Gerdy, John R. "Chapter 2: Do Sports Build Character?

" Sports in School: The Future of an

Institution. N.p.: Teachers College, Columbia University, 2000. 18-30. Print.

Sharon K. Stoll and Jennifer M. Beller are the authors of Chapter 2: Do Sports Build Character,

in the book Sports in School: The Future of an Institution. Sharon had a Ph D in Physical

Education with an emphasis on the ethics and philosophy of sports. Jennifer M. Beller has a Ph

D in Education and a Master of Science in Physical Education. In this chapter the authors explain

the connections between athletics and character, and if playing sports actually builds character.

This chapter is in the section of the book called The Educational Benefits of Sport: Myth or

Reality? In the beginning of this chapter, the authors explain how in the early 1800s English

School Masters came up with an idea the physical and competitive activity helped build

character and made people better. Even though that idea has been accepted and considered by

almost everybody, it has never been backed up by proof or evidence. The authors also define

what character really is. One of the first definitions of character was given by Aristotle, who

defined it with good morals, honesty, justice, and respect. Stoll and Beller emphasize that

character mean different things to different people, and that it can also be confused with things

like intellect for example. After the defining of character, the chapter goes into actual research

that has gone into asking, does athletics develop character? Research on if sports builds character

began in the 1950s, and many studies and much research has been done since. In the studies

done, the findings always seemed to claim that playing sports seem to callous or harden one’s

morals. The reasoning given behind this is that athletes, especially after getting older and playing

longer and longer, tend to lose focus and develop a win-at-all-costs attitude. Studies down also

showed that educational background did not affect moral issues either. Stoll and Beller write that

they believe the way athletic programs are in the U.S. hinder moral and ethical reasoning skills.
Beyond their beliefs, they go onto explain at the end of the chapter how there could be a change

to the way athletic programs work. “If our athletic programs are to contribute positively to the

ethical and moral development of athletes, they must be structured to do so… Accomplishing

this goal is neither simple nor simplistic, but rather requires courage and dedication to

educational principles and programs that are multifaced and multidimensional, involving

coaches, administrators, athletes, students, fans, and the media” (27). The authors admit that

sports have the potential to build moral character, but they believe changes are needed.

“If our athletic programs are to be ‘about education’ we must provide coaches and administrators

opportunities to further develop and refine their skills as educators” (26).

“Developing moral-reasoning skills is a lifelong process, affected by environment, education,

exposure to role models, and the media” (25).

“Research indicates that an athlete’s moral reasoning becomes more ‘masked’ the longer he or

she participates in competitive athletics” (20).

This chapter of Sports in School: The Future of an Institution, was not a bad read. This chapter

helped give an insight into how playing sports affects academics. A big part of succeeding in

school and being a successful athlete is having good morals and a good character. This is one of

the few sources that I have found that actually shows negative aspects of being a student-athlete.

Most other sources believe athletics has more of a positive impact. The authors of this piece

believe that athletics can have a negative impact on one’s morals. Even though there are some

cases that do, I believe that sports have a better impact of education and morals than the authors

make it out to be, even with their research and credibility. I believe the writers drag out some of

the information, and over exaggerating at times, not looking at all aspects.