox has held several national leadership positions, including membership on the NCAA Football Oversight Committee and LEAD1 board of trustees. He helped to create the Minority Opportunities Athletic Association and subsequently served as a member of its board. From 2003 to 2005, he was president of the Black Coaches Association.

A former men's basketball player at Notre Dame, Wilcox helped lead the Fighting Irish to a 1978 NCAA Men's Final Four appearance and four NCAA tournament berths. He went on to graduate from Notre Dame in 1981 with a degree in economics before earning a law degree from Brooklyn Law School in 1988.

Scott Bearby is senior vice president of legal affairs and general counsel, overseeing the office of legal affairs, hearing operations and government affairs.

The office of legal affairs handles numerous legal responsibilities for the Association, including managing litigation involving the national office and supporting its governance and sport committees, 90 championships, and national office staff in assisting the membership and student-athletes.

Bearby was named vice president of legal affairs and general counsel in August 2016 after serving in various legal positions at the national office since January 1999.

Before joining the NCAA, Bearby spent six years in private practice. A native of Hammond, Indiana, he earned his bachelor's degree in government from Notre Dame and his law degree from Indiana University, Bloomington.

Tim Buckley began his role as senior vice president of external affairs on March 1, 2023. Buckley, who has more than 15 years of experience in government relations, political communications and public affairs strategy, oversees the Association's government relations and communications efforts to strengthen relationships with key constituents at the state and federal levels. Buckley also engages membership, media, policymakers, coalitions and other stakeholders to advance the NCAA's mission and goals.

Having served in multiple senior positions in state government, most recently as chief of staff to then-Gov. Charlie Baker of Massachusetts, Buckley has extensive knowledge and proven experience crafting winning strategies for complex organizations. As chief of staff, Buckley led a team to advance Gov. Baker's initiatives, including legislative priorities and administrative goals across the 40,000-member executive branch with a $50 billion annual budget.

Before becoming chief of staff, Buckley oversaw government relations, legislative affairs and federal affairs while managing communications efforts across the executive branch of state government. Buckley helped shape Baker's bipartisan brand and guided his administration through multiple crises and complex policy challenges, including the state's COVID-19 response.

Buckley also served as communications director for Baker's successful 2014 campaign for governor and advised communications efforts for several statewide campaigns in Massachusetts. Buckley graduated from Colorado College with a Bachelor of Arts in political science.

Joni Comstock joined the NCAA national office in September 2006 and is the senior vice president of championships and senior woman administrator. Her duties include oversight of 84 NCAA championships, media coordination and statistics, playing rules, ticket operations and marketing, merchandise and licensing and social and digital media. Before coming to the NCAA, Comstock was a Division I athletics director at American and UNC Asheville. She also has held senior athletics leadership roles at Purdue and Illinois.

Comstock received her bachelor's degree in health and physical education at Eastern Illinois; a master's degree in education and sports management from Illinois State; and a doctorate in administration of higher education from Illinois.

Dan Gavitt joined the NCAA staff as vice president of men's basketball in August 2012 after spending the previous seven years as the associate commissioner for men's basketball at the Big East Conference. In his current role, Gavitt oversees the day-to-day operations of the NCAA Division I men's basketball championship, as well as the NCAA's 11-year, $10.6 billion contracts with broadcast partners CBS and Turner Broadcasting. He also supervises the Postseason NIT and NCAA Divisions II and III Men's Basketball Championships and serves as the staff's day-to-day contact to the Division I Men's Basketball Committee and the Men's Basketball Oversight Committee.

Prior to his service at the Big East, Gavitt was director of athletics and recreation at Bryant, which has one of the largest Division II athletics departments in the country. Earlier in his career, Gavitt ran his own sports marketing and event management firm, Craigville Sports Associates; served as an assistant basketball coach at Providence College; and ran the Rick Barnes basketball camp.

Gavitt holds a bachelor's degree in history from Dartmouth and a Master of Business Administration from Providence. Gavitt is a member of both the National Association of Basketball Coaches and the National Association of Collegiate Directors of Athletics.

As the NCAA's first chief medical officer, Brian Hainline oversees the NCAA Sport Science Institute, a national center whose mission is to promote and develop safety, excellence and wellness in college student-athletes, and to foster lifelong physical and mental development. The Sport Science Institute works collaboratively with member schools and centers of excellence across the United States.

