Am I being too harsh ? Sport/school

[Pocketwithaholeinit27]

Hi just like to get others opinion on the following please - DS is in year 2, he has been at his school since Nursery. After returning in September I discovered from him that he and some of his class mates are no longer taught PE by the boys sport teacher with experience in teaching rugby, cricket and football but by the girls PE teacher - who I should say has no experience in teaching rugby,football and cricket, this is so the other half of the class who are considered more talented can be taught by said boys PE teacher - with a view to representing the school in these sports. On taking this up with the school I was told that yes my DS is probably at a disadvantage as he is one of the youngest in his year but that essentially, too bad. They are very ambitious for the teams to do well and as such they will not change this policy. My argument is that ALL the boys should be taught by the boys PE teacher as he is the person with experience in the traditional boys sports. If they want to get a dream team together, good for them, but they should offer extra training for those boys and not disadvantage the boys less able. My DS is 6 years old and I feel that his sporting education has already been written off by his school. I should say DS is at an independent school that is - or so they say - non selective... Any words of wisdom or views would be welcome . Thanks

Well there are a couple of points here.

Why are children being streamed based on performance in sports so early?

And, why are there boys in the girls class - are there girls in the 'better' boys class too, or is just ok that the girls have to put up with lesser able boys in their class?

What are boys sports, and girls sports? We played hockey, rugby and cricket as well as tennis, gym, athletics, basketball, badminton... Etc etc... None of these were classified as boys or girls, and we played mixed games too.

I would ask for a proper review of the schools sports policy and start to get more parents on your side to make a change- it sounds like the policy serves no one only the more able boys, and not the girls, or the lesser able boys.

If we say that half the boys are deemed to be able, this means about 75% of students are disadvantaged.

The point is- there is no such thing anymore as 'girls' sports' and 'boys' sports'.

If this school has that policy did you know about it when you chose it?

My son did rugby out of school between the ages of 9-11 and it was a mixed group - girls and boys. They learn ball skills and so on- it's called touch rugby. I am rather shocked that a school is seemingly selecting potential international rugby players at 6, but more surprised you are so worried. Talk to the school yes and see what they have to say and if you think your son has a penchant for rugby and talent then either change schools or enrol him in a local club.

That's ridiculous and totally unfair!

When ds1 was in year 2 the cow of a PE teacher told me about how talented the boys in his year were and 'there's always the B team.'

As things turned out ds1 was picked for the A team for every single match in football, cricket and rugby during junior school amidst stiff competition. He was even made captain. He's played at district and county level and is basically going from strength to strength.

There is no way you should put up with this.

Slight detour back to cricket. Sorry some DCs have had lousy experiences though DS's cannot be exceptional. DS plays in a junior league across the region and certainly everyone bats, bowls, keeps wicket and fields for the same number of balls. You can see them rotating clockwise around the positions every two overs.

Part of the package of a prep school is that your son will have some training in the sports that are likely to be played at his preferred senior school. He will be a more appealing boy to them if he can hold his own in one of their teams. If he leaves prep school without having taken part in fixtures etc then that will also set him back at his next school.

The whole "our team must win" ethos is a tricky one. Obviously sporty boys coming from sporty preps have a good track record with senior schools, and the "halo effect" can help the other pupils at the school to gain places as well. But this shouldn't be to the detriment of the other boys in the yeargroup. Equally it is important for those who show leadership abilities within the team to be able to develop those skills further by bringing on and encouraging the weaker members of the team.

If you feel that the school is sidelining your son in this area at age 6, how confident are you that they will bring him on in other ways over the next 5-7 years? There are preps who do very well for their bright sporty talented few, but have little to offer other children, and rely on a few headline scholars each year to take the attention away from the others who don't get to the schools that suit them most.

At this stage I don't think that you can argue too much about which teacher is teaching your son PE. He is still being taught by a qualified teacher, and I suspect that you don't know for sure what her coaching skills are like. Is your son interested in sport? If so are there school clubs he can sign up to? And if not, what about out of school?

He is still being taught by a qualified teacher

Not necessarily!

Well the OP obviously thinks so - he said as much in his second post.

Haha! Doh!

Must RTFT more...

They are a private school, this is their ethos summed up for you quite clearly. I think you either accept it or vote with your feet.

