# data[].attributes.headline
Brittanica - Should Students Have to Wear School Uniforms?

# data[].attributes.subject
Brittanica - Should Students Have to Wear School Uniforms?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
History of School Uniforms
Traditionally favored by private and parochial institutions, school uniforms are being adopted by US public schools in increasing numbers. According to a 2020 report, the percentage of public schools that required school uniforms jumped from 12% in the 1999-2000 school year to 20% in the 2017-18 school year. School uniforms were most frequently required by elementary schools (23%), followed by middle (18%), and high schools (10%).

The first recorded use of standardized dress in education may have been in England in 1222, when the Archbishop of Canterbury mandated that students wear a robe-like outfit called the " cappa clausa." The origin of the modern school uniform can be traced to 16th Century England, when the impoverished "charity children" attending the Christ's Hospital boarding school wore blue cloaks reminiscent of the cassocks worn by clergy, along with yellow stockings. As of Sep. 2014, students at Christ's Hospital were still wearing the same uniform, and according to the school it is the oldest school uniform still in use. When Christ's Hospital surveyed its students in 2011, 95% voted to keep the traditional uniforms. Read more history...

Pro & Con Arguments

Pro 1

School uniforms deter crime and increase student safety.

In Long Beach, California, after two years of a district-wide K-8 mandatory uniform policy, reports of assault and battery in the district's schools decreased by 34%, assault with a deadly weapon dropped by 50%, fighting incidents went down by 51%, sex offenses were cut by 74%, robbery dropped by 65%, possession of weapons (or weapon "look-alikes") decreased by 52%, possession of drugs went down by 69%, and vandalism was lowered by 18%.

And, school uniforms prevent the display of gang colors and insignia, reducing gang activity and pressure to join on school property. The U.S. Department of Education's Manual on School Uniforms stated that uniform policies can "prevent gang members from wearing gang colors and insignia at school" in order to "encourage a safe environment." Educators in the Long Beach Unified School District have speculated that the sharp reduction in crime following the introduction of school uniforms was a result of gang conflicts being curbed. Osceola County, Florida School Board member Jay Wheeler reports that the county's schools had a 46% drop in gang activity after their first full school year with a mandatory K-12 uniform policy. Wheeler explains that "clothing is integral to gang culture... Imagine a U.S. Armed Forces recruiter out of uniform trying to recruit new soldiers; the success rate goes down. The same applies to gang recruitment." [35] [37] [67]
Read More

Pro 2

School uniforms keep students focused on their education, not their clothes.

Wearing uniforms also enhances school pride, unity, and community spirit, which can boost interest in education. A study of over 1,000 Texas middle school students found that students in uniform "reported significantly more positive perceptions of belonging in their school community than reported by students in the standard dress group." Christopher P. Clouet, former Superintendent of the New London Public Schools in Connecticut, stated that "the wearing of uniforms contributes to school pride." Arnold Goldstein, PhD, head of the Center for Research on Aggression at Syracuse University, points out that uniforms help troubled students feel they have the support of a community: "There is a sense of belonging." Further, "teachers perceived an increase in the level of respect, caring, and trust... throughout the school" and "students are made to feel 'important' and as if they are a part of a team by wearing a uniform," according to a peer-reviewed study.

Plus, school uniforms can improve attendance and discipline. A study by researchers at the University of Houston found that the average absence rate for girls in middle and high school decreased by 7% after the introduction of uniforms, and behavioral problems lessened in severity. School uniforms make getting ready for school easier, which can improve punctuality.
When uniforms are mandatory, parents and students do not spend time choosing appropriate outfits for the school day. According to a national survey, over 90% of US school leaders believe school uniform or formal dress code policies "eliminate wardrobe battles with kids," make it "easier to get kids ready in the morning," and create a "time saving in the morning." Tracey Marinelli, Superintendent of the Lyndhurst School District in New Jersey, credits the district's uniform policy for reducing the number of students running late. Lyndhurst student Mike Morreale agrees, stating that "it's so much easier to dress than having to search for clothes and find out that something doesn't match." A Youngstown State University study of secondary schools in Ohio's eight largest school districts found that school uniform policies improve rates of attendance, graduation, and suspension.
Read More

Pro 3

Students' legal right to free expression remains intact with mandatory school uniforms.

Besides, students can still express their individuality in school uniforms by introducing variations and adding accessories. Junior high school student Amelia Jimenez wrote in her op-ed for the Pennsylvania Patriot-News that "contrary to popular belief, uniforms do not stop students from being themselves. Uniforms do not silence voices. Students can wear a variety of expressive items, such as buttons or jewlery." Students can inject their personal style into their daily look with hairstyles, nail polish, and colorful accessories such as bags, scarfs, and fun socks. 54% of eighth-graders said they could still express their individuality while wearing school uniforms.

Further, students dressed in uniform are better perceived by teachers and peers. A 1994 peer-reviewed study found that students in uniform were perceived by teachers and fellow students as being more academically proficient than students in regular clothes. The study also found that students in uniform were perceived by peers and teachers as having higher academic potential, and perceived by peers as being better behaved. Students need to learn a balance between free expression and working within the confines of expectations.
Read More

Con 1

School uniforms do not stop bullying and can actually increase violent attacks.

Further, a peer-reviewed study found that "school uniforms increased the average number of assaults by about 14 [per year] in the most violent schools." A Texas Southern University study found that school discipline incidents rose by about 12% after the introduction of uniforms. And, according to the Miami-Dade County Public Schools Office of Education Evaluation and Management, fights in middle schools nearly doubled within one year of introducing mandatory uniforms.
Read More

Con 2

School uniforms do not improve attendance, academic preparedness, or exam results.

The problems arise because focusing on uniforms takes attention away from finding genuine solutions to problems in education. Spending time and effort implementing uniform policies detracts from more effective efforts to reduce crime in schools and boost student performance. More substantive improvements to public education could be achieved with smaller class sizes, tightened security, increased parental involvement, improved facilities, and other measures. Tom Houlihan, former Superintendent of Schools in Oxford, North Carolina, stated that school uniforms "are a distraction from focusing on systematic and fundamental transformation to improve our schools."

That uniform policies are a distraction is most evident when we realize that the push for school uniforms is driven by commercial interests rather than educational ones. Americans spend around $1 billion on school uniforms every year. Retailer J.C. Penney Co. says school uniforms are "a huge, important business for us." In one year alone, uniform company Lands' End spent $3 million on marketing efforts directed at public schools and districts. Multiple studies used to promote the effectiveness of uniforms were partly funded by Lands' End, and at least one of those studies is "so wholly flawed as to render itself useless," according to David L. Brunsma. Reuters reported that retailers were "sensing their opportunity... stepping up competition in the uniform aisles and online. Walmart has set up 'uniform shops' or temporary boutiques within some stores."

The commercialization of school uniforms in public schools also undermines the promise of a free education by imposing an extra expense on families. Parents already pay taxes, and they still need to buy regular clothes for their children to wear when they're out of school and for dress-down days. The Children's Commission on Poverty (UK) found that over "95% of parents on low incomes reported difficulties in meeting school-related costs," including uniforms, despite their children attending tuition-free schools. Anderson, Indiana, parents Laura and Scott Bell argued against their children's school uniform policy, saying the $641 for their children's uniforms broke the guarantee of a free public education. In York County, Pennsylvania, a local NBC affiliate reported that some children were missing class because their families couldn't afford to purchase the required uniforms. And, all of that is before the uniform policies themselves are examined. Most operate like dress codes and are classist, racist, and sexist.
Read More

Con 3

School uniforms restrict students' freedom of expression.

Uniforms take away the ability to use clothing as means of expressing support for social causes. Students at Friendly High School in Prince George's County, MD, were not allowed to wear pink shirts to support Breast Cancer Awareness Month and 75 students received suspensions for breaking the school's uniform restrictions. Removing these choices can delay the transition into adulthood. Adults make their own clothing choices and have the freedom to express themselves through their appearance. Denying children and teenagers the opportunity to make those choices may make them ill-prepared for the adult world. Adolescents see clothing choices as a means of identification, and seeking an identity is one of the critical stages of adolescence, according to the late developmental psychologist Erik Erikson.

When students have to wear the same outfits, rather than being allowed to select clothes that suit their body types, they can suffer embarrassment at school. Child and teen development specialist Robyn Silverman says that students, especially girls, tend to compare how each other looks in their uniforms: "As a body image expert, I hear from students all the time that they feel it allows for a lot of comparison... So if you have a body that's a plus-size body, a curvier body, a very tall body, a very short body, those girls often feel that they don't look their best." A study by researchers at Arizona State University found that "students from schools without uniforms reported higher self-perception scores than students from schools with uniform policies." Some students also find uniforms less comfortable than their regular clothes, which may not be conducive to learning.
Read More

Did You Know?

1. The first school district in the United States to require all K-8 students to wear uniforms was Long Beach, CA, in Jan. 1994.

2. Americans spend around $1 billion per year on school uniforms.

3. Students at Eton, one of England's most prestigious schools, were required to wear black top hats and tails on and off campus until 1972.

4. US schools with a minority student population of 50% or more are four times as likely to require uniforms than schools with a minority population of 20-49%, and 24 times more likely than schools with minority populations of 5%-19%.

5. A government agency in Sweden declared that mandatory school uniforms were a human rights violation, stating that students should decide their dress and appearance as "a matter of the individual's freedom and integrity."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
School Uniforms Pros and Cons - 13 Arguments For and Against

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Proponents say uniforms may increase student safety. Opponents say uniforms restrict expression. Explore both sides of the debate.

# data[].attributes.headline
Debate Wise - School Uniform Should be Mandatory. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Debate Wise - School Uniform Should be Mandatory. 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
School uniforms; to wear or not to wear. That is the question.

All the Yes points:

1. School Uniforms - Yes

2. It encourages discipline

3. It contributes to the sense of school's unity

4. Creates a sense of equality

5. Uniform has practical benefits when students are outside the school building.

6. Uniform prepares students for life after education, when most will be expected to dress smartly.

All the No points:

1. Inappropriate

2. Too much money

3. We all have a right to individuality, to make personal choices and to express our personality.

4. There is no good evidence that links school uniform to improved results.

5. Personality and Expressing yourself

6. School Uniforms Not Mandatory

7. Only a few inner-city schools have had problems with children wearing "gang colours".

8. Uniform is often not practical or pleasant to wear.

9. There is no proper research that shows that introducing uniform cuts crime in schools.

10. Forcing children to wear uniform can ignore their religious and cultural needs.

11. Very few countries feel the need to put most of their children in school uniforms.

12. Schools waste a lot of time trying to enforce uniform rules.

13. Rather than introduce school uniform, why not have a dress code instead?

14. Wearing a school uniform is not good preparation for working.

School Uniforms - Yes

From Grade school through HS, uniforms were the norm.
Everyone in school was equal. Rich, Poor, Handicap, etc. - everyone is equal.

Today, a pair of $300 nike's, cellphone and a Chrysler 300 with chrome rims seperate your from the pack.

Why?

What does that teach?

What did the child learn?

As a parent, are you succeeding by enabling?

It encourages discipline

Gives more leeway to break rules. A uniform shirt not tucked for example can lead to detention, as can nail polish or grown nails or wearing a hat or getting ink on a tie etc etc.
The school staff is then, more focused on correcting/controlling the way students dress than actually teaching. Those with cleaner, well-ironed and at times more visibly expensive( richer students wear designer or custom-made/made-to-fit blouses/pants/skirts etc, not to mention better socks/stockings, shoes, shoe polish etc) uniforms are automated to become teacher favorites and therefore get more attention in class and are thought of as bright only because they are neat and privileged.

It contributes to the sense of school's unity

Creates a sense of equality

There are differences on how many uniforms a student has or how well s/he wears it. the lengths of skirts, sleeves & tops can be customized, as can the fit . Not all uniform shops/stores sell the same quality uniforms. Any white blouse can replace the uniform shirt and certain white blouses are more fashionable than others.

The same can be said about accessories such as ties, hair bands, scrunchies, broaches, clips,make-up,hair-gel,hairspray,hair-dye,other hair-products etc. The class divide exists despite uniforms and is visible wearing a uniform, doesn't mean everyone's dressed the same.

Uniforms are also all about going to a preppy public-U.K/private-the-rest-the-world school vs an inferior school.

Uniforms also create class divides between schools; thus.

Uniform has practical benefits when students are outside the school building.

Uniform prepares students for life after education, when most will be expected to dress smartly.

Expenses

Inappropriate

Too much money

We all have a right to individuality, to make personal choices and to express our personality.

There is no good evidence that links school uniform to improved results.

Personality and Expressing yourself

In my opinion I think that if students wear uniforms it won't show my personality and it won't express who I am. Some students especially girls can't wear uniforms because skirts are uncomfortable for them or maybe just because there not allowed to wear skirts in their religion. Uniforms are really expensive too and you might only get 3 sets which you have to put in the laundry almost everyday.

I really like wearing different clothes most of the times because of the latest styles or maybe just because I love different style of clothing.

But, it is good wearing uniforms because it shows discipline of the school and if there is a fire drill or lockdown then you can easily recognize a student and say that he/she is not an intruder.

But I personally don't like wearing uniforms.

We do not go to school to express our personality. Schools are instituitions of learning, and are not social clubs. Express yourself on your own time, not during time that should be spent studying. In that regard, I contend that the wearing of casual clothing can actually be a distraction from ones studies- i would spend more time worrying if i'm wearing the right ('cool') clothing than worrying about my my education.

I did not enjoy wearing uniforms when i was in school, but on the odd day we were allowed to wear casual clothes, we regarded it as a treat.

But just because i did not enjoy wearing uniforms does not mean I think they should not be mandatory.

School Uniforms Not Mandatory

In my opinion school uniforms should not be mandatory. Students should have the will to express themselves through there clothing. Some girls don't like to wear skirts or can't wear skirts. Boys like to play. they wear t - shirts and shorts so they can move around. Not every boy likes to be dressed up. Then theres also the money problem. Uniforms aren't the cheapest clothing and some familys can barely buy normal clothing. Wearing a uniform does not make kids smarter or beahve better what so ever so there really is no point in wearing uniforms.

A Website With Cons:
http://kids.lovetoknow.com/wiki/Pros_and_Cons_of_School_Uniforms

Who said that girls school uniforms HAD to be skirts? Just because the Uniform is Formal, doesn't mean it has to be skirts. Boys and girls can wear the dress pants and shirts just that the girls can be specially fitted for girls and girls styles. Also there are study's that say that girls and boys do better in schools while they are in uniforms. The following was taken off of E HOW:

A case study from 1999 conducted in Long Beach, California showed that instituting a uniform policy greatly reduced violence and other issues in the school. Crimes, suspensions and sex offenses were all reduced by at least 90 percent and vandalism dropped by almost 70 percent.
The following is from president Bill Clinton:

"This morning I want to talk with you about what we can do to break hold of gangs and violence in our schools and what we can do to create an atmosphere in our schools that promotes discipline and order and learning ... I believe we should give strong support to school districts that decide to require young students to wear school uniforms. We've all seen the tragic headlines screaming of the death of a teenager who was killed for a pair of sneakers or jewelry or a designer jacket. In Detroit, a 15-year old boy was shot for his $86 basketball shoes. In Fort Lauderdale, a 15-year old student was robbed of his jewelry. Just this past December in Oxon Hill, Maryland, a 17-year old honor student was killed at a bus stop, caught in the cross fire during the robbery of another students designer jacket" (Clinton, "Transcript," 1-2).

The only reason I would be against School uniforms would be the inability for the student to express him/her self. The other point would be that the dress code might go against a person's religion.

Only a few inner-city schools have had problems with children wearing "gang colours".

Uniform is often not practical or pleasant to wear.

There is no proper research that shows that introducing uniform cuts crime in schools.

Forcing children to wear uniform can ignore their religious and cultural needs.

Very few countries feel the need to put most of their children in school uniforms.

Schools waste a lot of time trying to enforce uniform rules.

Rather than introduce school uniform, why not have a dress code instead?

Wearing a school uniform is not good preparation for working.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
School Uniforms Should Be Mandatory - DebateWise

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Should school uniforms be mandatory? There are many valid points supporting and many refuting this practice. Learn more and decide yourself!

# data[].attributes.headline
Helpful Professor - 35 Pros and Cons of School Uniforms

# data[].attributes.subject
Helpful Professor - 35 Pros and Cons of School Uniforms

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
School uniforms in public schools are considered essential for teaching children to obey rules and develop a sense of community in many countries, including the UK and Australia. But public schools in other countries like the USA and Canada rarely enforce mandatory school uniforms.

It is, however, far more common for private schools to enforce school uniforms no matter the country in question.

This article takes a deep dive into the pros and cons of school uniforms, showing that there are positive arguments on both sides of this debate.

Overview - 10 Top Pros and Cons of School Uniforms

Pros of School Uniforms

Cons of School Uniforms

1. Pro - Uniforms Build School Spirit

1. Con - Upfront Uniform Costs

2. Pro - Less Bullying in Schools

2. Con - Lack of Freedom of Expression

3. Pro - Saving Time in Mornings

3. Con - Uniforms Teach Gender Norms

4. Pro - Improves School Safety

4. Con - Children Don't get to Exercise Free Choice

5. Pro - Clear 'Appropriate Dress' Rules

5. Con - Uniforms can Violate Religious Expression

6. Pro - Uniforms Improve a School's Reputation

6. Con - Uniforms Highlight Social-Class Differences Between Schools

7. Pro - Uniforms can Increase Student Focus

7. Con - There's Less Visible Diversity

8. Pro - Protection of a School's Religious Identity

8. Con - It's Another Thing for Teachers to Police

9. Pro - School Truancy can be more Easily Identified

9. Con - Parents need to Manage Laundry Routines around School Days

10. Pro - Ensures Appropriate Sporting Outfits

10. Con - Difficulty in Finding the Uniform

Get a Pdf of this article for class

Pros of School Uniforms

1. Affordability

Many schools intentionally choose uniforms that are very basic, such as "white polo shirt and grey shorts", so that parents do not have to pay exorbitant amounts of money on the uniforms. Many low-cost clothing stores also make the effort to produce and distribute these typical uniform-conformant clothes at low cost during back-to-school sales.

A typical 5 pack of basic white polo shirts that students can wear to school as a uniform is likely to be significantly cheaper than an outfit a child would wear otherwise.

Furthermore, while children in schools without uniforms would feel pressure to change up their outfits regularly (adding to costs), the forced repetition of wearing
Related Article: 17 Surprising School Uniform Statistics, Facts & Data
2. Hand-me-Down Options

It is regular practice at schools with school uniforms for parents to offer uniforms for free as hand-me-down outfits once their children grow out of the uniform. This has the effect of helping poorer families to access uniforms for their children without cost.

There tends to be an over-supply of uniforms - both new and second-hand - because of the sheer number of children growing out of their uniform every month. As a result, parents in desperate need of uniforms are often able to source uniforms for free.

Many schools have a hand-me-down bin in their front office, allowing parents to drop-off pre-loved uniforms, and other parents to arrive and request free shirts and pants discretely.

3. Visible Poverty is Reduced

If all children are dressed the same, the poorer children whose parents cannot afford brand-name clothing are not as visibly singled-out. They will be wearing the same clothes as the wealthier children.

This can have the effect of reducing chances of bullying based on a child's family's levels of wealth. But it also enables children who are poor to feel as if they are no different from others. It helps to start all children off on a level playing field, and makes them feel more secure that they're just another student - neither better or worse than other students who are of higher or lower wealth.

4. Students may Focus and Listen Better

In this study by Chris Baumann and Hana Krskova, published in the International Journal of Educational Management, it was found that children wearing school uniforms tend to listen more intently and for longer periods of time than children without uniforms.

As a result, they found that teachers also spent less time disciplining students and waiting for students to give their attention to the teachers. This leads to more engaged working time in the classroom.

One potential reason behind this finding is that the conformity in dress reduces distractions for students.

However, there are plenty of other studies that have found no significant difference in academic achievement by parents, so in my opinion the jury is still out on whether this is true. More research is required.

5. Ensures Appropriate Sporting Outfits

Even schools that do not have mandatory school uniforms often have sports uniforms for physical education lessons. This is for several reasons, including both conformity and practicality.

Firstly, there are unique pros and cons of sports uniforms that differ from those of school uniforms. Namely, teams in sports need to have a sense of camaraderie and unity that the uniform can help achieve. Wearing the same colors can instil team spirit that helps with the team's performance.

Secondly, a team uniform is useful in sports for helping to quickly identify team members to pass the ball to or seek support in the fast pace of a game.

Thirdly, a sports uniform is specifically designed and loosely fitted so students are comfortable while engaging in physical activity, which may include physical contortions, stretching, sprinting, and other actions not usually undertaken outside of the sporting arena.

6. Increases Physical Activity During Physical Education

A study by Nathan et al. in the International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity found that children who wear dedicated sporting uniforms during sports lessons tend to do more physical activity than children who do not.

This was a sizeable study - with 42 schools and over 3000 children studied - making these findings some of the more reliable results within the school uniforms literature.

Logically, this also checks out.

Firstly, if all children are wearing a pre-approved sporting outfit that is fit for purpose and can be comfortable during physical activity, they will have less clothing distractions and have one less potential barrier preventing them from participation in lessons.

Secondly, another logical rationale for this is that the students know they can change out of the uniform after the lesson (into either their regular uniform or non-uniform clothing), giving them the sense that they can sweat and get the uniforms dirty without suffering negative consequences for the remainder of the day.

Thirdly, it could be argued that the act of putting on the sporting uniform can help students psychologically prepare for the physical activity. The uniform is a psychological signal to the students that it's time for them to do exercise.

7. Less Bullying

School uniforms could remove one more thing that children can be bullied over. If all children are dressed the same, then children will not bully one another for their fashion choices.

And high school students seem to agree that bullying will be decreased if mandatory uniform policies are introduced.

However, empirical evidence does not always support this widely-held belief. This study, for example, found no difference in disciplinary issues before and after a school uniform was introduced at one particular school.

It is possible that bullying will happen regardless of uniforms, and that making all children wear uniforms does nothing to actually teach kindness. A bully will be a bully - targeting things other than dress codes if need be - unless the bully is actively taught not to do so.

8. Confidence and Self-Esteem

A study by Sanchez et al. interviewed 604 middle school students found that the students reported increased confidence and self-esteem while wearing uniforms. The primary hypothesis for this growth in confidence is that students didn't feel so self-aware about the way they dressed.

However, it's possible that some students may also develop increased confidence by expressing themselves through their uniforms. By trying out new clothes, children learn to develop a unique identity and get more practice dressing in ways that make them feel good about themselves.

9. Improves the School's Image in the Community

A school with a cleaner uniform where students appear well-dressed may have a better image in the community than a school without a uniform, or even with an outdated or simple uniform.

And a study by the National Association of Elementary Schools Principals (NAESP) shows that this is a key concern for school principals. 83% of principals in the study reported that they believed the uniforms improved their school's image in the community.

Here, the main concern of the school principals is the message the uniform sends and not and actual tangible effect. Given there are several studies highlighting that there is no academic benefit of a uniform, this seems like a vanity metric.

Nevertheless, the symbolism of having well-dressed students can have the effects of attracting new parents to the school and having parents and the community value and respect the school and its students more.

10. School Spirit

School spirit includes pride and sense of belonging within a school. Wearing a uniform may help with this. If all the students are wearing the same clothing, there's a sense that they're "a team" and "working together" rather than being individualistic.

The NAESP study named above also looked at principals' perceptions of whether uniforms improve school spirit. 77% of school principals in schools with uniforms believed that uniforms did help with school spirit.

11. Saving Time in Mornings

Many parents also like schools that have uniforms. It's simply easier to get ready in the morning if children know exactly what to wear. There is no back-and-forth choosing and changing outfits or arguments between parents and children about what is acceptable to wear.

And in fact, the NAESP study found that 92% of parents believe it's easier to get their kids ready in the morning if they have a school uniform. Similarly, 93% of parents believe that a uniform policy saves time in mornings.

Significantly, the parents cited less wardrobe battles as the key reason time is saved.

12. Safety and Identifiability on School Grounds

If all students are wearing school uniforms, it's easier to identify people on the school grounds who do not belong there. Those people would not be wearing uniforms.

This is why (as this study shows) parents and teachers tend to perceive uniforms as positively impacting school safety, while students don't believe uniforms make them more safe.

Of course, there is one big hole in this argument.

It would only make it easier to identify children or teenagers who do not belong. Parents who do not belong could easily be confused for a teacher seeing as most schools don't have uniform policies for teachers.

And of course, one big threat to school safety is adults coming onto the grounds impersonating teachers.

