Home

Welcome To

Equality in Bellmont Sports
Dedicated to ensuring Equality in sports at Bellmont High school

 

Not your “normal” who knows who discrimination, but organized, pervasive, designed, and consistent

The situation can be effectively addressed by a simple post season confidential and anonymous athlete questionnaire, and a Board of Education that represents all students, not just subsets.

The Board Of Education was notified of the situation last March.  The Board has chosen not to take the measures defined in the NACS Policy Manual or properly address the situation in any manner.

Student Handbook 2021-2022

NONDISCRIMINATION AND ACCESS TO EQUAL EDUCATION (POLICY # 2260)

The School Board does not discriminate on the basis of religion, race, color, national origin, sex, disability or age in its programs, activities or employment.
Further, it is the policy of this Corporation to provide an equal opportunity for all students, regardless of race, color, creed, disability, religion, gender, ancestry, age, national origin, place of residence within the boundaries of the Corporation, or social or economic background, to learn through the curriculum offered in this Corporation.
Page 22

Why Not?

“What Would Jesus Do?”

What would any other public school system do?

It CAN change.

But the Board of Education has chosen NOT to address the situation consistent with NACS Policies.

5 of the 6 (83%) Board of Education members are affiliated with the institutions sponsoring the private schools, contributing 30% of the students.  1 of the 6 (17%) does not, representing 70% of the students.

One simple adjustment can dramatically improve the situation.

But MOST importantly click on the “What can I do” button in the Main Menu

Introduction

(if you don’t like reading and want to cut to the chase, click on the links below)

Basketball

Baseball

Summary

It is past time to address an issue that has festered and grown for some time in athletics at Bellmont High School, favoritism and politics with the emphasis on religious and ethnic discrimination issues.  Politics has unnecessarily and negatively affected the experience and growth of many student athletes, some severely.   Not experienced as a problem at DHS or initially at BHS, the problem has become very prevalent and obvious over the years in some sports since the consolidation of the High Schools.[1]

The root cause is a system that tolerates this tendency and makes no attempt to hold coaches accountable for proper, equal, and fair treatment of all athletes.  Changing one coach does not change “the system” short or long term, but may be required when the coach’s past bias cannot realistically be expected to change.  However, any replacement must be screened for this form of bias for the situation to improve.  The “system” has to change starting with definitions of proper behavior with accountability.   Policies exist and sound good, but without accountability they are just empty words on paper degenerating to false Public Relations; AKA propaganda.  An important part of the solution is simple and effective if implemented with sincerity at the top of the chain of command, the School Board.

These are fragile, vulnerable, and sensitive teenagers developing self-esteem for a lifetime.  They have no EEOC to appeal to.  There is no HR department for student athletes.  Expecting a child to risk reprisal and further harassment by reporting is not realistic.  Their self-esteem should not be jeopardized based on what middle school they attended, who they are related to, or any other form of political influence.  It should be enhanced by their abilities, hard work, sportsmanship, and team spirit.

North Adams does not have policies or a “chain of command” that even attempts to be effective on this issue.  There are unenforced policies without any attempt for determination of violations.  There needs to be an accountability system starting with the coach, AD, Principal, and eventually reaching the School Board if lower levels do not handle situations properly.  No accountability translates to hot air public relations for appearance sake only.  This is not an issue that can be buried or white washed somewhere in the chain of command as it has been in the past.

An Analysis of Two Sports

Documented and Clear Evidence

of severe and consistent political  religious and ethnic discrimination bias based on grade school attended

in two of the sports programs at

Bellmont High School

Two sports were reviewed for political religious and other discrimination, boys’ basketball and baseball; two of the sports consistently producing comments of political discrimination.   Discrimination FOR any individuals or group is discrimination AGAINST all others.  Subject to availability the methodology for analysis used was:

  1. Percent of varsity players by the two district primary private schools (PS-1 and PS-2) as compared to:
    1. The overall enrollment by PS-1, PS-2 (separately and combined), and all others (“O”).[1]
    2. The number of student athletes chosen for each sport at BHS by grade school
    3. The percent of players advanced to team levels beyond their peers by each group.

The first false discounting factor will be each PS having better sports programs and thus producing superior athletes.  This can easily be refuted or confirmed by comparing the combined difference in scores of contests between the middle schools involved for the player groups and for the years attended by the athletes.  That information was not made available for review.  Nor does this approach apply to baseball, as the middle schools do not have their own teams.  There was no known methodology for normalizing the population base other than a function of the general school enrollment population.  That assumption is acceptable in that most youths play baseball that desire to and the base population size adequate.[2] 

The advancement percentage is most illuminating and damning.  Beyond being assigned as part of the starting lineup and falsely earned playing time this is the most effective means of encouraging some athletes and discouraging others; and totally at the head coach’s discretion.  There has been a new twist to the advancement encouragement and discouragement methodology.  Some players are now listed on the programs as being on the varsity, even though they are expected to play in a lower level game making them unavailable. That’s in addition to the initial team selection bias and arbitrarily and inappropriately advancing some players for the sectionals.  Student athletes don’t have to wait a year for their peers and the public to know next year’s selection.  Nor does that encourage any advanced player to improve their skills before next year.  Each slot left open short of a full roster for false reasons replaces a slot for another older athlete denied the opportunity to participate in any way, shape, or form.  Michael Jordan was cut his sophomore year, but continued to improve.  Fortunately for basketball he didn’t attend BMS.  Ironically once a player has been listed as a varsity team player, even they have little motivation to try to improve.  Everyone loses.

If a player quits a sport out of frustration, the favored players survive without needing to continue to discourage other players; very effective and allowing token representation at the lower initial levels.  When there are younger players placed on higher level teams, why bother trying out the next year?; self-enforcing future bias.

[1] The complete 2020 year data was not included pending availability.  Some years were absent JV and Freshman teams.

[2] If statistical confirmation is required and beyond the District’s ability it will be provided should full District information be made available.

Basketball –

One of the most obvious examples due in part to three different team levels, the situation includes a notable change under the head coach assigned in 2018.  The percent of Varsity Players is compared to the enrollment population by the two major Private Schools, PS-1 and PS-2, and by all other (others, “O”).  With typically three levels there is much more opportunity to encourage some and discourage others by advancing to levels beyond their peer grade class group.  Of course that is in addition to and more important than the standard selection, starting position, and playing time methods.

Varsity Basketball Players by Middle School Group[1]

Per cent of varsity players by broup

To summarize: PS-1’s enrollment was 12%[2], yet the average roster contained 40% of the athletes; a favorable percentage of 28% or over a threefold multiple; 333% of proportional expectations.  Of special note is the increase from 18% under the previous coach, to 50% in the most recent year under the current head coach.

PS-2 has averaged 39% of varsity players.  PS-2’s percentage, at first dropping significantly under the current head coach, has since increased to the previous levels.  It is suspected that some education was in order for the new head coach by the baseball head coach, or Athletic Director.  PS-2 has averaged 39% of the varsity players over the years analyzed; 21% more than the enrollment would otherwise dictate.

All other players, “O”, have only averaged 21% of the players, yet represents 69% of the student body.  This represents 48% less than the enrollment would otherwise dictate.   Adding the two Private Schools (PSs) together is even more dramatic.  Fully 79% of the players came from those two schools, representing only 30% of the enrollment; the total difference of course being entirely offset by the O group.  2022 set a new record, 92% of the players coming from the PS schools, and all at the expense of the Others, dropping to 8%; a favorable percentage change for the PS schools just from 2017 of 28%, and from the enrollment population to 62% while the Other participation dropped 61% from their population making up the total increase difference for the PS schools.

