Would you be a bit surprised at this?

[haggisaggis]

dd's small primary has advsied that her class will be doing mountain biking in school this week. It will mean going up and down ramps in the playground. dd has afew mild coordination problems and finds cycling difficult at the best of times - she hated the cycle training they did in school previously. She really does not want to do the mountainbiking and I asked if she could opt out. Have been told she can't as it forms part of their PE allocation this week. Does this not see a bit strange? Mountain biking is not a main stream activity and I would have thought you should be able to opt out if you don't want to do it. ANy views?

Agree about different levels, but not an opt-out. All children need to take part in these activities.

Sorry - didn't realise there'd been other responses. It was the ramps bit that got her - teh bit we knew she wouldn't be able to do. They apparently played games on teh bikes before hand that she DID enjoy. But I will still say that for this activity she SHOULD have been able to opt out. She fully participates in teh rest of teh PE activities - even although she finds things like hockey etc difficult. dd does not NOT take part easily - she persevered with Irish Dancing for 5 years before she finally got totally disheartened by girls who had only just started going right past her..(then asked me if stopping made her a "quitter"!)
She feels humiliated as she ended up in tears -surely that should not be part of the school experience? I still do not see that "mountain biking" should be considered a compulsory experience.

why NOT "mountain biking" , Its as relevant an activity as tennis or high jump and primary school PE includes both those.

It wasn't actually mountain biking tho, was it, it was a bit of cycle activity in the school play ground.

OK, your DD wasn't very good at it, or very confident about it. But is she good at every other new skill they are introduced to in PE? No one is expecting children to be perfect at a new skill, but they are expected to try. If a child can do and enjoy the flat land cycle activities ( which you say your DD did) then why should they not be expected to try a slightly more difficult skill.

A local secondary school have cycling as a standard part of their PE curriculum. Every child in Yr 7. 8 and 9 does a block of 6 weeks cycling. On and off road.

Legally they have to make a 'reasonable adjustment' - that would be either not doing it at all, or if she could do it on a scooter offering that as an option.

I find this interesting as this is exactly the sort of thing we do and will face.

We had an overnight camp this year (DS is 8 dev age of 6). The planned activities were as follows.
Wed bus to Lyttleton and get ferry over to Quail Island, do the 2 hour walk on the island, have lunch do some activities, get bus back to school. Have dinner, camp in tents then do fear factor activities all day the next day.
DS has ASD and recently been diagnosed with Dyspraxia. We, the teacher, the teachers aid and the SENCO all agreed there is no way he would cope with all of it. I chose the part he would cope with least which was the Quail Island trip as none of the above mentioned people could go, it involved loads of safety issues such as water, dehydration risks, and physical tasks which would be a real stretch for my ds. So he arrived at school as the others were returning and camped the night with me as one of the overnight helpers and then did fear factor the next day which he didn't cope with but was the lesser of two challenges for him. The principal gave us an unjustified absence for the day.
Next year they have cycle training...ds can ALMOST manage a 3 wheel scooter, he CANNOT manage a 2 wheel scooter or a bike and I can see another unjustified absence coming our way unless the principal is willing to change the curriculum to allow ds to participate in another way. I don't think it is ok for ds to be asked to use his 3 wheeler as 1. He can almost manage it but not really got the hang of it yet. 2. He will be a social sitting duck. I am more than happy about him learning about road safety, rules, and so on but not actual cycle skills at this stage.

My dyspraxia 8 yo would not have done it as he can't ride a bike.
End of.
What is the point in totally humiliating someone for something they can't, not won't, do?

why NOT "mountain biking" well not everyone can ride a bike for a start ...does the school provide the mountain bikes?

yawning monster - I am shocked that he got an unjustified absence after you had agreed with his SEN support what he should do. I would challenge that.

While I feel that mountain biking is a great opportunity, as a teacher you teach a child where they are at and move them on.

If a child can't ride a bike, you put them on a bike with stabilisers and teach them how to ride.

If a child can just ride a bike and has co-ordination issues, you do riding activities on the flat to improve their riding and balance.

To put ops child on the ramps is like throwing a non-swimmer in the deep end.

This was not appropriate. She should have been encouraged to join in AT HER LEVEL.
At our school, there are children who can't ride a bike, what would they have done with them?

Exactly, seems planned to humiliate children who can't ride a bike, which in this day and age is many, many children (one-fifth of ds's year couldn't before bikewise in year 5 but they were allowed to try it or to opt out): not just dyspraxia or ASD but also people living in flats have nowhere to put a bike, children with one parent or very busy parents or very chaotic lives might not have been taught; the list is endless.

It's not the same as the example of swimming or writing as both of those would be taught from scratch to a child who can't do them; not 'thrown in at the deep end'.

OP's dd could have been a marshall or some other role created to not humiliate her.

Exactly what steppemum said, where was the differentiation?
Where was the appropriate target-setting for her?
OFSTED lesson fail.

books, that is the point, you wouldn't throw a child in the deep end, you would teach them from where they are at

To put this child on a ramp, was not teaching them where they were at, but putting them in a situation that is beyond their capabilities, and that is like throwing them in the deep end

There will be lots of other children with similar issues too and I'm sure they will all be taken care of and might actually enjoy it.
If it was my child I would not let them opt out and I would make them go as I really believe in having a go in life and if they opt out of something like this they will feel they can opt out of other 'challenging' situations and I don't think that is a great idea in the long run. What is the worst thing that can happen. They are lucky to be doing mountain biking Id love my kids to do it! They currently do PR in their day clothes and not much at that!