Which begs the question: why do children have to wear uniforms and teachers don't? If the argument is children on school grounds need to be identifiable by their uniforms, then shouldn't teachers also have to wear uniforms so they're identifiable? It seems like adult hypocrisy to me.

13. Age and Gender Identification

Uniforms may also be useful to schools for age identification of children. This would require different year levels to have different uniforms. For example, the infants could wear one color while the older children can wear another.

This would allow schools to police movement through the school. If a younger child is in a part of the school reserved for the older children, they could be easily identified and sent to their dedicated space (which may also help with safety).

This identification could also work across gender lines, where different genders can wear different uniforms. For example, if there are two private schools side-by-side where one is all-girls and one is all-boys, then this could work well to ensure the two genders remain separated, as per the private schools' policies and ethos.

14. Reduction of Prejudice

It could be argued that, if all students dress the same, then there is less chance of prejudice by students and teachers.

For example, if a child wears a particular religious dress that a teacher dislikes, the teacher may treat them differently. But if all children dress the same, then the teacher is less likely to be prejudiced toward that child.

However, there is an obvious flaw in this argument. It doesn't reduce prejudice because it is potentially prejudicial to tell some children they're not allowed to dress in ways that accord with their culture or religion.

15. Identification during Excursions

School excursions to busy places can be stressful for teachers. The teacher needs to keep an eye on all the students in the class while there are also many other members of the public in the same space.

Uniforms are very useful in these situations. The teacher can count-off all the people in uniform to easily ensure all the students are there and ready for their next instructions.

16. Learning to 'Dress Appropriately'

All cultures have rules around acceptable forms of dress. Usually, these have to do with not wearing sexually provocative clothing and not wearing clothing with insulting or provocative signs on them.

A uniform gives students a set of guidelines about what is considered acceptable and unacceptable to wear.

And it seems parents and school administrators often cite this as a key reason for mandatory school uniforms, particularly in religious schools.

However, this also raises concerns about exclusionary dress. Different people have different ideas around what is and is not appropriate. If you're attending a school that has more conservative values than your family, you may feel particularly constrained by an arbitrary dress code that doesn't conform with your own values.

17. Protects and Extends Childhood

Most people believe that sexuality and sexualization should not be associated with childhood. By enforcing a school uniform, children are discouraged from wearing sexually evocative clothing that most of society would consider inappropriate at a young age.

Thus, by enforcing a uniform, children feel less pressure to focus on their outfits, 'looking good' for the opposite (or same!) sex, or thinking about sexually provocative clothing.

18. Truancy can be Identified

I grew up in a school where we all wore uniforms. Police would often approach students walking around town in uniform during the school day. They would ask if we were supposed to be at school (and sometimes even call the school).

If students were found to be truanting, the police would drive them back to school.

Thus, uniforms can also be a useful way for the whole community to oversee where children of school age should be at all times.

Of course, children can simply get around this by bringing a change of clothes, which would in-turn make it easier for them to truant if the police are looking for people in school uniform!

19. They Teach Gender Norms

Many conservative parents want their children to grow up conforming to society's gender norms. Boys are raised to be leaders and girls are raised to be ladies.

And while in today's age, gender norms are increasingly considered to be bad for society and children, some parents still desire this for their children.

So, for those parents, uniforms could be a positive. Girls are taught to wear skirts and dresses, while boys are taught to wear shorts. Even these uniform requirements send a message - it's harder to do rough and tumble activities in a skirt than shorts!

By raising children from a young age to wear gender-conforming outfits, the schools are showing the children how to 'act their gender'.

I personally consider this to be a negative, but many parents see it as a positive, so I've placed it here for them!

20. Protection of a School's Religious, Cultural, or Social-Class Identity

Public schools usually do not have religious, cultural or social-class identities that diverge from the mainstream.

However, many private schools have particular affiliations, such as:

Affiliation with a religion.

A desire to appear upper-class.

Affiliation with a particular cultural group (such as international schools).

For these schools, uniforms can act as signals about the school's values. An upper-class school might enforce the wearing of blazers with school crests on them.

And some religious schools may have rules about wearing traditional or conservative clothing.

This can help create a unified sense of the school's identity.

21. Prevention of Gang-Related Color Schemes

In areas where gangs are active, school uniforms can help ensure gang-related colors are not worn on school grounds. This can help make schools gang-free zones and help prevent student recruitment into gangs.

Without the visible signs of gangs at school, the gangs' influence and perceived power is reduced. It can also help minimize chances of rival gang groups from targeting one another on school grounds based on the clothing the students are wearing.

Furthermore, students who have no affiliation to gangs could be made to feel safer if the visibility of gangs is reduced. The intimidating insignia of gangs would not be visible to them at school each day. Read more about the relationship between gangs and school uniforms here.

22. Uniforms make Plain Clothes Dress Days Fun!

Let's finish up with a fun one. In Australia we used to have a thing called "mufti day". We would have this day about twice a year. And it was a day where you could wear whatever you want!

In the lead-up to mufti day, we would all be on our best behavior so it would go ahead. The day was, after all, a reward for good behavior.

On mufti day, everyone would be very excited. We would plan out and wear our favorite outfits.

This gave the teachers extra leverage to get the students to behave. And it gave the students something fun to look forward to!

Cons of School Uniforms

23. There is no Impact on Grades

Several studies have found no changes in academic achievement between groups of students who wear uniforms and those who do not. If there is no clear academic benefit of a uniform, it can be argued that the uniforms are pointless.

It seems that the true benefit of wearing a uniform is in the hidden curriculum - that is, in teaching things at school that are not in the academic curriculum. That includes things like discipline and conformity. Whether it's the role of schools to teach these things, however, is open for debate. Should schools just focus on grades and not on reinforcing conformity and discipline?

24. Lack of Freedom of Expression

There are some who question the legality and constitutionality of enforcing school uniforms in public schools in the United States. The First Amendment protects freedom of speech, which may also protect free dress.

However, to date, the Supreme Court has not made any comment on the constitutionality of uniforms. In 1969, it got close, but upholding students' rights to wear black armbands to protest the Vietnam war.

Overall, the key argument here is that a dress code restricts creative expression. If we want our education system to build-up creative, critical, and free-thinking people, a uniform seems inappropriate.

The uniform literally makes people uniform, in the sense that 'uniform' means 'the same'.

Do we really want schools to be making us all the same? Isn't that exactly the problem with the education system today?

25. Visible Diversity can be a Good Thing

People who argue for school uniforms say that it prevents bullying. It stops children from teasing each other because of what they wear.

But if we want a multi-cultural world, isn't school the perfect place to start talking about our diversity and how it's a good thing?

But making all children wear uniforms, we're hiding ("sweeping under the rug") diversity. We're preventing conversations about it and celebration of it.

Thus, uniforms are arguably outdated in a world where diversity should be something that is visible, celebrated, and discussed - especially in schools.

26. Lack of Choice of Dress Codes

Another key problem with school uniforms is that children often don't get a chance to have a say about what the dress code should be. Many uniform dress codes are decades old, and the children currently wearing the uniforms just wear what they're told to wear.

But, you would think that a fair and democratic school would let the children wearing the uniform to choose what it looks like.

Unfortunately, it is usually the teachers, administrators, and parents who make these decisions. Even worse, sometimes it's an outside company that is hired to select the uniform. Children are rarely consulted.
Related: 31 School Dress Code Examples
What does that say about what sort of people we're raising in our schools? Do we want to raise compliant sheep, or creative people who are active participants in community decision-making, especially when it comes to decisions that directly affect them?

27. Uniforms can be Ugly

This may seem like a very superficial point, but it's also serious. We're forcing children to wear clothing that the children themselves might consider to be ugly. It seems a little unfair to tell people to wear something that they consider to be unattractive.

You look around at some schools and they have color schemes that include browns, mustards, and greys, that most people wouldn't choose to wear if they had the choice!

Of course, this isn't the most serious of points. But, for the children, it may be a very serious one indeed. They have to deal with it every day!

28. Violation of Religious Expression

This is one of the most serious problems with school uniforms. There are religions that have very strict dress code rules. These include having to wear certain colors, hair coverings, and even ceremonial knives (for some Sikhs).

By enforcing a strict uniform policy, you may be violating religious liberty.

When I was in school, we had one girl at the school who was a Muslim and who wore a Hijab. Her parents had to negotiate with the school principal about what uniform she could wear, seeing as the school didn't have approved hijabs in the uniform code.

At the end of the day, her mother made her a hijab that was in the school colors, and everyone was happy. But, it still required some negotiation because of differences between religious requirements and school uniform policy.

29. Uniforms Require Parental Cooperation

Uniforms can cause conflicts between the school and the parents. I remember one girl I went to school with who would sometimes come to school out of uniform. She would get into trouble and not be allowed to play at lunch.

The problem was that it wasn't her fault. Her parents often wouldn't wash her uniform for her, meaning she didn't have a choice but to wear a non-uniform outfit.

Here, my classmate was getting into trouble even though it wasn't her fault - it was her parents!

We can see that parents need to cooperate and consent to the uniform policy. They have to make sure their child wears the uniform, and if enough parents don't participate, the mandatory uniform policy falls apart.

30. Gender Expression Issues

In today's day and age, we're learning that enforcing gender norms in schools could be a violation of the gender expression of children. Some girls don't want to wear dresses. And sometimes this isn't even an issue of gender selection. It's simply the fact that some girls don't want to wear dresses!

Here, a uniform could be considered a violation of a child's gender expression. Conservative old people are telling kids what to wear, even though perhaps their values are outdated for today's world!

In fact, this became a big issue in a state in Australia where it was found many private schools forced girls to wear dresses. The state government had to intervene, with a government commissioner saying the schools were "stuck in a different age".

31. Erases Cultural Differences

While school uniforms are seen as a positive for helping to erase visible social-class differences in schools (rich vs poor), they also have the negative effect over erasing cultural differences.

Children of all different races, cultures, and ethnicities attend modern schools. But, at least in Western schools, they must all adhere to a western dress code that doesn't allow for cultural expression.

Forcing children to wear the clothes of a culture that is not their own is most visible (and, perhaps, offensive) when it comes to religious objections. However, even without the religious element, forcing children to wear uniforms can be seen as a form of cultural assimilation. It denies people their chance to practice their culture in the public sphere.

32. Difficulty in Finding the Uniform

When a school decides to enforce a uniform policy, it needs to take into account how easy it would be for parents to find the uniform.

Many public schools with uniform policies intentionally make this easy. They will be okay with a plain white or blue polo shirt.

But more prestigious schools will often develop uniforms that are very specific - with complex logos or designs on them. These uniforms often need to be bought straight from the school uniform shop or a small number of pre-approved nearby stores.

At the start of the school year, it can be find to get your hands on a uniform. All the parents are trying to get them at the same time!

This can also lead to price gouging where shops raise the price because they know demand is higher than supply.

33. They Promote Social-Class Identities

If you look at different schools' uniform policies, you quickly see that some schools have very posh policies while other public schools that serve working-class communities have simple bland polo shirts.

In fact, some elite private schools require 'white collared' dress shirts, while public schools will require 'blue collared' shirts you'd more commonly see being worn by a construction worker.

These differences in dress codes from so early on reveal something unfair about the school system: wealthy people have the choice to go to elite schools where they're raised for high-powered, high-paid white collar jobs (lawyers, etc.). Many public schools, as seen by the sorts of uniforms provided, are more humble and appear to be raising people in comfortable clothes that you'd expect to be worn for manual labor jobs.

In other words, uniforms don't just train people to embrace gender norms. It also trains people to embrace social-class based identities.

34. It's Another Thing for Teachers to Police

Mandatory school uniforms are just one more thing for teachers to have to worry about. In a world where teachers are over-worked and under-paid, it might be better for teachers to simply not have to worry about what their students wear.

Furthermore, for teachers who are on a power trip, it gives the teachers an excuse to get children into trouble. A small and minor problem, such as having an untucked t-shirt, could lead a child to get into trouble.

Here, rather than the school focusing on education, it may focus on nit-picking and bullying of students (as a teacher, I have a real issue with how often I see teachers bullying students based on things irrelevant to their education).

35. Upfront Costs

While it is arguable that school uniforms can be a more affordable choice than non-uniform outfits for children, some still argue that mandating school uniforms adds a cost burden for parents. Parents need to buy everyday clothing for their children regardless of whether they're at school. Children need something to wear on weekends and during school holidays, after all!

So, at the start of the school year, often parents do need to fork out money they hadn't planned to, and all at once.

For example, this report from the London School of Economics, points to one case study where a parent in England had to pay £310 for her children's uniforms at the start of the school year. The woman was under particular financial strain as she was living on subsistence from the government, which was £556 a month. In this instance, uniforms took up more than half the family's income for the month.

Summary Image

Conclusion

Clearly, there are many pros and cons of school uniforms. But, one thing I did realize when researching for this article was that there are a lot of differing opinions within the research. Some research papers (such as the one by NAESP that I cited several times) appear very biased toward school uniforms. And some academic studies found conflicting information, particularly around whether uniforms increased grades.

In other words, it seems like a lot of these arguments are philosophical and hypothetical. People can land on either side of the mandatory school uniforms debate depending on their own values, opinions, and backgrounds.

Another thing I found really interesting personally was that my friends who didn't wear uniforms as kids looked at uniforms negatively - they saw them as tools for suppression of creative expression and even referred to them as looking a little communist! By contrast, my friends who wore uniforms as kids were much more positive toward them.

For me, this shows just how much our backgrounds and experiences have conditioned us to sit on one side of the debate or the other. So, I'd encourage you to genuinely think about the other perspective and see if you can come to the debate with as neutral and open a mindset as possible (if that's possible at all!).

Scholarly Sources and Studies Cited

Baumann, C. & Krskova, H. (2016). School discipline, school uniforms and academic performance. International Journal of Educational Management, 30(6), pp. 1003-1029. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-09-2015-0118

Firmin, M., Smith, S. & Perry, L. (2006). School Uniforms: A Qualitative Analysis of Aims and Accomplishments at Two Christian Schools, Journal of Research on Christian Education, 15(2), 143-168. https://doi.org/10.1080/10656210609485000

Gregory, S. L. (2013). Perceptions of High School Students of the Impact of a School Uniform Policy. PhD Dissertation. University of Arkansas. https://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/592

Han, S. (2010). A mandatory uniform policy in urban schools: Findings from the school survey on crime and safety: 2003-04. International Journal of Education Policy and Leadership, 5(8). https://doi.org/10.22230/ijepl.2010v5n8a253

Mahling, W. (1996). Scondhand Codes: An Analysis of the Constitutionality of Dress Code in the Public Schools. Minnesota Law Review, 80(1): 715. https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/mlr/2492

Morris, E. (2005). 'Tuck in That Shirt!' Race, Class, Gender, and Discipline in an Urban School. Sociological Perspectives. 48(1): 25-48. https://doi.org/10.1525%2Fsop.2005.48.1.25

Nathan, N., McCarthy, N., Hope, K. et al. (2021). The impact of school uniforms on primary school student's physical activity at school: outcomes of a cluster randomized controlled trial. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 18(17). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-021-01084-0

National Association of Elementary School Principals. (2013). The Right Fit: Principals on School Uniforms. Communicator, 36(12). https://www.naesp.org/resource/the-right-fit-principals-on-school-uniforms/

Sanchez, J. E., Yoxsimer, A., & Hill, G. C. (2012). Uniforms in the Middle School: Student Opinions, Discipline Data, and School Police Data. Journal of School Violence, 11(4), 345-356. https://doi.org/10.1080/15388220.2012.706873
Banner Photo by Chen Feng on Unsplash
Velder, J. (2012). An Analysis of the Implementation and Impact of School Uniforms on Graduation and Discipline Rates in a Unified School. PhD Dissertation. Northwest Missouri State University). https://www.nwmissouri.edu/library/ResearchPapers/2012/Velder,%20Jessica.pdf

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
35 Pros and Cons of School Uniforms (2023) - Debate Points

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Pros and cons of school uniforms include the fact school uniforms can build school spirit and discourage bullying, while also restricting free expression.

# data[].attributes.headline
Seattle Pi- Should Schools Make it Mandatory that Students Wear Uniforms?

# data[].attributes.subject
Seattle Pi- Should Schools Make it Mandatory that Students Wear Uniforms?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Should Schools Make it Mandatory That Students Wear School Uniforms?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Should Schools Make it Mandatory That Students Wear School Uniforms?. Mandated school uniforms are common in some districts, while other campuses may just have loose guidelines, or a specific dress code for students to follow. Despite the debate, there are advantages and disadvantages to requiring s…

# data[].attributes.headline
Asamblea Nacional Discussion about Uniforms

# data[].attributes.subject
Asamblea Nacional Discussion about Uniforms

# data[].attributes.body
Start at 1:08 minutes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Mayin de acuerdo con uso de uniformes escolares En inicio de clases presenciales

# data[].attributes.headline
ABC News - Should Girls, Boys be in Separate Classes?

# data[].attributes.subject
ABC News - Should Girls, Boys be in Separate Classes?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
May 13, 2004 -- The 30-year-old federal law prohibiting sex discrimination in public schools may soon be altered, paving the way for separate classrooms for boys and girls.

The law, known as Title IX, may soon be altered because the U.S. Department of Education wants to give parents the option of enrolling their children in same-sex public school classes. Same-sex classes have long been available in private schools, but there are currently only 25 same-sex public high schools in the country.

Supporters of same-sex education say having boys and girls in separate classrooms allows them to focus less on each other and more on their schoolwork.

"You don't look around and go, 'Wow, there's no boys here,' " says Stefanie Kuonon, a senior at Philadelphia High School for Girls, one of the few single-sex public schools. "But you will notice there's not as much clowning around. You can talk about serious issues and there's not like laughing or stuff in the background because no one's embarrassed."

The top student in her class, Kuonon has a scholarship to the University of Pennsylvania. She says the school's supportive atmosphere helped her succeed - and it seems to have helped her classmates too: 95 percent of the school's seniors go on to college.

Principal Geraldine Myles roams the halls of "Girls' High" high-fiving her students and showering them with praise. She is an African American who grew up in the era of Brown vs. the Board of Education, which called for an end to racial segregation in public schools. But she has seen the benefits of separating girls from boys in classes. Without the presence of boys, Myles says, the girls focus more on academics and less on the latest fashion trends.

"I think the environment that we have here is one that maximizes learning and opportunity to develop for young women. And we do it well."

Clones of Girls' High?

Girls' high was founded long before title IX outlawed most same-sex classes over concern programs for just one sex discriminate against the other. Now with the proposed changes to the law, several districts across the country are poised to put in place programs similar to the ones at girls' high.

Same-sex education has influential advocates. Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., who went to a women's college, and Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, joined together to propose the changes to Title IX. But civil rights groups and some women's groups fear tinkering with Title IX is to take a step backwards.

"I'm worried that in the name of flexibility what we will go back to is separate and unequal - what we go back to is an OK sign that no girls can apply," says Marcia Greenberger, co-president of the National Women's Law Center

Greenberger knows the value of same-sex education - she graduated from Girls' High herself - but she fears classes created just for boys or girls could be based on old stereotypes.

"We teach boys math and science and engineering and teach the girls the kinds of things girls have got to learn," she warns.

Students at girls' high insist they thrive in an all-girls environment. Along with a rigorous academic schedule that includes physics and foreign languages, they also are exposed to modern dance and art appreciation.

"It sets standards for me higher. Because people know I go to Girls' High, they say, 'that means she can handle this' and nobody is going to lower their expectations of me," says senior Shane Fletcher.

If the changes to title IX take effect this summer, it is possible same-sex classes or schools could begin in the fall. But opponents vow to challenge any changes in court.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Should Girls, Boys Be In Separate Classes?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
May 13, 2004 -- The 30-year-old federal law prohibiting sex discrimination in public schools may soon be altered, paving the way for separate classrooms for boys and girls. The law, known as Title IX, may soon be altered because the U.S. Department of Education wants to give parents the option of enrolling their children in same-sex public school classes.

# data[].attributes.headline
Burnsville Family Physicians - American Academy of Pediatrics

# data[].attributes.subject
Burnsville Family Physicians - American Academy of Pediatrics

# data[].attributes.headline
Carli Lloyd's football kick soared, but will the NFL ever hire women?

# data[].attributes.subject
Carli Lloyd's football kick soared, but will the NFL ever hire women?

# data[].attributes.headline
New York Times - Caroline Crosson Gilpin

# data[].attributes.subject
New York Times - Caroline Crosson Gilpin

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Should Girls and Boys Sports Teams Compete in the Same League? (Published 2017)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Does age make a difference when boys and girls compete against each other in sports?

# data[].attributes.headline
AEM Lleida Infantil Femeni Campiones - Video by Federación Catalana de Futbol

# data[].attributes.subject
AEM Lleida Infantil Femeni Campiones - Video by Federación Catalana de Futbol

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Lately, the topic of girls playing with boys in sports has been at the forefront, especially since Mo'ne Davis, the incredible female Little League World Series pitcher, shocked people back in 2014 when she pitched a shutout game. Stories like Mo'ne's are becoming more common: Colorado female linebacker Haley Abeyta attending a college combine, 16-year-old Melissa Mayeaux being the first girl listed on the MLB International Registration, and Brooke Leibsch starting as quarterback for her Kansas City high school team. It's even the subject of FOX's new show Pitch, which is about a female major league pitcher.

But is it safe? Many coaches and school athletic programs still do not support girls with boys in athletic sports; and it should stay that way.

The first reason would be that boys play more competitively, meaning the game will be more physical. And that can mean injuries. Janelle Greer of the Express Times states, "I firmly believe that males and females should not be competing on the same athletic teams. Plain and simple, females are the weaker vessels of the two sexes. It's not degrading. It's not an insult. It's a fact of life."

Football could be especially dangerous. Granted, all players receive pads and a helmet, but what are those going to do for a 110-pound girl when a 250-pound boy is charging at her? Nothing.

In a sport like basketball, there are no pads, so contact do more damage. Although basketball is not classified as a contact sport, contact still happens, especially with the level of competition and aggression.

Another reason against co-ed sports would be that boys'/men's bodies are physically at an advantage. "Men have greater cardiovascular reserve, with larger hearts, greater lung volume per body mass, a higher red blood cell count, and higher hemoglobin. They also have higher circulating clotting factors, which leads to faster healing of wounds," writes Neel Burton M.D., a writer for Psychology Today. And according to Jeff Fenske, "In terms of anaerobic power, men have over 45% higher vertical leap and over 25% faster sprint times." This shows that when it comes to physical sports, men have advantages in every category.

Another argument against girls playing sports with boys is that if a boy were going against a girl in sports, the boy might feel awkward or protective and not play as aggressively, giving the girl an advantage. "Boys might fear being too aggressive with girls on the playing field," states Barbie Carpenter, writer for Livestrong.com. Current culture includes a level of chivalry in which boys are taught not to hit girls. Girls playing contact sports makes this situation complicated.

Some people disagree and believe girls should be able to play male-dominated sports. They feel that the success stories previously mentioned show that certain girls have what it takes to compete. Also, the US actually has a law giving girls equal rights in sports. Meet Title IX. Title IX states, "No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance." This law was passed in 1972, and yet forty years later, there is still debate over what some schools think Title IX means. Many interpret the law to mean that girls should not necessarily play sports with boys, but should have sports teams of their own. For example, during boys basketball season, girls basketball is offered; the same goes for swimming and track. And during boys' football season, girls' volleyball is offered as an option for the fall.

Some people think that girls should be able to play sports with boys, and others think that girls shouldn't, but when weighing whether girls should or shouldn't play with boys, there are many factors involved: most importantly, safety and fairness.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why Girls Should not be Allowed to Play Sports with Boys

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Lately, the topic of girls playing with boys in sports has been at the forefront, especially since Mo'ne Davis, the incredible female Little League World Series pitcher, shocked people back in 2014 when she pitched a shutout game. Stories like Mo'ne's are becoming more common: Colorado female linebacker Haley Abeyta attending a college combine, 16-year-old Melissa...

# data[].attributes.headline
Washington Post - adapted by NewsELA staff

# data[].attributes.subject
Washington Post - adapted by NewsELA staff

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
On Thursday,

when her opponent Joel Northup forfeited because of his faith.

Many people are applauding Northup for standing up for his convictions, while others are bashing him for a variety of reasons. I say he should have never been put in the situation in the first place.

I know I am probably in the minority and will probably make some enemies with my fellow females, but I firmly believe that males and females should not be competing on the same athletic teams.

My two exceptions for this would be children of elementary age since the playing field is pretty level before puberty hits and recreation leagues such as beer-league slow-pitch teams since they are mostly about fun.

Just think back to your school days. While in elementary school everyone had gym class together. Once middle school hit, though, the gym was divided in half with boys on one side and girls on the other. Why should sports be any different?