The bias is even more evident when combining the two PS groups and are compared to the largest enrollment group, Others.

Advancement of Varsity Basketball Players by Middle School Group

As stated previously, in addition to the starting lineup and playing time, selecting players to advance above their peer group to a higher level is a very effective means to strongly encourage some, and strongly discourage others.  Prematurely advancing a favored player accomplishes much, dramatically boosts that player’s self-esteem and makes room for additional favoritism at lower levels; all at the expense of an Other player at a higher grade level.

Totally at the head coach’s discretion, this indicator is particularly illuminating and disturbing.  The PS-1 group is regularly receiving 48% of the promotions, 36% more than what the enrollment would dictate.[3]  Again of particular note is the O group under the new head coach.  Initially at approximately 30% under the previous coach, now single digits when not 0%.  Instead, the PS-2 group has replaced promotion in an apparent effort to keep both PS groups approximately equal.  For the last three years players from the PS groups have averaged 97% of the advancement of players beyond their peers.  And now, under the new Head Coach, the bias has become complete, with the largest player group, Other, not advancing any player.

The Bellmont Junior Varsity and Freshmen teams demonstrate the same bias and discrimination.  As the results are roughly the same they are included for comparison purposes generally without comments.

The only additional observation of note is how the players’ % from all three groups starts out approximately the same the Freshman year (even though the O group over twice the size of the PS groups).  However the O group consistently and dramatically drops off in later years at advanced levels.  A player can either be encouraged or discouraged in any number of ways.  Entirely at the coach’s discretion, sitting on the bench most of the year does not motivate a player to return the next year only to be exposed to the same environment for the same bias and treatment.  This would also allow the coach to suggest impartiality between the groups when the opposite is the case; as well as make room for more discriminatory selection and advancement.  However the bias, even among what appears to be equally yet unfairly allocated Freshmen teams, becomes evident when combining PS-1 with PS-2 and comparing to Other.

[1] For all graphs: “Avg” is the average percentage for the years reviewed; “Pop” is the percentage of the groups’ enrollment populations; and “Dif” is the difference between the sport’s average population and the enrollment percentage respectively for each group.  “BKB” represents basketball; and “BB” indicates baseball.

[2] The per cent of incoming players participating at their previous middle schools will be determined if and when the information becomes available.  Additionally enrollment for each separate year have not been calculated separate; again when and if the information is made available.  It is doubted any difference will materially change the results.  Additionally, it is recommended that the annual summary Bellmont win/loss record be compared to identical opponents over an extended period of time to determine the impact on the programs overall.  That information is not made available to the general public but is available to the administration.  Enrollment population percentages do not sum to 100 due to Excel truncating.  The percentages to one decimal are 12.1, 18.5, and 69.4 for PS-1, PS-2, and Other respectively.

[3] The double bias of selection and advancement was not taken into consideration or calculated separately. 

Bellmont Baseball –

Time to switch to the other side of the same ugly coin that helps maintain a degree of balance between the two PS school groups.[1]  Allowing one PS to control each sport closely followed by the other PS avoids an ugly food fight in any one sport that would bring attention to the situation not allowing either to share the spoils.

Bellmont Varsity Baseball Discrimination by Group

In this sport PS-2 obviously dominates matters with 18% of the enrollment, yet 52% of the players.  As with PS-1 in basketball, a 288% increase in player participation over the group’s enrollment.  The difference in PS-1’s improvement seems to have started around 2019, the same time that PS-2’s increased participation in Basketball.  And again and as always, at the expense of a drop in the O group.  Back scratching keeps everyone happy.

Bellmont Baseball Advancement Discrimination

While the data set for the advancement information is not as abundant due to the lack of lower level teams, similar trends and patterns are still evident.  Much of the lack of data is due to the lack of a JV team; a Freshmen team never fielded.

The very effective advancement discrimination is more evident when combining the two PSs.

Much less data for the Bellmont Baseball JV team is available. [2]  However PS-2 continues to dominate disproportionally while PS-1 is starting to catch up to the new BHS order; and, as in a broken record, at the continued and increasing expense of the Other group.

Finally with the arrival of the new Asst. Athletic Director PS-1 is receiving their disproportionate representation; all the while PS-2 strengthening their control; as always at the expense of the Other group.

And combining the two PS groups shows continued and increasing total dominance by the PS groups.

 

[1] To date information from 2020 not made available and pending.  2022 not yet transpired.

[2] Data beyond 2019 not available and pending.

Summary

That the chain of command has conspired, cooperated, endorsed, and perpetuated this discrimination is quite evident by the coaching assignments as well as the situation deteriorating.  How far up the chain of command is unknown, however the many policies addressing this tendency have been ignored throughout the NACS system; and that is in spite of efforts for many decades nationally to eliminate any discrimination of any nature.

Candidly upon embarking on this analysis it was expected that a student athlete post season confidential survey would correct the situation over time.  However the abuse and political discrimination has proven to be so profound and extensive that expecting the individuals primarily responsible will ever be fair is totally unrealistic.  And for the same and other reasons, the situation needs addressed immediately lest rugs be pulled and/or swept under, and Walmart run out of white wash.  Coaches will always have a significant degree of discretion.  They either use their discretion wisely and fairly, or they do not.  It is totally unrealistic to assume any of the current individuals will suddenly be totally fair in the execution of their responsibilities.  Instead, they will just be more subtle and less severe in their implementation of their discrimination and abuse of student athletes.

Had the bias been limited to one or even two exceptionally skilled student athletes it may have been somewhat defensible.  But discrimination, prejudice, and bullying this consistent and absolute is nauseating when you try to picture the disappointment in so many faces unnecessarily.  It may be falsely argued as in the best interests of the varsity teams.  The overall win/loss record over time against consistent opponents through history will be anxiously awaited should that information be made available.  As opposed to benefiting either program, the bias is expected to have negatively affected both.

For those unfamiliar with either sport, any difference between athletes can be slight and difficult to determine.  Casual observations indicate that the abilities of many of the players advanced and encouraged are detectably less than many of the players discouraged.

Leadership involves tackling the difficult and uncomfortable issues, not turning a blind eye and ignoring them.  Education professionals are supposed to be an important part of the solution; not an important part of the problem.  If discrimination is this blatant and ignored, it is concerning to think how much more subtle discrimination exists in the academic and other portions of NACS; although reports of that nature have been fielded and experienced as well.  The Board may want to consider random surveys of that nature.  It’s time to decide whether NACS is a public school system, or an extension of private ones that do not want the expense of their own.  Some favoritism, discrimination, and political bias are difficult to detect.  This is easy to observe and is quite obvious.

This analysis is not intended to be a comprehensive explanation of religious discrimination, favoritism, political influence, and bullying by adults; simply the most prevalent, publicly observable, systematic, and organized at BHS.  The other more typical forms may be present as well.

In summary:

  • That this degree of discrimination is anything other than pervasive, consistent, and obvious cannot be credibly contested; and is quite evident.
  • The Administration is legally required to have knowledge of issues of this nature, without reporting by the general public.
  • In years past retaliation has been experienced thus the need for anonymity. In addition the facts speak loudly enough for themselves.  More and more accurate data is available to the Administration than the public.
  • That everyone was ignorant of the situation will not pass the first smell test at the distance of a home run.
  • That some slight bias may have existed would not have been surprising and perhaps difficult to statistically prove beyond random deviations. That the bias was so complete, extensive, and consistent, saved the normal statistical confirmation of relevancy.  An eyeball, brain, and common sense are all the statistical proof one needs.
  • For any of the coaches involved to deny perpetuating and expanding this discrimination, is an insult to the common sense of community they reside in. Denials of that nature and magnitude belong in D.C.
  • That the Athletic Director not only participated, conspired, and coordinated this situation is not defensible.