For more than 20 years, Hainline has been involved in sports medicine, including serving as chief medical officer of both the U.S. Open Tennis Championships and the U.S. Tennis Association. He is co-author of "Drugs and the Athlete" and played a pivotal part in the rollout of drug testing and education worldwide. He is currently vice chair of the American Academy of Neurology's Sports Neurology Section. He is also a clinical professor of neurology at the New York University School of Medicine and the Indiana University School of Medicine. Hainline received his bachelor's degree from Notre Dame and his medical degree from the University of Chicago.

Brian Higgins was appointed senior vice president of business performance in September 2023. He came to the NCAA as an independent contractor to oversee the national office business review. Before that, Higgins worked at McKinsey & Co., a global management consulting firm, where he helped clients review data and analytics to improve decision-making.

Higgins served as an officer in the U.S. Navy for 10 years, including three years on board the USS Virginia attack submarine. As part of his duties, he managed nuclear research and waste projects. He also served as a congressional and budget analyst for the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program and as the Navy's senior program manager for the White House Social Aide Program, where he oversaw ceremonial events at the White House.

Higgins played baseball for Division III Washington and Lee, earning a bachelor's in politics and Spanish. He also holds a master's in political communications from Johns Hopkins and an MBA in finance and operations from The Wharton School at Pennsylvania.

Higgins and his wife, Carolina, have two boys, Lucas and Matias.

In March 2022, Felicia Martin was named senior vice president of inclusion, education and community engagement.

She had held the role in an interim capacity beginning in June 2021. Internally, she leads all inclusion operations and leadership development programming and supervises national office staff in inclusion, education and community engagement. She serves as a national office ambassador to member organizations, promoting the NCAA's core values of diversity and inclusion.

Martin became the vice president of the NCAA Eligibility Center in February 2017. In that role, she was responsible for the Eligibility Center's strategic direction and oversaw a staff that annually certified academics and sport participation credentials for approximately 100,000 Division I and II prospective student-athletes.

In addition to her regulatory affairs experience, Martin has an extensive campus background. Before coming to the NCAA, Martin was a senior associate director of athletics for academics, student services and sports administration at Texas Tech from 2008 to 2017. From 2003 to 2008, Martin served as the assistant executive director at the Division 1A Athletic Directors' Association, now known as the LEAD1 Association. She began her athletics career at Texas Tech as a counseling specialist focusing on freshman student transition, student-athlete tutorial services and mentoring programming.

Martin is a long-standing member of the National Association of Academic and Student-Athlete Development Professionals, where she has held various leadership roles, including president from 2017-18. Martin represented the NCAA on the National Association of Collegiate Directors of Athletics Executive Committee as an at-large representative. In addition, she is a member of the Minority Opportunities Athletic Association, Women Leaders in College Sports and the Indy Chamber. Martin serves on the NCORE National Advisory Council and its Athletics in the Academy committee. She also is a graduate of the NCAA Dr. Charles Whitcomb Leadership Institute. Martin is credited as a co-founder of the Lauro Cavazos & Ophelia Powell-Malone Mentoring Program (Mentor Tech). She has facilitated several student-athlete development leadership conferences and is a frequent panelist, presenter and keynote speaker.

A native of Bay Springs, Mississippi, Martin earned her bachelor's degree in educational psychology and master's degree in counselor education from Mississippi State.

Mario Morris is the NCAA senior vice president of administration and chief financial officer. He joined the national office in September 2022, bringing a deep background of experience in college athletics and the financial services industry.

As senior vice president of administration and chief financial officer, Morris provides strategic leadership and oversight of all financial activity and administrative operations for the Association.

Prior to serving the NCAA, Morris was executive deputy athletics director at Notre Dame where he was responsible for the athletics department's core business and revenue-generation functions, including strategic financial planning, business operations, multimedia rights, apparel, fan engagement, corporate relations, business innovation, ticketing, marketing, hospitality, contracts, information technology, data analytics, athletics equipment, facilities and events. Morris also helped to lead the development of Notre Dame's name, image and likeness policy.

