Thank Goodness for Private schools

[Guest Bilo]

It's not surprising really that the rich and privately educated are getting the majority of our medals.

Of course they have more oppurtunity to take up sport, but they are also much more likely to be interested. The upper class are generally more intelligent and motivated (hence their wealth). Don't attack me here lefties, it's true. And I'm saying that as a middle class lad who went to your standard public college.

How many public school pupils would be interested in rowing or velodrome cycling? A few but not many. The vast majority would only want to play football or not bother with Sport at all.

You say that but the school at which I teach runs Outward Bound trips where students get the chance to take part in any number of activities including rock climbing, abseiling and white water rafting and they absolutely adore the trips; they're popular with staff, parents and kids alike. This is no middle class school either, most come from working class backgrounds where most of their families have never experienced such activities.

The problem is that the cost of these trips means that not every child has the opportunity to go on these trips, but for those who have the opportunity it's undoubtedly a worthy and character building experience.

http://www.outwardbound.org.uk/

[Webbo]

Middle and upper class kids are not more intelligent than the working class kids. Just better educated.

[AoWW]

It's not surprising really that the rich and privately educated are getting the majority of our medals.

Of course they have more oppurtunity to take up sport, but they are also much more likely to be interested. The upper class are generally more intelligent and motivated (hence their wealth). Don't attack me here lefties, it's true. And I'm saying that as a middle class lad who went to your standard public college.

How many public school pupils would be interested in rowing or velodrome cycling? A few but not many. The vast majority would only want to play football or not bother with Sport at all.

I don't think you mean 'public' schools, do you?

[NiftyFox]

A lot of cricket players were privately educated because their expensive schools have the facilites to provide them the opportunity which state schools can't hence like these Olympic sports. 4/11 England team were privately educated.

[Salieri]

It's not surprising really that the rich and privately educated are getting the majority of our medals.

Of course they have more oppurtunity to take up sport, but they are also much more likely to be interested. The upper class are generally more intelligent and motivated (hence their wealth). Don't attack me here lefties, it's true. And I'm saying that as a middle class lad who went to your standard public college.

How many public school pupils would be interested in rowing or velodrome cycling? A few but not many. The vast majority would only want to play football or not bother with Sport at all.

Don't consider myself a 'leftie' as such, but stopped reading there. Bilge.

[ADK]

Its not surprising, public/private schools have much better facilities than state schools.

I'm not sure how much of the difference is down purely to fixable inequalities however.

Most 'working class' people would rather be a footballer than take up an olympic sport.

Some sports are always going to require a background of money, i don't think you'll get inner city kids competing at dressage anytime soon.

[Jimothy]

Nicely brought up at this point before the likes of Jessica Ennis, Mo Farrah, Andy Murray, Chistine Orhoughou, Philips Idowu, Dai Greene and the mens football team have had chance to pick up medals. Pretty sure none of those are privately educated.

[Tielemans63]

It's not surprising really that the rich and privately educated are getting the majority of our medals.

Of course they have more oppurtunity to take up sport, but they are also much more likely to be interested. The upper class are generally more intelligent and motivated (hence their wealth). Don't attack me here lefties, it's true. And I'm saying that as a middle class lad who went to your standard public college.

How many public school pupils would be interested in rowing or velodrome cycling? A few but not many. The vast majority would only want to play football or not bother with Sport at all.

There's just so much wrong with that post I don't know where to start. You're making a huge generalisation about the preferences of state (not public) schoolkids when you couldn't possibly know how they would react to opportunities they'll probably never have because school sport is so chronically underfunded (FACT).

As a PE teacher I feel I'm qualified to comment on this and I find your post quite offensive. We try to offer a diverse range of sports and the kids generally really enjoy trying new sports like Lacrosse and even Golf. To imply that these kids wouldn't be interested in rowing or cycling purely because state schools don't have these facilities is ludicrous. I think the opposite is true. There is so much talent going to waste because school sport isn't taken seriously enough. The last government paid lip service to improved funding and structure but failed to deliver and the current haven't even bothered to do that much.

I also disagree with you assertion that the upper classes are more intelligent and motivated. I think the difference is that they have more opportunities. There are wasters and achievers in every social strata so that's too simple an assumption.

Oh and please don't be lazy and assume I'm a 'lefty'.I do have some left views and I also hold some more conservative views - it really pisses me off when anyone who voices their dissatisfaction with the status quo is branded as some sort of tea-drinking hippy.

Rant over.

[AoWW]

Its not surprising, public/private schools have much better facilities than state schools.

I'm not sure how much of the difference is down purely to fixable inequalities however.

Most 'working class' people would rather be a footballer than take up an olympic sport.