  • That purported Christian adults, representing the interests of Christian institutions, would perpetuate this harmful emotional damage to innocent youths, is an insult to the concept of Christianity.

  • It is expected that someone will suggest that any Other player that may not feel equal treatment awaits them attend another school 20 miles away or more. Extend that suggestion to 70% of the student athletes for any one sport?  Because…..?  It would make more sense that if either the 12% or 18% group wants their own sports team to resurrect their old High Schools.  The facilities are still available.  And illegal discrimination would not be necessary.  Private schools ARE available and created for the purposes implied in this discrimination bias.

  • Discrimination of this nature to even one individual is not tolerated elsewhere, let alone a whole class of students; and the largest class of students. The minorities discriminating against the majority?  What country are we in?  It was thought that religious discrimination and superior ethnic issues were settled in 1945 if not 1776.

  • Replacing a coach mid-season will be argued as inappropriate. Here the hypocrisy is a little more difficult to grasp.  Basically that is stating that disruption to the program is not timely even though the program will immediately be a better one and there are ample alternatives in the community, if not the school system.  So ultimately that is saying the program and athletes are not important, but lack of accountability and embarrassment to the coach is?  So the coach for a few months is more important than the program and student athletes?  Try to think that one through logically.  No, logic aside the emphasis on doing so in fact clearly states that this behavior will not be tolerated in the future more than any other type of message.  Of course the whole point is moot barring a coach selection process that is conducted with open eyes.
  • This form of blatant, persistent, obvious, and consistent religious discrimination is discrimination NOT against one individual with a differing religious preference; but simultaneous religious discrimination against ALL others, Muslim, Buddhist, agnostic, atheist, Jewish, and so complete even includes OTHER forms of Protestant and Christian religions. The very reason for initial immigration to North America over some  500 years ago and a VERY BASIC tenet of the Constitution some 246 years ago.
  • In a :
      • PUBLIC school system;
      • against VENERABLE and innocent youths;
      • at a very formative point in their fragile lives.
  • Nor is an exact allocation based on any criteria for either selection or advancement suggested or required, for there will be minor variance in abilities and skills. All that should be required is any semblance of objectivity in selection with the best system available for accountability.

  • This cannot be adequately stressed. This is meant in no part to reflect the vast number and majority of the many fair, ethical, and moral individuals associated with all groups.  The results of this situation in this analysis only requires three people and an administration and Board of Education with totally blind eyes, totally deaf ears, and totally oblivious to the situation.  A condition not allowed by law.  Unfortunately individuals so inclined gravitate to these positions of responsibility for reasons very obvious.

To partially correct the situation the following needs to occur:[1]:

  • The results of two sports analyzed are confirmed and appropriate action be taken consistent with existing policy.
  • That the balance of the BHS sports programs be briefly reviewed for any similar discrimination. It is fully expected that many head coaches have executed their responsibilities fairly, ethically, morally, and with Christian values established centuries ago; and reflected in NACS rules and policies.  
  • Should any preliminary reviews warrant a more extensive review, those reviews should be completed within 90 days.
  • That a system of player feedback in the form of a confidential questionnaire be implemented to provide an objective source for any continued discrimination and be communicated and reviewed by an appropriate representative of the NACS school Board.

Please further understand that should the above not be executed the matter will be referred to:

  • The United States Department of Education;
  • The United States Department of Justice Office of Civil Rights;
  • The ACLU;
  • The IRDA;
  • Private counsel

Developments no one in the community should want.

This is long, long overdue and will benefit the entire district community of NACS, most especially Bellmont High School in general, and Bellmont sports, students, and athletes in particular.  The District has ample challenges to enable the school system to be the best it can be.  This is one that should have been unnecessary and was self-inflicted.

 

Most sincerely,

fairnessatbellmont@gmail.com

[1] Selected NACS policies included in Documentation and Reference Section

Methodology Used

Please note:
  • Information for Zion, St. Peter-Immanuel, home schooling, and any transfers was not made available and thus added by default to the Bellmont Middle School numbers and labeled as Other (“O”) for High School groups, or Undefined (“U”) for some athletes with unknown middle school attendance. Any further information will only increase the discrepancies and bias.
  • “Advancement” was defined as:
    • Sophomores advanced to Varsity when a Junior Varsity team was in place (1 level)
    • Freshman advanced to Junior Varsity (1 level) or Varsity (2 levels) when a Freshmen Team was in place.
  • The two PS schools were listed separately and combined for comparison to the Other group.
  • The results were tracked by Varsity, Junior Varsity, and Freshmen when appropriate.
  • The absolute accuracy of each player’s designation is not critical to the findings. The raw findings, well outside any reasonable multiple of the deviation from the norm, as well as over several years, would not be significantly different if at all; only potentially more dramatic.
  • Throughout this analysis the 2022 enrollment population will be used, as additional information was unavailable and any year approximates most years. Again, any difference not changing the basic results.
  • While some statistics are available to determine relative abilities, it is understood that some abilities are unique to some sports positions. The extent of the bias cannot be explained on that basis alone if at all; even if it could for an individual athlete.
  • As for “improving” the programs, aggregate win/loss records against consistent opponents compared to any years without bias, or a correlation coefficient, could be calculated should that information be made available.
  • It is suggested and projected that any correlation to middle school score differences and either selection or advancement, will produce a range of possibly and slightly positive, to very probably and significantly negative.

What needs to happen

a big step in the right direction.

The School Board must define proper and ethical treatment of student athletes; starting with reading what is already in place.  In addition the Board must insist that the Athletic Department institute the following:

  1. At the end of each season all players must fill out an anonymous questionnaire sent to their home address and returned to the School Board designated recipient and not BHS staff; describing the coach’s equal and fair treatment of players as well as any other issues the Board deems relevant, or the lack thereof. In business this is part of what is called a “360 performance review” and can be very helpful in producing the best environment at all levels.  Some schools have already implemented such a system in part to improve the athletic experience as well as the success of the programs.  Some coaches encourage this process as it enables them be better coaches.  An excellent start would be any athletes from last year’s teams either still students or recently graduated.  One spring sport is notorious for this tendency.
  2. The appropriate individual must review the results with the coach, subject to any disciplinary policies as typical in any position; and as appropriate in any part of the athletic department.
  3. The unedited results must be made available to the parents of all players. Parents will need to pursue up the chain of command as necessary and appropriate.
  4. The Board must have access to the unedited raw questionnaires and review once a year.
  • Coaches have a carte blanche to cite “attitude”, false subjective performance, or any host of other issues as a reason for treating any player with inappropriate discrimination. The issue is easily confirmed or rejected by interviewing other players.  An “attitude” many times is simply the athlete reacting to the “attitude” of the coach.  The experience at Bellmont in some situations has been a problem with the coach, not the player. 
  • To the suggestion that parents should address any issues with the Coach or Athletic Director first; that has not produced any positive result in 50 years. It’s never been known to hear of any situation when that approach has accomplished anything positive instead reinforcing status quo if not compounding any bias.  Additionally, this is a totally separate issue from a feedback system by the players; the most knowledgeable about the situation.  Some foxes have guarded the henhouse for far too long.[2]  This expectation only reinforces and further enables any coach’s bias.
  • To tolerate favoritism and even mental abuse without protesting is to enable and encourage the wrong conditions and behavior. It will just continue to fester and grow more prevalent.  In reality this behavior is a form of adult bullying and systematic discrimination; and should not be tolerated; and would not be tolerated in any other public school system.
  • For the record, there are many very good, competent, and fair coaches at Bellmont. This is not an issue in individual sports (tennis, wrestling, track, cross country, golf, swimming, etc.) where a student succeeds on their abilities; or even some team sports with comparable coach discretion.  This problem is most prevalent in team sports where coaches have total discretion on what athlete makes the team and actually plays; and coveted scholarships are in play.