Plain and simple, females are the weaker vessels of the two sexes. It's not degrading. It's not an insult. It's a fact of life.

And quite frankly, I for one am very appreciative of that fact. I'm glad my husband is stronger than me because it means he has to do more manual labor around the house than I do. All kidding aside though, there is absolutely nothing wrong with admitting and embracing the differences between the two.

But rather than exhausting all the reasons why I think girls should not participate on boy sports teams, let's examine the flip side. Let's look at males participating on a female team.

We have a fine example right here in the Lehigh Valley.

For the past several years now, Allen High School has had at least one boy on its field hockey team. I know that several area coaches don't like it and I don't blame them. I have seen first hand how the boys outperformed the girls not just because of their skill (that's not to say they were more skillful because they were boys), but also because they were more powerful.

The boys could run faster and hit the ball harder and even though field hockey is not a physical sport there is some contact in the game when players are going after the ball. It doesn't take much to figure out which player would win that battle.

But let's look at some other sports.

Let's propose that there is a high school (or college for that matter) that does not field a baseball team so a boy participates on the softball team. He leads the league in steals because the girl behind the plate can't throw him out (hard to do even when a girl is stealing). He also leads the league in home runs since the fences are usually no more than 200-215 feet.

How about a sport with a little more physical contact?

There's a boy on the girls basketball team for the same reasons as above. This boy completely dominates since he can jump higher for rebounds, run faster, more than likely is taller so he has a clearer view to shoot or to block shots and can box out better since he is stronger. He can simply play a more physical game.

Would there be an outcry against the boys then? If there was, I'd like to know how the double standard would be justified.

Here's a more real-life example.

While helping out at a softball camp this past summer a few female players and I were trying to hit home runs via soft toss. Try as we might (and we did for several days) we couldn't get it out of the park. Our drives continually fell just short of the fence. Then both the male trainer and a male helper picked up the bat and had no trouble knocking out homer after homer.

It's plain and simple anatomy. Males are designed to be bigger and stronger and can therefore compete on an entirely different level than females. And that reason alone is enough to show why the two sexes should be on separate teams.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Males and females should not mix on the field of competition

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On Thursday, when her opponent Joel Northup forfeited because of his faith. Many people are applauding Northup for standing up for his convictions, while others are bashing him for a variety of reasons. I say he should have never been put in the situation in the first place.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
BY SABRINA VICTOR

Huge advances have been made in women's sports since the first Olympics Games in ancient Greece, where women weren't even allowed to watch the competitions. Few women competed in sports until the late 19 th and early 20 th centuries when social changes in Europe and North America occurred. Differences in physical strength and stamina led to the creation of female versions of male sports. These women's' rights were an important achievement because although women now can enjoy their freedom playing sports, back then women worked hard to gain that freedom. When women started being more active in sports the mentality that women were inferior to men started to decrease.

Erin Dimelgio, South Plantation High School's 5 foot 5, 140 lb. third string quarterback became the first girl to ever play quarterback in a regular season high school football game in Florida. In a football game against Nova High School, with 1:40 left on the clock, South Plantation's Coach Doug Gatewood decided to put Erin out on the field. As she jogged onto the field everyone wondered, "can this girl really play?" Can she even throw? Since that night Erin has proved she can play just as well as the boys, maybe even better, as she headlined the nation's top newspapers including The New York Times and The Huffington Post. However, the question still remains: should we allow integration of sports? Two reasons we shouldn't are that most women aren't physically capable of playing with the boys, and this would hinder the girls' teams.

Although women aren't lesser athletes than men, it is crucial to keep in mind that men are bigger and stronger than women. This is why I believe sexes should remain separated, because female college athletes will never be physically capable of playing for a men's professional team since the difference between their physical attributes will keep getting greater.

Even though some girls in middle school and high school are good enough to play with the boys, we still shouldn't let them because these girls are the best players for girls sports programs. If we let the best girls play on the boys' teams, then talent would be taken from girls sports programs and this would hinder female sports and cut funding. Hindering female sports would be a setback from the huge advances that have been made in women sports by advocates such as Senda Berenson, a gymnastics instructor and P.E. teacher at an all-girls school that created the first girls basketball team.

We have made a big leap forward from just a generation ago when girls sports weren't funded, however, we simply can't allow co-ed athletic competition because of the physical differences between male and females, especially in contact sports. Instead of the integration of females and males on athletic teams, we need to make sure women sports are provided training facilities, equipment, coaching staff, trainers, playing fields, recruitment for sports and adequate funding. Many people may call this unfair but it is a matter of safety. Not only is this a matter of safety, but moreover, we also want the best female players to be representing the girls instead of putting all of their talent on the boys teams.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
BY SABRINA VICTOR Huge advances have been made in women's sports since the first Olympics Games in ancient Greece, where women weren't even allowed to watch the competitions. Few women competed in sports until the late 19 th and early 20 th centuries when social changes in Europe and North America occurred.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Lower transportation costs. Less money spent on facilities and overhead. Increased teacher and student attendance. And...higher test scores? New research suggests, perhaps counterintuitively, that the four-day school week not only doesn't hurt student achievement, but seems to help.

The four-day school week has some appeal when budgets are tight, especially in rural districts where students and teachers may travel a long way to get to school. Schools in 17 states have four-day school weeks, which usually entail longer school days in order to meet instructional hour requirements. In Colorado, for instance, more than a third of districts use the shorter week. These are mainly small, poor, rural districts, serving about 3 percent of students in the state.

For "Does Shortening the School Week Impact Student Performance? Evidence from the Four-Day School Week," Mary Beth Walker of the Andrew Young School of Policy Studies at Georgia State University and D. Mark Anderson of Montana State University compared 4th grade reading scores in 17 schools with compacted schedules and 5th grade math scores in 14 such schools with control groups designed to reflect the rural, usually low-income make-up of the schedule-switching schools. The researchers looked at math scores from 2001-2010 and reading scores from 2000-2010 from the Colorado Student Assessment Program.

Overall, districts with a four-day week started out with lower average scores than schools on traditional schedules, but saw a significant increase in the percentage of students scoring proficient or advanced on both reading and math tests after they switched to the four-day week. Specifically, the researchers found that the shortened week was associated with a 7 percentage point gain in math scores and a 3 percentage point gain in reading. In reading, the improvement took place the year after the schedule was switched; in math, the improvement took place during the year the schedule was switched. In both cases, the improvements seem to have stuck for multiple years after the shift.

The report suggests a number of potential explanations, including improved attendance, increased teacher job satisfaction, and better teaching methods. (The longer school day might allow for longer lessons, for instance.) But this particular study doesn't indicate which are actually at work here.

A four-day week presents some challenges, the researchers write, especially outside the rural context. Child-care needs for younger students would increase, and so might opportunities for teenage delinquency. The authors call for additional study into some of the implications of shorter weeks.

I was especially interested by the suggestion that the four-day week might lead to a decrease in the dropout rate and increase the potential for high school students to have part-time jobs. I've also heard the argument that a four-day work week would lessen schools' environmental impact (think fewer commuters, less energy spent powering office buildings, etc.) and improved quality of life, though Utah's experiment with the concept didn't last too long.

What would a four-day school week look like in a more urban area? What are some benefits and challenges? Would a four-day week with longer days lead to an increase in your job satisfaction?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Making the Case for Three-Day Weekends Every Weekend

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
For "Does Shortening the School Week Impact Student Performance? Evidence from the Four-Day School Week," Mary Beth Walker of the Andrew Young School of Policy Studies at Georgia State University and D. Mark Anderson of Montana State University examined rural schools' fourth grade reading and fifth...

# data[].attributes.headline
We Are Teachers -  by Elizabeth Mulvahill 

# data[].attributes.subject
We Are Teachers -  by Elizabeth Mulvahill 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Making the switch to a four-day school week is a growing trend in districts across the country. Once a practice reserved for rural districts, the idea is catching on in suburban and urban areas as well. Research by The National Conference of State Legislatures estimates 560 school districts in 25 states have at least one school with a four-day schedule. Leading the charge are Colorado (55%), New Mexico (43%), Idaho (38%), and Oregon (32%).

SOURCE: Center on Reinventing Public Education

While the majority of districts cite financial reasons as the major reason for making the change, the concept has issues on both sides, from academic achievement and equity issues to life-work balance and teacher retention.

Pros to a Four-Day School Week

Financial Benefits

Most school districts cite budget constraints as the top reason for making the change. Cutting back services to four days a week helps districts reduce overhead costs, particularly in the categories of building operations and maintenance, transportation and food service. Although a report from the Education Commission of the States declares the overall savings small (an average savings of between 0.4% and 2.5%) the difference can lead to big savings. In Duval County School District in Jacksonville, Florida, moving to a four-day week produced only a paltry-sounding 0.7 percent savings. But that figure translated to a budget reduction of $7 million.

More Teachers

Proponents claim a four-day work week helps attract and retain quality teachers. After Colorado's District 27J switched to four-day school weeks, their recruiting prospects jumped from a handful of applicants to over 100 per opening. This includes what superintendent Chris Fiedler calls "harder vacancies," such as special ed and secondary math positions. In addition, the pool included more highly qualified applicants with master's degrees and special certifications. Most impressive, the district's teacher turnover rate dropped from over 21 percent to just 13 percent this year.

Improved Quality of Life

Compacting school into just four days a week leaves more time for kids to spend with family, friends and outside interests. Older students can spend time engaging in resumé-building public service or paid work. Teachers have more time to prepare lessons and collaborate during the day.

In addition, having an extra day each week to schedule appointments and family trips results in improved attendance. After all, when each day counts as 25% of the learning, students are less likely to miss a day. Looking forward to a three-day weekend each week leads to greater work-life balance for teachers, which leads to improved staff morale and a positive impact on what is taught in classrooms.

Cons to a Four-Day School Week

It's inequitable.

Opponents of the four-day school week point out the difficulties for lower income families. Finding childcare for just one day a week is often difficult and costly. And since most adults work five days a week, chances are that many children will simply find themselves in non-school "school" settings, like daycares, on the remaining day. It's not exactly the idyllic three-day weekend that proponents of the adjusted schedule put forth.

Not to mention, many students rely on school food services for the majority of their meals. For these children, adding an extra day to the weekend comes at a real cost.

Longer days are tough on the youngest learners.

School days are long enough for preschoolers, kindergarteners and primary students. Switching to a four-day school week extends the school day by an hour to an hour and a half. With limited capacity for learning and retention, these long days may have negatively affect achievement and students' attitudes.

Extracurriculars are adversely affected.

Students who wish to participate in after school sports and clubs may have fewer opportunities, especially if other schools in their district operate on different hours. In addition, transportation may not be available because of late start and finish times.

Kids need structure.

Some opponents worry about the unstructured, unsupervised free time that goes with a shorter school week. One study of schools in Colorado showed a direct correlation between a four day schedule and juvenile crime. Juvenile arrests for property crimes, especially larceny, increased by 73%, although no change was reported in drug related or violent crimes.

When it comes to academic outcomes, the jury is still out.

Opinions differ when it comes to measuring student achievement in the context of the four-day school week. One study, reported in Education Finance and Policy, reports a positive relationship between the four-day week and student performance in reading and math, using standardized test results. Another study, cited in Rural Educator, found no significant difference in the mean levels of overall academic achievement between four-day districts and five-day districts. However, an unpublished Oregon study found a temporary decline in academic performance among minority, low-income and special needs students, in particular. Time and more research are needed to determine whether the change leads to positive or negative results.
Has your district made the move to a four-day week? If so, come share your experience in our WeAreTeacher HELPLINE group on Facebook. Plus, what teachers need if the U.S. ever wants to see another globally-competitive generation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
25 States Are Testing 4-Day School Weeks-Will Yours Be Next?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Making the switch to a four-day school week is a growing trend in districts across the country. Once a practice reserved for rural districts, the idea is catching on in suburban and urban areas as well. Research by The National Conference of State Legislatures estimates 560 school districts in 25 states have at least one school with a four-day schedule.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Wait a minute, isn't the question that the school board will face in December about whether the district will go to a four-day school week?

That is the proposal - a four-day school week. But consider the other side of the equation. If there is a four-day school week, doesn't that mean a three-day weekend?

In Tuesday night's presentation, recruitment of staff was offered as one of the positive points of a four-day week (i.e. a three-day weekend). And going by the experimental calendar presented, there would be some four-day weekends and some two-day weekends, but almost always a four-day week.

The presentation by the four-day school week committee appeared to be well researched and clearly supports the benefits of the three-day weekend. Students and staff have the opportunity to use Friday for all types of activities that will benefit them. Unfortunately, no data was presented that showed why the points given by the committee were objectively accurate - but it did feel good.

Some of the benefits shared by the committee were: Professional development time for staff; time for students to participate in extra-curricular activities; lower absenteeism for both students and staff; extended attendance opportunities; family time; community involvement; make-up days without extending the calendar.

What I gathered from the presentation was that students and teachers need an extra day to do things outside of school.

Our schools - not just local Delta Junction schools - have issues. Many feel our education system is failing us. There are many good people in the system, and a few who are questionable. Looking at alternatives to the status quo is a positive thing. Unfortunately, in this case we are only evaluating one alternative - a four-day week - and only looking at that with one goal in mind: extending the weekend.

Let's look at one alternative to a four-day school week that doesn't involve a three-day weekend that doesn't appear to have been discussed at all. Let's hold school on Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, and Friday. In other words, children get a day in the middle of the week to spend on out-of-school activities, or if need be, work on school projects that they need extra time to complete. Teachers could continue to work a five-day week and be available for students on Wednesdays.

Could such a plan benefit students? I don't know. It certainly gives them some options to do better in school with most of the benefits presented Tuesday night - but clearly not all of them.

Would such a plan benefit staff? I don't know. But is that the question being addressed?

I know the first opposition to such a plan would be increased teacher time. Let's look at the math. The typical required school day for teachers is about 7 to 7 ½ hours long. Add the proposed hour for the longer day, and it becomes 8 to 8 ½. Four days, about 34 hours a week.

Teachers are now available to work six hours on Wednesday and do professional development, collaboration, planning, grading papers, and other items that occupy their time other than instructional time. Remember, the typical day already includes some time for these activities. Teachers don't instruct the entire time they are at the school.

The question that should be before the school board is this: should we change the school schedule to benefit our students, parents, staff, and our community? If so, what are the alternatives to the current schedule? The board needs to look at all the alternatives. A better process would be to begin with identifying the concerns, listing all the alternatives, and then evaluating the alternatives for each of the concerns listed? Not, "Should we change to a four-day week?"

Some of the alternatives include a four-day week, a six-day week, a longer school day on the existing calendar, a shorter school day on the existing calendar, extending the school year, going to a year-round schedule, or a three-day school week. There are others, but let's look at all the options before deciding the existing schedule isn't the right one for our students, parents, teachers, and the community.

Changing the school schedule is a major topic and shouldn't be done without due diligence, reviewing all of the options.

What's your opinion? Space is available for you to express your opinion here. The school board will most likely be discussing the issue at its November work session tonight, November 3, its December work session on December 1, and is planning to take up the issue for a decision at its December 15 business meeting. Most likely the board will give you the opportunity for your opinion to be heard at one or all of these meetings.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Should teachers and students get a three-day weekend?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Wait a minute, isn't the question that the school board will face in December about whether the district will go to a four-day school week? That is the proposal - a four-day school week. But consider the other side of the equation. If there is a four-day school week, doesn't that mean a three-day weekend?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What are the Pros and Cons of 4-Day School Weeks? - The Edvocate

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Spread the loveThe four-day school is a phenomenon that has been sweeping across the U.S. When I was a teacher, many moons ago, this was a fringe schooling schedule only practiced by rural school districts. Why did they switch to 4-day school weeks? It was a kneejerk response to dwindling education…

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Several school districts across the United States and around the world are exploring the idea of implementing a 4-day school week. The experiments are producing mixed results, with rural districts seeing more positives from the change than urban and suburban ones.

The landscape of alternative schedules is changing in the educational world because there is more flexibility in the way that schools implementing learning days. Standard requirements in the United States is to have 180 days of learning that total about 1,000 hours. Therefore, schools can switch to a 4-day week because they can still meet the hourly requirement.

Students in a 4-day school week still receive the same amount of instruction time. It just happens over a longer day so that a three-day weekend is possible each week.

There are several advantages and disadvantages of 4-day school weeks to examine based on the results that districts are reporting from their efforts to implement this schedule.

List of the Advantages of 4-Day School Weeks

1. Schools can save up to 20% on some budget-line expenses with a 4-day week.
When schools move to a 4-day week, the goal is usually to reduce the amount of money that goes toward the transportation budget. You're transporting students one less day per week, which means up to 20% of the cost of busing and other needs in that department can go away. Although there aren't many other opportunities to save since the instructional hours are the same, some districts are saving up to $1,200 per student, per year because of this change.

The amount of money that could be saved for taxpayers across the United States if all 18,000+ public school systems moved to a 4-day week exceeds $4 billion per year.

2. It is easier to recruit teachers with a 4-day school week.
Teachers flocked to New Mexico when districts started launching 4-day school weeks because it gave them a real day off. The contact hours that these dedicated educational providers give to kids each day is just one part of their schedule. It is not unusual for them to bring work home, spending time on the weekend grading papers and taking care of additional duties. The districts that were authorized to make this change to their schedule saw an increase in the number of qualified applicants of up to 20% for open positions.

It was such a popular change for the school districts in New Mexico that the state had to stop the practice since no one knew at the time whether it would help or hinder student performance.

3. Districts can better plan for sports activities and after-school groups.
Extra-curricular activities are easier for school districts to plan when classes are on a 4-day schedule. Athletic practices typically happen in the afternoon each day, forcing schools to play games between Thursday-Sunday each week. Some districts must travel several hours by bus to reach some away games. Since there is one day completely free in the schedule thanks to this shift, planning events for that free day gives everyone more flexibility. Even clubs that meet after-school can come together on this free day instead of extending the amount of time spent on-campus after a long day of instruction.

This advantage reduces the number of missed classes or instructional opportunities that occur because of the travel requirements of student athletics.

4. Many parents are already working a flexed schedule.
The typical schedule for a school district operating on a 4-day week is either 7:30-5 or 8-5:30 each day. This structure helps parents who work regular business hours because it eliminates the daycare requirements that are necessary for younger children and an earlier release. Then older children can manage the home environment on their own while their parents are at work on the extra day off.

Many parents are already working a flexed schedule over a 4-day period already. 15% of employers offer an alternative schedule like this already. Labor unions are pushing for this option as well, meaning some families could get a three-day weekend together.

5. It makes the after-school schedule easier to manage.
When school districts use a 5-day schedule to manage the instructional process, it creates a need for multiple transitions throughout the day. These times create distractions for students that can rob them of energy. Tired kids often struggle to control their emotions and reactions, which can lead to problems at home when there are extra-curricular activities like sports, reading groups, or scouting events to attend.

Even though the day is longer for students in a 4-day week, the reduction of transitions creates more energy to use after school. This advantage is one of the reasons why a majority of students say that the shorter week with longer days makes them feel happier about attending classes. There are fewer problems with student exhaustion.

6. Students quickly adjust to the new schedule.
Critics of the 4-day school week suggest that children can struggle to stay focused on learning during the longer days. Research from the districts that were early adopters of this policy shows that the results are very different. Montana, Oklahoma, Oregon, Colorado, and New Mexico consistently report fewer behavioral issues, better grades, and less time away from the classroom due to illness or tardiness with the compressed schedule. These advantages apply to students at any grade level in the K-12 spectrum.

It can lead to early mornings for students who live along the outskirts of a rural district, but there are still ways to fill that time. Many kids like to use the transportation time to finish their homework or do some reading.

7. Schools with a 4-day week spend more time in instruction.
If students transition four times during the day to different classes, lunch, and recess moments, then there can be up to 40 minutes of wasted time every day. That means you're losing over three hours of instructional time per week walking to different places on campus. When schools move to a 4-day week, there are fewer transitions that take place. That means teachers can spend more time on specific subjects and lessons to ensure each student has an understanding of the information.

Every student demographic sees an increase in grades when the shift to a compressed schedule occurs. Some schools report that their teachers are adding 6-8 hours of direct contact instruction per week since there is less movement throughout the day.

8. Discipline issues improve at schools with a 4-day week.
School districts that implement a 4-day week see a significant decrease in the number of behavioral problems in their student body. The number of referrals can decline by as much as 70% in some areas. Although there are no research-based clues as to why this advantage exists, officials believe the reduction of transitions creates more consistency for children who struggle with changing environments. Teachers can keep engaged with learning opportunities, provide interesting experiments, or play learning games because lesson plans aren't crunched into 45-minute time segments.

Students can also achieve more rest on the 4-day school week. The extra day off allows for some extra time to recharge. With less fatigue driving the decisions that kids make, their emotional state remains more balanced to create a positive atmosphere in the classroom.

9. Attendance rates improve in districts that use the 4-day school week.
The first school districts in the United States that implemented a 4-day school week discovered that attendance levels increased by 20% in just one year with the schedule change. Most of the schools were in rural areas, allowing families to work on chores at times that were convenient for them. There were fewer moments of needing to miss classes because of work that needed to happen on the farm.

It's been over 20 years since the first school districts started implementing this alternative schedule. The research shows that this advantage remains consistent in almost all circumstances. Only urban districts see fewer improvements, but even they see a small boost in attendance.

10. Teachers miss fewer days when they work a 4-day schedule.
The restful benefits that students experience with a 4-day schedule at school also applies to teachers. Some districts had a decrease of substitute teacher needs of greater than 30%. The average teacher who uses five sick days during the year would use one fewer thanks to this alternative schedule. Since there is more flexibility to spend time with family and juggle the extra work that teachers have during the week, there are much higher levels of workplace satisfaction.

Teachers also found that the extra day off was useful for their ongoing educational requirements to maintain their licensing.

11. Students have higher grades in schools with a 4-day week.
Students have better grades in schools that use the alternative schedule listed here because it allows for different learning opportunities. Instead of using a lecture-based format where students must take notes to study at home, teachers can engage in small-group discussions and hands-on experiments to build knowledge. There is more time to incorporate different forms of media and content as teaching tools as well.

Although student performance is an individualized measurement that depends on a child's unique engagement, the average grade goes up between 5% to 15% in districts with a 4-day week.

List of the Disadvantages of 4-Day School Weeks

1. Some schools don't save any money with the 4-day week.
School districts are always looking for ways to save money, so reducing the need for transportation seems like a logical choice. Most schools spend the most on their busing needs. Although there are several examples where the final savings were upwards of 20%, some districts are only saving 5% or less with this transition. One district in Oregon, Morrow County, found that their cost-savings from making this switch was less than 2%.

The schools that tend to benefit the most from this shift are large, rural districts that have significant transportation needs. If parents are providing most of the transportation to-and-from school, then the savings here will be minimal.

2. Most people don't receive a genuine day off with the alternative schedule.
Most kids don't get to take an entire day off from school to get a three-day weekend with this alternative schedule. Since most districts try to plan athletic events during this off day, there could be a full day of driving to a game and back home. It is not unusual for teachers to take advantage of the extra day to schedule conferences. Administrators are usually on campus during the open fifth day to coordinate with districts that haven't shifted to the 4-day week.

The concept of offering an extended weekend to everyone is an advantage that looks great on paper. When the reality of its implementation receives close examination, the results are not as advantageous.

3. Urban school districts may see cost increases with a 4-day schedule.
Only 1 out of every 10 schools that are using the 4-day schedule are in an urban environment. The reason why this idea tends to stay in rural areas is because of their natural isolation. Most city-based schools build more flexibility into their schedules so that students, teachers, and staff can build a routine that fits their daily needs. Urban schools usually have more events, athletic activities, and after-school groups that use the grounds. That means adding more time to four days during the week to accommodate these needs can result in higher expenses for large districts.

This disadvantage is the primary reason why some districts who went to the 4-day schedule decided to return to the traditional educational approach.

4. The 4-day school week usually benefits wealthy families only.
Parents might have fewer daycare responsibilities to juggle when schools go to a 4-day schedule, but the costs remain the same for the average household. Instead of watching students for 1-2 hours every day, families are trying to find providers that can take their child for an entire day. In the districts where a shift from five days to four takes place, only half of the parents or guardians receive approval from their employers to shift their schedule to match it. That means the families with higher household income levels or self-reliant, mature older children are the ones that typically see the financial benefits from this switch.

5. It's more challenging for teens to find jobs with the alternative schedule.
There are specific work rules in place in the United States and around the world for teens. Kids must be of a certain age before a formal offer of employment is valid. The number of hours that someone can work on a school night is severely restricted. Although the extra day off creates an opportunity for longer hours on that one day, it may be impossible to find work that fits the Monday-Thursday schedule.

