4 replies to this topic

[ckn]

Daily Mail attack on Tory education policies, while at the same time praising a Labour education policy.

It's the end of the world, I tell you... I'm convinced of that. First, Scotland RU win two weeks in a row, now the Mail praises Labour while criticising the Tories. They even criticise Cameron for a "rugby" quote where he clearly means union rather than league.

Flippancy aside, it's a serious issue. Under the Tories in 89-97, PE was de-prioritised to almost extinction, Labour helped slightly in restoring that but also enabled many schools to sell their sports fields. Now, under the Tories it'll be dragged down again.

[sam]

Daily Mail attack on Tory education policies, while at the same time praising a Labour education policy.

It's the end of the world, I tell you... I'm convinced of that. First, Scotland RU win two weeks in a row, now the Mail praises Labour while criticising the Tories. They even criticise Cameron for a "rugby" quote where he clearly means union rather than league.

Flippancy aside, it's a serious issue. Under the Tories in 89-97, PE was de-prioritised to almost extinction, Labour helped slightly in restoring that but also enabled many schools to sell their sports fields. Now, under the Tories it'll be dragged down again.

i'd quite like to be able to compare what level of sport takes place in my old secondary school compared to when i was there from 86-91. our 'core' pe lesson was 2*1hr sessions. these involved combining 2 classes, girls with 1 teacher, boys with another. we had a state of the art gym built in 87/88, but i personally rarely used it because after trying several different sports we came to the conclusion that playing football was the preferred game. 2 matches took place, 1 involving the 'sport billys' and 1 involving those who wanted to smoke.

on top of that each year had football and cricket teams (i'd love to see the aussies bat on some of the pitches we played on).

i'm all for spending shed loads on sport and any cut is ridiculous. but why is it always sport? why not music? art? etc. some kids have zero interest in pe and their only exercise is wii bowling.

[JohnM]

There is an underlying issue, I believe, and that is that the Mail is virulently anti-coalition. This is not the first time that the Mail has attacked this government.

However, as I understand it, it is govt policy to enable Heads to make their own decisions as to how to spend their money, rather than having the centre dictate.

[Bedford Roughyed]

School sports is another area that Labour put lots of money into but the details got a bit muddled (the targets for example). Targets are great as they give the schools a standard they should work too, however you soon find some schools fudging things to meet the target, i.e. what counts as PE? Using useless 1hr sessions (20mins + of changing/showers etc).

But letting Head teachers decide how to use the money also has risks (pet projects, etc).

So strict central driven targets can be bad, heads given free reign can be bad...not sure there is a middle way!

[tim2]

There is an underlying issue, I believe, and that is that the Mail is virulently anti-coalition. This is not the first time that the Mail has attacked this government.

However, as I understand it, it is govt policy to enable Heads to make their own decisions as to how to spend their money, rather than having the centre dictate.

The heads will be more concerned about their league table position, and sports and PE don't figure in that. If push comes to shove, sports will suffer. If they are OK academically, PE will probably be OK too.