The following are the keys to a successful ongoing effort annually in the future and after an initial internal assessment has been conducted:

  • A fair system will provide feedback for all, no one player or coach would be singled out. A “system” that relies on one on one talking with someone (player, parent, coach, AD, or Board member) is unfair to some coaches, and reinforces status quo if not retaliation.  That is not appropriate, and begs the overall issue, now and especially for the future.  This is NOT about any one coach or student athlete, but an environment that is not best for developing teenagers and with the lack of any accountability.
  • A parent has to be able to review unedited questionnaires by players. The questionnaires will need to be drafted carefully and professionally.  If the loop of information is not closed at this point, it will not be a totally effective system.
  • At least one Board member has to take this seriously or the Superintendent. It is critical that at least one will to avoid efforts outside of NACS.

This is not intended to benefit any one student athlete, but all student athletes, Bellmont High School, and the community in general.  Nor is this intended to address any one coach.  To the coaches that do not subscribe to these tendencies (there are many), thank you for your dedication to Bellmont sports.  Yes, all parents are partial to their children and some complain without merit.  But if someone wants to suggest this is not an issue at Bellmont, they are not living in reality.  Do we want our children to graduate thinking politics is unavoidable?  Or, do we want them to graduate thinking hard work and ability is more important in life?  What character traits do we want to develop?  For children learn more by example than words.  If someone wants to claim “it’s only sports”, they do not understand the reality of emotional development and the priorities of teenagers.  Who should be their role models?  Which and how many student athletes should we inappropriately deny the opportunity to develop their skills and self-esteem in favor of undeserving student athletes?

Coaches promoting and favoring players for whatever reason unrelated to the play, abilities, and teamwork mentality, is not fair to the player, team, school, or community.  With this system there will be a documented defense of good coaches, and hold the other coaches objectively accountable for improper behavior.  The students will be taught by example fairness, the benefit of maximizing abilities, hard work, and training.

A token and typical white wash, bury under the rug, “let me talk to this (or that) coach”, or “let us look into it” will not be acceptable.  Only permanent concrete change and improvement will.  Student athletes should not have to move or attend a different school system to find fairness and an equal opportunity.  Sports should be about building character positively; not inappropriately destroying self-esteem.   The most candid players will be those that have recently completed their last season or graduated.

This is not an insignificant issue.  Some teenagers’ self-esteem, attitude on life, and mental scars are affected for the balance of their lives.  Some have suffered even more severe consequences (can be shared confidentially with Board).  Getting any one coach replaced is not the entire answer.  Putting in an accountability system is an important first step.  This problem is avoidable, unnecessary, inappropriate, and not in the best interest of the NACS district.  North Adams is a public school system, not a private one; intended to serve all students in the community, not a subset.  There are private schools available for evidently what many are trying to accomplish.  If this is so insignificant, why is so much effort put into perpetuating this tendency?

[1] If one is not familiar with the North Adams School system a brief explanation is in order.  Prior to 1968 there were three High School, Decatur (Public), Monmouth (Public), and Decatur Catholic (private).  All three High Schools were eventually consolidated and became Bellmont High School.  The parochial schools, primarily St. Joseph Catholic, and now Wyneken Memorial Lutheran School. Have maintained their grade school systems through grade 8.  However the student from those grade schools then attend Bellmont High School for their last four years.

[2] https://www.competitivedge.com/unfair-coaches-revisited/

Frequently Asked Questions

  1. But it’s only sports, how important is it?
    1. Teenagers are building a foundation of lifetime self-esteem, self-confidence.  To many students unfortunately sports is more important to them than academics.
    2. It is not known to what, if any, extent similar conditions exist in the academic or other parts of Bellmont High School.  It only stands to reason that similar conditions exist but are transparent to the public.
    3. If this is NOT so important, why is so much effort put into perpetuating this discrimination?
  2. But it will never change.
    1. This Board has demonstrated they have no motivation to represent ALL of the students, merely a small subset.  So yes, expecting this Board to implement the necessary changes is unrealistic. 
    2. This is perhaps an unprecedented and unique situation, to the extent this form of discrimination exists at Bellmont.  Most just scratch their heads, when they would otherwise jump at a situation involving just one student.
    3. But there ARE many things that can be done to encourage, or even require, a positive change:
      1. Most importantly write the Department of Justice, Office of Civil Rights.  THEY:
        1. Are assigned responsibility for this issue.
        2. They can INSIST that appropriate changes be made and enforce it by denying Federal Funding.
        3. Seldom is a lawsuit involved.  Typically they just demand and negotiate appropriate changes.
        4. When initially contacted the response indicated they considered it an individual issue and not one as pervasive as it is at Bellmont.  Who would?  If others contact the DOJ, they will understand the situation is a serious form of religious and ethnic discrimination.
      2. Contact the Department of Education.  The DOE demonstrated a significant interest in the situation, but deferred the matter to the DOJ.  The DOE handles ethnic discrimination, the DOJ religious.  This has elements of both.  If convinced that the matter is ethnic as well as religious by others, they may address the matter.
      3. Contact the ACLU, recommended by the DOE.  As with the DOJ, the ACLU did not understand the degree of severity due to the rare situation.
      4. Contact the Indiana Civil Rights Commission.
      5. Call or write the individual Board members.  While lip service can be expected, it’s really a matter of two simple issues:
        1. a) a confidential survey post season, and
        2. b) a Board that takes the matter seriously.
      6. Vote for Board members that take their oath seriously and will represent all students, not a subset.
      7. Legal action – should all other efforts fail, this costly and time consuming option will be pursued with enough support.
  3. But my children/grandchildren have graduated/don’t play sports.
    1. Right is right, and wrong is wrong.
    2. As Bobby Kennedy said “If not me who?  If not now when?”
    3. “Verily I say unto you, inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these My brethren, ye have done it unto Me.’  Matthew 25:40
    4. Rosters are available to the public.  Information on other issues such as academics, is generally not.  It is not know if these issues are present in other areas of Bellmont besides sports, but that would be a reasonable assumption.
    5. If the founding fathers had that attitude, the U.S. would still be a British Colony.

What Can I Do?

Contact one or more of the following

All contact information can be found under “Contacts”:

  1. Most importantly write the Department of Justice, Office of Civil Rights.
  2. Contact the Department of Education.  The DOE demonstrated a significant interest in the situation, but deferred the matter to the DOJ.  The DOE handles ethnic discrimination, the DOJ religious.  This has elements of both.  If convinced that the matter is ethnic as well as religious by others, they may address the matter.
  3. Contact the ACLU, recommended by the DOE.  As with the DOJ, the ACLU did not understand the degree of severity due to the rare situation.
  4. Contact the Indiana Civil Rights Commission.
  5. Call or write the individual Board members.  While lip service can be expected, it’s really a matter of two simple issues:
    1. a) a confidential survey post season, and
    2. b) a Board that takes the matter seriously.
  6. Vote for Board members that take their oath seriously and will represent all students, not a subset.