Schools can make adjustments for this issue by having work-study opportunities like a student newspaper. If a family needs the extra income for some reason, this disadvantage can have a devastating effect.

6. Some students do not react well to the longer school schedule.
Some students have a challenging time getting through a standard 6-hour day of instruction. Adding another 90 minutes to those expectations can cause behavioral issues to flare instead of settling down. The responsibilities of homework, longer days, and extra activities once the learning day is over can place a lot of pressure on children today. Some kids spend over 12 hours away from home on the 4-day schedule because of their busing requirements.

7. It can cause some students to need to wait for the bus in the dark.
Parents don't always support the 4-day school week because it forces an early-morning bus pick-up. If school begins at 7:30 am and it is a 1-hour ride to reach the school, then a young child could be waiting at their stop at 6:15 am to make sure they don't miss their ride. Since school happens over the winter, there is a significant period when the drop-off time will be in the dark.

Some students will also need to walk home from their bus stop in the dark during the winter months. For parents of K-4 students, this situation can make them feel extremely uncomfortable. It places the safety of their child into question in a variety of ways.

8. The 4-day week changes the approach to snow days.
If schools must cancel classes for weather-related events, then it can become challenging to make up the time within the constraints of the schedule. Some districts may need to extend their contact time deeper into the summer if their governing authority doesn't grant a waiver for missing the allotted contact time.
Conclusion
Some schools can move to a 4-day school week without any problem because the schedule works well for a majority of families. Rural communities see some challenges to its implementation at times because of the early start for buses, but the benefits usually outweigh the problems.

Urban and suburban communities can struggle with the alternative schedule because of the professional requirements of each parent. Adding more time to the school day might reduce daycare costs, but it can also create an all-day problem with the extra free time on the fifth day.

Each district must take the time to examine all of the advantages and disadvantages of 4-day school weeks to determine if the policy would be useful. It is a difficult choice to make because there will always be unknown variables, but there are numerous benefits that make it an experiment worth pursuing.

Author Biography
Keith Miller has over 25 years of experience as a CEO and serial entrepreneur. As an entrepreneur, he has founded several multi-million dollar companies. As a writer, Keith's work has been mentioned in CIO Magazine, Workable, BizTech, and The Charlotte Observer. If you have any questions about the content of this blog post, then please send our content editing team a message here.

---

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
19 Advantages and Disadvantages of 4 Day School Weeks

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Several school districts across the United States and around the world are exploring the idea of implementing a 4-day school week. The experiments are producing mixed results, with rural districts seeing more positives from the change than urban and suburban ones.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Your typical school week: Monday-Friday with the hours sometime between 7 am- 4 pm. But slowly over the nation, schools are switching to a four day school week. Class runs Monday- Thursday with an added 40-60 minutes each day to compensate for the lost time by not having the schools run on Fridays. Sometimes even starting school earlier in the school year, or keeping kids a few days later in the spring to again, make up for the lost time.

At first, this may not seem worth it. In the end, the time spent at school is the same, just spread differently. So what are the pros and cons?
Pros:
Schools that have shortened to four days saw an increase in student attendance.

Utility bills were less, as well as a decrease in labor costs and bus expenses.

Teachers are less stressed and happier because they have an extra day for their weekend.

The fifth day of the week can be used for tutoring, school activities, and collaboration between teachers and peers, still leaving Saturday for free time, instead of taking up the entire weekend.
Cons:
Students who are special needs or behind academically had a harder transition to the shorter week.

Juvenile crime rates went up significantly.

Longer days of school can be harder on the students, especially the younger grades.

Childcare expenses can become a problem for working parents.

The research is scattered for four day school weeks, a study in one state shows thousands of dollars saved, with reading and math scores going up, while another school shows no money saved and test scores dropping for a few years before they start to rise again.

One thing that does seem fairly consistent in the research is the first five or so years of adapting to the new schedule for schools with negative side effects before seeing improvement in the later years. This alone is a big reason districts are hesitant to change. But overall, will the change improve long-term results? Is it worth it at the cost of potentially putting students through a few hard years? Some are saying no, others are saying yes.

What side of the fence are you on? What other pros and cons do you see?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Your typical school week: Monday-Friday with the hours sometime between 7 am- 4 pm. But slowly over the nation, schools are switching to a four day school week. Class runs Monday- Thursday with an added 40-60 minutes each day to compensate for the lost time by not having the schools run on Fridays.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Across the United States, several school districts have begun to explore, experiment with, and embrace a shift to a four-day school week. Just a decade ago this shift would have been unimaginable. However, the landscape is changing thanks to several factors including a slight change in public perception.

Perhaps the biggest shift giving leeway to the adoption of a four-day school week is that an increasing number of states have passed legislation giving schools the flexibility to substitute the number of instructional days for instructional hours. The standard requirement for schools is 180 days or an average range of 990-1080 hours. Schools are able to switch to a four-day week by simply increasing the length of their school day. Students are still getting the same amount of instruction in terms of minutes, just in a shorter number of days.

Too Early to Tell

The shift to a four-day school week is so new that the research to support or oppose the trend is inconclusive at this point. The truth is that more time is needed to answer the most pressing question. Everyone wants to know how a four-day school week will impact student performance, but conclusive data to answer that question simply does not exist at this point.

While the jury is still out on its impact on student performance, there are several clear pros and cons of moving to a four-day school week. The fact remains that the needs of every community are different. School leaders must carefully weigh any decision to move to four-day weekend seeking out community feedback on the topic through the use of surveys and public forums. They must publicize and examine the pros and cons associated with this move. It may turn out to be the best option for one district and not another.

Saving School Districts Money

Moving to a four-day school week saves the district money. Most schools that have chosen to move to a four-day school week do so because of the financial benefits. That one extra day saves money in the areas of transportation, food services, utilities, and some areas of personnel. Though the amount of savings can be argued, every dollar matters and schools are always looking to pinch pennies.

A four-day school week can improve student and teacher attendance. Appointments for doctors, dentists, and home maintenance services are able to be scheduled on that extra day off. Doing this naturally boost attendance for both teachers and students. This improves the quality of education the student receives because they have fewer substitute teachers and are themselves in class more often.

Higher Teach Morale

Moving to a four-day school week boosts student and teacher morale. Teachers and students are happier when they have that extra day off. They come back at the start of the workweek refreshed and focused. They feel like they accomplished more over the weekend and were also able to get some extra rest. Their minds come back clearer, rested, and ready to go to work.

This also allows teachers more time for planning and collaboration. Many teachers are using the day off for professional development and preparation for the upcoming week. They are able to research and put together higher quality lessons and activities. Furthermore, some schools are using the day off for structured collaboration where teachers work and plan together as a team.

Better Quality of Life for Families

The change can provide students and teachers more time with their families. Family time is an important part of American culture. Many parents and teachers are using the extra day off as a family day for activities such as exploring a museum, hiking, shopping, or traveling. The extra day has given families the chance to bond and do things that would not have been able to otherwise.

Teachers Already on Board

The change can be a great recruiting tool for attracting and hiring new teachers. The majority of teachers are on board with the move to a four-day school week. It is an attractive element that many teachers are happy to jump on. School districts that have moved to a four-day week often find that their pool of potential candidates is higher in quality than it was before the move.

Evidence Against a Four-Day School Week

Moving to a four-day school week increases the length of the school day. The trade-off for a shorter week is a longer school day. Many schools are adding thirty minutes to both the beginning and end of the school day. This extra hour can make the day pretty long especially for younger students, which can often lead to a loss of focus later in the day. Another drawback to a longer school day is that it gives students less time in the evening to participate in extracurricular activities.

Shifting Costs to Parents

Moving to a four-day school week also has many drawbacks. The first of which is that it shifts a financial burden to parents. Childcare for that extra day off can become a major financial burden for working parents. Parents of younger students, in particular, may be forced to pay for costly daycare services. In addition, parents must provide meals, typically provided by the school, on that day off.

Student Accountability

The extra day off may also lead to less accountability for some students. Many students may be unsupervised on the extra day off. The lack of supervision translates to less accountability which could potentially lead to some reckless and dangerous situations. This is especially true for students whose parents work and make the decision to allow their children to stay home by themselves in lieu of structured childcare.

Moving to a four-day school week will potentially increase the amount of homework a student receives. Teachers will have to resist the urge to increase the amount of homework that they give to their students. The longer school day will give students less time in the evenings to complete any homework. Teachers must approach homework cautiously, limiting homework during the school week and potentially giving them assignments to work on over the weekend.

Still A Divisive Subject

Moving to a four-day school week can divide a community. There is no denying that the potential move to a four-day school week is a sensitive and divisive topic. There will be constituents on both sides of the aisle, but little is accomplished when there is contention. In difficult financial times, schools must examine all cost-saving options. Members of the community elect school board members to make difficult choices and they ultimately must trust those decisions.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Examining the Pros and Cons of Shifting to a Four-Day School Week

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Across the United States, several school districts have begun to explore, experiment with, and embrace a shift to a four-day school week. Just a decade ago this shift would have been unimaginable. However, the landscape is changing thanks to several factors including a slight change in public perception.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Participating in sports encourages physical activity, improves mental health and teaches teamwork. But, some people might think gender-segregated sports teams send the wrong message to kids by keeping boys and girls separate. However, coed sports teams present a number of challenges for the kids and coaches alike, and those should be seriously considered before merging male and female athletes onto the same team.

Skill Level

Sports teams are often divided by age, weight or skill level, depending on the league. High schools will have varsity and junior varsity teams to distinguish skill level, and community recreation teams usually divide players up by age. Boys and girls of the same age likely have different skill levels. Boys are usually taller and stronger than girls, which can give them an advantage on the playing field. If girls are on the same team as them, they might not perform as well as they could on an all-girls team, where they would be up against players with a similar skill set.

Comfort

Boys and girls might be more comfortable playing sports with the same sex. Boys might fear being too aggressive with girls on the playing field. From a social perspective, they might fear failing in front of girls who they like socially. Girls, on the other hand, might be more timid when playing with boys, which might inhibit their athletic skills. They might feel more supported by an all-girls team than a coed one.

Motivation

Coaches can face challenges when leading a coed sports team. Although every player might respond to different motivations, coaches can find general ways to motivate teams of boys or teams of girls. Motivating a team of boys and girls, who inherently might have different reasons for playing or factors that motivate them, can be particularly challenging. Finding a gender-neutral way to coach and motivate a team is a disadvantage of coed sports.

Logistics

Logistically, coed sports teams present a few challenges. While coaches can overcome these logistical challenges, the effort might not be worth it when all of the disadvantages of coed teams are considered. Boys and girls often wear different styles and cuts of uniforms, doubling the effort that teams have to make when selecting uniforms. When teams retreat to the locker room at halftime, boys and girls will go to separate rooms, making it difficult for a halftime speech from the coach to prepare athletes for the rest of the game.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Are There Disadvantages of Girls and Boys Playing Together in Sports?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Participating in sports encourages physical activity, improves mental health and teaches teamwork. But, some people might think gender-segregated sports teams send the wrong message to kids by keeping boys and girls separate.

# data[].attributes.headline
Why boys and girls should be put in separate classes by John Monteiro

# data[].attributes.subject
Why boys and girls should be put in separate classes by John Monteiro

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Last October, more than 450 public school teachers, principals and central administrators from across the United States - as well as from Argentina, Bermuda, Canada and Poland - came together in Atlanta, Georgia, for the fifth annual convention of the National Association for Single Sex Public Education.

Dozens of presentations extolled the superiority of gender-segregated classrooms and entire schools, with lecture titles such as, "Burps, Farts and Snot: Teaching Chemistry To Middle School Boys," and "Just Don't Say 'SEX' - tips on how to implement single-gender programs in conservative, rural communities."

Attendees ranged from Chicago and Philadelphia inner-city high school teachers to elementary school principals from small towns in Idaho and Indiana. They represented a fraction of recent converts to the Single Sex Public Education (SSPE) movement, which has expanded at a remarkable pace.

In 2002, only 11 public schools in the United States had gender-segregated classrooms. As of December 2009, there were more than 550.

The movement is based on the hypothesis that hard-wired differences in the ways that male and female brains develop and function in childhood through adolescence require classrooms in which boys and girls are not only separated by gender, but also taught according to radically different methods.

For example, SSPE doctrine calls for teachers in male classrooms to be constantly moving and speaking in a loud voice, even to the point of shouting, while teachers in female classes should be still and use a calming tone. This differentiation stems from the central tenet of SSPE ideology that young males thrive on competition and confrontation, while young females require a more nurturing and cooperative learning environment.

"When most young boys are exposed to threat and confrontation, their senses sharpen, and they feel a thrill," explains Dr. Leonard Sax, the founder and executive director of the National Associate for Single Sex Public Education. "When most young girls are exposed to such stimuli, however, they feel dizzy and yucky."

In a landmark essay published in the Spring 2006 edition of Educational Horizons, just as the SSPE movement was gaining strong momentum, Dr. Sax detailed the different ways elementary school teachers should address their students in gender-segregated classes. "[The teacher] may move right in front of a boy and say, 'What's your answer, Mr. Jackson? Give it to me!' Far from being intimidated, boys are energized by this teaching style. With girls [teachers should] speak more softly, use first names, terms of endearment and fewer direct commands: 'Lisa, sweetie, it's time to open your book. Emily, darling, would you please sit down for me and join us in this exercise?'"

The title of Dr. Sax's essay was "Six Degrees of Separation," a reference to the SSPE guideline that while the perfect ambient temperature for a male classroom is 69 degrees Fahrenheit, females learn most effectively at 75 degrees.

Heroic Behavior vs. Wedding Cakes

Separating boys and girls is a longstanding tradition at private and parochial schools. The concept began to gain traction in American public schools earlier this decade as schools began to experiment with SSPE in oft-desperate attempts to reduce disciplinary problems and improve test scores. The Department of Education accelerated the trend in 2006 by altering the Title IX provision of the No Child Left Behind Act to ease restrictions on gender-segregated education in public schools.

Since then, advocates like Dr. Sax, a child psychologist who never set foot in a classroom as a teacher, have stepped up their promotion of SSPE as a panacea for public education. With scant evidence backing them up, they herald SSPE as the most effective way to narrow the achievement gaps between rich and poor students and black and white students that persist eight years after the passage of No Child Left Behind.

Although SSPE programs are now in place at schools in 39 states and the District of Columbia, they are particularly popular in urban districts with large minority populations, and most concentrated in the Southeastern U.S. South Carolina has 173 SSPE schools, by far the most of any state.

Last year, the largest school system in Alabama, the Mobile County Public School System, with 66,000 students, implemented SSPE programs in eight of its 93 schools with no parental notification. The most extreme program was at Hankins Middle School in Theodore, Alabama, where boys and girls ate lunch at different times and were prohibited from speaking to one another on school grounds.

Hankins teachers were directed to create "competitive, high-energy" classrooms for boys and "cooperative, quiet" classrooms for girls. Boys were to be taught "heroic behavior." Girls were to learn "good character." Sixth-grade language arts exercises called for boys to brainstorm action words used in sports. Girls were instructed to describe their dream wedding cake. Electives were gender-specific. Boys took computer applications. Girls took drama. No exceptions.

Mark Jones, whose son Jacob attends Hankins, said that when he complained to the principal about the changes, she told him they were necessary because "boys' and girls' brains were so different they needed different curriculum."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Gender Segregation: Separate But Effective?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Last October, more than 450 public school teachers, principals and central administrators from across the United States - as well as from Argentina, Bermuda, Canada and Poland - came together in Atlanta, Georgia, for the fifth annual convention of the National Association for Single Sex Public Education.

# data[].attributes.headline
The Pros and Cons of Single-Gender Education

# data[].attributes.subject
The Pros and Cons of Single-Gender Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
While public schools have long been coeducational, families that consider private schools are almost certain to encounter single-gender options, and it is important to weigh the pros and cons.

Single-gender schools have a long history in the U.S. In fact, until the 1960s and 70s, it was common for boys and girls to be separated for at least some of their classes. Today, most K-12 classrooms are coeducational and, though there are some single-gender public schools, most are private.

Public or private, there are arguments both for and against single-gender education, and the research on the subject is mixed. Opponents say it limits vital social interaction while proponents say it is an opportunity to customize the educational experience, increase confidence and strengthen community involvement.

"I personally can't think of any bad things that come from empowering girls and allowing them to really be confident in their leadership skills," says Carrie Wagner, CEO of GALS Inc. and the founder and executive director of Girls Athletic Leadership School Los Angeles, known as GALS LA.

Single-Gender Education for Girls

According to research collected by the National Coalition of Girls' Schools, graduates of all-girls schools are more likely than those attending coeducational schools to impact their communities; perform better academically; consider majoring in math, science or technology; and have higher aspirations and greater motivation.

However other research, including a 2014 meta-analysis by researchers at the University of Wisconsin and Whitman College, has found little evidence of benefits. Pscyhology professor Janet Hyde, one of the authors of the analysis, explained in an interview that many studies on the benefits of single-gender education fail to account for other factors that might influence success.

"Especially in the United States, parents who choose single-sex schooling, on average, have more money and more education, which all predict performance," she said. "So if you find that the students are performing better, you don't know if it's due to the single sex education or the fact that they started out with these advantages."

Vanessa Garza, founding principal at GALS LA, argues that a single-gender learning environment benefits girls by increasing confidence which, in turn, builds leadership capabilities.

"If you look around the room, who's going to be the student body president?" she says. "It's going to be a female. Who's going to lead an after-school club? It's going to be a female."

While there can be competition, girls can also be very supportive in a single-gender setting, Wagner says.

"What you find at our school, and what I found when I was going to my own all-girls high school in Ohio, is that the girls are just super supportive of one another," she says.

Single-Gender Education for Boys

Some education experts say that single-gender schools can help reduce behavioral issues for boys because the educational environment provides a more comfortable classroom experience.

"In single-gender schools, boys are often more willing to take risks because they don't feel the fear of failing in front of the other sex," says Matt Albert, executive director of the Center for Reflective Communities in Los Angeles, which works to enhance the relationship between children and parents or caregivers. "Single-gender schools can establish more relaxed environments [and] less gender stereotyping, and courses can be tailored to student needs and interests."

Single-gender schools can also allow boys to learn and grow at their own pace, gaining confidence in their abilities without being compared to girls, who often develop some skills more quickly, Albert says.

Education experts say that one downside of single-gender education can be the lack of interaction. At some point in their lives, both boys and girls will have to learn to coexist with each other.

"Being only used to people of the same gender might pose a problem once the need to interact with the opposite sex sets in," Albert says.

But Rachel Connell, the rector of Chatham Hall, an all-girls day and boarding school serving grades 9-12 in Virginia, says much can be done to help students gain social skills.

"With a vast array of co-curricular and extracurricular activities, any school can offer its students a broad spectrum of opportunities and interactions," she says.

Choosing a Single-Gender School

Education experts say the best thing that parents can do when considering a single-gender school is to evaluate whether or not the environment serves their child's particular needs.

"Parents should shut out all the other noise around parenting and schools and simply focus on what feels right for their own child," Albert says.

That can depend on age. "Exposure to all types of diversity, including gender diversity, is critical for the development of young children," Albert says. For older kids, he recommends that parents look first at the arguments the school makes for single-gender education. If those arguments match parental values, they can evaluate whether the school lives out its mission.

"Take a look at who the graduates are," Albert says. "What kind of people are they? What distinguishes the school from other single-gender schools and other coed schools?"

In high school, experts say children are old enough to participate in the school decision-making process - and they should. "Parents and adolescents can have real conversations about the decision," Albert says.

In the end, it comes down to finding the right fit. When families visit a prospective school, Connell says, it's important that "they leave with not just a good impression but that intangible 'good feeling' as well."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Pros and Cons of Single-Gender Schools

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
While public schools have long been coeducational, families that consider private schools are almost certain to encounter single-gender options, and it is important to weigh the pros and cons. Single-gender schools have a long history in the U.S. In fact, until the 1960s and 70s, it was common for boys and girls to be separated for at least some of their classes.

# data[].attributes.headline
Academic Performance and Single-Sex Schooling

# data[].attributes.subject
Academic Performance and Single-Sex Schooling

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Academic performance and single-sex schooling: Evidence from a natural experiment in Switzerland | Gender Action Portal

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The gender gap in academic performance might be explained in part by stereotype threat, or the anxiety or concern that individuals of a certain identity (e.g., woman) feel when they risk confirming negative stereotypes about that identity (e.g., women’s inferior mathematics ability). Here, it is sug…

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
St Andrew's College is proud to be the only independent school in the South Island offering Pre-school to Year 13 education for both boys and girls.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The polar bears in Winnipeg have disco poo. Their droppings look like little glitterballs.

Before anyone starts sprinkling the stuff on their cornflakes, this isn't the hottest new beauty trend nor is it a natural phenomenon: Assiniboine Park Zoo's keepers use coloured glitter in the bears' feed to identify their droppings.

Why? Well, scat reveals all sorts of things about individual animals; information the keepers share with the scientific community. Many zoos conduct such studies, and also run captive breeding programmes for endangered species. However, critics say this doesn't justify their existence.

"Zoos are prisons for animals, camouflaging their cruelty with conservation claims," Mimi Bekhechi, director of international programmes at PETA, explains. "Animals in zoos suffer tremendously, both physically and mentally. They often display neurotic behaviour, like repetitive pacing, swaying, and bar biting. Not surprising, perhaps, considering the typical polar bear enclosure is one million times smaller than the area they would naturally roam."

PETA isn't alone. In April, ethical tour operator Responsible Travel - after consultation with wildlife charity Born Free Foundation - axed trips that include zoo visits. It's the first travel company to publicly make such a move.
Read more: Should I worry about chemtrails?
"Only 15% of the thousands of species held in zoos are considered 'threatened'," says Will Travers OBE, president of Born Free. "An even smaller proportion are part of captive breeding programmes and, of those, a tiny fraction have been released back into the wild. That's not a record that justifies tens of millions of wild animals kept in zoos."

PETA's Bekhechi adds, the aim of breeding programmes is just "to produce baby animals to attract visitors."

Some, however, argue that children benefit from zoos. "We engage huge audiences with wildlife, inspiring the conservationists of tomorrow," argues zoological director of ZSL London and Whipsnade Zoos, Professor David Field. That claim is up for debate. A 2014 study by the Society for Conservation Biology found that of over 2,800 children surveyed following visits to London Zoo, 62% showed no positive learning outcomes.

But, for every story that casts zoos in a bad light - from Vince the rhino's poaching at Paris' Thoiry Zoo in March; Cincinnati Zoo shooting endangered gorilla, Harambe, last year after a child fell into his enclosure; or Copenhagen Zoo killing and publicly dissecting Marius, a two-year-old giraffe in 2014 - there are heart-warming tales too.

Zoos across the US can take credit for reviving the wild Arabian oryx, golden lion tamarin and Californian condor populations, among many others. And Steve Irwin's Australia Zoo has an on-site Wildlife Hospital to save sick and injured native species.

In the age of social media, high profile culls have sparked heated debates. The shooting of Harambe the gorilla spawned the most-shared meme of 2016 and caused a hounded Cincinnati Zoo to suspend its social media accounts. When it comes to lethal force and animal welfare, at least, public opinion swiftly sides against zoos.

But whether recent events have triggered a profound shift in public consciousness is harder to quantify. Regardless of the merits or ethics of zoos, one thing's for certain: they're going to be around for some years yet.

How can you tell a zoo from a sanctuary?

The Global Federation of Animal Sanctuaries (GFAS) operates an accreditation system for sanctuaries, rescue centres and rehabilitation centres. Look out for the GFAS seal of approval.

So it's better to have 'close encounters' with animals in the wild, right?

Wrong! Step away from the selfie stick. Don't be suckered into supporting companies that offer experiences like hugging a tiger, swimming with dolphins, riding elephants, or kissing sharks. These experiences are often harmful to wildlife and dangerous for you.

How do we save wildlife if not by breeding programmes?

PETA says: "People who care about protecting endangered species should donate to organisations that safeguard them in their natural habitats - if a species' native environment has been destroyed, there's nowhere left for the animals to go."
Published in the June 2017 issue of National Geographic Traveller (UK)
Follow us on social media

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Hot topic: is it time for zoos to be banned?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The polar bears in Winnipeg have disco poo. Their droppings look like little glitterballs. Before anyone starts sprinkling the stuff on their cornflakes, this isn't the hottest new beauty trend nor is it a natural phenomenon: Assiniboine Park Zoo's keepers use coloured glitter in the bears' feed to identify their droppings.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Foto: (Photo: CC0 Public Domain/pexels/Kevin Bidwell)

Should zoos be banned? Do they serve a positive purpose, or are they unnecessary and cruel? Here are the pros and cons and some helpful history and context.

