What the hell is wrong with competition?

[Twiglett]

I hate this whole ooo non-competitive sports, we're not competitive

we need to be able to teach children to play properly, to be gracious when winning, to be noble in defeat

we need to teach them how they should always do their best and people are different and have different abilities, strengths

we need to teach them that by practicing and trying hard they too MIGHT win .. or they'll certainly do better

I cannot stand the whole non-competitive ethos .. it only comes from adults

Children are the MOST competitive of all

it seems nowadays the only competitition that is encouraged is based on how you look and what clothes you have

Sports day is too easy an example for people to remember the harshness of competition. Competetion, for jobs, promotion, partners etc is a part of every day life. Prof Robert Winston, who is an eminant child psychologist and maker of the programme "A Child of our Time" did a talk at my place of work. I asked him what he thought of the "non-competitive" ethos in schools. (This includes not allowing children to "fail" tests, or "win" spelling or art competitions - it's not all about sport.) He thought it was outrageous and said that if you don't teach children to be competative and learn to win, that we will raise a nation of failures. There is no other outcome. That the survival of the species has always relied on competition and survival of the fittest. If children feel no need to succeed then they won't. Seems obvious to me.
FWIW Twiglett, I COMPLETELY agree with you about the third level education too. How on Earth does one pick the brightest of a generation if almost everyone goes to uni. Stupid. It's a stupid electioneering tactic which the GBP have fallen for. If I were an employer, even one in the media, I would immediately discount CV's of anyone with a degree in Media Studies or similar useless waste of time and taxpayers money degrees.

I'm with the the twig. Life is competitive; and we had better tech them how to compete. How to win, how to lose, and sometimes you just don't want to play. But, everybody has to compete at something sometime.

I don't have a problem with voluntary competition, it's healthy and fun. But kids shouldn't be made to feel that their whole worth depends on their performance in a particular activity.

As for the style of marking, I'm from Scotland (now living in England) and we still have a system of the top x% get an A etc. It wasn't emphaisied and people weren't made to think of it as wishing their classmates do badly, but what it did mean is that there was no argument about 'deserving' a grade. If you got an A then you deserved it, no matter how easy or hard the test was, or how much the average intelligence has gone up or down.

I would support a similar system in England. The current situation means that poor kids who have tried their damndest to get good grades get scoffed at. Employers can't tell the difference between someone who just scraped a pass and someone who genuinely would have passed under a differnt system. It does them all a disservice.

There are healthy kinds of competition which encourage children to try their best, and there is competition which just completely destroys the confidence of some kids who aren't ready for it. I think that competition shouldn't be compulsory in order to allow for the differences between children. Emphasis should be on trying, but with genuine reward for those who do well.

Isn't that 'losing / failing' line from a Nike Ad? I can picture the poster but not the product!

There are healthy kinds of competition which encourage children to try their best, and there is competition which just completely destroys the confidence of some kids who aren't ready for it. I think that competition shouldn't be compulsory in order to allow for the differences between children. Emphasis should be on trying, but with genuine reward for those who do well.

Absolutely agree with that. Children need to be rewarded for their efforts, and, why not, their talents. Still, the word competition send shivers down my spine, I start to envisage pushing mothers and american beauty pageant...
I used to be of Twigglett's opinion about higher education. But then I also think that the access to higher education is the key to social change and a more civilized, wealthier country. maybe.

I would love someone to explain lucidly to me how "access to higher education is the key to social change and a more civilized, wealthier country. maybe".

we just end up extending the years a child stays in education, burdening them with debt whilst in many diplomas / degrees they are taught nothing that will enhance their prospects

we remove the ability of bright students to study for the sake of academia .. if your course does not lead to a job only the wealthy can afford to study for the joy of learning

We don't end up with a more highly educated workforce because so many courses are plainly pants

We have the highest drop-out rate in the first year of uni ever seen before - oh that's motivating for a disafected young adult isn't it?

Graduates burdened with vast debt do not walk into more highly paid jobs any more

its all just baloney

"yes but hasn't she learned to keep going and try harder?

agree that team games are good idea in younger ages

but kids don't get the 'nobody won, you're all winners' bollocks .. I swear they don't "

Yes - I do agree that she's now learned not to give up, but at age 5 she couldn't comprehend why it was important to keep going. It's much easier to lose as part of a team than it is to feel 'useless at (in dd's case) sport' on your own.

I totally agree with the nobody won, you're all winners thing though!! They don't buy it!

pmsl @ Soupy's dh!!!

My mum works with 'disaffected young adults' and she says most of them are gobsmacked when told they simply have to try harder to do better. They doddle through life with a "We can't win" mentality, and it comes as a shock that if you try, you will do better.

I think the key is well chosen competition. I was crap at PE, many were. Why don't we stream it? put the crappest people all in one class, and let them compete against each other! Then at least they know they have a much better chance of winning a race than when they are up against the school champion 200 metre sprinter. This might just teach them that they can win, if they try.

Colditz,
I'm working with sixth formers atm who don't realise that you have to work to do well in your A levels. These are nice, bright kids who have coasted through their GCSEs with little or no work. They are going to get one hell of a shock next week when they do their first A level test, and most of them fail it.

Yes, The F word! Fail. Not, 'Pass with a grade D' Fail it.