Contacts

U.S. Dept. of Justice

Kristen Clarke
U.S. Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001

Submit a report here:

https://civilrights.justice.gov/report/

 

Alonzo Rivas, Attorney

U.S. Department of Education

Office of Civil Rights

John C. Kluczynski Federal Building

230 South Dearborn Street, 37th Floor

Chicago, Illinois 60604

alonzo.rivas@ed.gov

Submit an online complaint or download a PDF file here:

https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/complaintintro.html

Kenneth Falk, Attorney

ACLU of Indiana

1031 E. Washington St.

Indianapolis, IN 46202

rmimms@aclu-in.org

 

Online Complaint Form:

https://www.formstack.com/forms/?1157118-hfibE7kI4V

 

 

Indiana Civil Rights Commission Complaint Form:

https://icrc.powerappsportals.us/create-complaint/
 

Commentary

The enclosed report demonstrates the inability of the North Adams Community Schools Board of Education to provide minimal oversight for the staff and students at Bellmont High School.  As the report states, sports is disproportionally important to youth of high school age.  The foundation of self-esteem and confidence, and other personality traits established in their venerable teenage experience. 

The results of discrimination in the Athletic part of Bellmont, is the only component part with transparency to the public.  While some indications have been noticed in the academic component, comparable information of any similar degree of discrimination is not available to the general public.

There is a false intuitive belief that a Board of Education elected by the general public, is the best Board selection methodology available.  It is not.  Nor is the previous system of the Board appointing new members; a form of incest.[1]

The problems with the previous methodology are obvious and thought to have been addressed.  The intuitive process of a public election is generally considered to be the “best” system, and many times for false reasons.  The current elected Board process is venerable to:

  • Merely a popularity contest; regardless of ability to contribute to the Board objectively and fairly.
  • John Q. Public with an axe to grind, typically reflecting overemphasis and total preoccupation with one or two “values” of particular interest to them; regardless of ability to contribute to the Board objectively and fairly.
  • John Q. Public with a good marketing campaign; regardless of ability to contribute to the Board objectively and fairly.

Are there alternative and better selection methodologies?  Yes, used every day by major corporations and other institutions wanting the best Board possible.  What process do they use?

  • The needs of the organization are reviewed primarily with the President and/or Chairperson of the Board (Superintendent).
  • A nominating committee is formed to search for the best and most appropriate nominees.
  • The nominees are presented to the shareholders (public) for election to these very important positions.
  • The best Board possible if formed and maintained.

Being a public school system a few adjustments need to be made to the typical corporate (or other) approach.  First it must be realized what characteristics and qualifications produce the best Board.  Business success?  Not necessarily.  Popularity?  No.  A good self-promoter?  Doubt it.  Someone with good “moral” character?  Yes, a constraint for consideration in fact; but try to define that.  The associated characteristics are also important, honesty, integrity, fairness, etc.  Again not a selection criteria but a screening constraint.

First, what is the purpose of a Board of Education?

  • First and foremost hold the Superintendent accountable for developing the best public school system obtainable. Not a skill set by the average public, but a walk in the park for another superintendent.  They know.  The public does not.  The public just becomes a rubber stamp Board:. i.e. Compton, the only known preacher as a superintendent in Indiana  (it is NOT known any degree of competence by the current superintendent, the assumption being average or better, but any discrimination bias also unknown).
  • PROTECT a good superintendent from inappropriate self-serving public criticism.
  • Bring expertise to the Board to supplement the Superintendent’s strengths and any weaknesses which we all have. What are those areas of expertise?
    • First and foremost other Superintendents to share ideas and help tackle the common problems with all schools. This is why you’ll find other CEOs most prevalent on corporate Boards.
    • Expertise in unique areas of education and understanding youth development
    • Educations specialists for leading edge solutions; i.e. academic institutions with that focus on those matters such as Ball State.
    • At least one member with financial expertise. This isn’t balancing the family checkbook.
    • At least one member with legal knowledge, although this need can perhaps be addressed by preexisting Board counsel, depending on the situation.
    • One or more members of the community for input, transparency, and accountability to the public.

But this is a PUBLIC school system, what about PUBLIC accountability?  Yes, a very important consideration and thus an extra step in the selection process.

  • In a “normal” corporation (and any number of other institutions) the nominating committee is generally a subset of the existing Board with considerable if not absolute influence all the way to control by the CEO (not a good situation).
  • For a public school system (and other situations) the BEST nominating committees are members of the community elected and thus held accountable to the community. But NOT members themselves; an option not ruled out but potentially self-serving.
  • Why a nominating committee elected by the public? Several reasons:
    • Public accountability. The public has assurance that the nominees (thus Board members) have been selected using the best criteria.
    • Realistic education and understanding of the needs for the Board of Education.
    • Accessing and networking the best individuals for the Board of Education.
    • Networking and recruiting the best nominees over an extended period of time.
  • With this process, the public can choose from the best nominees available.

Why is this NOT done?

  • The simplistic shallow perception that a democratic election is the best process for selection of any public position. Congress is chock full of exceptions to this perception.
  • Lack of understanding the entire process, what is needed, what is best, and how to ensure the best Board possible.
  • Intuitive and deceptive “common sense” coupled with lack of knowing or considering alternatives.
  • The very prevalent and all encompassing “holier than thou” shared by everyone knowing they are the best Board members available as with most matters.

So does anyone besides good businesses take this approach?  In part or full?  Instead of electing from the general public?

  • Professional sports teams, with a nominating committee (scouts) producing nominees for the team. Corporations wanting to fill a key position (headhunters).  Various forms of recruiting in many environments where selection is critical.
  • Many specialized organizations where specialized knowledge (i.e. education) is very helpful; art museums; specialized non-profits; any corporation wanting experience in their industry; any corporation wanting the unique perspective and input at the same level as their CEO (superintendent); any organization wanting input on specialized expertise (education, law, finance, etc.).
  • What about reflecting local “values”? What values are uniquely local and not universal?  Do you really believe education professionals will not have appropriate values?  Other Superintendents?  Or is the fear NOT having a false Christian religious bias?  What “value” does that reflect if not bias and discrimination?

Can it still be implemented?  Why not?  If not now when?  A no brainer in concept, only requiring an understanding of the desired outcome and full process; a significant challenge to explain to others full of holier than thou preconceived bias.

Sincerely,

fairnessinbellmontsports@gmail.com

[1] Some of the tradeoffs between an appointed and elected Board are described in this web sites; as well as the skill and knowledge sets necessary and generally absent in most Board members.

https://education.stateuniversity.com/pages/2390/School-Boards-SELECTION-EDUCATION-MEMBERS.html

https://www.masb.org/attributes-of-an-effective-school-board-member.aspx

https://xqsuperschool.org/rethinktogether/what-makes-a-good-school-board-member/

https://my.lwv.org/sites/default/files/how_to_choose_a_school_board_candidate.pdf

 

Reference Material

Rosters




Applicable NACS Policies

Selected NACS Rules and Policies in Direct Opposition to Reality

0144.2 – BOARD MEMBER ETHICS

A Board of School Trustees member should honor the high responsibility which his/her membership demands by:

  1. thinking always in terms of “children first”;
  2. understanding that the basic function of the School Board member is “policy-making” and not “administrative”, and by accepting the responsibility of learning to discriminate intelligently between these two functions;
  1. accepting the responsibility along with his/her fellow Board members of seeing that the maximum of facilities and resources is provided for the proper functioning of schools;
  1. refusing to “play politics” in either the traditional partisan, or in any petty sense;
  1. representing at all times the entire school community;
  1. accepting the responsibility of becoming well informed concerning the duties of Board members, and the proper functions of public schools;
  1. recognizing responsibility as a State official to seek the improvement of education throughout the State.

A Board member should meet his/her responsibilities to his/her community by:

      A.….F….

  1. winning the community’s confidence that all is being done in the best interests of school children.

