to think that we really don't need to be making children do more sport?

[Tricccky]

Don't get me wrong, I am LOVING the olympics. It's fantastic to watch and great that it will, no doubt, 'inspire a generation'. I hope that some kids are genuinely inspired go greatness from it. But it does not highlight anything systemically wrong in sports teaching (in my opinion) or mean we should strengthen sports teaching targets. Three points:

1. We are THIRD in the world already (looking at the medal tally). There's clearly not a long wrong with our current approach. The two country's ahead of us have approximately 4 times (US), and 16 times (China) our population. We are punching way above our weight. The national lottery sponsored schemes have clearly been a massive massive success and due credit should be given.

1. Success in sport at a national competitive lesson should not be for schools to push. Giving children access into competitive sports absolutely should be - and in my experience most schools do do this. The whole 'state schools don't do competitive sports' thing is complete bollocks from what I know. Every state school I know where I am does competition perfectly well thank you very much. They encourage it (and not just in sport) so it really bugs me when this myth is peddled about. However, schools can and should only take children to a certain level - essentially recognising potential. Specialist sports clubs at local and national level is what will take children beyond that.

1. Sport just isn't for everyone. If there wasn't an Olympics, and instead there was a major musical (for example) world playoff, we'd all currently be clamouring for 2 hours music teaching for every child every week - there's plenty of evidence of the added extra that music (etc) gives to children who spend time on this activity, that it adds to their other academic achievements, gives them confidence etc etc. All this extra proposed time for sport will take away from other 'non-core' areas, like music, which would be a massive negative for many children for whom sport will never be a mainstay.

Our primary school does not do competitive sport - they do sport for all!! Which is a bit of a bummer if you are chosen for the swimming team to take part in a schools competition and you would rather be playing your violin!!!

so its not a total myth!

Fair enough. I genuinely think that parents at schools that don't do competition should be shouting from the roof tops about it and aiming to change it. But the stereotype of it being the norm in state schools irritates me, as it is not my experience.

ALSO, how why is it that none of the champs in tae kwando and boxing come from private schools eh? Surely there needs to be some kind of enquiry about why so many of them are from state schools???haha

I agree in most part with you, however currently the only access to sports for some primary aged children are through private clubs cosing lots of money for parents.

I do think that sports should be more accessable for all. It is far more accessable for the priviledged and the deprived and this is unfair for working familes or families living in non deprived addresses.

all state schools that are classed as schools of excellence in one area say music or sports should offer choice to the children who want to persue that specific acclaim, as currently if your catchment school is a sports school and you are persuing music you will have no choice but attend a school that will not meet your needs.

no idea really about this subject, but those are my thoughts.

are you serious?

You do realise that 2hrs extra music teaching a week isn't going to improve anyones health, reduce cancer risks or the alarming propensity to obesity?

For those children who don't think of themselves as being sporty far more should be done to encourage them to take up other physical activity like aerobics/zumba or whatever the latest craze is.

I was convinced by school sport that I was rubbish and pretty much gave up sport the second I walked out of my last PE lesson at school. 30 years later I took up running and three months later I ran a 5k. Had my school been more successful at encouraging everyone to get involved in whatever sport suits them I might not have developed the horrendous lifestyle I did.

this
There's clearly not a long wrong with our current approach

And this

All this extra proposed time for sport will take away from other 'non-core' areas, like music, which would be a massive negative for many children for whom sport will never be a mainstay.

Plus, in the last few years (in preparation for the olympics) other areas have faced massive cuts and it would be nice if some parity was restored.

It is such a knee jerk negative reaction, we are doing very well, celebrate and move on time!

our primary deosn;t do competitive sport either and I can tell you that at the end of year 1 its already noticeable that many of the girls are disengaging and seem to believe that sport is a boy thing.

Healthy living and winning the Olympics are too entirely separate areas. Confusing them is nonsensical.

Also increasing the amount of sport in schools will not automatically increase the quality . Let's be careful not to 'put off a generation'.

My PE lessons at school put me off sport for life TBH.

And you're being very naive if you think that one successful olympics with home country advantage is reflective of our country's approach to sport.

Lost of the more minor successes came out of the Sporting giants programme which targeted young adults and was nothing to do with school sport.

I'm 99% sure within 6 months of the Olympics all this extra sport and competition business will have died down. Although considering childhood obesity etc I think enough isn't being done to make us a sporty nation which is what I would like to see more of.

The thing with boxing (have zero knowledge of tae kwando) is its not middle class. It's violent, dangerous and has a slightly seedy thuggish image. My DS is a boxer (amateur), DH was semi-professional and his various relations were also involved in the sport. As were most of the men in my family, apart from the traditional boxing between Cambridge and Oxford its seen as very working class.

Mn is the perfect example of this. When the boxings been on, there are constant comments on the Olympics threads morning they wish it was something else, they don't like it, it's not a sport, it should be banned. I questioned this a few times, pointed out my DS does it and am told its damaging to the brain, it's the equivalent of street fighting etc. most people have no idea of the levels of fitness, the skills and technique required, not none can just get in and throw a punch, the rules, the fact that there is a referee who intervenes. Maybe once it was a brawl but it's really not. Ali is one of the greatest sporting heroes and he was a boxer, the sport derives more respect.

