O/T English Sport

Got anything else on your mind that isn't about the Warriors? If you do, this is the place to post.
GeoffN
Posts: 12559
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2004 1:40 pm

Re: O/T English Sport

Post by GeoffN »

Getting somewhat off-topic, but the educational arguments above do apply equally to a sporting context. The government is aiming for eveyone to achieve a basic level of physical fitness, which is a laudable aim in itself, but does nothing to encourage a sporting elite in any sport.
Welski
Posts: 984
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2002 12:23 pm

Re: O/T English Sport

Post by Welski »

GeoffN posted:
Getting somewhat off-topic,
We are getting off an off topic. That's got to be a first!

Strongest Armpits in Rugby League
DaveO
Posts: 15880
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2002 5:32 pm

Re: O/T English Sport

Post by DaveO »

Welski posted:
DaveO posted:
I don;t have a problem with that. Provided everyone is given the same opportunity to succeed. Grammar schools fail miserably in that regard.

Dave
Couldnt disagree more.
The 11+/Grammar school system tests not only a childs ability but that of the parents. Good parenting rather than fiancial status will ensure their offspring has the best chance of success at 11+ and therefore being given a great chance in life.
And what happens when 300 kids "pass" the 11 plus one year for the 200 places and the year after only 150 make the grade?

I'll tell you what happens. 100 from the first example are denied the opportunity given to the 200 that did get in. They are even denied it compared to 50 kids who will get in the year after who didn't do as well as them in the exam because you can bet your bottom dollar the grammar school will not take a reduced intake.

You can be the best parent of the lot but if the places are not there then there is nothing tou can do about it.

Deciding a child's academic future at age 11 is totally stupid and I like to think I am a prime example of why.

I failed my 11 plus, went to "secondary modern" where a number of subjects were simply not taught e.g. Chemistry and the aim was to prepare the kids as factory fodder.

My parents who are working class actually paid the exam fees for me to take O levels as the school would not put me in for them. I passed and left the school at 16 to go the grammar school to do my A levels which wasn't perfect because the exam boards used were different.

When it came time to go to Uni I was very fortunate that the prof of the Geology department recognised my rather odd route through school and set me a low offer for a place. My former education was still a problem though as the lack of chemistry ultimate made me realise I wasn't going to get a good Geology degree but fortunately that same geology prof insisted I do Computer Science and I ended up doing a degree in that. In fact for the first time since age 11 I was on a par with my peers because no one had done any computing before that as Computer Science A levels were then rare so at last I was not disadvantaged by my previous education.

The rest is history and I have been working in IT for over 20 years as well as being a tutor for the Open University.

I had to go through this ludicrous path all because of a stupid exam at age 11 despite the support of my parents.

What is even more crazy is I know for certain I was not the brightest of the kids at my secondary school and there were others who would have easily managed a university education had they been given the opportunity. They missed out because of that stupid exam.
This is exactly what is wrong now, everyone is not being given the same opportunity. The gifted ones are being held back by a culture of rewarding failure and discouraging competition across every spectrum of life.
Well the school my son goes to seems to do OK. It is a state High School and while there are problem kids there, our neighbours eldest daughter went to Sheffield this year to study denistry having left with striaght A's on four A levels.
It's a harsh lesson but in all forms of life there are winners and losers and for the good of the species only the winners survive. We wouldnt be here now if it wasnt the case.
I think that is a very simplistic view to take with regard to education compared to sport. In sport it is obvious the best rise to the top but basing education on a misguided application of that rule is not only unfair but wastes talent.

Dave
DaveO
Posts: 15880
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2002 5:32 pm

Re: O/T English Sport

Post by DaveO »

Welski posted:
Without the selection process at any early stage only those children whose parents could have afforded to send them to the best schools would have had the chance to fulfill their potential. This is what is happening right now. With the abolition of grammar schools, if you do not have the financial resources, the standard of your education is a lottery no matter how gifted you are.
It is no more of a lottery than basing it on an exam taken at age 11. As a parent one thing I have learned is kids mature at different ages both physically and academically. Some kids will simply not be ready for an exam at age 11.

In a sporting context the Kiwi's recognise this. In RU they play by weight not age. We in this country insist playing kids of the same age against each other despite quite alarming differences in physical maturity.

I believe the same applies mentally. Some kids at age 11 won't be able to cope with the exam but are just late developers who if given the chance and opportunity will catch up with their peers and have the chance of success.

Cast them off at age 11 to a vocational college or to some sub-standard school (which is what any school is if it is not a grammar school in a grammar school district) and they face a much more difficult route to academic success if they even attempt it.

What is more when I ended up at the grammar school for my A levels there were some kids who had been there for all their secondary education and you wondered how on earth they managed to get near the place.

Oh and from a sporting point of view the place was the pits in that the head of the sports department just use to let you do your own thing including nothing.

Dave
Doveoverdave
Posts: 1949
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 9:36 am

Re: O/T English Sport

Post by Doveoverdave »

Dave O posted;

I failed my 11 plus
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :blush:
Doveoverdave
Posts: 1949
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 9:36 am

Re: O/T English Sport

Post by Doveoverdave »

waterside glens posted:
ireland is playing some good union at the moment probably 2nd best in world behind all blacks
SA, Aus pos. France?
Doveoverdave
Posts: 1949
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 9:36 am

Re: O/T English Sport

Post by Doveoverdave »

Dave O posted
Grammar schools fail miserably in that regard.
Especially when you fail the 11+ :lol:

Poor thing!
CherryandWhiteandProud
Posts: 504
Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2006 7:42 pm

Re: O/T English Sport

Post by CherryandWhiteandProud »

It's odd, we invented so many of these games and we were the best and 100 and a bit years on, we can't win anything! :(
GeoffN
Posts: 12559
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2004 1:40 pm

Re: O/T English Sport

Post by GeoffN »

Leaving the Grammar school debate alone (for a while, at least), an article in today's news illustrates my point about "elitism".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/6159857.stm

Someone has finally realised that "dumbing down" isn't working, but when they point this out "Teachers' leaders accused him of elitism"

Further down, the leader of one of the teachers unions says "It is becoming increasingly evident that Number 10 is bewitched by the independent sector and is seeking to mimic its most unattractive feature - elitism."

When will these people realise that we need an elite, especially in sport, if we are to achieve any sort of success?
Welski
Posts: 984
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2002 12:23 pm

Re: O/T English Sport

Post by Welski »

DaveO posted:

And what happens when 300 kids "pass" the 11 plus one year for the 200 places and the year after only 150 make the grade?

I'll tell you what happens. 100 from the first example are denied the opportunity given to the 200 that did get in. They are even denied it compared to 50 kids who will get in the year after who didn't do as well as them in the exam because you can bet your bottom dollar the grammar school will not take a reduced intake.
Blimey no wonder they phased out Grammar schools with questions like that one!:(

Is the answer 42? :)
Strongest Armpits in Rugby League
Locked