1200 – ADMINISTRATOR ETHICS

The proper performance of school business and administration of an effective educational program requires the services of individuals of integrity, high ideals, and human understanding. To maintain and promote these essentials, the School Board expects all administrators to maintain high standards in their working relationships, provide professional leadership in the Corporation and community, and in the performance of their duties, …

In addition, the Board believes that each administrator should maintain standards of exemplary professional conduct and conform his/her behavior to the code of ethics set forth below as adopted from the American Association of School Administrators’ Statement of Ethics for School Administrators by:

  1. making the well-being of students the fundamental value of all decision making and actions;
  1. fulfilling professional responsibilities with honesty and integrity;
  1. supporting the principle of due process and protecting the civil and human rights of all individuals;
  1. obeying local, State and national laws and not knowingly joining or supporting organizations that advocate, directly or indirectly, the overthrow of the government;
  1. implementing the Board’s policies and administrative rules and regulations;
  1. pursuing appropriate measure to correct those laws, policies, and regulations that are not consistent with sound educational goals;
  1. avoiding the use of his/her position for personal gain through political, social, religious, economic, or other influences;
  1. accepting academic degrees or professional certification only from duly accredited institutions;
  1. maintaining the standards and seeking to improve the effectiveness of the profession through research and continuing professional development;
  1. honoring all contracts until fulfillment, release or dissolution mutually agreed upon by all parties to the contract.

2260 – NONDISCRIMINATION AND ACCESS TO EQUAL EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY

Any form of discrimination or harassment can be devastating to an individual’s academic progress, social relationship, and/or personal sense of self-worth.

As such, the Board of School Trustees does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex (including transgender status, sexual orientation and gender identity), disability, age, religion, military status, ancestry, or genetic information which are classes protected by Federal and/or State law (collectively, “Protected Classes”) occurring in the Corporation’s educational opportunities, programs, and/or activities, or, if initially occurring off Corporation grounds or outside the Corporation’s educational opportunities, programs, and activities, affecting the Corporation environment.

The Board also does not discriminate on the basis of Protected Classes in its employment policies and practices as they relate to students, and does not tolerate harassment of any kind.

……

Sanctions and Monitoring

The Board shall vigorously enforce its prohibitions against unlawful discrimination/retaliation occurring in the Corporation’s educational opportunities, programs and/or activities, or, if initially occurring off Corporation grounds or outside the Corporation’s educational opportunities, programs and activities, affecting the Corporation environment by taking appropriate action reasonably calculated to stop and prevent further misconduct.

While observing the principles of due process, a violation of this policy may result in disciplinary action up to and including the discharge of an employee. All disciplinary action will be taken in accordance with applicable State law and the terms of the relevant collective bargaining agreement(s), if any. With respect to violations of this policy by Respondents who are students, disciplinary action may be imposed up to and including expulsion from school, in accordance with applicable State law. Any discipline of students with disabilities will be in accordance with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”) and the Federal and State regulations implementing the IDEA.

When imposing discipline, the Superintendent shall consider the totality of the circumstances involved in the matter. In those cases where unlawful discrimination/retaliation is not substantiated, the Board may consider whether the alleged conduct nevertheless warrants discipline in accordance with other Board policies, consistent with the terms of the relevant collective bargaining agreement(s), if any, and with Federal and State laws and regulations.

All sanctions imposed by the Board and/or Superintendent shall be reasonably calculated to end such conduct, prevent its recurrence, and remedy its effect. Prior sanctions imposed on the Respondent(s) for similar past conduct shall be considered in determining the appropriateness of the sanction(s) imposed for the present conduct.

……

Retaliation

Retaliation against a person who (1) makes a report or files a complaint alleging unlawful discrimination occurring in the Corporation’s educational opportunities, programs and/or activities, or, if initially occurring off Corporation grounds or outside the Corporation’s educational opportunities, programs and activities, affecting the Corporation environment, or (2) participates as a witness in an investigation, is prohibited.

Specifically, the Board will not discriminate/retaliate against, coerce, intimidate, threaten or interfere with any individual because s/he opposed any act or practice made unlawful by Federal or State nondiscrimination laws, made a charge, testified, assisted or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding, or hearing under those laws, or exercised, enjoyed, aided or encouraged any other person in the exercise or enjoyment of any right granted or protected by those laws.

Individuals found to have engaged in retaliation shall be subject to disciplinary action, up to and including termination of employment or expulsion from school.

…..

2431 – INTERSCHOLASTIC ATHLETICS

The School Board recognizes the value to the Corporation and to the community of a program of interscholastic athletics for as many students as feasible.

The program of interscholastic athletics should provide students the opportunity to exercise and test their athletic abilities in a context greater and more varied than that which can be offered by a school or the School Corporation alone.

The program should foster the growth of school loyalty with the student body as a whole and stimulate community interest in athletics.

Game activities and practice sessions should provide many opportunities to teach the values of competition and good sportsmanship.

The Board subscribes to the administrative guidelines of the Indiana High School Athletic Association but maintains responsibility for enforcement of all rules. The Board believes that it is the purpose of an interscholastic program to provide the benefits of an athletic experience to as large a number of students as feasible within the Corporation.

Since the primary purpose of the athletic program is to enhance the education of participating students as indicated in this policy, the Board places top priority on maximum student participation and the values of good sportsmanship, team play, and fair competition, rather than on winning, particularly at sub-varsity levels. The Superintendent is to develop guidelines for coaches to follow which will ensure that as many students as possible have the opportunity to play so they have the opportunity to benefit from the learning experience.

……

The Superintendent is also to develop guidelines for ensuring that sportsmanship, ethics, and integrity characterize the manner in which the athletic program is conducted and the actions of students who participate. Such guidelines should provide a set of behavioral expectations for each type of participant. The Superintendent is authorized to implement suitable disciplinary procedures against those who do not abide by these expectations.

In order to support such a program, the Board commits itself to:

  1. recognize the value of school athletic activities as a vital part of education;
  2. adopt policies (upon recommendation of the administration) which reflect the Corporation’s educational objectives and promote the ideals of good sportsmanship, ethics, and integrity;
  3. attend and enjoy school athletic activities, serving as a positive role model and expecting the same from parents, fans, participants, coaches, and other school personnel;
  4. support and reward participants, coaches, school administrators, and fans who display good sportsmanship.

3139 – STAFF DISCIPLINE

The School Board believes that standards of conduct for professional employees are necessary to provide students with a positive example of adult behavior and an orderly instructional environment. To this end, the Board has adopted a policy of progressive discipline to be applied except in cases of gross misconduct. In instances of gross misconduct, the purpose of this policy is to consider if the misconduct warrants suspension without pay or termination.

…….

Exceptions to the principle of progressive discipline contained in this policy may be made in cases in which the Board finds that the interests of students and the school community make the application of the principle of progressive discipline inappropriate. Examples include, but are not limited to the following:

  1. Reporting for duty under the influence of an alcoholic beverage, an illegal drug, or a prescription drug used other than in accordance with a prescription.
  2. Possession or use of alcoholic beverages or drugs on school property or at an event sponsored by the Board.
  3. Willful refusal to follow established rules or standards for the conduct of a professional employee, i.e. insubordination.
  4. Theft, fraud, or another violation of criminal law.
  5. Arrest and subsequent conviction of a crime.
  6. Falsification or omission of a material fact in the application for employment by the Board.
  7. Threats of and/or acts of violence to a person or substantial property damage.
  8. Poor professional judgment resulting in a risk of physical harm to a person.
  9. Harassment in violation of Board policy on harassment.

……..

3210 – STAFF ETHICS

An effective educational program requires the services of men and women of integrity, high ideals, and human understanding. To maintain and promote these essentials, the School Board expects all professional staff members to maintain high standards in their working relationships.