"Healthy living and winning the Olympics are too entirely separate areas. Confusing them is nonsensical."

No it isn't - if you provide children with role models who are successful sports people they will try to emulate them resulting in a healthy lifestyle. My DS has just spent a week on a tennis course largely due to his obsession with Andy Murray. I doubt he will win wimbledon or the Olympics (though I can of course dream) but it may get him into lifestyle choices which will last a lifetime.

Dunno if it matters if some primaries don't do competitive sport... Secondaries do. The time comes and all that.

no I'm not sure if it matters either at primary level Nit - but OP seems to think competitive sport at school is standard.

my dds primary school does competative sports for juniors, my dd is very driven and is involved in lots of sports, she is in infant so the sports availible are not pushed on her but availble on a fun level. She is often gutted that they are less availible to the younger ones .

This motivates her at 6 to become involved, the older kids really do act as role models, she sees them winning medals and awards for athletics, football, rugby, swimming, netball, cross country and she wants to be winning medals and awards and spurring her team mates on. It is great, however once she reaches secondary school her catchment school pushes performing arts. the influence in school also has shaped her activities outside too but it is way too expensive.

her frineds primary school is not holding a sports day next year as too many children became upset this year , I thought sports day was part of the current curiculum?

My DS is in secondary.
He walks to school 30 minutes two days, gets a lift part way 3 days; walks home 5 days (about 30-35 minutes)

Then PE 2 days at school.
Karate every week
Rugby after school.

So I think he does enough.
I don't need anyone telling me my DS needs more excercise, thank you.

See if you'd asked me when dd1 was in EY I would have extrapolated from her and my experience and said OH MY GOD it's terrible schools don't do competitive sports days.... And then in a year I would have looked very silly because actually they just didnt make four year olds do it.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think there are many secondaries that don't do competitive sports days.

Hmm it's difficult. My dds school do do sport competitively. They sing from the rooftops how they win every inter school competition. BUT it's the same very few children who are chosen to represent the school. As a consequence my dd (and many others) feel that they are no good at sport and are disengaging as they are never selected.

We are fortunate that we can afford swimming lessons and dd has just started her level 8 classes at the age of 8 so she is doing some sport and succeeding at it.

I feel in addition to competition in sports the children should be given the opportunity to compete against themselves eg 'You managed to jump X metres in long jump last week, can you beat it this week?' 'Your 110m hurdles time was X last week, how much faster can you go this week?' and earn house points/stickers etc for successes.

I hated sports at school and as a consequence have never participated and am pretty unfit really. I would love dd to see being fit and healthy as a normal desirable part of life.

Ruby it is also what is availble and what people have access to, it is probably cheaper to join the local boxing club in some inner city or towns than it is to sign up for the althletics clubs, not to mention the outlay on gear between the both. similar with equestrian sports.

but some people do need to be told though 70s so i would rather be told how to suck eggs and work with school etc for my child than see some children being failed access due to thier parents poor capacity.

some people do not know how to feed thier children a healthy diet or how to encourage exersise.

too many fat , malnourished children in the Uk. more sport/ physical activity thebetter

I do think that sports should be more accessable for all. It is far more accessable for the priviledged and the deprived and this is unfair for working familes or families living in non deprived address

I think that's nonsense actually.

Of all the children I know who participate seriously none of them are deprived. All of them come from working families.

Sport is expensive.

Even just transport costs can make it impossible if you are 'deprived'

I think there is more than enough compulsory sport in school.

The government admits that the provision for sport in schools is patchy so I really don't understand why people come onto these threads talking about how their dc do lots of sports at school and denying there is a problem.
I totally agree with kewcumber and rubyfakenails. How on earth are we going to tackle the massive obesity epidemic we have in the UK if we don't provide children with more access to sport. I think we also need a new attitude. Sport for girls doesn't have to be freezing to death on a hockey field. Let's get them trampolining, cycling even zumbaing. Anything as long as it gets them moving.

DD's primary school was only interested in sport. Every after school activity organised by the school was one sport or another, except for Gardening Club.

They had spent a fortune on a new music studio - fantastic equipment. It was one of the reasons we sent dd there. The new head was clearly an utter jock, as she wouldn't allow it to be used as music 'disturbed' other classes - this was during the normal school day, so music lessons were complete rubbish, and took place in the ordinary classrooms (where the noise carried even more and was very disturbing to other classes), and of course the only equipment available was a box of old percussion instruments like jars of rice. The woman was an idiot (no, I don't like her and yes, we were angry about it and protested, eventually by changing school).

Loads of sport in school, imo. Music will teach just as much about working as a team, and it has now been scientifically shown that singing makes you happy, classical music will help with intelligence and concentration, and everyone knows that music will enhance your mood. More music in schools.

Kilmur do you see these fat kids? Because around here we have a similar number olds fat kids as I saw when I was at school in the dark ages, but far more anorexics and very slim girls.
I also agree my DCs primary which achieves highly at sport, also puts a lot of kids off by 11 as they are "just not good enough".