Some sports are always going to require a background of money, i don't think you'll get inner city kids competing at dressage anytime soon.

Maybe not, but dressage isn't nearly as elitist as people think. Yes, many people competing at the top levels are upper/middle class but there are also many exceptions. Of the 4 Team GB members... Carl Hester grew up on the tiny island of Sark and, as it doesn't have any cars, earned pocket money by driving carriages round the island for tourists (and we're talking donkeys and ponies here, nothing fancy!). Charlotte Dujardin was born in Enfield to a 'middle class' family - she later went to a mainstream upper school in Leighton Buzzard which she left aged 16. Laura Bechtolsheimer was born in Germany and is from an undeniably privileged background - yes, she went to an independent school. Richard Davison was born in Nottingham, he used to run a petrol station until he took up riding competitively.

Not all as 'posh' as people assume!

[Jon the Hat]

There's just so much wrong with that post I don't know where to start. You're making a huge generalisation about the preferences of state (not public) schoolkids when you couldn't possibly know how they would react to opportunities there'll probably never have because school sport is so chronically underfunded (FACT).

As a PE teacher I feel I'm qualified to comment on this and I find your post quite offensive. We try to offer a diverse range of sports and the kids generally really enjoy trying new sports like Lacrosse and even Golf. To imply that these kids wouldn't be interested in rowing or cycling purely because state schools don't have these facilities is ludicrous. I think the opposite is true. There is so much talent going to waste because school sport isn't taken seriously enough. The last government paid lip service to improved funding and structure but failed to deliver and the current haven't even bothered to do that much.

I also disagree with you assertion that the upper classes are more intelligent and motivated. I think the difference is that they have more opportunities. There are wasters and achievers in every social strata so that's too simple an assumption.

Oh and please don't be lazy and assume I'm a 'lefty'.I do have some left views and I also hold some more conservative views - it really pisses me off when anyone who voices their dissatisfaction with the status quo is branded as some sort of tea-drinking hippy.

Rant over.

Great post. Do you get any benefit from lottery finding or access to Elite facilities for the kids you teach? It seems to me we are probably under using what we have.

[Webbo]

Maybe not, but dressage isn't nearly as elitist as people think. Yes, many people competing at the top levels are upper/middle class but there are also many exceptions. Of the 4 Team GB members... Carl Hester grew up on the tiny island of Sark and, as it doesn't have any cars, earned pocket money by driving carriages round the island for tourists (and we're talking donkeys and ponies here, nothing fancy!). Charlotte Dujardin was born in Enfield to a 'middle class' family - she later went to a mainstream upper school in Leighton Buzzard which she left aged 16. Laura Bechtolsheimer was born in Germany and is from an undeniably privileged background - yes, she went to an independent school. Richard Davison was born in Nottingham, he used to run a petrol station until he took up riding competitively.

Not all as 'posh' as people assume!

I've got to be honest, your argument hasn't convinced me.

[Trav Le Bleu]

I've got to be honest, your argument hasn't convinced me.

Naysayer.

[Tielemans63]

Great post. Do you get any benefit from lottery finding or access to Elite facilities for the kids you teach? It seems to me we are probably under using what we have.

To be fair to the previous government, 5 years ago school sport was comparatively well funded. Sport England had a tonne of lottery & government cash to distribute and it was relatively simple to gain funding if you were realistic - asking for little but asking often worked well. To be honest it was probably a little too easy (fitting for the last government!).

The biggest impact on funding came with the credit crunch (as is the case for many other good causes). I think it was around the end of 2010 when the Coalition announced that the budget for Sport UK (as it is now) was to be cut by 30%.

In my opinion 30% was very much a headline figure as the cuts have appeared pretty savage at grassroots level. It became almost impossible to gain extra funding and the message seemed to be "you've had all these extra facilities in the last few years so use them" and to an extent they had a point but obviously equipment soon gets old and our PE dept now looks ancient and uninspiring.

In my opinion the cuts to Sport UK itself may have been 30% but the cuts to the school sport budget must have been more like 50-60% because it almost literally dried up. I'm fairly sure that a lot of their budget has gone on paying for the Olympic Games as we've had virtually nothing for 3/4 years.

The coalition's decision to allow schools to become academies may help to fill that void as PE departments can then seek their own funding from the school sponsors. However, our school currently has no plans to switch to academy status (our Head is dead against it) so we rely on funding from a whole-school budget that is already spread very thinly and as you'd imagine, PE is way down the pecking order.

As for your question about elite athletes: 5 years ago you would have to go through numerous stages of justification to gain elite athlete funding, but the finance was there. In a good year we'd have maybe 4 elite athletes for which we'd get approx £2000 (£500 each). That money would then be spent exclusively on helping that student progress (that would be things like: extra curricular training, kit, transport to events, accommodation etc). You would then have to show how the funding had helped the athete's development before you were given the next year's funding.