Professional staff members in the performance of their professional duties will:

  1. recognize basic dignities of all individuals with whom they interact in the performance of duties;
  2. represent accurately their qualifications;
  3. exercise due care to protect the mental and physical safety of students, colleagues, and subordinates;
  4. seek and apply the knowledge and skills appropriate to assigned responsibilities;
  5. keep in confidence such information as they may secure, unless disclosure is required by law, authorized by the Superintendent, or is necessary to protect the health and welfare of the student or others;
  6. ensure that their actions or those of another on their behalf are not made with specific intent of advancing private economic interests;
  7. avoid accepting anything of value offered by another for the purpose of influencing judgment;
  8. refrain from using their position or public property, or permitting another person to use an employee’s position or public property for partisan political or sectarian religious purposes. This will in no way limit constitutionally or legally protected rights as a citizen.

3362 – ANTI-HARASSMENT

Bullying

Bullying rises to the level of unlawful harassment when one (1) or more persons systematically and chronically inflict physical hurt or psychological distress on one (1) or more students with the intent to harass, ridicule, humiliate, intimidate or harm that/those student(s), and that bullying is based upon sex, race, color, national origin, religion, or disability, that is, characteristics that are protected by Federal civil rights laws. It is defined as any unwanted and repeated written, verbal, or physical behavior, including any threatening, insulting, or dehumanizing gesture, by an adult or student, that is severe or pervasive enough to create an intimidating, hostile, or offensive educational environment; cause discomfort or humiliation; or unreasonably interfere with the individual’s school performance or participation; and may involve

…….

Religious (Creed) Harassment

Prohibited religious harassment occurs when unwelcome physical, verbal, or nonverbal conduct is based upon an individual’s religion or creed and when the conduct has the purpose or effect of interfering with the individual’s work or educational performance; of creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working and/or learning environment; or of interfering with one’s ability to participate in or benefit from a class or an educational program or activity. Such harassment may include but is not limited to conduct directed at the characteristics of a person’s religious tradition, clothing, or surnames, and/or involving religious slurs.

IHSAA

8-2 Coaches Conduct The member School principal is responsible for initiating appropriate disciplinary measures against coaches for improper and unethical practices. A report of such must be forwarded to the Executive Committee if requested by the Commissioner.

The Emotional Impact of Adult Bullying on Student Athletes

References on the impact on a student athlete’s self esteem[1]

  1. Booker, C., Skew, A., Kelly, Y., & Sacker, A. (2015). Media use, sports participation, and well-being in adolescence: Cross-sectional findings from the UK household longitudinal study. American Journal of Public Health, 105(1), 173-179.
  2. Bowker, A. (2006). The relationship between sports participation and self-esteem during early adolescence. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 38(3), 214-229.
  3. Chen, W., Chen, C., Lin, Y., & Chen T. (2012). Sport participation and self-esteem as mediated by perceived peer acceptance and sport self-concept in Taiwanese college students. Social Behavior and Personality, 40(4), 699-704.
  4. Daniels, E., & Leaper, C. (2006). A longitudinal investigation of sport participation, peer acceptance, and self-esteem among adolescent girls and boys. Sex Roles, 55(11), 875-880.
  5. Diener, E. (1994). Measuring subjective well-being: Progress and opportunities. Social Indicators Research, 28, 35-89.
  6. Diener, E., & Diener, M. (1995). Cross-cultural correlates of life satisfaction and self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(4), 653-663.
  7. Donaldson, S. J., & Ronan, K. R. (2006). The effects of sports participation on young adolescents’ emotional well-being. Adolescence, 41(162), 369-389.
  8. Downward, P., & Rasciute, S. (2011). Does sport make you happy? An analysis of the well-being derived from sports participation. International Review of Applied Economics, 25(3), 331-348.
  9. Harter, S. (1985). Competence as a dimension of self-evaluation: Toward a comprehensive model of self-worth. In R.H. Leahy (Ed.), The development of the self. New York: Academic Press.
  10. Jewitt, R., Sabiston, C. M., Brunet, J., O’Loughlin, E. K., Scarapicchia, T., & O’Loughlin, J. (2013). School sport participation during adolescence and mental health in early adulthood. Journal of Adolescent Health, 55(5), 640-644.
  11. Mitrovic, M., Todorovic, D., & Markovic, Z. (2012). Anxiety and self-esteem in students of sport and physical education. Research in Kinesiology, 40(2), 133-139.
  12. Pedersen, S., & Seidman, E. (2004). Team sports achievement and self-esteem development among urban adolescent girls. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 28(4), 412-422.
  13. Perry-Burney, G., & Takyi, B. (2002). Self-esteem, academic achievement, and moral development among adolescent girls. Allied Health, 5(2), 15-27.
  14. Richman, E., & Shaffer, D. (2000). If you let me play sports. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 24(2), 189-199.
  15. Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  16. Ruseski, J., Humphreys, B., Hallman, K., Wicker, P., & Breuer, C. (2014). Sport participation and subjective well-being: Instrumental variable results from German survey data. Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 11(2), 396-403.
  17. Ryan, M. (2008). The antidepressant effects of physical activity: Mediating self-esteem and self-efficacy mechanisms. Psychology and Health, 23(3), 279-307.
  18. Slutzky, C. B., & Simpkins, S. D. (2009). The link between children’s sport participation and self-esteem: Exploring the mediating role of sport self-concept. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 10(3), 381-389.
  19. Varca, P., Shaffer, G., & Saunders, V. (1984). A longitudinal investigation of sport participation and life satisfaction. Journal of Sport Psychology, 6(4), 440-447.
  20. Wagnsson, S., Lindwall, M., & Gustafsson, H. (2014). Participation in organized sport and self-esteem across adolescence: The mediating role of perceived sport competence. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 36(6), 584-594.

Long-lasting effects

Why is it so important to put a stop by bullying by coaches, as well as all forms of emotional abuse, whether it be by a coach, another player, a parent, volunteer, spectator, or official?

Because research that shows that bullying, like other forms of emotional abuse, can have dramatic and long-lasting effects on its victims, impairing social and emotional development and causing substantial harm to mental health. “When bullying occurs in an athletic setting,” says Swigonski, “those harmful effects are augmented by the stress kids often feel as a result of athletic competition.”

Perhaps because the damage caused by emotional abuse is not obvious, like sexual abuse, or immediately apparent, like a physical injury, its effect is often overlooked and minimized. But, as the late San Francisco child psychologist Maria Pease pointed out in Home Team Advantage, the damage is no less real, and, in fact, may be much more damaging and long-lasting:

  • Children are deeply affected by negative comments from parents, coaches and other adults to whom they look up and respect. One comment can turn a child off to sports forever.
  • Children are much more sensitive than adults to criticism: being yelled at, put down, or embarrassed is much more likely to have negative psychological consequences and to cause the child to feel humiliated, shamed and degraded and to damage her feelings of self-worth and self-esteem.
  • If the abuse becomes chronic, a pattern of negative comments can destroy a child’s spirit, motivation and self-esteem. Over time, the young athlete will begin to believe what adults say about him. Abusive comments intended to improve athletic performance are likely to have precisely the opposite effect.
  • Children who experience screaming on a regular basis will react in certain ways to protect or defend themselves. This may be adaptive in the moment to survive the screaming, but ultimately be maladaptive and constrict their ability to be psychologically healthy over time.
  • A more anxious, sensitive child may be intolerant of screaming very early on, and remove himself from the sport (he maybe the lucky one). However, he is also more likely to endure the screaming without telling a parent or responding to the coach directly out of fear of reprisal from the coach. A more sensitive child who stays in this situation may be more affected physiologically with overall heightened arousal levels as discussed above.
  • A more secure child will likely have the same physiological responses but be less vulnerable to them. He may find a way to tune out the yelling or the negative comments by the coach, but this may come at a cost of emotional sensitivity. As the child becomes less sensitive to his own fearful feelings, he can become less sensitive to the feeling of others, leading to loss of empathy. He will also become less sensitive to emotions in general, and have a loss of sensitivity to positive emotions as well. He is also likely to resent the coach for putting him in such a psychologically vulnerable position.
  • Children involved in sports often make strong connections and develop a special trusting relationship with their coaches and instructors, and if the coaches’ power is abused, children can suffer severe psychological injuries that may last a lifetime. In a 2004 study of emotional abuse of elite child athletes in the United Kingdom,[5] for instance, athletes reported that the abuse by their coaches created a climate a fear and made them feel stupid, worthless or upset, lacking in self-confidence, angry, depressed, humiliated, fearful and hurt, and left long-lasting emotional scars.