Not all prep schools are hung up on sport- some will place emphasis on drama, art, music, etc. It's all about choosing the right school for your child's ability and interests, and maybe if the OP has made any mistake it's allowing her son to go from pre-prep to prep without a re-evaluation of what the school offers.

yes well it was just the same at the state primary, the sporty star types who already had the full kit for eg cricket etc., were chosen for the teams and the rest were more or less ignored!

The school sounds cr*p. How useless is the male PE teacher if he can't cope with his fair share of the year group? The school should sack him and find someone more adequate.

Or are the "more talented" girls also getting the male PE teacher, learning rugby, football and cricket and missing out on netball and hockey?

Maybe the female PE teacher should be out on her ear, too.

I think at independent schools (at least from 7) it is normal for girls to do hockey, netball and rounders (one a term) and boys to do rugby, hockey and cricket (also one a term) - they mostly all structure it in the same way so they can play in leagues against other schools.

That isn't true of all prep schools. My sons school actively encourages boys and girls to do a range of sports. The boys and girls all do rugby, football, cricket, rounders, netball and gymnastics as part of the PE curriculum and both sexes are encouraged to join any of the extra curricular sports clubs that they wish to join. This isn't exclusive to my sons school as the school participate in matches against other indie schools where they need mixed sex teams for football, netball, rugby and swimming.
This idea of certain sports being for a particular sex should have gone out with the dark ages.

I was going to reference the same book as Lomaamina .

I think all the girls teacher / boys teacher / girsl sports / boys sports discussion is a bit of a red herring.

At primary level all children who wish to take part in matches / competitions should get the chance to.
All children who wish to turn up for 'squad' sessions should be encouraged.
What a way to put a child off PE than to already tell him at 6 he is not good enough to receive 'perceived' if not 'actual' better tuition.

I would totally ignore any labels placed upon your child by a primary p.e. dept.
Primary teachers, state and indy, are on the whole, not specialist sports' coaches. They have to cover a range of activities and IME are rubbish in spotting future sporting potential. (It improves dramatically at secondary level.)
Find a good after school/weekend club. The clubs are all affiliated to the UK sports' progression trees and will have specialist coaches, who've trained leading sportsmen and women.
Coaches will not to start seriously training before the age of eight, however, when muscles are sufficiently developed to take on the tougher regimes.
I can feel your frustration. But don't worry, he is still very young. My DC was told he would not make the cut for his primary school's gifted list - which received special sports' enrichment training - but we joined a club and he's since competed at county and national level and receives sponsorship funding.
The school does become important much later on when choosing pupils to take part in the prestigious English Schools' Championships. But by that time he will have had the specialist coaching, and if talented, will be too outstanding to be refused!

Most state primaries have taught PE by someone who has no special training in teaching cricket-rugby etc. Teacher in flip-flops teaching sport not so uncommon.

Not that the rules to cricket-etc. are that complicated, anyway.

This must be a private school, right?
if you feel you're not getting what you paid for then perhaps yanbu.

At my kids indie schools (two different ones) - every day they do an hour of games separated boys/girls

Autumn term - Football (boys) / Hockey (girls)
Spring term - Rugby (boys) / Netball (girls)
Summer term - Cricket (boys) / Rounders (girls)

The teams are trained together but they have A and B teams with a C if enough children

On top of this they have 3 hours a week of PE mixed class which is
Swimming / Gymnastics / Athletics

That is all mandatory regardless of whether the child likes sport or what sport.

Then on top of this there is selective (either school choosing elite and/or child putting their name down) of all the above sports plus others such as rowing/archery etc. This is when the girls for example could play rugby and cricket. These are for an hour a day. They have girls representing rugby at a national level at the elder one's school and boys representing hockey at a regional level at the younger one's school for example.

This to me is what an indie school should be offering the mandatory and the options.

Agree that what stoppicking says is pretty much the norm for indie.

From what OP says, she seems to be facing two issues

1. completely ignoring gender (which you must do, to sound reasonable), is her child receiving sub-standard quality of sporting guidance by this streaming?
2. has the opportunity for her son - and the other children - to move between the two groups (as their talent ebbs/flows) been removed?

If the answer to both is yes, then a complaint should be made on these bases. But for heaven's sake, don't talk about male/female teachers and their ability to only teach to their own gender because that is offensive and undermines what are probably genuine concerns.

If the school is ambitious with regard to sport then they are being bonkers in limiting the potential talent pool by 50% at the age of 6, as they will never sport latently developing talent.