School bans "unstructured play" during break times

[Kokeshi123]

www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-56568473

Hackney New School claims to have eliminated bullying by banning unstructured games (football---or even things like skipping) by kids during their breaktimes, replacing them instead with poetry recitals and chess clubs.

Apparently the kids are allowed to get some exercise.... during PE classes, but sports are "more structured" and supervised.

Anyone else think this is really bad? Kids need a lot of running-around time. The amount of weight gained by a lot of kids in lockdown should serve as a rebuke to those who think that kids will get enough exercise by being nagged to exercise by adults; they need to blow off steam and run about playing their own games. I also think it's very important for children's social and emotional development that they get to direct their own activities sometimes, without being constantly micromanaged by teachers or parents.

Having chess clubs and supervised activities as well as the regular playground activities would be completely fine--but why ban kids from playing their own games?

Why does structured play mean less movement? If they said it was chess every lunchtime then fair enough but the majority of school lunchtimes is spent arguing about who can play, what they should play and who is left out including conflict because some of the are playing 'wrong'.

I agree some unstructured play is good for their imagination but I can see why they've decided to introduce it. Children's social skills have been drastically limited by covid. Some structured play might teach them how to play with more people in a less confrontational way and therefore be beneficial?

I don't understand why structured / supervised play can't include sport or games.

Have you been in a secondary school playground? Apart from obnoxious games of football that take up 90% of the space there’s precious little play going on. Mostly kids sitting around playing on phones. Structured play sounds like a good way of making them actually have some proper leisure/hobby time. They can sit around and look at their phones at home for hours on end, no need to do it at school too.

At primary in the 70s my school went this way for a while.

Endless "The farmer's in his den" lead by dragon dinner lady.

I think it was because there was a developing craze for kiss chase and British Bulldog that caused a few problems.

It petered out and we went back to playing Charlie's Angels quite alot as I recall.

I think as actual lunch and play times aren't that long there should be a balance between free time and avoiding potentially harmful things perhaps? With the option that those who don't fancy it get to do the structured things ?

YABU
The only bullying type of trouble I've ever know of was during unstructured play. I think it's a good idea. The kids could do structured physical activity such as lunch time sports clubs etc, not just sedentary stuff.

Children who are not taught how behave at home, rude, entitled bossy kids spoil all the fun for the nice and well behaved kids at school playtime. Children with additional need often struggle with unstructured play too and are often left feeling isolated and unpopular, which is cruel. I think it's a genius idea. I'd offer lots of supervised physical activities though so that they learn about fair play and team work, not just chess.

I'd even argue that arguments and bullying are important for social development - spotting it, challenging it, learning to be fair and inclusive but not taken advantage of. But it's harder for adults to supervise.

Mostly kids sitting around playing on phones.

Have a brick-phones-only policy, then.

It's a secondary school, so I'm not sure that there would be all that much skipping going on anyway.

I can see the appeal of lunchtime clubs but I think the students need downtime too.

Is it an early April fools day thing. It has to be. I mean come on how many secondary schoolers still skip rope

It's a terrible idea. How much more are we going to baby our children? They'll be fit for nothing in the future if we constantly micro manage their lives.

I agree with you OP. I hate all this structured play and kids constantly being supervised and micro managed all the time.

Kids need to use their imagination and be able to amuse themselves. And what's wrong with playing football and skipping?

Great idea. Too many children playing daft games related to online gaming.

I’ve never seen secondary school kids play. We were always having illict fags, playing spin the bottle or setting fire to bins at 11-16.
And I was a nice kid in a good school

Primary would be different obviously.

The thing is, plenty of younger secondary school pupils would actually enjoy skipping etc if it’s wasn’t seen as “uncool”. By removing the “cool” option (of sitting around looking like you don’t care), they’re making it OK, and indeed the norm. to join in. Why shouldn’t they skip, or play wide games, or sing etc. Lots of Guides and Scouts do this sort of thing at secondary age and thoroughly enjoy it.

Surely they just mean lunch clubs?

Why can’t schools have structured football practise and matches at lunch time?
That would solve the bullying

You see I would have loved this at secondary and so would my DD.

I absolutely detested breaks, hanging around with no structure having to pretend to be delighted to be running round a playground trying to avoid my bully, and cool kids because it just emphasised that I wasn't cool! Such a feeling of dread knowing a break was coming up.

I hate sport. My DD hates sport. Far rather be sat in the library reading a book.

Wish my daughters school did this.

Sadly, my experience is that quite a few children don't actually know how to play. In addition, some children don't seem to have learnt physical boundaries and limits so what starts out as a fun game tips over into someone getting hurt. Others haven't learnt the skill of joining a game in a positive way - either getting left out or trying to join in and then dominate the game. Structured play seems quite a good idea if the end goal is to teach the children play skills. If it is endless games of Farmers in the Den as described by a PP, then it is pointless and boring.

In the case it is true. Why is it impossible for the school to be able to monitor the students properly? They should be putting in policies to deal with the bullies not force crap like this on all their students. I would rather them be standing in the playground talking with each as they naturally would than stay indoors doing essentially more learning. Many schools offer these things as additional extras.

I was at school in a bygone era and oddly in both my primary and secondary school unstructured play of games like football, rounders, stuck in the mud and skipping ended up being structured if sufficient pupils joined in.

By that I meant a teacher/lunchtime supervisor in primary school or some older kids in secondary would supervise the game and be the ref.

It also meant we couldn't get away with playing games like British bulldog....

It would be a nightmare in a primary school, but as others have said, in a secondary school there's only ever 'running around' done by aggressive territorial boys, whilst everyone else cowers on the sidelines doing nothing much. (At least, that was the case many years ago when I was at school!)

The playground was a nightmare when I was at primary. I used to long for it to rain. Or for someone to at least supervise the skipping, climbing frame, hopscotch. Someone was always left out or ostracised. There were the popular groups who barred you if you weren't what they liked. This is aged 9 to 11 at its peak but building up before that.
At sons secondary all the SEN kids spent their entire break in the SEN common room instead of getting fresh air...the teachers encouraged this...there was simply no way if negotiating the worst excesses of unstructured breaks.
Tbh the best secondaries have lots of lunch clubs either sport or music or drama or even things like debating or science club. Nothing's worse than just being in an enormous mass of unfriendly cliques. You don't have to be SEN to experience this.

@Kokeshi123

Mostly kids sitting around playing on phones.

Have a brick-phones-only policy, then.

Hahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!

I think you have to have been into a particular type London school to comment. One of my old teacher friends worked at one and he said the race relations between students were so bad they'd literally attack each other all lunch and parents didn't care because they agreed that the enemy had to be attacked!
If you look at it from this perspective the above suggestion seems reasonable.

Indeed, there were only so many times I could stomach being aggressively petted as the chosen dog with good humour....... it was almost like "approved" bullying now I think about it......

Like I say, give them the choice, especially at secondary school. if more gravitate to interesting structured things, the die hard playground dwellers might get curious enough to join in......

I agree with OP this is a bad idea. I can see the attraction for the teachers but particularly at secondary school level I think kids need some time out from structured activity for their own social development, and I would agree this includes trying to resolve disputes and even bullying issues without an adult immediately stepping in. That’s not to say I condone bullying obviously but sadly there are bullies all through life, not just at school. I would have HATED this at school, I was not a sporty child in the slightest but had great fun chatting and gossiping with my friends at breaktime and formed lifelong friendships there. I’m not sure that would have happened if we were constantly kept too busy to talk, plus not all my friends were necessarily in the same classes as me, so we only really got to chat at break and lunch.