Before joining Notre Dame, Morris held a variety of financial management roles at Wisconsin. As CFO, Morris had primary oversight of Wisconsin's $150 million budget and financial operations.

In 2021, he was selected as the College Athletic Business Management Association's manager of the year. In 2020, Morris was chosen for the NCAA Pathway Program, which is designed to elevate senior-level athletics administrators to the next step in their careers.

Morris received his law degree from Wisconsin, his bachelor's degree in finance from Alabama and is currently pursuing his doctorate in educational leadership and policy analysis at Wisconsin. He was a starting linebacker on Alabama's football team, playing on the Crimson Tide's national championship team in 1992.

Vice President Terri Steeb Gronau
of Division II/Liaison to the NCAA Board of Governors

Terri Steeb Gronau was named vice president of Division II in July 2013. She previously served as director of Division II. Her responsibilities include serving as the chief liaison to the Board of Governors and Division II governance bodies and membership. As the director of Division II, she led strategic planning efforts, established and implemented priorities and oversaw the budget. She joined the NCAA as a post-graduate intern and advanced through the national office, gathering experience on rules interpretations, budget management, legislation and strategic thinking. Gronau competed in volleyball while a student at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, where she earned her bachelor's degree. She earned her master's degree at Ohio.

President's Cabinet:

Derrick Crawford was named vice president of hearing operations in May 2021, overseeing the infractions process for the national office.

Crawford serves as direct liaison to the NCAA Committees on Infractions and Infractions Appeals Committees in all three divisions and oversees the staffs that support the committees. These committees decide on penalties for member schools and involved individuals who violate NCAA rules.

He also provides strategic coordination for the NCAA's Independent Accountability Resolution Process. Specifically, Crawford serves as the NCAA's primary liaison with the Independent Accountability Oversight Committee, the Infractions Referral Committee and the Independent Resolution Panel.

He was named managing director of enforcement in 2013, overseeing the NCAA's investigations and processing group. Prior to that, he served as director of enforcement for football, where he led an investigative team that oversaw football development and investigations within the NCAA's enforcement division.

Before joining the national office, Crawford served in various senior-level roles related to diversity, equity and inclusion within higher education. He was the first chief diversity officer and ombudsperson at Cal State San Marcos and the chief equal employment opportunity and diversity officer for The Citadel.

In addition, Crawford served as counsel for policy and litigation at the National Football League for eight years. He also served as an assistant attorney general in Alabama. Before his work with the Alabama attorney general's office, Crawford spent five years with the FBI as a special agent and legal advisor.

A native of Auburn, Alabama, he received a Bachelor of Arts in political science and Juris Doctor from Alabama.

Jon Duncan became the vice president of enforcement in March 2014 after serving in an interim role since March 2013. Before coming to the NCAA, he was a partner at the Kansas City, Missouri-based law firm of Spencer Fane Britt & Browne, where he had practiced since 2003. Previously, he spent five years at another Kansas City firm, Husch Blackwell, where education and sports were the core of his work. He first represented the NCAA in litigation in 1998, and since then has served as a legal advisor for the NCAA and offered legal counsel to its committees, working groups and task forces. Duncan attended William Jewell - now part of Division II - and graduated from the University of Kansas School of Law in 1995, where he was a published member of the Kansas Law Review.

Lynn Holzman returned to the NCAA in February 2018 as the vice president of women's basketball. She is responsible for the strategic direction of women's basketball and oversight, operations, and management of the Divisions I, II and III Women's Basketball Championships. Early in her tenure, women's basketball unveiled a strategic initiatives plan focusing on producing memorable championships, providing transformational student-athlete experiences, and enhancing quality competition for the sport. Under Holzman's oversight, women's basketball has experienced significant growth, seeing significant increases in areas such as championships attendance, broadcast viewership, social media engagements and student-athlete and fan experiences.

In 2014, Holzman was appointed commissioner of the West Coast Conference after serving in various leadership roles within the conference office. In that role, she served as the conference's chief executive officer, overseeing the conference's strategic direction and positioning, while also serving on various leadership bodies within the NCAA governance structure. Before her conference office tenure, Holzman worked at the NCAA national office for 16 years, last serving as a director of academic and membership affairs.

