Academics First, Sport Second: the No Pass, No Play Rule

Excelling at extracurricular activities is exciting and rewarding and should be encouraged, but not at the expense of academics. As student athletes, it is easy to get caught up with the notion of becoming a top college player and even a professional athlete with all the huge benefits and lifestyle that go along with it. Nevertheless, where does your future lie if you miss a scholarship or a chance of becoming a professional athlete? Thanks to the No pass, No play rules in Texas, now some academics standard have been required among high school athletes in the state over the last decades. Even though there has been a major controversy among Texas high school coaches, parents, fans and student athletes about the No pass, No play rules, the provision has had a positive impact on high school student athletes.
Texans became concerned about the poor performance in high school test scores and the literacy rate among high school students 28 year ago. The public noticed that high school athletes were paying more attention to meeting coaches’ expectations than putting much time to studying their lessons. In 1983, due to the enormous grievances from the public about their children’s future, Texas Governor Mark White decided to appoint an education committee to study the state education reform policy. The committee headed by Dallas billionaire, Ross Perot came up with several sweeping proposals, including the No pass, No play controversial provision.


Although the No pass, No play law was the only provision that caused controversial debate, other provisions that made up the House Bill 72 contain new requirements for teachers, including competency testing and certification for high school graduates. Both provisions were enacted in 1984 and took immediate effect during the 1985-86 school years, but only the No pass, No play law was later amended in 1995 because of its controversy. Before its 1995 amendments, the law required a high school student athlete to pass all courses including advance placement, international baccalaureates and dual college courses with a minimum grade of 70 and above before being allowed to participate in any extracurricular activities (e.g. football, band, tennis, soccer, volleyball, basketball, baseball, swimming, track, etc). In addition, the law bans students that failed in a course during the instructional periods from participating in a school sponsored program for six weeks until the grade has been improved and confirmed by an instructor (Texas State Library).
The early birth of the law in the late 80s affected some student athletes that took sport greater than academic. For example, a student named Gray Edward at Carter High school in Dallas was one of the first victims of the law. Edward became ineligible to participate in his school playoff match in the late 80s because of a 68.75 average in Algebra. His mathematic professor refused to add the two points because being a top linebacker and key player on the school team, Edward refused to sit in class for lectures (Bissinger 291-312). Moreover, the No pass, No play law also affected a famous track and field student athlete named Doyle Jones, who at the time held the national high school state record for 100 meter and 200 meter dashes, and was denied participation in the 1989 state championship because of a 62 average in English (Mathis 1).
However, both cases resulted into lawsuits involving parents, coaches, fans, administration, and student athlete themselves. These lawsuits made opponents of No pass, No play law argue that the purpose of the law was to deprive kids the right to participate in extracurricular activities. They further argued that by denying kids the right to participate in extracurricular activities because of poor academic performance is effectively denying them a valid educational opportunity. On the other hand, proponents of No pass, No play have also argued that students affected by the No pass, No play rule will not only try to improve their test score, but they will examine their priority in order to see academics as a future rather than sports (Burnett 2000).
Although there has been controversy among coaches, parents, and fans that the law was going to create a high drop out rate and low eligibility in extracurricular activities, the No pass, No play law has had some positive impact on students. For example, student athletes now put more attention to studies and at the same time perform better in extracurricular activities. The law has encouraged coaches and athletic parents to develop a small program in order to help student athletes maintain their eligibility and stay active on the team. Team sports, such as football that has more then 25 members, have made a team oath to help those who are academically performing poorly by organizing study groups to help one another succeed. According to the Austin Independent School District Office of Research and Evaluation, since the passage of the law more students have remained eligible to participate in extracurricular activities. The study shows that student athletes have had the largest increase in the eligibility rate from 47 percent in the fall of 1984-85 to 60 percent in the fall of 1992-93. Moreover, since the No pass, No play law was implemented the percentage of students taking honor classes has increased by 13 points from 35 percent during 1984-85, to 48 percent in 1992 (Sabatno).
In 1995, eleven years after the education standard was implemented for student athletes all over the state, another reform took place that revised the standard of the 1984 No pass, No Play provision. The new amendments allow a student with failing grades to practice on the team and to compete after three weeks, instead of six weeks, after the grade improves. It also allows school districts to exempt advance placement, international baccalaureates and dual college courses. The purpose of the 1995 amendment was to create a level playing field among school districts and to give high school student athletes the opportunity to choose classes that they could handle while being active on the team, but the new reform law did not work out for everyone. Some school districts took advantage of the law and exempted multiple classes (Ayres 1).
For example, Austin Independent School District exempted 100 classes, while Southlake School District, which is the home to the premier football program, did not exempt any course. These enormous exemptions of classes made representatives that constructed the law regret making such changes. According to The Dallas Morning News, Rep. Sadler who chaired the House education committee that changed the 1984 No pass, No play provision said, “[i] don’t think we would ever have envisioned [well known] school being allowed to exempt 100 different classes. I never imagined that school districts would exempt 100 classes. That is just beyond belief to me,” said Rep. Sadler an acknowledged expert on Texas educational laws. “It creates an uneven playing field”, Rep. Sadler said (Ayres 1).
Even though the new law allowed school districts to exempt classes and students to participate in extracurricular activities, both the old and the new laws serve today as guidance for Texas high school athletes. According to Texas State Library and Archives, Texas was the first state to pass such a law in United States and other states have followed since the 90s (Texas State Library). The law made parents and coaches to become more involved in student athletes academics achievements while the student combined sport skills with good education foundation.
Moreover, the law has helped high school student athletes recognize the significance of academics, realizing that good academics performance is the key attraction to today college coaches. Sports are wonderful and can use as an opportunity to get quality education, but student athletes need to take academics first and sport second because education is the key to a better tomorrow. The popularity of your sport might fade away, but your education will forever remain with you.












Work Cited

Ayres, Karen. “School districts find way around no-pass-no-play.” The Dallas Morning News.
20 Jan. 2007. 3 Sept.2008 .
Bissinger, H.G. Friday Night Lights. Cambridge, MA: Da Capo Press, 2003. 291-312.
Burnett, Mitchell. A. “One Strike and You’re Out: An analysis of No Pass/No Play Policies.”
High School Journal. V84 n2 Dec. (2000): p1-6.
Mathis, Nancy. “’ No –Pass, No-Play’ at 5: Texas Statue Still a Controversial Mode for Reform.” Education Week. 17 May. 1989. 15 Sept.2008 .
Sabatino, Melissa. “A Look Back at the No Pass/No Play Provision.” Executive Summary 93.05 Austin Independent School District Office of Research and Evaluation. May 1994 (3-12). .
Texas State Library & Archives Commission. “Press conference by White, August 8, 1985.”
.