Picture this. A magnified image of a cross section of the human brain.  The image shows hundreds of tiny brownish bits. These bits are toxic proteins, called tau, that form after brain trauma.  Tau can inhibit cellular functions in the brain, leading to depression, dementia and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, better known as Lou Gehrig’s disease.

Now, picture this. The same magnified image. This image shows activities associated with vibrant cellular connections. The brain is seemingly swarming with activity, actually brightening the image.

The first image is of a brain of a former football player. The formation of the tau are the result of hundreds, if not thousands, of repeated hits to the head.  These violent hits, in effect, shake or “scramble” the brain, flooding it with chemicals that deaden cellular receptors and tear neural connections linked to learning and memory. In short, the connections necessary for optimal brain function and development are being shaken loose.

The second image is of the brain while playing music. Brain function is about “connections” between cells and neurons. Healthy brains have strong, clear and vibrant connections. And research tells us that playing music triggers activity in cells and neurons in the brain that are linked to concentration, memory and creativity, thus refining the development of the brain and the entire neurological system.  Further, playing music not only strengthens these connections, but also creates new connections, thus widening the brain’s neural network.  That activity virtually bursts through the second image.

Recently, this paper ran a four part series regarding the future of interscholastic sports in Lancaster County. Much of the series focused on how schools are coping with the challenges of maintaining vibrant sports programs in an increasingly dire economic climate.  In a perfect world, no programs would be cut. But with politicians making it perfectly clear that for the foreseeable future state educational funding will be significantly reduced, it’s painfully clear that we no longer live in a perfect world.  That being the case, school districts will be forced to engage in the very difficult debate regarding how to allocate increasingly scarce “extracurricular” dollars. And the fundamental question that must drive that debate is, “Which activities garner the best educational return on investment?”

Traditionally, the analysis of “extracurricular” spending has focused on the choice between elite, interscholastic athletics versus programs in music and the arts.  Unfortunately, this debate has failed to honestly acknowledge the elephant in the room – the sport that is by far the most expensive to sponsor – football.

The point of this essay is not to bash football or elite athletics. As the son of a high school football coach and former All-American and professional basketball player, I have witnessed and believe that sports have the capacity to be a powerful educational asset. But the culture surrounding elite, interscholastic athletics has changed dramatically over the past 25 years. Specifically, there has been a steady evolution of sport in American education away from the “process oriented” model (e.g., education) toward a “results oriented” model (e.g., winning). This evolution, along with the skyrocketing expenses required to field a team, has eroded football’s potential as an educational resource and diminished its educational return on investment.

Now the revelations of the serious consequences to brain health and function that result from the repeated hits to the head sustained in football must enter the debate. No longer should the discussion focus on the question of whether footballs’ educational value merits its disproportionate economic costs.  We now have to give serious consideration to the question of whether the potential human costs to students’ health have become too great for an educational institution to assume.

Certainly, there have always been physical costs to participants. Football is a violent game. But we are not talking about sprained ankles and broken bones. Sprained ankles and broken bones eventually heal. We are talking about young people’s brains. Brains don’t always heal.

In the end, this is about community values as reflected through our educational institutions. Should our educational institutions be sponsoring activities that deaden and destroy brain cells and impair brain function? Should football, rather than music, which strengthens and develops brain cells and enhances brain function, receive our economic resources? In other words, is the goal of education to develop brains or “scramble” them?

Perhaps it is time to have a serious discussion about the role of football in our educational system. This discussion must take place against a background that recognizes the fact that America’s economy has changed from one based on industrial might to one based on technology and innovation.  Clearly, the skills necessary to succeed in the workplace of the future will have far more to do with brains than brawn, requiring intellectual and creative skills of the mind nurtured in the classrooms and concert halls rather than muscles built in the weight room and on the playing field.

We should welcome this discussion and analysis because if we approach it honestly, the end result will be better schools serving our children and communities more effectively.

If, during the process, we find that football is in fact meeting its educational purposes, perhaps we should invest more heavily in it. But what if it is not? What if it is determined that investment in music and arts as an “extra-curricular” activity brings a greater return on educational dollar invested? What should our school boards do? What should we as parents and tax paying citizens, do?

And because a picture is worth a thousand words, a good place to start that conversation would be to observe scans of the brain on football versus the brain on music.

Dr. John R. Gerdy is founder and president of Music For Everyone