Holzman has served as president and on the board of Women Leaders in Sports. She also has served in various leadership capacities for the Women's Basketball Coaches Association, San Jose Sports Authority, Collegiate Conference Administrators, Kay Yow Cancer Fund and Women's Basketball Hall of Fame.?

Holzman received a bachelor's degree in exercise science from Kansas State, a master's degree in sports administration from North Carolina and a Master of Business Administration from Purdue. She was a four-time letter winner and captain for the Kansas State women's basketball team and received K-State's Impact Award. Holzman has been recognized by the Sports Business Journal as one of its Game Changers and Administrator of the Year by Women Leaders in Sports.

Gina Lehe assumed the role of vice president of communications on March 1, 2023, after serving as interim senior vice president since July 2022. Lehe, who oversees communications strategy for the national office, joined the NCAA staff in November 2019 as the managing director of communications, brand and strategy after a more than 20-year career in the college football bowl system. During her short tenure at the NCAA, Lehe has implemented a collaborative brand vision and helped navigate the communications landscape throughout the pandemic. Among her achievements include a brand refresh, a newly redesigned website, and the creation of the NCAA Social Series.

Beginning in 2014, Lehe served as senior director of external relations and branding for the College Football Playoff. Before that, she was director of media for the Rose Bowl Game, director of public relations for the Tostitos Fiesta Bowl and public relations manager for the Insight Bowl.

She was inducted into the College Sports Communicators Hall of Fame in 2022 and named a Street and Smith's Sports Business Journal Game Changer in 2017.

Lehe graduated from Arizona with a bachelor's degree in communications.

She now lives in the Indianapolis area with her husband, Adam, and two daughters, Adriana and Natalia.

Louise McCleary was named vice president of Division III in April 2022 after serving on an interim basis since February 2021. She brought to the position more than two decades of administrative experience within the division.

She joined the NCAA in 2012 as director of Division III before being promoted to managing director of the division in September 2017.

McCleary had been the athletics director at Elms since 2002 after spending time at Vassar, first as an associate athletics director and then as interim athletics director. She started her career at Tri-State University (now known as Trine), first as an assistant women's basketball coach, then as a sports information director and assistant athletics director.

McCleary has a bachelor's degree in political science and American studies from Wellesley and a master's degree in sport management from Massachusetts.

David Schnase was named vice president of academic and membership affairs in September 2015. Schnase joined the NCAA staff in 1995 and most recently served as a managing director of academic and membership affairs, overseeing all compliance functions. In his current role, he oversees the work of a staff that serves all three NCAA divisions in a number of regulatory areas, including rules compliance, interpretation and academics. During the 2010 academic year, he participated as an American Council on Education Fellow - the first NCAA staff member chosen for the prestigious professional experience. Schnase earned his bachelor's degree in psychology from Nebraska and his master's and law degrees from Kansas.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
At the NCAA's national office in Indianapolis, more than 500 staff members work under the leadership of a team of executives who are granted authority by the NCAA

# data[].attributes.body
The NCAA has a leadership development program that hosts educational and training programs nationwide.

# data[].attributes.body
Some people are able to live out their dreams through NJCAA

# data[].attributes.body
Top ten college coaches in football.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Top 10 college football coaches over the past 50 years, according to Bill Connelly

# data[].attributes.body
Folks want to get rid of these type of trophies.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Everyone hates participation trophies - here's how we can fix them

# data[].attributes.body
This is Princeton vs Yale

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
First American Football Game Ever Filmed: 1903 Princeton Tigers vs Yale Bulldogs

# data[].attributes.body
Sandusky scandal with Penn state

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What did Penn State know about Sandusky? - E-mails revealed

# data[].attributes.body
Northwestern is a university in the NAIA

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
2023 NAIA FB National Championship - Northwestern (IA) vs Keiser (FL)

# data[].attributes.headline
VIDEO COVERAGE ON MY STATE CHAMPIONSHIP VICTORY AT GILLETE STADIUM IN 2018

# data[].attributes.subject
VIDEO COVERAGE ON MY STATE CHAMPIONSHIP VICTORY AT GILLETE STADIUM IN 2018

# data[].attributes.body
First state championship for Springfield in history of football

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Central football makes history, wins Massachusetts Division III championship