Brooke de Lench is the Executive Director of MomsTEAM Institute, Founder and Publisher of MomsTEAM.com, and the Producer/Director/Creator of the PBS documentary, The Smartest Team: Making High School Football Safer.   

  1. Swigonski NL, Enneking BA, Hendrix KS.  Bullying Behavior by Athletic Coaches.  Pediatrics. 2014;133(2); doi:10.1542/peds.2013-3146.
  2. Alexander K, Stafford A, Lewis R. The Experiences of Children Participating in Organised Sport in the UK. Edinburgh, Scotland. The University of Edinburgh/NSPCC Child Protection Research Centre. 2011.
  3. Shields DL, Bredemeier BL, Lavoi NM, Power FC.  The sport behavior of youth parents, and coaches: the good, the bad, and the ugly. J Res Character Educ.2005;3(1):43-59.
  4. Brooke de Lench. Home Team Advantage: The Critical Role of Mothers in Youth Sports(New York: HarperCollins 2006), pp. 120-121.

 Effects of Early Sport Participation on Self-esteem and Happiness[2]

Authors:
Dr. Nandini Mathur Collins
Dr. Fred Cromartie
Dr. Stephen Butler
Dr. John Bae

 Socialization to gender roles: Popularity among elementary school boys and girls[3]

PA Adler, SJ Kless, P Adler – Sociology of education, 1992 – JSTOR

Favoritism

Favoritism in sports breeds frustration[4]

By Alli Gray

Favoritism Among Athletics[5]

By  Deloy Cole

[1] https://thesportjournal.org/article/tag/self-esteem/

[2] https://thesportjournal.org/article/tag/self-esteem/

[3] https://www.jstor.org/stable/2112807

[4] http://www.coronadocougars.net/blog/2018/03/04/favoritism-in-sports-broods-frustration/#:~:text=Favoritism%20confuses%20other%20players%20and,a%20motive%20to%20achieve%20anything.

[5] https://papyrus.greenville.edu/2012/12/favoritism-among-athletics/

Additional JV and Freshman Data

Combining the PS schools make the bias very clear.

The JV players seem to be less biased until you take into consideration the fact that it is difficult to field a JV team.  The players left over from varsity assignment are those that weren’t advanced to varsity.  Finally the Other group gets some representation, but still not comparable to the enrollment population. 

 

Legal References

Legal References:

NEA Legal Guidance on Students’ Rights

https://www.nea.org/resource-library/legal-guidance-students-rights

U. S. Department of Education

Religious Discrimination – US Department of Education

https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/religion.html

 

Know Your Rights: Title VI and Religion

https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/know-rights-201701-religious-disc.pdf

Online Resources Related to Religion and Bullying

Know Your Rights about Religious Expression at School

Addressing Bullying Based on Diversity, Race and Religion

Instructional Resources for Teaching about Religion

Additional Resources

American Educational Research Association. (2013). Prevention of Bullying in Schools, Colleges, and Universities: Research Report and Recommendations (Washington, D.C.: AERA).

Gardner, R.S., Soules, K., & Valk, J. (2017). “The Urgent Need for Teacher Preparation in Religious and Secular Worldview Education,” Religious Education, 112(3), 242-254.

Guo, Y. (2011). “Perspectives of Immigrant Muslim Parents Advocating for Religious Diversity in Canadian Schools,” Multicultural Education, Vol 18, no 2, 55-60.

Mogahed, D., & Chouhoud, Y. (2017). American Muslim Poll 2017: Muslims at the Crossroads (Dearborn, Mich.: Institute for Social Policy and Understanding).

Rogers, J., Franke, M., Yun, J.E., Ishimoto, M., Diera, C., Geller, R., Berryman, A., & Brenes, T. (2017). Teaching and Learning in the Age of Trump: Increasing Stress and Hostility in America’s High Schools (Los Angeles, Calif.: UCLA’s Institute for Democracy, Education, and Access).

Teaching Tolerance Staff. (Summer 2017). “A Matter of Life and Death – Two Scholars Make the Case for Teaching Religious Literacy,” Teaching Tolerance, Issue 56.

StopBullying.gov. (2018). Diversity, Race & Religion, web page (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services).

Religious Discrimination

The civil rights laws enforced by the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) protect all students, regardless of religious identity, from discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, disability, and age. None of the laws that OCR enforces expressly address religious discrimination. However, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI) protects students of any religion from discrimination, including harassment, based on a student’s actual or perceived:

  • shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics, or
  • citizenship or residency in a country with a dominant religion or distinct religious identity.

For example, OCR can investigate complaints that students were subjected to ethnic or ancestral slurs; harassed for how they look, dress, or speak in ways linked to ethnicity or ancestry (e.g. skin color, religious attire, language spoken); or stereotyped based on perceived shared ancestral or ethnic characteristics. Hindu, Jewish, Muslim, and Sikh students are examples of individuals who may be harassed for being viewed as part of a group that exhibits both ethnic and religious characteristics.

Other federal agencies enforce laws that expressly prohibit religious discrimination by schools, colleges, and universities. For example, complaints of religious discrimination in employment can be brought to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), in housing (including dormitories) to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and by public schools and colleges to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ).

 Policy Guidance
Learn about different types of guidance documents, including how to comment on significant guidance.

 Other OCR Resources

 Examples of OCR Case Resolutions Involving Religious Discrimination Claims

Other Federal Government Resources

Religious Diversity as a Civil Rights Issue

Very little research has investigated bullying based on religious differences. In these types of bullying situations, the act may have more to do with negative attitudes and stereotypes about how someone expresses their beliefs and have less to do beliefs themselves. Nevertheless, when bullying based on religion occurs in a severe, pervasive or persistent manner, it can be considered harassment under Title IV of the Civil Rights Act (AERA, 2013). When schools do not adequately address harassment, they may be in violation of civil rights laws, sometimes requiring intervention by the U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division.

Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 authorizes the Attorney General to address certain equal protection violations based on religion, among other bases, in public schools and institutions of higher education. The Educational Opportunities Section works to ensure that all persons regardless of their religion are provided equal educational opportunities. The Section’s work includes addressing discrimination and harassment on the basis of religion, and spans all religious affiliations. For examples, view the cases list.

RELIGION

Campbell v. St. Tammany Parish School Board (E.D. La.) Summary       Brief in Support       Brief in Opposition       Order

Fostering programs that help to establish positive and healthy values for youth sports, such as the Institute for the Study of Youth Sports and Character Counts, is important.5,51 The six pillars of character, ie, trustworthiness, respect, responsibility, fairness, caring, and citizenship can be modeled by all adults who interact with children in sports.51 These pillars can be the building blocks for establishing sportsmanship and cooperation in the youth sports community. A reference list of organizations promoting a positive youth sports environment is provided in Table 5.[1]

[1] https://charactercounts.org/about-character-counts/