These days there is some similar funding available but the figure per person is around half of what it was and you will probably have to narrow it down to your most outstanding athlete as we've found it impossible to get more than one grant in the last 2 years. Now our top PE students are relying on a slice of our Gifted and Talented which is next to nothing. What we then do as teachers is try to support our other athletes by recommending them to local clubs or universities. We have a few athletes who train at Lougborough once a term.

We've had 3 individuals in the same position in the last few years and they have ended up with scholarships at private schools after impressing at Loughborough. I'm pleased that they have their opportunity to achieve their dreams but I would argue that we as a state school started the process and private school is a continuation of that.

I'm not dismissing the role private schools can and do play in developing our athletes but it shouldn't be forgotten that many of these guys were encouraged and supported by state schools in the first place and without that initial mentoring they'd never get the chance to develop at all.

[Parafox]

Whose alumni have provided half our olympic medals, and a world class rowing venue at Eton. Hopefully this Olympics can bring a newfound interest in funding school sports to a decent level in all schools.

I certainly hope so but sport in school has been squeezed especially now the "academies" are setting their own budgets. A friend who is a sports teacher, who gave up his own time to promote sport within the school system and took a school all-girl crcicket team to the national play-off's at Lords last year has lost his job because the Government withdrew funding for it.

It's being said now, that this generation are more interested in becoming "celebrities" ala TOWIE and X-factor than becoming famous through sport. That's where a lot of the fault lies and leads to the lack of state school athletes coming through. That and the lack of engendering genuine competetive spirit.

I bet there's more more public schoolies would know more about sporting heroes than they would about some pumped-up tart with a fake tan and a grinding accent and vice-versa for the state schoolies.

[davieG]

The Education Secretary, Michael Gove, has approved the sale of more than 20 school sports fields in the past two years, official figures show.

The sell-off comes despite the coalition's pledge to protect school playing fields in England.

The figures are likely to fuel concerns about school sport.

A government spokeswoman said sales could only be approved "if the sports needs of schools and their neighbouring schools can continue to be met".

The figures, obtained through a freedom of information request by the Guardian newspaper, revealed that 21 out of 22 requests had been given the green light by the Department for Education (DfE) in the past two years. One more remains under consideration.

[Parafox]

The Education Secretary, Michael Gove, has approved the sale of more than 20 school sports fields in the past two years, official figures show.

The sell-off comes despite the coalition's pledge to protect school playing fields in England.

The figures are likely to fuel concerns about school sport.

A government spokeswoman said sales could only be approved "if the sports needs of schools and their neighbouring schools can continue to be met".

The figures, obtained through a freedom of information request by the Guardian newspaper, revealed that 21 out of 22 requests had been given the green light by the Department for Education (DfE) in the past two years. One more remains under consideration.

F***ing criminal waste

[Tielemans63]

Gove is the biggest cvnt on the planet. The guy is utterly clueless.

[AoWW]

Gove is the biggest cvnt on the planet. The guy is utterly clueless.

If I could have +1'd this more than once I would have done.

[Guest Bilo]

I think Paddy will be getting a lot of +1s from anyone who works in education.

[AoWW]

If anyone else would like to +1 it on my behalf, then please do

[Jon the Hat]

Nuts. You would need to be very close to some very good facilities to justify selling playing fields. I am all in favour of multi-use sports facilities, but 20 sounds quite a lot.

How may schools are there in the UK? About 3500 apparently, so 20 would be 0.6%. Is it worth it?

[Guest MattP]

Very sad he has approved 21 of 22. That said I don't think too many of our champions learned there trade on the playing field.

Anyway he's got another 180 to go to match the last Government.

http://www.guardian....e?newsfeed=true

[Richard]

At school (left last year) we got offered football, cricket, rugby and rounders, and that was pretty much it. This was in a middle class area, and the school had "sports college" status and all the funding that goes along with it (we now have an empty office now the findings dropped). It's as much down to a teacher's preferred sports and what they can actually play. I went through all of school at never got the chance to play tennis, competitive cycling and when we wanted to play American football (the touch type, not contact) we had to print off the wiki page and teach ourselves

[accessory]

Was this Lancaster? Would be very shocked if the range of sports were so limited, especially as it promotes itself as a specialist sports college.

Maybe it needs to review its recruitment policy.

[Daggers]

Very sad he has approved 21 of 22. That said I don't think too many of our champions learned there trade on the playing field.

Anyway he's got another 180 to go to match the last Government.

http://www.guardian....e?newsfeed=true

...Or 4,978 to match Thatcher's.