Someone out there, please defend or explain the reasons for non-competitive sport at primary school

[Balls]

I thought I got it - you know give everynoe a chance to participate, but I've just come back from a shambles of a swimming gala where the not so able swimmers were humiliated in public by desperately trying to participate from the back and the able swimmers were not allowed to compete in their strongest strokes. What if the able swimmers fail at everything but swimming and this is their chance to shine in something? I'm prepared to be persuaded but right now I think it is PC gone bonkers.

eek! have you checked the archives?

Oh, am I asking for trouble by posting this then?

don't know the reasons behind it - DS1 (Y1) came home from school today and we were discussing his "sports day" (usually just one or two "straight" races lol) today. He said they'd been 'practising' in PE today and he came 3rd.......I was about to launch into the "it doesn't matter where you come blah blah blah" when he cut in - and said "but it doesn't matter if you win, it's how you play that matters" .

Im with you on this one! DS2s sportsday was mad!! DS2 isn't the most 'gifted' child academically but is great at sports. DS1 on the other hand is very very bright but can't run for toffee.

DS1 gets tons of praise and rewards for the academic stuff he is good at. DS2 gets nothing.

When it comes to sports day, and DS2 finally has the chance to so something hes good at he's not allowed, just in case some of his 'can't run for toffee' class mates (who have been beating him in spelling tests and reading schemes all year) feel left out.

Ridiculous - and I say that as someone who was utterly rubbish at competitive sports
Anyway, what about learning to lose gracefully?

I think what they do at DS1's (competitive) sports days to give those that aren't so great at sport/running a chance is split them into "fast" and "slow" groups so that the "good" ones race against each other and the not quite so good ones race each other. That way it's still competitive - but fairer for all.

A teacher from dd1's school was telling me before dd1 started there that teh sports day was 'wonderful' b/c it was non-competitive. I think my face must have registered that I thought she was a loon, even though for me sports day was a torture. Thankfully by the time dd1 started that nonsense had gone and there was a traditional day with potato and spoon races etc - the only downside being when it got postponed for a week when healthnsafety said they couldn't run on wet grass. .

I favour some basic streaming for primary sports days so everyone gets the chance of saving face, and 'elite' sports days at secondary school where the best athletes compete.

Well fannyannie, that sounds a bit more sensible and I can understand it, although it does really prepare kids for tough reality.

My DS1 has had sports day today and they race each other in the traditional things like egg and spoon and sack races but they are also split into teams so that the year sixes cheer on the reception children etc.
I agree that it gives those that do not shine academically a chance to do well. They also have races for Mummies, Daddies and teachers and you always get the competetive Mummies turning up in their tracksuits and trainers and then those like me that just kick off their flip flops and race barefoot with a baby on their hip!

yes it works well - there's still 1st, 2nd, 3rd (and the rest 'nonplaced' runners) in each race - but (generally) those that are last aren't way behind the rest - and still learn about losing with grace

I think a big problem is that in schools it is still perceived to be cool if you are good at sports, whereas to be academic (or just crap at sport) singles you out to be bullied.

Whereas as adults no-one gives a s**t if you happen to be good at netball.

I couldn't beging to.

Load of old bolleaux if you ask me and you did

Because competitive sports were utter, utter torture for quite a lot of us. Too vile for words. I still shudder at the memory.

motherinferior, they were for me too. But I think it was how they were done, not the competitiveness in principle. I remember refusing point blank to take part in the obstacle race - there was no way I had the agility for it. But I was okay at balancing the ball on the big spoon b/c that required concentration. It's possible at primary level to tailor events so everyone knows who has one and lost but still comes away feeling they've done well at something. And I do believe that for secondary pupils any sports event should be for the schools' elite only.

Won and lost, sorry. I'm off to meditate, that's nice and non-competitive!

they were torture for my brother too - always came last and was hopeless at PE......he now regularly runs in marathons!!

I swim a mile three times a week, FA. Still remember, with a visceral shudder, the appalling embarrassment of exposing my pudgy nine year old pre-pubescent self to the pitiless inevitability of public humiliation and failure.

Nothing wrong with a bit of competition IMO. Sports Day should be for everyone. All pupils hsould compete. And that also means that the more able sporting children should be allowed to complete and do well too. The etachers will know who the most able and least cionfident are. They could put them in races accordingly so like with like race.

Children should be allowed to succeed in things they do well IMO.

DD's sports day was a traditional sports day with winners, etc. All children participated in races with their class. It was fine. The children all enjoyed it and no one felt bad about not winning. It was a lovely event actually.

I totally agree with you Balls, so don't feel intimidated by starting the thread.

It seems to be one of those topics where, however much a compromise can be easily reached, certain people just don't want to listen.

It seems sensible to me to take the view that if a child is gifted at sport (or a particular sport) he or she should be given the chance to stretch themselves.

For children who do not like sport/or don't take to it well, a non-competitive but fun forum can easily be organized in conjunction.

The current PC approach is a total botch-job, in my opinion.

I'd like to see more non-competitive sports at secondary level esp. aerobics. But for primary level, it can be arranged for all to have a go at something.

I think district sports days are good for the more gifted sporty types at primary level, too.

I haven't yet watched sports day with my two, but they have non competitive in infants, and house competitions in junior. It seems to work well, in that both children enjoy themselves. Which after all is the point of sports days isn't it. I suspect that the reason they don't do competitive sports for the younger children is because some of them react very badly to losing (ds would throw complete wobblies in the past for example), and if too may kids are like that it becomes difficult to manage for the teachers and really no fun at all. Yes there are other aspects of school, even for little ones that are competitive, but it's much less visible (I mean scores aren't publically announced for spelling tests are they?). Swimming seems a bit strange in that presumably it's voluntary to be there at all?

our borough's school swimming gala was like that too - ds1 loves swimming and excels at freestyle - he's the fastest 10 year old in the borough - but could he swim freestyle in the gala? no .. because they had to give lots of children a chance - which meant ds had to swim his worst stroke (and still thrashed everyone ) while the children in the freestyle race could barely swim a length - completely pointless for everyone involved - grrrr

{hmm] Every summer we have this conversation. I think competeive sport is how it should be. There is little point doing it if you don't want to win.
If you are good at soemthing you should be allowed to excel and hopefully be the best that you can be.

Way I see it, sport is innately competitive whereas academic performance isn't necessarily portrayed or dealt with in the same way. So to want physically less able pupils to compete just to provide sufficient throng of losing participants seems a bit, well, unecessary at best and cruel at worst. There are plenty of children who are comfortable competing so can't those who don't want to compete engage in non-competitive fitness activities?

Hmm. I think.