Up until the early 19th century, the sole function of zoos was to symbolize the power of royalty and indulge their extravagant tastes. People working at zoos paid little attention to the concept of wildlife conservation or expanding our scientific understanding of the animal kingdom. This long history of exploitation is a big reason many activists call for zoos to be banned.

Evidence of the existence of zoos and menageries can be traced back to Ancient Egypt, circa 3500 BC. The Roman Empire was founded in 27 BC, and many Roman emperors kept private zoo collections. Sometimes the captive animals were studied; however, they were mostly used for entertainment in the arena, invariably ending in a cruel death.

The Deal With Modern-Day Zoos

The modern zoo as we know it emerged in the United Kingdom in the 19th century. It was only then that a transition was made from royal menageries, designed to entertain the elite, to public zoological gardens aiming to educate the wider population. Growing urbanization and industrialization led to heightened demand for new forms of entertainment. This rising need and the requirements of scholarly research led to the founding of the first modern zoos.

According to the Association of Zoos and Aquariums, the US had 230 accredited zoos and aquariums as of 2020. At the time, these institutions accommodated nearly 800,000 animals and 6,000 species, with around 1,000 on the endangered species list. Zoos provide 200,000 jobs with an annual budget of $230 million set aside for wildlife conservation. They attract more than 200 million visitors annually, with special educational programs designed specifically for school groups.

Over the past 30 years, many established zoos have endeavored to improve the level of animal care and rehabilitate their image in the public eye. However, despite good intentions and considerable financial effort, the concept of zoos is nonetheless seriously problematic. Activists are calling to ban zoos, and their voices are getting louder.

How can we effectively protect the natural world? Find out more here: Environmental Organizations: 8 NGOs and Non-Profits Worth Supporting

Should Zoos be Banned? Smaller Zoos Often Lack Regulation

The ethical dilemma around keeping wild animals in captivity is significant. The size and complexity of the zoo system and the vast range of animals in their care mean this problem can't be solved easily. So, some animal activists maintain that a total ban on zoos is the only fix.

The most urgent issue is arguably the lack of uniform regulation. For example, roadside zoos throughout North America make their profit by attracting visitors to adjacent facilities - usually on gas station lots.

Often animals in such zoos are trained to perform tricks. In addition, visitors are allowed to get very close to them, which is not permitted in larger, better-regulated establishments. In fact, the USDA states that allowing visitors to handle animals like baby tigers or lions violates the Animal Welfare Act.

These roadside zoos are consistently reported for neglect and severe animal mistreatment. That is typically a consequence of employing workers with little to no animal welfare or safety training. A complete ban or more vigorous enforcement of standards would also protect these untrained workers from injury or death caused by unpredictable animal behavior.

Moreover, these smaller, unregulated organizations sometimes possess animals procured through illegal trafficking channels, a serious global problem. Banning zoos could go a long way toward halting this practice or - at the very least - reducing its impact on the natural world.

Zoos and Animal Welfare

According to organizations like the World Society for the Protection of Animals and The Humane Society of the United States, restrictive cages and enclosures affect normal animal behavior and sometimes lead to shorter lifespans.

Animals in captivity often develop dangerous and destructive habits due to the stress of living in such restricted spaces. They also lack the everyday social interactions they would experience in the wild. Abnormal animal behavior also puts zoo workers at greater risk for injury and death.

Furthermore, zoos often harbor non-native species unacclimatized to the local environment. That means many animals suffer in extreme weather conditions (polar bears in hot regions, for example) they would otherwise never encounter.

Another unique set of problems arises from the live feeding of certain species, particularly big cats. Live feeding, often touted as positive since it encourages normal predatory behaviors, has a notable downside. Since this method of feeding large predators generally requires smaller animals to be bred and purchased solely for this purpose, it necessitates the exploitation and frequently painful death of the smaller species.

Should Zoos be Banned? The Pros & Cons
Pros:
When ecological conservation emerged as a matter of public interest in the 1970s, zoos began to engage in conservation programs. The American Zoo Association even stated that conservation was its number one priority. To push conservation issues, many large zoos stopped having animals perform tricks for visitors. They even expanded and redesigned animal enclosures to improve the lives of captive animals.

Given that the destruction of wildlife habitats worldwide continues unabated and species like elephants, big cats, birds, primates, rhinos, reptiles, and many others are at real of extinction, zoos have stepped in with the hopes of stopping or at least slowing the decline of these endangered species.

In the face of sharp criticism and loud calls for zoos to be banned, many modern zoos state that their primary function is to breed endangered species and reintroduce them into the wild. They also aim to teach visitors the importance of animal conservation and mindfulness of the ecosystem as a whole.

Tip: You probably came to this article with an open mind and ready to learn more about the usefulness and morality of zoos. This suggests a certain level of intellectual humility - which is an important skill to foster, not just for academic learning but also to bridge differences with others. Learn more about it: Unlock Intellectual Humility: Uncovering Its Benefits, Obstacles, and Development
Cons:
Critics and animal rights activists insist that despite their noble intentions, zoos are inherently immoral and primarily serve to entertain humans at the animals' expense. Zoo advocates maintain that their efforts make a difference in wildlife conservation and will continue to have a positive environmental impact well into the future.

Putting aside these opposing views, it remains a sad reality that the welfare of zoo animals varies widely depending on where you are. Some establishments have worked hard to adapt their enclosures to better suit the needs of the animals they hold. However, constraints like limited space and funds hinder this process. Smaller zoos don't always have the money to hire well-trained zoological staff or expand their breeding programs and facilities to maintain the ethos of conservation. Banning smaller, less established zoos with little funding could be a practical first step to reducing harm to wildlife.

For some cute marsupial, bear or cat-like faces that you might not get to see in a zoo, check out the 15 cutest exotic animals in the world!

There is no quick fix for the issues faced by zoos across the country and around the world. That said, a more uniform, robust, and compassionate regulatory system based on the humane care and conservation of wildlife would be a step in the right direction. Then, targeted bans for specific zoos that do not satisfy firmer regulations might become an option.

Learn more about endangered species on Earth:

** Links to retailers marked with ** or underlined orange are partially partner links: If you buy here, you actively support Utopia.org, because we will receive a small part of the sales proceeds. More info.

Do you like this post?

Tags: Animal Welfare Animals Conservation Guide Must reads

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Should Zoos be Banned? Are They Cruel - or Necessary for Animal Welfare?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Should zoos be banned? Do they serve a positive purpose, or are they unnecessary and cruel? Here are the pros and cons and some helpful history and context.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
For a mother and kids at the Philadelphia Zoo, in Pennsylvania, it was a close encounter of the ferocious kind. Directly in front of them was a Siberian tiger. But the family did not panic. They laughed. The tiger was in a meshed-in walkway.

That tiger trail is part of Zoo360. The exhibit has changed the way humans and animals experience the zoo. But Zoo360's bigger impact may come from its effort to change animals' lives in captivity.

PHILADELPHIA ZOO

Many experts think zoos need a major overhaul if they're going to last. The Philadelphia Zoo may be the best model for that change.

Studies show that many animal species are smarter and feel more than we have understood. Animals may suffer when they are removed from the wild. If creatures suffer when they're confined, should they be held in captivity?

"Even the best zoos today are based on captivity and coercion × coercion GETTY IMAGES the use of force or threats (noun) The bullies used coercion to get Sam to hand over his lunch money. ," says Jon Coe. He is the zoo designer who invented the Zoo360 concept. "To me, that's the fundamental flaw."

PHILADELPHIA ZOO

Rethinking Zoos

In 1975, when David Hancocks took over as director of the Woodland Park Zoo, in Seattle, Washington, it looked like any other major-city zoo. But within a year, Hancocks hired Coe to rethink how zoo animals are kept. Coe developed a plan that incorporated natural vegetation, room to roam, and abundant light.

The new polar-bear exhibit at the St. Louis Zoo, in Missouri, is a good example of an exhibit that has the animals' best interests at heart. The $16 million, 40,000-square-foot enclosure dedicates an area to each of the polar bear's native environments: sea, coast, and tundra × tundra MICHAEL DEYOUNG-GETTY IMAGES a vast, treeless, arctic region ( noun) The tourists hiked across the Alaskan tundra. .

Many zoos, however, do not have the money and space needed to provide a proper home for an animal. Take elephants, for example. A recent study shows how elephants thrive when they have social connections and can gather their own food. In 2011, the Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA) started requiring zoos with elephants to keep at least three of the animals and an elephant scientist on staff. Not every zoo can afford that.

FRANCK BOHBOT FOR TIME

Creature Connection

Hancocks has done a lot to shape the zoos we see today. Now he spends more time thinking about their future-and flaws. An exhibit might look better than a cage, but an animal might get little benefit from it. "A concrete tree is as useless as a light pole," he says. "From the animals' point of view, they're really no better off."

Most zoo officials don't agree. Many have dedicated their lives to working with animals. Ask a dozen zoo directors why these places should exist today, and education, conservation, and science all come up.

But helping people understand animals is the most common answer. "That moment at a zoo, when a person sees a gorilla look them back in the eye, helps them grasp their role in a greater natural world," says Mike Clifford. He works at a design firm that helps zoos create exhibits.

FROM TOP: ERIC GEVAERT-GETTY IMAGES; ART WOLFE-GETTY IMAGES; TOM MCHUGH-GETTY IMAGES

People are going to zoos in greater numbers than ever. According to the AZA, in 2015, more than 170 million people visited zoos in the U.S. Still, those big numbers will do little to lessen the growing arguments against keeping animals captive.

"Where are we going?" asks David Towne, who once oversaw the Woodland Park Zoo. "I guess I'm worried."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Experts say zoos need to better meet the needs of animals. For a mother and kids at the Philadelphia Zoo, in Pennsylvania, it was a close encounter of the ferocious kind. Directly in front of them was a Siberian tiger....

# data[].attributes.headline
Are Zoos Ethical? Arguments for and Against Keeping Animals in Zoos

# data[].attributes.subject
Are Zoos Ethical? Arguments for and Against Keeping Animals in Zoos

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A zoo is a place where captive animals are put on display for humans to see. While early zoos (shortened from zoological parks) concentrated on displaying as many unusual creatures as possible-often in small, cramped conditions-the focus of most modern zoos is conservation and education. While zoo advocates and conservationists argue that zoos save endangered species and educate the public, many animal rights activists believe the cost of confining animals outweighs the benefits, and that the violation of the rights of individual animals-even in efforts to fend off extinction-cannot be justified.

A Brief History of Zoos

Humans have kept wild animals for thousands of years. The first efforts to keep wild animals for non-utilitarian uses began about 2500 BCE, when rulers in Mesopotamia, Egypt kept collections in enclosed pens. Modern zoos began to evolve during the 18th century and the Age of Enlightenment, when scientific interest in zoology, as well as the study of animal behavior and anatomy, came to the fore.

Early zoos were a dismal affair. Animals were kept in small enclosures with little if any, greenery. With a scant understanding of what the various animals needed, many perished relatively quickly. In accredited U.S. zoos (and elsewhere) things are better now, fortunately. Primates, for example, have gone from barren cages with little furniture to naturalistic and sometimes semi-free-ranging designs. But is it enough?

Arguments for Zoos

By bringing people and animals together, zoos educate the public and foster an appreciation of other species.

Zoos save endangered species by bringing them into a safe environment, where they are protected from poachers, habitat loss, starvation, and predators.

Many zoos have breeding programs for endangered species. In the wild, these individuals might have trouble finding mates and breeding, and species could become extinct.

Some zoos have conservation programs around the world that use the zoo's expertise and funding to help protect wildlife against poaching and other threats.

Reputable zoos accredited by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums are held to high standards for the treatment of their resident animals. According to AZA, its accreditation guarantees that the organization has undergone strict evaluation by recognized experts to ensure the highest standards of "animal management and care, including living environments, social groupings, health, and nutrition."

A good zoo provides an enriched habitat in which the animals are never bored, are well cared for, and have plenty of space.

Seeing an animal in person is a much more personal and more memorable experience than seeing that animal in a nature documentary and is more likely to foster an empathetic attitude toward animals.

Some zoos help rehabilitate wildlife and take in exotic pets that people no longer want or are no longer able to care for.

Both accredited and unaccredited animal exhibitors are regulated by the federal Animal Welfare Act, which establishes standards for animal care.

Arguments Against Zoos

From an animal rights standpoint, humans do not have a right to breed, capture, and confine other animals-even if those species are endangered. Being a member of an endangered species doesn't mean the individual animals should be afforded fewer rights.

Animals in captivity suffer from boredom, stress, and confinement. No pen-no matter how humane-or drive-through safari can compare to the freedom of the wild.

Intergenerational bonds are broken when individuals are sold or traded to other zoos.

Baby animals bring in visitors and money, but this incentive to breed new baby animals leads to overpopulation. Surplus animals are sold not only to other zoos, but also to circuses and hunting facilities. Some zoos simply kill their surplus animals outright.

Some captive breeding programs do not release animals back into the wild. The offspring may be forever part of the chain of zoos, circuses, and petting zoos.

Removing individual specimens from the wild further endangers the wild population because the remaining individuals will be less genetically diverse and may have greater difficulty finding mates. Maintaining species diversity within captive breeding facilities is also a challenge.

If people want to see wild animals in real life, they can observe wildlife in the wild or visit a sanctuary. (A true sanctuary does not buy, sell, or breed animals, but instead takes in unwanted exotic pets, surplus animals from zoos, or injured wildlife that can no longer survive in the wild.)

The federal Animal Welfare Act establishes only the most minimal standards for cage size, shelter, health care, ventilation, fencing, food, and water. For example, enclosures must provide "sufficient space to allow each animal to make normal postural and social adjustments with adequate freedom of movement. Inadequate space may be indicated by evidence of malnutrition, poor condition, debility, stress, or abnormal behavior patterns." Violations often result in a slap on the wrist and the exhibitor is given a deadline to correct the violation. Even a long history of inadequate care and AWA violations, such as the history of Tony the Truck Stop Tiger, does not necessarily ensure abused animals will be freed.

Animals sometimes escape their enclosures, endangering themselves as well as people. Likewise, people ignore warnings or accidentally get too close to animals, leading to horrific outcomes. For example, Harambe, a 17-year-old western lowland gorilla, was shot in 2016 when a toddler accidentally fell into his enclosure at the Cincinnati Zoo. While the child survived and was not badly injured, the gorilla was killed outright.

Petting zoos have been linked with numerous incidents of diseases including E. coli infection, cryptosporidiosis, salmonellosis, and dermatomycosis (ringworm).

The Last Word on Zoos

In making a case for or against zoos, both sides argue that they're saving animals. Whether or not zoos benefit the animal community, they certainly do make money. As long as there is demand for them, zoos will continue to exist.

Since zoos are likely an inevitability, the best way to move forward is to ensure that zoo conditions are the best possible for the animals that live in captivity and that individuals who violate animal care health and safety sanctions are not only duly punished but denied any future access to animals.

One day we may look back at zoos and marvel at their barbarity. Or, one day we may look back at zoos and be grateful for the species they saved from extinction. Of these two scenarios, only time will tell.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Are Zoos Ethical? Arguments for and Against Keeping Animals in Zoos

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Zoos, if done right, could be a good thing for the animals and the public-yet many so-called zoos get it terribly wrong.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Oftentimes zoos and aquariums can get bad press which sparks the debate over how beneficial they are for wildlife. While we can't deny there are a couple of bad apples in the mix, the majority of zoos help enrich the lives of animals in many different ways. Many zoos do more than just connect people with nature; they also exist to facilitate and promote animal conversation. If you're wondering how zoos improve the lives of animals, this blog is for you!

Protection Against Extinction

It's sad to say, but the world is currently going through a mass extinction due to human activities encroaching on wildlife. A study published by Science Advances in 2020 found that human population and activity has caused rapid global mammal extinctions over the past 126,000 years. Even currently, many species are going extinct across the globe, and many more are facing the threat of extinction. Modern zoos and aquariums help combat these problems. Breeding programs help preserve genetic biodiversity and help reintroduce critically endangered species into the wild. Having animals in protection provides a reservoir against a population crash in the wild. Zoos have helped remove animals from the endangered species list and have saved many from extinction. Without the efforts of zoos, there would be fewer animal species alive today!

Zoo's Research Helps Wildlife

In order to reintroduce animals into the wild and repair the ecosystem, we need to understand how certain animals live and act. Studying animals in zoos can create real positive change for wildlife populations. Even if animals in zoos are never introduced to the wild, they still help improve the lives of their counterparts living in nature. Modern zoos act as a place for observation and research to study issues such as animal disease or infection and to help develop treatments.

Zoos Care for Their Animals

While there are many underfunded and neglectful zoos out there, the good ones positively contribute to the animals' health and well-being. Animals can have a quality of life as high or higher than in the wild. They don't suffer from the stress and threat of predators, the pain of parasites, injury, or illness, and they won't suffer from starvation or drought. Instead, they enjoy a peaceful life with a high-quality diet filled with all of the supplements they need. They won't have to endure the bullying or social ostracism that often happens in nature. Many dreadfulthings happen in the wild that aren't present in zoos.

The Children's Nature Retreat

We hope this blog has helped give you an understanding of how zoos improve the lives of animals! With the ongoing threat to wildlife environments and the many benefits that come with zoos, it's safe to say that they're essential to the long-term survival of many species. Not only can zoos help protect, breed, and reintroduce animals, but we can learn about them to help create a better world for them.

At the Children's Nature Retreat, many of our animals have been acquired from owners who could no longer keep or care for them. Some have been rescued from harsh living conditions and now enjoy the serenity of the Retreat. If you want to say "hi" to some of our animal friends, We have over 200 animals, We are open 7 days a week, no reservations required. You can visit us at 5178 Japatul Spur Alpine, CA 91901, or get in touch by calling (619) 320-4942 or contacting us on our website.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
How Zoos Improve the Lives of Animals Oftentimes zoos and aquariums can get bad press which sparks the debate over how beneficial they are for wildlife. While we can't deny there are a couple of bad apples

# data[].attributes.headline
Are Zoos Good or Bad for Animals? | KQED Education

# data[].attributes.subject
Are Zoos Good or Bad for Animals? | KQED Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Zoos are great, right? You get to be up close and personal with some amazing animals that you'd pretty much never get to see in the wild. Clearly, zoos are a win for people. But when it comes to the animals, zoos might cause more harm than good. Should zoos exist?

TEACHERS: Guide your students to practice civil discourse about current topics and get practice writing CER (claim, evidence, reasoning) responses. Explore lesson supports.

How did zoos become a thing?
Humans have been capturing and displaying exotic animals for thousands of years. The earliest known collections date back to 3500 BCE in Egypt, where rulers kept hippos, elephants, baboons, and different species of large cats. Now back then, that didn't mean that your average Egyptian could go check any of that awesomeness out. These early zoos were really just a way for kings to flex on other kings. Modern zoos, where the public can come and watch animals exhibiting their natural behavior, didn't really become a thing until the early 1800s. The longest continuously operating zoo in the world is the Vienna Zoo, which has been going strong for more than 260 years.

What are the arguments in favor of having zoos?
Zoos may be great entertainment, but their big goal is to educate the public about wildlife and what we can do to protect them. Zoo animals are sort of like ambassadors for their counterparts in the wild. Zoos also contribute to scientific research. "Zoo" is short for zoological park, and zoology is the scientific study of animal biology and behavior. In addition, zoos work really hard to save animals that are threatened in the wild. Zoos can take at-risk animals, breed them in captivity, and then reintroduce them back into the wild.

What are the arguments for NOT having zoos?
Zoos have their problems. Not all zoos are created equal. Some are clean and well staffed, others aren't. There are some in the richest cities in the world, and there are some in conflict zones. What this means is that not all zoos have the resources to properly care for the animals they house. And for many critics, no amount of education or research justifies keeping animals captive. That captivity can be REALLY bad for both physical AND psychological health. And while zoos have been really helpful is saving endangered animals, it doesn't work out for certain species. For example, most large carnivores like lions and tigers that are bred in captivity die when released into the wild. It turns out that they haven't developed the natural behaviors they need when they're out on their own and have to fend for themselves.

SOURCES:
Do we need zoos? (The Atlantic)
https://www.theatlantic.com/news/archive/2016/06/harambe-zoo/485084/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Are Zoos Good or Bad for Animals? | KQED

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Zoos are great, right? You get to be up close and personal with some amazing animals that you'd pretty much never get to see in the wild. Clearly, zoos are a win for people. But when it comes to the animals, zoos might cause more harm than good. Should zoos exist?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
About this film It’s no secret that our public water and sewer systems are in need of maintenance, repair, and upgrades, making them vulnerable to private corporations offering false solutions to cities struggling to pay for these necessities. When corporations take control of our water, they priori…

# data[].attributes.headline
Bottled Water: Always There When You Need It

# data[].attributes.subject
Bottled Water: Always There When You Need It

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Bottled Water - Always There When You Need It

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The battle between bottled water enthusiasts and tap water die-hards is finding new ground on YouTube, with dueling videos from environmental activists and the International Bottled Water Association.

# data[].attributes.headline
Should Bottled Water Be Banned From Schools?

# data[].attributes.subject
Should Bottled Water Be Banned From Schools?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What Are Some Advantages of Bottled Water?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
While some people might argue that it’s silly to spend money on something you can get for…

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Extreme Sports Facts

Check out our range of extreme sports facts.

Learn about the summer and winter X Games, different types of extreme sports, the surfaces and environments such as water, land, snow and air, as well as lots more interesting facts and information.

Extreme sports, sometimes called action sports or adventure sports, do not have an exact definition but are generally considered to be activities that are seen as having a high level of potential danger.

Extreme sports often involve high speeds, dangerous heights, the requirement for a high level of specialist technical skill, and highly specialized gear or equipment.

Success in extreme sports usually involves judging panels scoring athletes based on visual and technical criteria and completion of a 'trick'.

Height based extreme sports include Bungee jumping, skydiving, BASE jumping, paragliding and hang gliding.

Water based extreme sports include scuba diving, windsurfing, kitesurfing, wakeboarding surfing, whitewater kayaking and rafting.

Wheel based extreme sports include BMX, skateboarding, mountain biking, inline skating, rally car and motocross.

Winter based extreme sports include skiing, snowboarding, and snowmobile.

Cliff and cave based extreme sports include rock climbing, ice climbing, caving, free diving, mountaineering and cave diving.

The X Games are an annual extreme sports event, organized by the U.S. sports broadcaster ESPN. Participants compete to win gold, silver, and bronze medals along with prize money.

The first Summer X Games were held in 1995 in Newport, Rhode Island. The first Winter X Games were held in 1997 at Mountain Resort, Big Bear Lake, California.

X Games are typically held in the USA. The winter games are held in January or February and the summer games are usually held in August.

X Games have also been held in Asia since 1998 and Europe since 2010.

The X Games competitions often makes heroes of those athletes who are talented and brave enough to pull of a new and exciting 'trick' such as Tony Hawk's 900 in skateboarding, Travis Pastrana's double backflip in freestyle motocross, Heath Frisby's first snowmobile front flip or snowboarder Torstein Horgmo's triple flip.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Extreme Sports Facts - Information About X Games, Action Sports & More

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Extreme Sports Facts Check out our range of extreme sports facts. Learn about the summer and winter X Games, different types of extreme sports, the surfaces and environments such as water, land, snow and air, as well as lots more interesting facts and information.

# data[].attributes.headline
Slopestyle can be dangerous. But is it too risky at Sochi Olympics?

# data[].attributes.subject
Slopestyle can be dangerous. But is it too risky at Sochi Olympics?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Is your kid obsessed with becoming the next X Games star, Olympic medalist, or YouTube stuntman? Young kids often have no fear when it comes to taking risks, but are extreme sports like dirt bike riding and bungee jumping dangerous for kids?
Related: Sports Safety Tips for Your Child
Though traditional sports like football, basketball, and hockey aren't exactly going out of style, the world of extreme sports is growing in popularity. Kids and adults alike are participating in increasing numbers in these risky-if not sometimes downright dangerous-sports. But why?

From skateboarding and snowboarding to BMX biking and rock climbing, pop culture and social media have collided to amp up physical activity and make super-sized stunts seem like the norm. Long gone are the days when peer pressure from classmates, neighbors or older sibs drove younger children to drop into a half-pipe or launch their bike off a crazy incline.

Today's kiddos are also influenced by...well, influencers. YouTube stars, TikTok creators, and even Olympic athletes have turned extreme sports from something that only the wildest child would attempt to everyday activities.

If your littles are begging to do extreme sports and you're totally new to these types of activities, read on for more info on the risks, benefits, times to encourage your kiddo, and when to flat out say a big 'ol, " NO."