I have seen kids drop from a grade B at gcses to an outright fail at A level because the can't or don't put in the work required

And the re straming for PE, you should have been im my class....you'd have beaten the pants off me

The girls all used to say 'Do we have to have her miss, we had her last week!'

someone has a name, and still believes, on paper, that wider access to higher education is a good thing for a country. on the other hand I do agree with you that this system is incredibly faulty. sorry, i can't stay on the internet any longer, have to prepare dinner, I'd like to have more time to explain. I have very split views on this matter, half of me is still very idealistic, the other absolutely see your points.

sorry didn't specifically mean you franca .. it was a much wider question as in to the current education minister / prime minister .. but if you can explain Franca then all the better

Rewarding those who are talented or clever or pretty - that's the unfairness of life, that the things we often have no say over determine how our lives will be. The best parents and schools manage to help children of all types to feel confident and make the best of the talents they have. My 7 year olds get a spelling test with mark each week for example. It certainly helps to know if they've had 2/10 or 10/10. Interestingly although there's no publicity in the class about who got what they all seem to know, all seem to find out by one means or other who does well, who doesn't, who is clever, who isn't, who is good at sports, who is a nasty person, who's kind.

I fear some state schools by not saying things are wrong or bad or work is poor end up causing those children to do even worse than those in private schools who might well get a cross on their work when a mistake is made.

I wish I could Twiglett, as I said, I'm really thorn on this one. Also, being Italian, I have a narrower experience of the British education system (should catch up, ds is starting in January...). I think that, as far as my country is concerned, the fact that more people had access to university after the war (esp from the sixties) has served italy quite well, more social mobility, and access to some professions that used to be a prerogative of the upper classes. this, obviously only to a certain extent, I'm not saying that it was perfect. And at the moment the italian educational is going through a big crisis...
I also agree with you on the number of courses, personal debts, etc etc. but what is the alternative? again, I'm sorry, but I don't know the system that well.
sorry, have to go again

By Twiglett on Saturday, 23 September, 2006 5:39:53 PM

the whole of this post is spot on - read it!

I have already read it, and said that I see the point, exp the one about studying for the sake of academia. I wonder why then so many children are seeking to extend their stay in education regardless of debts. Is it false consciousness? Are they led to believe they are going to get a better job? what are the prospects for those who don't have a degree? again, my views are a bit confused, as this is not my country, this is not where I studied and I'm genuinely curious, there are so many different opinions on this subject!

Totaly agree with you Twiglet. My two (age 3 and 6) are naturally competitive and love competitive games etc. All this non-competitive crap is just PCness gone mad.

This is a really interesting thread (thanks Twiglett). My first reaction was to disagree with Twiglett on the grounds that some others have (mostly an acute memory of the humiliation of being crap at sports, and so on). I also agree with those who have said that, for those of us with children just starting school (say, under-7s) a greater emphasis on non-competitive activities (team games, and so on) is probably better. However, I do agree that a certain amount of competition is healthy, and that it encourages children to do better (now I'm thinking of spelling tests, etc.).

Franca, the Italian system is, in my (limited) experience, intensely competitive. The only point where it isn't is the point of access (i.e. university is open to all...). But the whole exams system is scarily competitive (mostly oral exams conducted in public and in front of the other students taking the exam), and to progress beyond a first degree is worse. The difference is that here we have the pretence of stringent entry-requirements (so you have to get 3 Bs in A'levels, or whatever, to get onto a particular course), but there is a feeling that that entry requirement is getting easier and easier to achieve, so all these super-qualified people are no more intelligent than people were, say, 20 or 30 years ago, they are just getting bigger prizes for jumping the same fences. (I'm not totally sure I agree with that, by the way, in my own experience, but then I teach a traditional subject in a traditional institution. Our students are certainly differently prepared than I was when I did my degree 20 years ago, but they are better at some things and worse at others. They are definitely not less intelligent!) I can't, however, speak for the MSc in Basket-Weaving courses....

Well, I was pro-competition on a Sports Day thread and was NOT popular. But I agree with Twiglett. Children ARE competitive. You can do your best to remove it, but it will out. They aren't fooled, on the sports field or in the classroom, by any attempt to imply that everyone's a winner.

Team games are competitive. For younger children they do to a certain extent dilute individual responsibility, but for older children they can be even worse. The humiliation of playing rounders, with the whole field reorganising itself to the shout of "left hander!", everyone knowin ghtat here wasn't a hope in hell of me actually making contact witht he ball, has stayed with me quite vividly. But so has the glow of coming top in chemistry.

Twiglett you're not going to believe this but I agree with your OP.

I think people should be rewarded for their achievements at any age. Otherwise why bother with stuff like the Olympics or any sport.

And I speak as someone who never won a single race at school sports day. I'm not scarred and embitterred. I just knew better than to pursue a career in egg and spoon racing.

I think all children are different. I have one very competitive child and one who really couldnt care less. The second is much more balanced and dare I say it a lot kinder to others, but the competitive child is much more self motivated to work hard at school and can tell me exactly who is on what reading book or maths sheet as he cant bear not to be top. Neither DH or I push our kids, but as twiglett said we try to teach them to be both good winners and losers. Interestingly the less competative child is the most sporty as he is a good team player and enjoys himself even if they dont win