Extreme Sports Growing More Popular with Kids

Some kids are happier riding their skateboards than dealing with the structure of soccer practice. Others like cruising around on their BMX bikes until their legs just quit, surfing themselves silly, or spending the entire weekend learning new tricks on their inline skates.

Of course, young kids are also attracted to extreme sports because they're cool. And who doesn't like being on the cutting edge? Snowboarding, the bad-boy little brother of skiing, was legitimized by sports traditionalists when it became an official Olympic event at the 1998 Nagano Games.

Fast-forward to the 2020 Tokyo Olympics (which were actually held in 2021 thanks to the pandemic) and skateboarding, sport climbing, and surfing became legit gold, silver, and bronze events!

Studies Show Fewer Kids Are Joining School Sports Teams

Have the days of dribbling a ball down a court or passing a puck gone the way of the dinosaurs? According to stats from Project Play, in 2021 the most popular youth sports for children ages six through 12 were bicycling, basketball, and baseball. Even though more than 5.2 million children biked in 2021, this was a significant change from way back in 2008.

The Project Play statistics show that only 18 percent of children reported bicycling in 2021, while a whopping 27.7 percent got active on two wheels in 2008.

Basketball team play dropped from 16.6 percent to 14.5 percent participation and baseball from 16.5 percent to 12.6 percent between 2008 and 2021. The number of children playing other popular team sports, such as soccer, tackle football, and flag football, also dropped during the same time frame.

Basketball is Less Popular But Bicycling is Big with Teens

The same downward trends didn't happen for teen participation in all traditional sports. Bicycling participation grew from 16.8 percent to 21 percent between 2008 and 2021 and baseball play rose from 8.2 percent to 9.5 percent.

What could account for the overall downward trend in team and individual youth sports play? There isn't one reason. But some of the possible explanations include an increasingly competitive climate, the high cost of intensive travel sports (such as hockey), or interest in other activities -such as extreme sports.

Dangerous Sports: Kids in BMX, Climbing, and Bungee Jumping?!

We spoke to Paul Vail, 29, a BMX freestyle bike rider for more than 14 years to learn more about the kinds of extreme sports kids are trying.

Vail says that when it comes to extreme sports, "Today's kids who've been riding skateboards or BMX bikes since they were 12-year-olds will become the parents who say, 'Yes, skateboarding, bike riding -- perfectly acceptable sports for my kid to do. And don't tell me they have to play football or be on the basketball team to be accepted, because that's no longer true.'"

Vail balks at the term "extreme sports." "People have been skydiving, skiing, riding bikes, doing tricks, and taking jumps forever. I think the extreme sports label is a gimmick. I like the term 'alternative sports'."

Extreme or not, it's important to encourage kids to express themselves physically, whether their athletic tastes are trendy or traditional. Both solo and team-oriented sports can build self-confidence, relieve stress, and promote physical fitness -- all of which are vital to growing kids and adults alike.

Kids in "alternative" sports are expressive, highly skilled athletes. And sports like rock climbing, snowboarding, inline skating, surfing, skateboarding, extreme skiing, and mountain biking (to name just a few), require significant technical ability as well as strength and endurance. Plus, alternative sports can help your kids develop positive qualities like discipline, persistence, and determination.

Kids in Ski Jumping or Snowboarding

BMX, skateboarding, and bungee jumping aren't the only extreme sports kids flock to. Even though ski jumping might seem like a new adventurous activity, it made its Olympic debut way back in 1924.

Of course, this doesn't mean kiddos were climbing up mountains, whooshing down slopes, and flying into the air on two skis a century ago. While this soaring sport isn't exactly new, its youth appeal has spiked in recent years. According to Women's Ski Jumping USA, five to eight years old is the age average for ski jumpers to start the sport!

Like ski jumping, snowboarding is a winter-time extreme sport that has skyrocketed in popularity. Again, snowboarding became Olympic-official in 1998. Almost a decade later, in 2006, then-19-year-old Shaun White made his first bid for the gold. But White certainly wasn't the last teen to take this extreme sport up a level and put it center stage.

Seventeen-year-old Chloe Kim became the youngest women's Olympic halfpipe competitor to nab the gold in 2018 at the PyeongChang games. With role models like White and Kim to follow, a whole new generation is getting into the halfpipe!

Not only do today's kiddos follow these, and other top athletes, but during the Olympics, they can watch the extreme antics of snowboarders on YouTube, TikTok, and just about every other social media site.

Kids and Sport Injuries

How dangerous are extreme sports? As a parent, your child's safety is priority number one. And that's why you're not so sure about your kiddo's extreme activities. Even though extreme sports do often come with, as the name implies, extreme risks, these aren't the only athletics that can result in serious injuries.

According to Stanford Medicine Children's Health, each year over 3.5 million children (14 and under) are injured during sports play. This includes more than 775,000 kiddos who require ER treatment. The majority of the injuries requiring hospital-level care are the result of collisions, falls, overexertion (during informal recreational activities) or object-related impacts.

When it comes to the most injuries per sport, football takes the top spot-with nearly 215,000 five- to 14-year-olds treated in hospitals in one year. This number is higher than what you find with some extreme sports. But in general, more children play this type of traditional team sport than engage in extreme activity.

A 2015 study published in the Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine looked at the prevalence of head and neck injuries in extreme sports. The researchers found that between 2000 and 2011 there were more than four million total injuries from these types of activities (this includes adult injuries).

Over 11 percent of these were head and neck injuries. Of these head and neck injuries, the extreme sports with the highest number of incidents included skateboarding, snowboarding, skiing, and motocross.

Fear is probably the number-one reason many of us avoid taking risks. For athletes in extreme sports, conquering fear is part of the adventure of sport. When a skateboarder is practicing tricks on a 15-foot ramp (commonly called a half-pipe), or a mountain biker is flying down a rock-strewn single-track trail, and he makes a mistake and falls -- well, it's going to hurt a little. Okay, maybe a lot.

But the athletes we spoke to didn't complain about injuries. In fact, most have enjoyed relatively injury-free experiences in their sports. Brian Krause, a competitive skydiver for the U.S. Army's Golden Knights, has taken thousands of jumps out of airplanes without so much as a sprained ankle.

But Matt Donovan, a pro downhill mountain bike racer from Massachusetts, said that when he first got serious about racing, his season was "very injury-laden. I had two concussions, a separated shoulder, a broken hand, multiple cuts, and lacerations. And I cracked a rib."

There are two kinds of sports injuries:

1. Chronic Repetitive or Overuse Injuries

Overuse injuries can cause stress fractures, muscle tears, or progressive bone deformities.

2. Acute Injuries

Acute sports injuries occur as a result of trauma from contact with a major force. Acute sports injuries include fractures, broken bones, dislocations, and more serious spinal and brain injuries.

Is It Wrong to Let Children Do Extreme Sports?

Should safety concerns stop your child from trying an extreme sport? There's no one-size-fits-all answer to this question. If your adventure-loving kiddo is all about skateboarding, snowboarding, parkour, BMX biking, or any other high-octane activity, you will need to think about:

Your Child's Age and Developmental Level

Is your child developmentally ready to handle the challenge? What is their skill level when it comes to basic coordination and athletic tasks like running, jumping, and balancing? Can you trust them to act responsibly, follow an instructor's directions, and wear safety equipment correctly?

Your Child's Motivation

Does your child want to become the next Tik Tok star? If your tween has dreams of easily twisting a BMX bike around in mid-air like their fave influencer or thinks videos of teens crashing their skateboards into just about anything and everything is hilarious, they may struggle to stay safe while engaging in an extreme sport.

The Instructor or Coach

Who will teach your child about the sport? A YouTube video or IG video are not a substitute for the real deal. Only a qualified instructor or professional should instruct your child.

The Safety Equipment

Do you know what safety equipment your child will need? Will they wear it? You may need to learn more about the equipment standards before you allow your child to participate in extreme activities.

What types of equipment do children need? The specific items depend on the sport. These could include a helmet, shoulder pads, shin pads, elbow pads, or wrist guards.

According to Seattle Children's Hospital, skiers and snowboarders should wear a helmet that meets ASTM, CEN, or Snell standards. Skateboarders should wear one that conforms to the ASTM F1492 standard. Children who ride bikes or scooters should wear a helmet that meets CPSC or Snell standards, knee pads, and elbow pads.

When is an extreme sport too extreme? If you don't feel comfortable with your child engaging in the activity or don't feel that they can follow safety directions, it's okay to just say no. Some sports are not age-appropriate for younger kids, and you should wait until they're a bit older to try them out.

It's also okay to talk to ask questions, talk to a pro, or take your time gathering facts, stats, and any other info about the adventurous activity! Learn more about extreme sports by taking our quiz here.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Kids and Extreme Sports: Should They Be Allowed?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Should kids do extreme sports? BMX riders, snowboarders and X Game stars weigh in on the benefits and risks of kids doing extreme sports.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Overconfidence and a lack of training and a habit of not wearing safety gear, especially helmets, help cause more than 40,000 head and neck injuries nationally a year in sports like skateboarding.

# data[].attributes.headline
Opinion: Playing high school football carries a big chance of brain injury

# data[].attributes.subject
Opinion: Playing high school football carries a big chance of brain injury

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Playing high school football carries a big chance of brain injury

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
/ CBS News

Extreme sports bring excitement, and are starting to draw big bucks.

But are the athletes putting too much on the line?

The daring participants say extreme sports are all about the thrill, the rush of adrenaline they get. They're climbing higher, jumping farther and moving faster, all in the name of personal glory.

Still, when things go wrong, they pay a heavy price.

Humans aren't supposed to fly, but Jeb Corliss comes pretty close.

His extreme exploits have a huge following. One video of him in action alone has gotten almost 9 million views.

Corliss hurt in stunt jump
Uncertainty clouds recovery of skiier Sarah Burke

On Monday, Corliss was seriously injured on Table Mountain in Cape Town, South Africa. Moments after he stepped off a cliff -- a 3,500-foot drop -- he hit the wall, breaking both his legs. He had to be taken by helicopter to a hospital.

Only a day before that, another extreme athlete, ice climber John Roberts, died after a 60-foot fall in Colorado.

And last Tuesday, free-skier Sarah Burke was critically injured during a training run in Utah.

All of these athletes take risks and are at the leading edge of extreme sports -- a one-time bit player on the sports scene that has exploded in recent years, thanks in part to social media and TV coverage.

The extreme athletes known as "Birdmen" even attracted the attention of "60 Minutes" in 2010.

Sponsorships have helped extreme athletes soar to new heights. Corliss has eight sponsors, including camera company GoPro.

GoPro CEO Nick Woodman says what Corliss does is risky, but not nearly as risky as most people would think, because he's so good at it.

Corliss jumped without permission from South African authorities, a jump that not only put him in danger, but his rescuers, as well -- one of the many reasons why big brands tend to shy away.

"A lot of big brands, (and) rightly so, don't want to take that chance. You don't want to see blood spattered all over a logo that you've invested millions and millions of dollars in," says sports marketer Joe Favorito.

But, Favorito adds, athletes who are determined will find a way. "What they're trying to do is offset costs and take it to another level as, quote, a professional athlete," he said. "And people think, when you're associated with sponsors, that makes you a professional. Sometimes, it makes you become a little more risky."

Professional skier and base-jumper JT Holmes knows how dangerous extreme sports can be. He knew Burke, and watched his close friend, Shane McConkey, die after jumping off a 2,000 ft cliff. Holmes was also the subject of the Steve Kroft "60 Minutes" story on "Birdmen," and was a stunt man for the film "Transformers." Holmes insisted on "CBS This Morning" that he engages in extreme sports because they're "just good, clean fun." He admitted he thinks about the possibility the activities could kill him. "Certainly," Holmes said. "Every single jump, every single ski run, you have to be aware of the (possible) consequences and, if you're going to choose to put yourself in these perilous situations, you need to be prepared."

To see the entire interview, click on the video below.

Jeff Glor

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
They've become big business, but a death and some injuries have led some to question whether they're worth the money, thrill

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Do you like the excitement of extreme sports? If so, you might be an 'adrenaline junkie'. Find out more about white-water rafting and parkour in this video.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Wingsuit Daredevil Jeb Corliss Completes Another Heart-Stopping ‘Flight’

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Wingsuit Daredevil Jeb Corliss Completes Another Heart-Stopping ‘Flight’ has 559 reviews and 0 ratings. Reviewer supermanbruh wrote: “I like artice, great vocabulary game”

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
You know all those people that told you that video games are bad for you? They were wrong. Read this to find out more.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
How did a quiet 16th birthday celebration turn into a full-scale riot? Read this to find out what happened when a Dutch teenager made a Facebook error.

# data[].attributes.headline
Pros and Cons of Technology in Classrooms

# data[].attributes.subject
Pros and Cons of Technology in Classrooms

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Technology in education is the biggest change in teaching we will ever see. For years, policy makers, teachers, parents and students alike have been weighing the potential benefits of technology in education against its risks and consequences.

Prior to March 2020, some would say that technology allowed you to experiment in pedagogy, democratize the classroom and reach Generation Z students. Others may have argued that technology in the classroom could promote cheating. But after 2020, technology in education has become essential-especially as the COVID-19 pandemic forced higher ed and public schools to swap face-to-face instruction for distance learning.

Below, we share 20 best practices for using technology in the classroom-and offer workable solutions that will help you meet the needs of your students. You can also download our free guide, which highlights how five acclaimed educators use technology to help their students excel in any course.

How technology can support learning outcomes for today's students

Students are digital natives. They've grown up with technology; it's woven into their lives. In fact, it's one of the basic 21st-century skills that they'll need in school and the workplace.

Technology integration in the classroom now begins during elementary school and carries through to high school and higher education. But using computer technology in the classroom isn't just about digital devices in class-it relates to anything that facilitates an interaction between teacher and student. Technology in education programs could be seen as a culprit, or it could be harnessed to improve student engagement and effectiveness-and that's what we'll discuss below.

"Digital education is generating new learning opportunities as students engage in online, digital environments and as faculty change educational practices through the use of hybrid courses, personalized instruction, new collaboration models and a wide array of innovative, engaging learning strategies," says David Goodrum, Director of Academic Technology and Information Services at Oregon State University.

"Furthermore, a 21st century view of learner success requires students to not only be thoughtful consumers of digital content, but effective and collaborative creators of digital media, demonstrating competencies and communicating ideas through dynamic storytelling, data visualization and content curation," Goodrum says.

Types of classroom technology

Education technology allows you to engage, interact with, and inspire students in and out of your class. Plus, certain types of technology tools like podcasts or video streaming platforms can help meet the unique learning styles of your cohort. Many of the technologies below are used to operate online education programs-including lectures, labs, group meetings or class tutorials. Plenty of higher education institutions have already integrated some of the following technology tools into their degree programs today.

Learning management systems (LMS) such as Canvas, Moodle and Blackboard allow you to manage courses, assign homework and tests, and track student grades.

Digital courseware such as ebook products by Pearson, McGraw-Hill and Macmillan can be used to create and distribute teaching resources (such as textbooks or question packs) to students as a way to create engaging homework experiences.

Classroom response systems including iClicker and Poll Everywhere help students reflect on their learning via polls or discussions in class.

Virtual classroom tools like Microsoft Teams and Zoom are used to host synchronous online lectures and let participants engage in breakout rooms or 'share their screen' with one another.

Remote proctoring software like Proctorio and Honorlock help maintain academic integrity by monitoring student behavior during tests and flag behavior indicative of cheating.

This article looks at the pros and cons of using technology in the classroom. We'll also share the advantages and disadvantages of technology in the classroom when incorporating new digital teaching and assessment techniques into your lesson plans.

8 pros and cons of using technology for student engagement

The pros:

1. Technology in the classroom helps ensure full participation

Online polling and other digital tools help to engage all students, including shy students who wouldn't normally raise their hands in class. Online engagement systems allow you to regularly check in with students for feedback on course materials and assignments. Student insights can also be used to help spot areas where learners might be struggling.

Student response systems help learners measure their understanding of a topic while professors can see what areas they need to review. For instance, iClicker offers questions that may be multiple choice or true or false. Students are then asked to identify a correct answer to a question in exchange for participation points from a professor. Clickers, virtual classroom software and assessment platforms like Socrative or Kahoot! can make for great engagement tools for educators looking to enhance their lectures. Student response systems help foster digital citizenship in the classroom and give students an opportunity to engage in class and get rewarded for it at the same time.

Another active learning technique that education technology can facilitate is offering students quizzes (not for credit). At the beginning of the class, students can gauge familiarity with a subject by taking a quick, anonymous quiz on the topic you're teaching-and this can also inform and direct what you need to focus on. At the end of the class, facilitating the same quiz again allows all students to gauge what they do and don't understand.

2. Using technology in the classroom allows you to experiment more in pedagogy and get instant feedback

Technology allows for more active learning. You can increase engagement through online polling or asking quiz questions during online lectures, with instantaneous results. If you're using a digital textbook, subject matter is dynamic and timely with embedded links to relevant materials or immersive multimedia.

Whether adding a single tool for a specific project or term, or making a more dramatic change such as a flipped classroom, being well-versed in technology can help build credibility with students and even fellow colleagues. Video conferencing software, live polls and discussion boards are all ways to form feedback loops with your students. An LMS such as Moodle and polling software like Poll Everywhere can also help educators get an instant understanding of student comprehension.

3. There are countless resources for enhancing education and making learning more fun and effective

From apps and e-textbooks to organizational platforms, there's no shortage of tools that can transform the classroom. Some instructors are turning toward classroom 'gamification,' the use of competitive scenarios, and the distribution of points and rewards to make the online classroom more fun and engaging. The key to ensuring these methods are also effective is designing them to support your course learning objectives. Digital storytelling, where students use simulations to immerse themselves in a fictional environment, can make learning more exciting and relatable for students. Gamification also allows for interactive lessons and can reduce passivity in the classroom.

Some gamification activities introduce healthy competition to your class. In role play, for example, students are asked to pose arguments on behalf of historical figures. Technology can greatly aid the implementation of classroom games, while students may be incentivized to complete their assessments. Blended learning can also play an effective role here, whereby student curriculum is partially delivered in person and partially via digital means.

4. Technology makes it simple for students to collaborate and engage in group work outside of class

Gone are the days when one student was tasked with creating a PowerPoint presentation for a group. Through technology, students can start working on a project together in class and seamlessly collaborate, communicate and bounce ideas off one another using social media, interactive whiteboards and more. Physical and social barriers no longer exist, letting students work together from anywhere and at any time. Technology has also enabled students to engage in spontaneous discussions and find instant answers to problems or questions they may have about a topic.

The cons:

5. Technology in the classroom can be a distraction

Tech savvy students may find it hard to concentrate in class when a wide range of digital devices are around them. It can be hard to keep students' attention while lecturing behind a screen, but James Lang, Professor of English and the Director of the D'Amour Center for Teaching Excellence at Assumption College, has a solution. Lang argues that change renews attention-meaning that if students are starting to tune out, it's time to incorporate opportunities for class discussions. Lang calls these moments 'signature attention activities' as they are designed to spark engagement in the midst of a slump.

Matthew Numer, an assistant professor in the School of Health and Human Performance at Dalhousie University, says in an article for The Chronicle of Higher Education that banning laptops is an "insult" to students. "Our students are capable of making their own choices, and if they choose to check Snapchat instead of listening to your lecture, then that's their loss. Besides, it's my responsibility as an educator to ensure that my lecture is compelling. If my students aren't paying attention, if they're distracted, that's on me." To Numer, students glancing at their mobile devices may indicate that a course's curriculum and instruction needs to be revamped.

This makes the notion of creating a structure and culture of respect all the more important from day one. Identify specific projects, opportunities for breaks and your intentions for participation and engagement using technology in the classroom. Creating expectations and guidelines for students-and sticking to them-will be important for them in respecting your boundaries.

6. Technology can disconnect students from social interactions

Many people are skeptical of technology and what it does to students', and everyone else's, ability to verbally communicate.

By creating assignments in class that use both technological tools as well as oral presentations and group collaboration, student learning has the potential to become more dynamic and interactive. Participation can also go beyond verbal communication. Consider how your LMS, discussion board or live chat can be leveraged to increase student engagement.

7. Technology can foster cheating in class and on assignments

Students have always found ways to cheat, but the digital age makes it even easier-from copying-and-pasting someone else's work to hiring an essay-writer from an online essay mill. Here, digital technology could end up hindering students' professional development.

While technology could be seen as yet another avenue for cheating, it's possible to structure assignments and exams in a way that makes cheating difficult. Alternatively, you can make exams open-book and focus on problem-solving and mastery rather than retention. Some classroom software allows you to set questions that are subtly different for every student, making them focus on the technique rather than the answer. Ed tech software such as Turnitin is already well-established in most higher education settings. With COVID-19, some institutions have relied on proctoring software to maintain academic integrity from a distance. These assistive tools can help professors maintain academic integrity.

8. Classroom technology doesn't necessarily make students more accountable

While it can certainly help, technology use in the classroom doesn't always mean students are more likely to stay on top of their deliverables. For example, it can be tricky to know if your students are viewing the full lecture recordings or coming to class having completed their assigned readings. Social media and other ed tech platforms don't necessarily indicate completion. Some LMS providers may show if a student has opened a file, but that only says so much. Whether students have reviewed, absorbed and are able to retain that information is a question that-like traditional learning materials-not all classroom tech can solve.

7 pros and cons of using classroom technology to increase flexibility

The pros:

9. Technology can automate a lot of your tedious tasks

Automation can speed up tedious, time-consuming tasks, such as keeping track of student attendance and performance. Engagement tools can help streamline grading for writing assignments, discussions and participation, as well as answer common student questions, which otherwise could seem daunting due to their objective nature.

The canonical example of this? One professor at Georgia Tech coded an artificially intelligent teaching assistant. ' Jill Watson' was able to answer a selection of student questions and pass any that she couldn't handle to a real person. Integrating technology in the classroom has the potential to reduce the amount of time spent on minor tasks.

10. Technology in college classrooms gives students instant access to fresh information that can supplement their learning experience

There is value in having textbooks and course materials that are always up to date, which can even include additions suggested by students. This also fosters a more collaborative learning environment-students can share information, work together on group projects and interact with their instructor online. Collaboration between professors and their students is put into practice through a learning management system (LMS) such as Moodle or Blackboard, where professors upload new content for students to review online.

Educational technology enables students to engage in an ongoing cycle of learning: before, during and after class. Student response systems such as clickers can also help learners apply their understanding of concepts covered in class and can indicate areas that need to be reviewed. For Generation Z, technology is arguably the best way to meet student needs. Demian Hommel, Senior Instructor of Geography and Environmental Sciences and Marine Resource Management at Oregon State University, uses a classroom response system to poll students every few minutes during lectures. "Using technology to help students understand the trends and patterns that are going to affect them is transformative," he says.

"Using technology to help students understand the trends and patterns that are going to affect them is transformative." -Professor Demian Hommel

11. Students have the choice to learn in real time or at their own pace

Using technology in the classroom has given students more choice in, and control over, their learning experiences. Learning tools have also given professors the flexibility in how to deliver their lectures or labs. For instance, students can tune into live-streamed lectures hosted at a specific time, while others can view lecture recordings on their own if they're unable to attend a live session. Plus, real-time lessons in online learning can help students feel a great sense of belonging and camaraderie that would otherwise be lost.

Asynchronous learning provides a new level of flexibility for both students and educators. For example, instead of waiting for students to show up at your office, host your office hours via Zoom and let your students know that they're free to drop by during a given time frame. Additionally, technology can be used to help students take asynchronous tests. Just make a test available on your LMS for a 48-hour period so that students can take their assessment at a time and place that works for them.

12. Address the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) guidelines with thoughtful technology use

Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is a framework for ensuring your course delivery meets the needs of all students. It's the ultimate way to provide flexibility in how, when and where learning takes place. The three tenets of this framework are providing multiple means of engagement, representation and expression.

In order to represent content in a variety of ways, you might consider complementing a textbook reading with a podcast. Alternatively, multiple ways of expressing students' understanding could mean offering students learning opportunities through journal articles or video reflections. Finally, multiple forms of engagement might mean gauging students' interests at the start of the term through icebreakers or a student interest inventory-and then use these insights to tailor your units of study accordingly.

The cons:

13. Lesson planning might become more labor-intensive with technology

The task of adapting technology into your classroom can seem daunting or overwhelming. In many ways though, using technology can become as natural to you as any daily activity.

When you're choosing classroom technology, it's important to engage with the software vendor and make sure you have the appropriate level of support in place. Some questions you should ask include whether they supply training or onboarding, and what their reliability statistics and support functions are. After all, you don't need to be the person all the students come to if the technology goes offline.

The most important factor is to allow yourself time to learn how to use a new ed tech tool and make sure you ask for, and receive, the support that you need.

14. Students don't have equal access to technological resources

An online education should be accessible to students. But some students can't afford iPads or even the textbooks required for class. Others simply do not have reliable Internet access. Point these students in the direction of your institution's library or community resources, or create assignments that allow them to work in groups and share resources. You might also consider using open educational resources (OER), which provide a cost-effective alternative to the traditional college textbook. Don't make technology the focus of your class, and don't make it a barrier. Incorporate it in a holistic and inclusive manner-and ensure you do your part to find equitable learning solutions.

15. Technology in education can create privacy concerns

Video conferencing or web-hosting solutions have brought with them some concerns around data protection. For example, do platforms offer end-to-end encryption in basic plans provided to students? Social media handles set up as part of a tutorial or learning activity can also lead to student information being accessed by a wider audience than intended. What's more, Zoombombing-disruptive intrusions into a video conference call-became a common occurrence during the COVID-19 pandemic.

And though they maintain academic integrity, remote proctoring solutions can make test-takers feel uncomfortable. Students may not want to have their homes shown in front of a proctor and being monitored can increase stress and anxiety.

5 pros and cons of using technology to aid instructional design

The pros:

16. We live in a digital world, and technology is an essential life skill

Being digitally literate is more than obtaining "isolated technological skills," according to the NMC Horizon Report: 2017 Higher Education Edition. Rather, it's about "generating a deeper understanding of the digital environment, enabling intuitive adaptation to new contexts and [the] co-creation of content with others." Here, the traditional whiteboard is almost extinct, while technology has never been more essential in the virtual classroom. Creating presentations, learning to differentiate reliable from unreliable sources on the Internet and maintaining proper online netiquette are all vital skills that students will learn to develop in the classroom.

Technology use can also help universities deliver a better return on the investment students pay for their education-as well as make learning relevant to a primarily Generation Z audience. Mobile technology in classrooms is a must-have if students want to be prepared for almost any career today. Student achievement may be boosted if they have the means to continue working on projects outside of the classroom.

17. Classroom technology is a cost-effective alternative to traditional course materials

Technology can help save students hundreds during a semester. Rather than asking students to buy a copy of five different textbooks, some professors might want to direct students to their institution's library or adopt open source textbooks.

Using technology in the classroom has its benefits for the environment as well. Institutions can reduce the amount they spend on ink and paper by distributing important documents in a centralized digital location. As opposed to asking students to buy a print book from your campus bookstore, authoring your own digital, interactive book can help students save big. Katie Thompson-Laswell, Senior Instructor of Human Development and Family Science at Kansas State University, was able to save her students $70 on course materials in the spring 2019 semester. Two years later, new cohorts of students continue to enjoy a low-cost, interactive homework experience from anywhere.

The cons:

18. The quality of research and sources students find may not be credible

The Internet is a blessing and a curse. Your students may need guidance on identifying legitimate and unreliable sources. Many colleges have writing centers that can help with this. You can also use OER-ranging from lecture notes, examinations, assignments and textbooks-and adapt them to fit the needs of your course and students. How can you tell if content is written by a competent authority? Use these tips to find effective OERs. Top Hat's Catalog-filled with hundreds of low-cost, interactive textbooks-is also a reliable source of OER you can use, regardless of your discipline or teaching modality.

19. Some classroom technologies could eventually replace professors

Classroom technology has helped position educators as a 'guide on the side' versus a 'sage on the stage.' But that shift in the role that professors play has the potential to put them on the sidelines-especially with online learning. Technology has automated many learning processes such as grading. With asynchronous online learning especially, it's possible that students could now have little-to-no interactions with their educators compared to their experiences in the traditional classroom.

Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs), which prioritize unlimited participation and open access, let students gain an unrestricted learning experience without a professor present. Platforms like Coursera let students watch on-demand video lectures from leading universities and companies for a fraction of the cost of a university degree. These platforms even offer selective degree and certificate programs. Other platforms like LinkedIn Learning prioritize skill-based learning, which allows students to complete courses or learning modules at their own pace-without the guidance of an instructor.

20. Institutions' lack of IT support can make it challenging to evaluate and implement new classroom technologies

Where do you begin if you're new to teaching? Educators may understandably feel overwhelmed when adopting new tools and platforms to meet the needs of their Generation Z students. While colleges may have a site-wide license for a particular LMS, educators are often left to their own resources to decide how to bring their material to life. Depending on the scale and quality of instructional design services offered at their institution, this can be a lengthy and uneasy process.

How classroom technology can help you meet your teaching goals next semester

This past academic year has highlighted the essential role that technology plays in student learning. No matter where you're teaching next semester, the best practices for using classroom technology below can help make your course more engaging, interactive and active. For additional advice, download our free guide on how to effectively use technology in your next face-to-face, hybrid or online classroom.

Eliminate distractions in class

1. Use frequent polls to make sure students pay attention-and to hold them accountable
2. Begin lessons with a game or icebreaker to encourage focus and collaboration from the start of class

Allow students to learn at their own pace

1. Adopt a flipped classroom model where students can view lecture modules and complete quizzes in advance of live lectures
2. Complement live activities with self-paced exercises such as blog posts or video journal responses, which students can share in your LMS

Create a classroom environment where students feel comfortable speaking out

1. Incorporate an anonymous discussion board during in-class polls
2. Ask your teaching assistants to respond to, and acknowledge, students' contributions in and out of class

Help students stay accountable for their learning outside of your classroom

1. Adopt or author your own digital interactive textbook that includes comprehension questions throughout
2. Keep a digital repository of discussion board prompts or quiz questions and re-quiz students on these concepts in future homework assignments to check for subject mastery

Provide instant feedback on student performance

1. Consider employing low-stakes, multiple choice quizzes that can be auto-graded
2. Grade assignments using a built-in rubric in your LMS and provide personalized feedback upon student request

Technology in the classroom: The final verdict

It's clear that the benefits of technology in the classroom outweigh the cons. But the key to technology in the classroom is always going to be the teacher-student relationship, because that's where the education happens. Technology can be a highly effective tool, but that's all it is-a tool. In today's hyper-connected world, sensible use of technology can enhance education. By using technology as an aid in the classroom, educators can create memorable and impactful learning outcomes for their diverse group of college students. For best practices on how to integrate technology in your classroom next semester, download our free guide packed with tips and tools five professors have used to give their course delivery a boost.

References

1. Kelly, R. (2018, January 11). 7 Ed Tech Trends to Watch in 2018. https://campustechnology.com/Articles/2018/01/11/7-Ed-Tech-Trends-to-Watch-in-2018.aspx?Page=1

2. Dhami, H. (2020, August 13). James Lang's Distracted: Why Students Can't Focus and What You Can Do About It. [Blog post]. https://tophat.com/blog/james-lang-distracted/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How to Take Advantage of Ed Tech In The Classroom | Top Hat

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Get best practices for enhancing technology in your classroom. Plus, download Top Hat's free guide to make ed tech tools work for your course.

# data[].attributes.headline
Cell Phones at School: Should They Be Allowed?

# data[].attributes.subject
Cell Phones at School: Should They Be Allowed?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Cell Phones at School: Should They Be Allowed?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We’ve created the ultimate pros and cons list to help you decide if cell phones should be allowed at school. Are cell phones good to have in the classroom?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
You love your video games, but how much is too much? Find out in this article for kids.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It is important to acknowledge that students are already interested and engaged in using technology, this creates many amazing opportunities for schools and teachers to benefit from integrating some forms of technology in the classroom and to make teaching and learning more effective. Here are some of the main benefits of using technology in the classroom. Improves engagement
When technology is integrated into lessons, students are expected to be more interested in the subjects they are studying. Technology provides different opportunities to make learning more fun and enjoyable in terms of teaching same things in new ways. For instance, delivering teaching through gamification, taking students on virtual field trips and using other online learning resources. What is more, technology can encourage a more active participation in the learning process which can be hard to achieve through a traditional lecture environment.
Improves knowledge retention
Students who are engaged and interested in things they are studying, are expected to have a better knowledge retention. As mentioned before, technology can help to encourage active participation in the classroom which also is a very important factor for increased knowledge retention. Different forms of technology can be used to experiment with and decide what works best for students in terms of retaining their knowledge.
Encourages individual learning
No one learns in the same way because of different learning styles and different abilities. Technology provides great opportunities for making learning more effective for everyone with different needs. For example, students can learn at their own speed, review difficult concepts or skip ahead if they need to. What is more, technology can provide more opportunities for struggling or disabled students. Access to the Internet gives students access to a broad range of resources to conduct research in different ways, which in turn can increase the engagement.
Encourages collaboration
Students can practice collaboration skills by getting involved in different online activities. For instance, working on different projects by collaborating with others on forums or by sharing documents on their virtual learning environments. Technology can encourage collaboration with students in the same classroom, same school and even with other classrooms around the world.
Students can learn useful life skills through technology
By using technology in the classroom, both teachers and students can develop skills essential for the 21st century. Students can gain the skills they will need to be successful in the future. Modern learning is about collaborating with others, solving complex problems, critical thinking, developing different forms of communication and leadership skills, and improving motivation and productivity. What is more, technology can help develop many practical skills, including creating presentations, learning to differentiate reliable from unreliable sources on the Internet, maintaining proper online etiquette, and writing emails. These are very important skills that can be developed in the classroom.
Benefits for teachers
With countless online resources, technology can help improve teaching. Teachers can use different apps or trusted online resources to enhance the traditional ways of teaching and to keep students more engaged. Virtual lesson plans, grading software and online assessments can help teachers save a lot time. This valuable time can be used for working with students who are struggling. What is more, having virtual learning environments in schools enhances collaboration and knowledge sharing between teachers.
To learn more about different ways of incorporating technology in the classroom, visit the Webanywhere website.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Top 6 Benefits of Technology in the Classroom - Advancing Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Explore the top 6 benefits of technology in the classroom. Enhance your teaching methods with School Jotter.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When he was a kid, Alex Vardakostas helped out in his parents' restaurant. "As soon as standing on top of a milk crate made me tall enough to reach the counter, I was making sodas for customers," he told TIME for Kids. Before long, Vardakostas was working the grill alongside adult employees. He estimates he's flipped 50,000 burgers.

Now, Vardakostas co-owns a burger joint. It's a restaurant called Creator, in San Francisco, California. But he doesn't stand over a grill flipping burgers. Neither do his employees.

VCG/GETTY IMAGES

At Creator, burgers are cooked and assembled by machine. Vardakostas a device. It grinds meat, cuts vegetables, grates cheese, and applies seasonings. The end result tastes just as good as-or better than-a burger made by hand. It costs less, too. That's because it's less expensive to the machine than to pay a kitchen full of employees.

Robo-Workers

Creator is just one example of a growing trend: is taking over many jobs. That means work is done by machines or computers, not people.

THOSSAPHOL-GETTY IMAGES

According to a 2017 report from McKinsey Global Institute, between 400 million and 800 million people could be forced out of jobs by 2030. McKinsey predicts that as technology improves, some tasks will be done more quickly or cheaply by machine. So businesses will install robots or computer programs to perform them. That means there will be less work for human employees. Many people could lose their jobs. Or they might have trouble finding new ones.

"There's going to be a big disruption in the next 10 or 20 years," says Martin Ford. He is an author and futurist. That is someone who studies trends and makes predictions about the future.

KIM KULISH-CORBIS/GETTY IMAGES

A Human Touch

Some jobs are more likely to be automated than others. Machines can do jobs that have three qualities: they are routine, repetitive, and predictable. "It's the kind of job where you come to work and work on the same kind of thing again and again," Ford says. Some of these jobs pay low wages and require little education. But others pay well and demand an advanced college degree. Taxi drivers, cashiers, lawyers, and doctors all perform some tasks that can be done by machines.

FRANCOIS GUILLOT-AFP/GETTY IMAGES

So what human jobs are safe? "Anything where you're thinking outside the box and coming up with new ideas," Ford says. "Or things that involve interacting with other people, having , and building relationships." Jobs in engineering, science, the arts, therapy, and nursing are examples.

Stop & Think! How does the writer help a reader visualize robots at work? How does word choice affect a reader's response to the topic?
Assessment: Click for a printable quiz. Teacher subscribers can find the answer key in this week's Teacher's Guide.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When he was a kid, Alex Vardakostas helped out in his parents' restaurant. "As soon as standing on top of a milk crate made me tall enough to reach the counter, I was making sodas for customers," he told TIME...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
3 fears about screen time for kids -- and why they're not true | Sara DeWitt

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Little boy in the dark playing with a digital tablet or iPad, the touch screen 's shine as a main light source. (iStock) Keywords: Child, Toddler, Dark, Night, Computer Monitor, Little Boys, Using Computer, Playful, Education, Computer, Digital Tablet, Glowing, Computer Equipment, Playing, Equipment, modern times, Lifestyles, Technology, Illuminated, Caucasian, Lying Down, 2-3 Years, Touch Screen, Multimedia, iPhone, iPad, screen, children, kids, kid, boy, young, (iStock)
Share Comment Save
Youngsters who spend too much time staring at televisions and computers may be more depressed than those who abstain completely, but kids who enjoy screen time in moderation may be the happiest of all, a recent analysis suggests.

Many pediatricians recommend that parents limit screen time to less than two hours a day because excessive use of television, computers and mobile devices is linked to obesity and other health problems and is also thought to impair cognitive development.

In the new study, researchers analyzed data from earlier studies involving more than 125,000 participants and found evidence that limiting screen time makes sense for children and young teens. Youth who spent at least five hours a day staring at screens were 80 percent more likely to be depressed than their peers who spent no time in front of screens.

There was, however, little difference in depression risk between children who didn't have any screen time and those who got about two hours a day.

And the connection between screen time and depression was only statistically meaningful for children younger than 14, the study found. Screen time didn't appear connected to depression in older teens.

Overall, in smaller doses, screen time appeared to be a good thing. Compared with children who had no screen time at all, those who got a half-hour daily were 8 percent less likely to be depressed, and kids allowed an hour a day had 12 percent lower odds.

"The finding of the lower depression risk with a relatively low quantity of screen time may suggest that exposure to screen/media, when in moderation, can have potentially positive impacts on adolescents' mental health," said senior study author Yao Shuqiao of the Medical Psychological Institute, Second Xiangya Hospital of Central South University in Hunan, China.

Longer screen time may mean fewer hours in the day for more productive or active endeavors, whether exercise or interacting with friends, and may negatively affect physical and mental health, Shuqiao added by e-mail.

"We suggest that parents may consider limiting their children's screen time to under two hours a day, preferably about one hour," Shuqiao said.

It's also possible that the type of screen time matters, said Larry Rosen, a professor emeritus at California State University at Dominguez Hills, who wasn't involved in the study.

While passive activities such as watching television may be linked to a greater depression risk, active pursuits such as texting on mobile phones or chatting on social media don't necessarily carry the same risk, Rosen said by e-mail.

It's not surprising that the teens who had only moderate amounts of screen time had a lower risk of depression, said Gary Goldfield, a psychology researcher at the University of Ottawa, who wasn't involved in the study.

"People with such low levels of screen time are probably engaged in many other activities, such as organized sport, dance, music or other hobbies that involve interpersonal interaction, which may protect them from depression," Goldfield said by e-mail.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Moderate amounts of screen time may be good for kids, a new study finds

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
But youths who spent five hours a day staring at screens were 80 percent more likely to be depressed.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Sharks: Stewards of the Reef (sharkstewards.com)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The White Shark, more commonly referred to as the "Great White," has been reported to be involved in more attacks on humans than any other shark.
Fossil remains suggest the Great White dates back to the early Eocene eras, which lasted from about 56 to 34 million years ago.

Mature males reach an average size of 10.5 feet while females can average 14 feet. Active during daytime hours, Great Whites feed on marine animals - they don't like sea birds or sea otters particularly. It's thought that they attack humans when they mistake diver and surfer silhouettes in the water during approaching from below the surface of the water. An alternative theory has also been suggested that Great Whites attack unfamiliar objects to test their potential as food. If true, that would help explain their involvement over the years in myriad hit-and-run attacks near beaches.

Not very much is known about the size of the great white's total population. Described as a slow-growing animal with low fertility rates, the Great White is considered at risk of overfishing.

Tiger Shark

According to theInternational Shark Attack File, the Tiger shark ranks No. 2 behind the white shark in the number of reported attacks on humans. The shark-monitoring group notes that the animal's "large size and voraciousness" qualify it as a formidable ocean predator. Surfers and swimmers need to know that Tiger sharks tend to be both curious and aggressive when they spot humans in the water.

Shortfin Mako

Powerful, fast and aggressive, the Shortfin Mako has been blamed for many reported shark attacks on humans. In more than a few cases, also blame human error as fisherman have been known to get injured after dragging hooked makos into their boats.
The Shortfin Mako is believed to be the fastest of any shark, able to swim up to 20 miles per hour. Prior to attacks, the sharks tend to swim in figure eight patterns and approach their prey with mouths open. The popularity of Mako meat in shark fin soup has reduced their populations; the World Conservation Union has listed the Shortfin mako as "Near Threatened."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Swimmers, Surfers and Divers Need to Pay Special Attention to these Five Species

# data[].attributes.headline
Rise In Shark Attacks Scares Tourists Away

# data[].attributes.subject
Rise In Shark Attacks Scares Tourists Away

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Elio, 13, was killed by an 8 foot bull shark while surfing at Cap Homard two weeks ago, on the west coast of the island paradise.

Since 2011 there have been 16 shark attacks, 7 of which have been fatal including the death of a 15-year-old girl in 2013, which prompted the government to impose a ban on bathing and surfing unsupervised along more than half of the island's coastline.

The attacks have devastated the island's economy as surf shops have been forced to close causing a 13 per cent drop in leisure tourism.

Rival holiday destinations in the region such as Mauritius and the Maldives have benefited from these shark attacks as more tourists visit these islands on a yearly basis.

Experts have tried to come up with a reason for the rise in shark attacks with some claiming the opening of a marine reserve in 2007 which was intended to boost the biodiversity of the coral in the area coupled with a fishing restriction in the area has led to an increase of prey for the sharks.

Other experts believe urbanisation is the root cause of the shark problem.

The increased levels of wastewater flowing in to the sea as a result of rising urbanisation on the island has created the perfect conditions for the bull sharks as they thrive in murky water.

Surfers and bodyboarders have called for more action to be taken to make the waters safer for humans.

Marine biologist Antonin Blaison said: "we will have to change our ways to account for the sharks' presence".

With no real plan of action and the tourism industry on the island continuing to plummet, Reunion's government may have to refocus their efforts on promoting the islands land attractions which boasts 91 different species of birds and a host of exotic animals.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Rise in shark attacks scares tourists away from paradise isle of Reuni

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A RISE in fatal shark attacks off the coast of Reunion Island including the death of rising surf star, Elio Canestri, has stopped surfers from visiting the French territory.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In a gruesome practice, sharks are sometimes hunted for their fins. When caught, the animal's fins are carved off and the rest of the shark is often tossed back into the water to die.

The fins are used in traditional Chinese medicine and made into soup. A new study finds more than two-thirds of the sharks that are hunted and used in this global fin trade are at risk of going extinct.

"Shark fins are considered a delicacy and high-end product in Southeast Asia to prepare shark fin soup, a traditional dish served in big events and social gatherings. It is a symbol of wealth," study author Diego Cardeñosa, a postdoctoral researcher at Florida International University, tells Treehugger.

Researchers were curious which species of shark were most often being killed for their fins.

They studied 9,820 shark fin trimmings from markets in Hong Kong from 2014 to 2018. Using DNA analyses, they were able to determine which fins came from which species of shark. They discovered 86 different species and 61 of those are threatened with extinction.

"This highlights that demand for shark fins is ultimately what is driving many of these species to extinction and that many coastal species that do not have any sort of national, regional or international protection are being largely affected by international trade," Cardeñosa says. "This conservation crisis demands the attention of stakeholders and policymakers to revert these trends and set regulatory and management actions that benefit these important marine predators."

The research was recently published in Conservation Letters.

Most Hunted Species

The majority of the fins in these markets came from the blue shark ( Prionace glauca), a species that is classified as "near threatened" by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). Nine of the remaining top 10 sharks they found were also considered threatened with extinction by the IUCN. Those species include silky sharks, hammerheads, makos, and threshers.

The greatest number of species that are taken for their fins reside in coastal waters. The researchers warn that without management measures, these sharks could become extinct.

"Our results highlight future approaches that can be used to revert some of these trends including international trade regulations and fisheries management actions at the national level such as fishing gear restrictions, catch limits, marine protected areas, together with socioeconomic studies of coastal fishing communities to understand and determine which of these actions can have the largest impacts in different locations," Cardeñosa says.

Shark Fin Trade Laws

Since 2000, some countries such as the United States, have passed laws that ban the fin trade but the practice is largely unregulated globally and laws are difficult to enforce.

Shark fin sales are banned in 14 U.S. states but state-level laws don't prohibit fins from being imported into the country. Shark fins are imported into the U.S. from countries that don't have bans such as China, India, and Indonesia.

Shark finning kills an estimated 100 million sharks each year, according to Shark Stewards, an international nonprofit working to save sharks and their habitat.

The group points out that, "The high value and increased market for shark fins is creating huge incentive for fishermen to take the fins and discard the animal, leaving room in the ship's hold for the more valuable meat of the tuna or swordfish. Shark finning is wasteful, inhumane, and unsustainable."

The organization also notes that the fight against finning is not an attack on Asian culture. Instead, they call it "an attack on an unsustainable fishing practice and trade."

Shark fin soup is linked with prestige and status.

Shark Stewards says: "The problem is simple economics: increasing affluence creates increased demand. This demand is exceeding the supply, which is creating a positive feedback loop, making the shark fins more difficult to obtain, and increasing the price, making the dish more expensive, increasing the prestige. This in turn motivates fishermen to obtain shark fins from a steadily diminishing source of sharks. Many countries have had practices associated with their cultures that were recognized as harmful or unethical and were stopped to protect wildlife."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Most Sharks Killed for Fins Are at Risk of Extinction

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The shark that end up in the fin trade are most often from animals that are threatened with extinction, study finds.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Sharks are scary-no doubt about it. Just ask anyone who's seen Jaws or other films that feature these sharp-toothed creatures.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Shark Attacks Expected to Rise This Summer

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
More shark attacks are predicted this summer, but there are strategies to avoiding becoming shark bait.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The main benefits of zoos and aquariums include Conservation, Education and Research programs that are designed to preserve and protect wild animals.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Some of the most widely used AZA statistics, updated annually.

Annual Survey Results

AZA members (Individual Professional category members and Primary Contacts of Conservation Partner, Commercial, Related Facility and Institution Members) may log in and download the results of the most recent AZA Annual Survey of Members.

Accreditation

237 accredited zoos and aquariums in 13 countries (Updated September 2023)

USA: 213 in 46 states and the District of Columbia

Canada: 7

Mexico: 4

Bahamas: 1

Bermuda: 1

Dominican Republic: 1

Argentina: 1

Colombia: 1

Spain: 1

Hong Kong: 1

Singapore: 2

South Korea: 2

United Arab Emirates: 2

15 accredited related facilities
Accreditation occurs every 5 years
Approximately 25 facilities undergo the accreditation process every 6 months

Types of Accredited Facilities

134 zoos

59 aquariums

9 both zoo and aquariums

16 safari and theme parks

15 science and nature centers

2 aviaries

2 butterfly houses

54% non-profit

35% public

11% for-profit

Animals in AZA-Accredited Facilities

Over 780,000 animals in the care of AZA-accredited zoo and aquarium professionals

Over 8,600 species

Over 800 Vulnerable, Endangered, Critically Endangered, and Extinct In The Wild species as categorized by the IUCN Red List

Species Survival Plan® (SSP) Programs

42 Taxon Advisory Groups (TAGs)

Nearly 500 Species Survival Plan Programs

AZA Reproductive Management Center

Supports SSP ® programs by monitoring the safety and efficacy of contraceptives used for all mammalian species and helping bring new contraceptive methods to the zoo, aquarium, and wildlife community

AZA Population Management Center

Population planning for 500 species for the next 100 years

Conservation

$252.2 million was spent on field conservation in 119 countries in 2022

232 species and subspecies that benefited are listed as Endangered or Threatened under the U.S. Endangered Species Act

$29 million was spent on AZA SAFE: Saving Animals From Extinction species programs in 2022

AZA's Conservation Grants Fund

Over $8.7 million supporting over 470 conservation projects since 1991

Economy

In the most recent survey in 2018, AZA-accredited zoos and aquariums:

Contributed more than $22.5 billion to U.S. economy

Supported more than 198,000 full-time jobs in the U.S.

Served more than 200 million annual visitors worldwide (183 million in the U.S.)

Informal Science Education

Based on the Education Programs survey data from 2019,

AZA members provided teacher professional development, curriculum resources and free planning visits that reached more than 96,000 teachers

5.5 million individuals were reached through field trips, outreach programs and education resources targeted to K-12 students

124 facilities reported more than 1,200 education programs that include content about connecting to nature, reaching more than 33 million.

(Updated April 2023)

Over 785 zoo and aquarium professionals have completed in-person AZA courses from 2020-present

Almost 250 zoo and aquarium professionals participated in virtual AZA courses from 2021-2022

AZA offers 18 in-person courses that are team-taught by professionals in the field, designed to develop a variety of animal management, education, and leadership skills

AZA's Executive Leadership Development Program prepares the next generation of executive leaders to successfully advance the zoo and aquarium movement in the future. More than 80 leaders have completed the program since 2014, with 27 having been promoted to the role of Executive Director or CEO.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Learn more about the Association for Zoos and Aquariums' members, educational programs, and conservation efforts, as well as the kinds of facilities we support.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Back to Animals

A zoo can be an awesome place to see animals first hand and learn about what they eat, their habits, environment, and all sorts of other interesting facts about animals. Another name for a zoo is zoological garden.

Today zoos are becoming better and better places for animals. In the past some zoos were somewhat cruel to animals. Placing animals in environments they were not suited for and often not keeping the animal's best interest in mind. However, today many zoos do wonderful work in animal research and take great care of their animals.

Photo by Ducksters

Some good things that many Zoos do today include:

Acting as sanctuaries for endangered animals. They provide a safe environment for animals that are being threatened by changes in the environment. Often zoos will work to breed and maintain endangered animal populations. Sometime animals are nearly extinct in the wild and the only place they survive is in zoos.

Education on wildlife. Zoos provide a great opportunity for us to learn more about creatures from distant lands.

Research on wildlife and how we can help animals survive radical changes. Zoos do veterinary medicine research as well.

Today's modern zoos house animals in enclosures that are similar to the animal's natural habitat. This can include buildings made for nocturnal animals where they are bright at night, so the animals can sleep, and dark during the day, so zoo visitors can see the animals moving about. Also, climates are controlled in some zoo enclosures for animals like penguins and polar bears. Many zoos have great open spaces as well where animals may graze together. Some zoos have an area where you can take a mini-safari or ride around in a truck or bus to hopefully see the animals up close.

Perhaps the most famous zoo is the San Diego Zoo in Southern California. Many modern zoo practices were pioneered at the San Diego Zoo. The largest zoo in number of animals is the Bronx Zoo with over 6000 animals. The largest zoo in land size is the North Carolina Zoo with 535 acres.

Photo by Ducksters

Seeing an elephant, giraffe, lion, polar bear, penguins, seals, or other incredible creatures at the zoo can be an amazing experience. Be sure to check out your local zoo and get the opportunity to see some awesome animals and learn more about nature.

Another great place to see animals, similar to a zoo, is at an aquarium. Most states have an aquarium where they display all sorts of fish and some sea mammals.More on endangered species:
Amphibians in Danger
Endangered Animals
How Animals Become Extinct
Wildlife Conservation
Zoos

Back to Animals

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Learn about the zoo. History and types of zoological gardens. List of Zoos with interesting animals.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
How do you feel about keeping animals in zoos? Read both sides of the argument to help you decide.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Learn more about the Association for Zoos and Aquariums’ members, educational programs, and conservation efforts, as well as the kinds of facilities we support.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
It's pumpkin time, and zoos think that's a smashing idea

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Zoos step in to help save wild animals around the world

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Real sanctuaries are safe, comfortable places for animals to live after they've been rescued from not-so-nice places like circuses or laboratories. People can sometimes visit these sanctuaries, which is an awesome way to learn about and see animals without supporting businesses that hurt them, like roadside zoos or wildlife parks. Roadside zoos and wildlife parks use animals to make money. It's confusing because they sometimes call themselves "sanctuaries" or "rescues" to bring in more customers, because they know that people don't want to visit roadside zoos, but they're being dishonest when they do that.

It's important not to get these horrible places confused with actual sanctuaries. But how can you tell the difference? It's easy! There are a few simple questions you can ask about a place to figure out whether it's helping or hurting animals the animals who live there.

You can find answers to these questions by browsing a facility's website and social media pages (your parents can help):

1. How are animals housed?

Real sanctuaries make sure that an animal's living space is as close to their natural habitat as possible. Animals should live with others of their own kind so they can have friends. It's mean to keep them all alone in small, dirty pens with concrete floors and nothing to do-and you should stay away from places like that.

2. What kinds of activities do the animals get to do?

The animals' living area should have lots of ways for them to play and enjoy themselves! For example, there should be a large structure for chimpanzees to climb on, water for bears to soak and splash in, and large fields for roaming and exploring. Animals need these things if they're going to be healthy, happy, and comfortable.

Animals should also live with others of the same species so they can communicate with each another easily and form relationships and groups. In many sanctuaries, the animals who already live there help teach the newcomers how to get back in touch with their natural instincts and enjoy life again.

3. How big is the facility?

Animals should be given enough space to explore, roam, climb, and forage. And a real sanctuary NEVER takes the animals out of the facility to show them off.

4. Are visitors allowed to touch or hold the animals?

True wild-animal sanctuaries (with big cats, bears, primates, or wolves) NEVER allow visitors to touch or hold the animals, even babies, and that includes taking photos with them. This would be scary for the animals and dangerous to the visitors, too!

5. Where did the animals come from?

The animals who live there probably came from a place where they were mistreated, so they have a sad and painful past. The staff will want to share each animal's story so that visitors can learn about the various places that hurt animals (like laboratories, circuses, and roadside zoos). Real sanctuaries provide animals with a permanent home for the rest of their life. They NEVER trade, borrow, or loan animals.

6. Does the facility breed animals?

Sanctuaries NEVER breed animals, meaning that they don't make any of the animals have babies. Places that do breed animals are using them to make money-that's not right, and that's not a sanctuary.

7. What is it like to visit a sanctuary?

Most sanctuaries only allow very limited visits. Usually a guide takes people on a small tour of the place and doesn't let them walk around by themselves.

8. Is it accredited?

True sanctuaries are accredited by the Global Federation of Animal Sanctuaries (GFAS), a group that makes sure sanctuaries follow strict rules to protect the animals who live there, like the ones listed above.
*****
All living, feeling beings deserve a comfortable place to live where people aren't always staring at them. A true sanctuary puts the needs and wants of the animals first. So if you care about animals, NEVER visit a roadside zoo or a wildlife park, and explain to your friends and family why places like that are bad for animals!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
8 Ways to Tell a REAL Sanctuary From a Roadside Zoo | PETA Kids

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Roadside zoo or animal sanctuary? This list will explain the difference-so you can figure out if a place is hurting or helping animals.

# data[].attributes.headline
NC Zoo’s ‘adoption’ program benefits animals, zookeeper training

# data[].attributes.subject
NC Zoo’s ‘adoption’ program benefits animals, zookeeper training

# data[].attributes.body
(0–1:19)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.

The N.C. Zoo is one of only two state-operated zoos in the country. While more than 60 percent of its operating budget comes from the state, all of its conservation, research and education programs - and even the animals exhibited at the park - are purchased with private funds raised by the North Carolina Zoological Society.

Karen Brown with the Zoo Society says the "Adopt an Animal" program features a list of animals that can be "adopted" for a year.

Those who "adopt" an animal get a certificate, a photo of the animal and a fact sheet about the species.

Funds raised through the program benefit the Zoo's Animal Enrichment Program, which allows the Zoo to pay for additional training for zookeepers as well as purchase treats for the animals.

Some of the most popular animals for "adoption" are the African elephant, the polar bear, the zebra, the giraffe and the chimpanzee.

For more information about "adopting" zoo animals, visit nczoo.com or call the Zoo Society at (336) 879-7250.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
NC Zoo's 'adoption' program benefits animals, zookeeper training

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The N.C. Zoo is one of only two state-operated zoos in the country. While more than 60 percent of its operating budget comes from the state, all of its conservation, research and education programs - and even the animals exhibited at the park - are purchased with private funds raised by the North Carolina Zoological [...]

# data[].attributes.body
*the start of the clip may be one that you want to steer students toward during Session 12 “Who Said What? Studying Perspective”

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Smithsonian's National Zoo: We Save Species

# data[].attributes.headline
Are there animal care problems at the zoo

# data[].attributes.subject
Are there animal care problems at the zoo

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
/ CBS News

WASHINGTON - The National Zoo has a reputation as a leader in animal care, science and cute photo opportunities such as the naming of Bao Bao the baby panda earlier this month.

But a CBS News investigation has learned that behind the scenes, there are insider allegations of mismanagement involving animal care. Five sources with more than 35 years' combined experience at the National Zoo have raised concerns to CBS News about recent animal injuries, deaths and escapes.

The sources don't want to be identified for fear of retaliation. They say problems began last year when the zoo decided to double the population of the Cheetah Conservation Station, adding a half dozen new species but no extra space. Besides cheetahs, the CCS also houses zebras, gazelles and other species.

CBS News asked animal biologist and ethicist Marc Bekoff to look at the complaints. He was an independent reviewer of a 2005 National Academy of Sciences investigation of the zoo that found "systemic problems at the highest levels."

Of the newly raised issues, Bekoff said: "I call it 'fetch and pray.' You get the animals and then you pray that the project will work out."

The CCS' new animal mix didn't always work out. Issues identified by the zoo sources include two newly acquired hornbill birds that were kept in an indoor shack for seven months because their exhibit yard wasn't ready. Only after a volunteer complained were the birds allowed in an outdoor space. But the wallaby that had to share its yard with these new arrivals became frightened, according to sources, bloodied its nose and spent much of its time frightened and hiding.

One of two new red river hogs quickly became malnourished and died of an infection. The other hog, along with oryxes and sitatungas (two types of antelopes), sometimes became overly aggressive when mixed together, and some were injured in vicious fights.

It's not unusual for animals to spar, but the zoo sources say management failed to predict easily foreseeable conflicts between species and genders, and had ineffective backup plans for separating and protecting the animals when the conflicts arose.

"It's no surprise to me as a field biologist that so many of them do not work out," Bekoff told CBS News. "They're just too hastily put together and they're not well thought through."

Zoo spokeswoman Pamela Baker-Masson says the National Zoo meets the highest industry standards and the animals always receive the best care.

"We take great care in introducing our animals to these various habitats and transitioning them. Ideally, these things wouldn't happen, of course," said Baker-Masson. "I think my colleagues were very well aware and they know these species and they know how to take care of these species. ... Every single animal has a very specific course of action and a plan."

Bekoff says the zoo's plans appear to have been inadequate. "They should only be able to get the animals when it can be shown that they can properly house them and care for them."

Two animals in the CCS, a Dama gazelle and a pregnant kudu (another type of antelope), died when they got spooked on separate occasions and ran into barriers in their confined spaces, breaking their necks.

The gazelle death happened last month after a zebra attacked a veteran zookeeper. The commotion apparently frightened the gazelle, which is on the endangered species list. Zoo sources say it wasn't found for hours. The pregnant kudu died last June. Zoo sources say as the animal lay suffering with a broken neck, workers were unable to quickly locate necessary veterinary records.

Baker-Masson says Dama gazelles and kudus are skittish animals by nature and were housed in adequate spaces that met the requirements of the American Zoological Association, which recently re-accredited the facility.

As for the hornbill birds that were keep indoors for eight months, Baker-Masson says the space was "more than adequate and it gave the staff a very good amount of time to prepare and work with the hornbills" but "ideally they would have [had] access to their outdoor yard space more quickly."

Bekoff calls the lengthy indoor confinement "totally unacceptable."

"There's not one single excuse that I would accept," he said. "Basically this is a form of animal abuse and animal neglect. ...They get an 'F' in this project.'

Zoo sources also expressed concern about two escapes from the CCS: a vulture whose wings were allegedly not properly clipped and a red panda who managed to climb out of its exhibit. Both animals were later recaptured and zoo officials say the failures that allowed the escapes have been fixed.

CBS News has learned that the zoo convened a task force last summer to investigate the internal complaints about animal care at the CCS. The task force made findings last August and Baker-Masson says some of its recommendations are already being implemented.

Zoo officials refused CBS News' repeated requests to release the task force report even though, under public records law, it's considered public material.

As to why the National Zoo is withholding the information, Baker-Masson provided a number of rationales. First, she said that the task force report was still only a draft, four months after it was scheduled to be completed. However, when CBS News asked for the draft, she would not provide that either.

Later, in an interview, Baker-Masson said that the task force report is finished, but that the zoo isn't ready to release it.

"We're more than happy to [release the task force report]," Baker-Masson told CBS News. "But we have to do it in a thorough and process-oriented way that makes sense."

She acknowledged that some of the concerns investigated were founded.

"Absolutely," Baker-Masson said. "Anytime a concern is raised, it's looked at very seriously and we have to examine, you know, what changes are appropriate for that particular species, what changes are appropriate for the staff, what changes are appropriate for the facility itself. So yes, absolutely, some changes have been made."

Another incident the zoo is keeping mum about is the November zebra attack on the zookeeper. Baker-Masson says that AZA standards require that there always be a barrier between a keeper and zebras, which can inflict serious bite wounds. But the zoo says three weeks after the attack, it still has not identified how the zebra got to the keeper and it would not release the incident report or other public information about it. The injured zookeeper was recently released after several weeks in the hospital.

Sharyl Attkisson

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Are there animal care problems at National Zoo?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Behind the scenes, there are insider allegations of mismanagement involving animals at famed D.C. facility

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
I would like to begin by defining “zoo.” It is a park-like area in which live animals are kept in cages or large enclosures for public exhibit. Hold on, large enclosures? More like tiny cages. As zoo funds are cut, cages become smaller wi

# data[].attributes.body
*may be one that you want to steer students toward during Session 12 “Who Said What? Studying Perspective”

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This piece is a response to "The Modern Zoo" from the May 2008 issue of Teen Ink. I volunteer at the Cleveland Metroparks Zoo and have gotten to know its keepers, veterinary staff, and other workers. According to the writer of "The Modern Zoo," staff torture animals, do not provide adequate living space, and keep the animals merely to entertain. In my three years of volunteering, I have never seen, nor had any reason to suspect, any foul play at my zoo. The allegations in "The Modern Zoo" that all zoos are inhumane and cruel is false, I believe.

According to the article in Teen Ink, "Zoos claim to educate visitors. Yet we've all seen the one-sentence signs that describe monkeys. What can be learned from this? Certainly not enough to justify inhumane captivity." One-sentence signs are not the end of zoos' efforts to educate. At my zoo an entire department is devoted to educating the public about conservation of animals and our planet. If zoos didn't care about education, why would they have this? While exhibits may display signs with brief information, staff work daily at the zoo to educate visitors about conservation and other critical topics.

Some zoo employees visit schools and businesses to educate the public about how to be more responsible with our environment. This department even organizes conservation projects around Ohio, such as the community effort to remove waste from Big Creek. Volunteers spent a day restoring the creek to a more healthy ecosystem. The zoo is also part of a national conservation campaign called Year of the Frog, dedicated to saving amphibian species from extinction. Zoos put forth tremendous effort to educate people, and to say that they do not is just not true in my experience.

"Zoo animals endure inadequate living conditions with no space," claims the article. It's not fair to make this generalization. My own zoo, for example, is planning a one-of-a-kind, spacious exhibit for its elephants. The exhibit encompasses many acres, and will be large enough to support a breeding population. If zoos didn't care about adequate space for their animals, why would they waste time raising millions of dollars to build this type of exhibit? Also, my zoo cares a lot for its animals; it houses the second oldest hippo in North America and its polar bears are twice the age of those in the wild.

I witnessed a life-saving surgery on a 13-year-old wolf. Veterinarians worked for two hours to save his life. Thirteen is very old for a wolf. Zoos do care for their animals, and do what they can to keep them strong and healthy.

"These animals are simply meant to entertain," claims "The Modern Zoo." That too is false. At the Cleveland Metroparks Zoo, animals are never forced to do anything for the sake of visitors' entertainment. We believe in positive animal/ human interaction. Zoo staff never force or coerce an animal due to this policy.

The author of "The Modern Zoo" is obviously very passionate in his opinion about zoos. I am also very passionate. I have not written this to personally attack him. Rather, I am simply stating facts. "The Modern Zoo" paints zoos as cruel, inhumane facilities, but it is both unfair and untrue to claim this about all of them. Many have state-of-the-art veterinary facilities and work hard to save endangered species.

I hope that readers will see that zoos seek to protect and save endangered species, as well as educate and encourage the public to do the same.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This piece is a response to "The Modern Zoo" from the May 2008 issue of Teen Ink. I volunteer at the Cleveland Metroparks Zoo and have gotten to know its keepers, veterinary staff, and other workers. According to the writer of "The Modern Zoo," staff torture animals, do not provide adequate living space, and keep the animals merely to entertain.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"The best way to predict the future is to create it!"
- Dennis Gabor

Start A Petition

Our Promise: Welcome to Care2, the world's largest community for good. Here, you'll find over 45 million like-minded people working towards progress, kindness, and lasting impact.

Care2 Stands Against: bigots, racists, bullies, science deniers, misogynists, gun lobbyists, xenophobes, the willfully ignorant, animal abusers, frackers, and other mean people. If you find yourself aligning with any of those folks, you can move along, nothing to see here.

Care2 Stands With: humanitarians, animal lovers, feminists, rabble-rousers, nature-buffs, creatives, the naturally curious, and people who really love to do the right thing.
You are our people. You Care. We Care2.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Care2 is the world's largest social network for good, a community of over 40 million people standing together, starting petitions and sharing stories that inspire action.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Largest online community empowering people to lead a healthy and green lifestyle while taking action on important causes such as human rights, animal welfare and global warming.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Skip to main content

Why Zoos Matter

We at the Saint Louis Zoo are passionate about the work we do. We not only care about the work we're doing, we are fostering animals that are threatened or endangered and supporting their perpetuation into the future.

Making a Difference

The world around us is changing fast. Species of wildlife are facing global extinction on a massive scale. About 41 percent of all amphibian species and 26 percent of all mammals are now threatened with extinction, and fully half of the world's primates - our closest relatives - teeter on the edge of existence. We face the loss of one in eight of all bird species. Overall, the extinction rate has increased a hundred-fold over the last century, and today we estimate that over 18,000 species face oblivion. Zoos are in a unique position to make a difference. Zoos are focused on offering the very best possible nutrition, enrichment and environment for animals in their care.

The many committed people at zoos care deeply about animals, working with an incredible variety of species, from one-celled creatures to elephants. Our research on behavior, reproductive biology, nutrition, animal health and genetics is valuable to wildlife managers, field researchers and other scientists.

For example, the Saint Louis Zoo has been doing a mother/infant bonding study with antelope and other hoofed animals at Red Rocks for 14 years. The data we've gathered - how often and when a species typically nurses, who initiates nursing, proximity, grooming, nuzzling - has provided information to field researchers that would be hard to come by otherwise.

We are animal experts

Zoo professionals are experts on breeding small populations of endangered species. That knowledge, too, has become valuable to scientists working with wildlife populations. Nowadays animals in wild habitats are often found in small, fragmented groups because of agriculture, logging or other human activity.

We collaborate with organizations worldwide on conservation breeding, habitat preservation, community development, public education and research.

Explore our conservation efforts

From Fence to Field

In 2004, the Saint Louis Zoo established the WildCare Institute to work in conservation hotspots locally and around the globe.

From Forest Park and Missouri streams to the Horn of Africa or the coastline of Peru, the Zoo is taking a holistic approach to wildlife conservation. While the Zoo has been involved in helping save endangered species for decades, our goal today is create a sustainable future for wildlife and for people around the world. Ultimately, we need to help save the ecosystems on which animals and humans depend. WildCare Institute addresses three key ingredients in conservation success: wildlife management and recovery, conservation science, and support of the human populations that coexist with wildlife.

Connecting people to animals

People learn at zoos. They learn in our formal classes, lectures, camps, teacher workshops, distance learning, zoo tours, overnights and outreach programs. Informally they learn from keeper chats, docent volunteers, interpreters, signage and special exhibits. Most important, they learn from observing zoo animals.

On a scale of 1 to 10, our visitors rate their educational experience at the Saint Louis Zoo as a 9.1.

Unique Experiences.

Zoos are a place where families can have unique experiences together every time they visit. Today's families are more conscious than ever of the need to teach their children about the natural world and respect for living creatures.

Why do people come to the zoo?

Why do zoos matter?

Because we care.

We want to keep this planet's amazing wildlife around for future generations.

Donate to our Conservation Fund

If you'd like to contribute financially to our conservation efforts, you can make a donation through the Saint Louis Zoo.

Learn more

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Saint Louis Zoo is dedicated to saving species and bringing people and wildlife together. Home to over 16,000 animals, many of which are endangered, entry is free every day for everyone, an important part of our commitment to people and animals - always.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Experts say zoos need to better meet the needs of animals. For a mother and kids at the Philadelphia Zoo, in Pennsylvania, it was a close encounter of the ferocious kind. Directly in front of them was a Siberian tiger.…

# data[].attributes.headline
7 Reasons Why Animals in Captivity Deserve Freedom

# data[].attributes.subject
7 Reasons Why Animals in Captivity Deserve Freedom

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
7 Reasons Why Animals in Captivity  Deserve Freedom | Animal Videos | Kids Videos | @PETAKids

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The main benefits of zoos and aquariums include Conservation, Education and Research programs that are designed to preserve and protect wild animals.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Some of the most widely used AZA statistics, updated annually.

Annual Survey Results

AZA members (Individual Professional category members and Primary Contacts of Conservation Partner, Commercial, Related Facility and Institution Members) may log in and download the results of the most recent AZA Annual Survey of Members.

Accreditation

237 accredited zoos and aquariums in 13 countries (Updated September 2023)

USA: 213 in 46 states and the District of Columbia

Canada: 7

Mexico: 4

Bahamas: 1

Bermuda: 1

Dominican Republic: 1

Argentina: 1

Colombia: 1

Spain: 1

Hong Kong: 1

Singapore: 2

South Korea: 2

United Arab Emirates: 2

15 accredited related facilities
Accreditation occurs every 5 years
Approximately 25 facilities undergo the accreditation process every 6 months

Types of Accredited Facilities

134 zoos

59 aquariums

9 both zoo and aquariums

16 safari and theme parks

15 science and nature centers

2 aviaries

2 butterfly houses

54% non-profit

35% public

11% for-profit

Animals in AZA-Accredited Facilities

Over 780,000 animals in the care of AZA-accredited zoo and aquarium professionals

Over 8,600 species

Over 800 Vulnerable, Endangered, Critically Endangered, and Extinct In The Wild species as categorized by the IUCN Red List

Species Survival Plan® (SSP) Programs

42 Taxon Advisory Groups (TAGs)

Nearly 500 Species Survival Plan Programs

AZA Reproductive Management Center

Supports SSP ® programs by monitoring the safety and efficacy of contraceptives used for all mammalian species and helping bring new contraceptive methods to the zoo, aquarium, and wildlife community

AZA Population Management Center

Population planning for 500 species for the next 100 years

Conservation

$252.2 million was spent on field conservation in 119 countries in 2022

232 species and subspecies that benefited are listed as Endangered or Threatened under the U.S. Endangered Species Act

$29 million was spent on AZA SAFE: Saving Animals From Extinction species programs in 2022

AZA's Conservation Grants Fund

Over $8.7 million supporting over 470 conservation projects since 1991

Economy

In the most recent survey in 2018, AZA-accredited zoos and aquariums:

Contributed more than $22.5 billion to U.S. economy

Supported more than 198,000 full-time jobs in the U.S.

Served more than 200 million annual visitors worldwide (183 million in the U.S.)

Informal Science Education

Based on the Education Programs survey data from 2019,

AZA members provided teacher professional development, curriculum resources and free planning visits that reached more than 96,000 teachers

5.5 million individuals were reached through field trips, outreach programs and education resources targeted to K-12 students

124 facilities reported more than 1,200 education programs that include content about connecting to nature, reaching more than 33 million.

(Updated April 2023)

Over 785 zoo and aquarium professionals have completed in-person AZA courses from 2020-present

Almost 250 zoo and aquarium professionals participated in virtual AZA courses from 2021-2022

AZA offers 18 in-person courses that are team-taught by professionals in the field, designed to develop a variety of animal management, education, and leadership skills

AZA's Executive Leadership Development Program prepares the next generation of executive leaders to successfully advance the zoo and aquarium movement in the future. More than 80 leaders have completed the program since 2014, with 27 having been promoted to the role of Executive Director or CEO.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Learn more about the Association for Zoos and Aquariums' members, educational programs, and conservation efforts, as well as the kinds of facilities we support.