All Ages Physical Education in Techie Times

gracer

gracer

Legacy Member
Most children nowadays are not physically active anymore. They would rather play inside their houses the whole day with their gadgets. I see the importance of Physical Education in school more and more with this kind of sedentary lifestyle that children opt to do. At least they still get to have some form of outside activities and sports while they are in school.

What do you think is the importance of Physical Education in children at a time when technology is their main form of recreation and concentration?
 
Well I think that it just underscores the need for some physical education in the curriculum. That said, we all know that it is a tough sell sometimes to the school boards who might be looking at the budgets more than the actual need for the courses, but I guess that is just how it goes, and I cannot say that I am too surprised there. The last thing we need is a generation of lazy, non-athletic people.
 
Even though technology is taking over our worlds at the moment and I can only see that being set to continue, at the same time it's still important to make sure that children are physically fit and active so physical education in the curriculum is more important now than it ever was. I'm sure that we are all aware that outside of the school day, a lot if not most children will prefer to sit behind a games console, TV or PC instead of going out playing sports like my generation did and parents are often happy enough to let them.

While we can't control what happens outside of a school day, we can control what happens in it, and so physical education at least a few times a week is important. Without that, some of these children wouldn't get any exercise at all.
 
True enough. I remember my childhood days when personal computers were only limited to a few families who could afford them and the only game console available for children was the handheld tetris game. Most children during that time were outside their houses playing their well loved traditional games with other children. Now most children have never heard of the games I used to play as a child. They only get to learn about the traditional games by the time they go to school and take their Physical Education class. This is why I most appreciate this subject now than ever before. :)
 
Trouble is though, ask a lot of teachers, parents and sometimes even the children themselves and they want to see physical education continue as part of the curriculum, but it's those in authority that don't see the benefits of it and here in the UK they're actually thinking about either not making it compulsory for schools to do, or dropping it altogether.

Then again though I guess this is just another example of those who are making the decisions on our children's future being out of touch with the actual children themselves, and not take into account the thoughts of the teachers and tho's that are in the schools on a day to day basis.
 
That is just sad pwarbi. I do believe that those who are in higher positions don't really have an idea on what really goes on inside schools on a day to day basis. They don't see how students and teachers interact and what subjects are really working out well for students. This sometimes makes me ask myself why authorities just go on and make decisions without immersing themselves first to actual school situations; listening to students, parents and teachers and then finally making decisions basing on what they have gathered from them.
 
Unfortunately the same can be said about pretty much all the government officials in charge of most government departments. A lot of them have no actual knowledge of the department they're in charge of. Wouldn't it be a better idea to employ people that have actually worked in that sector, or at least people that have a vested interest of what they're in charge of in the first place?

Why have a person in charge of education making decisions that affect children, when they have never worked in education before and most of the time they don't even have children anyway, so any decisions they make are primarily based on finance rather than effect.
 
I have also noticed the same. It's really hard to figure out how these people in charge are being delegated to their positions when they have no knowledge about them in the first place. A hierarchy system should just be followed to make sure that the person who has been assigned in the highest position has come from the lowest to the highest position of that department, experiencing and knowing what it feels like to be exposed in the field first before finally being given the chance to rule. But then again, the government is mostly all for economy wise decisions so most of the time, they overlook these kinds of things. I just find it unfair for the children who are supposed to be the most important aspect of having an education department.
 
I'm in general more of an optimist than a pessimist, but if things don't change, and don't change soon, then it doesn't bode well for the future generations as they are now having to grow up in a world where the people making the decisions on their behalf, those who are supposed to know better and put things in place for their benefit, are making decisions to benefit themselves rather than those they are supposed to be looking after.

Many parents blame the teachers themselves for any problems that come about, but I'd say that in 95% of the cases, that teachers hands are tied and they are only allowed to do so much, and if they deviate from the curriculum or try and do something that hasn't been authorised, even if it's to benefit the children, it's them that get into trouble and risk losing their jobs due to the amount of legislation and red tape that surrounds them.
 
I agree. It's mostly the teachers who take all the blame from parents when the truth of the matter is that they're just following what the higher authorities demanded them to do. If they don't follow, this could even cause them their job. Such a sad truth to bear but one which seems to have no solution at the moment. :(
 
One solution could be to let the teachers control more of the curriculum that they're allowed to teach, or at least let them have a certain amount of input as to what a class gets taught at a certain age. Now it's just a case of a child will HAVE to know this at this age, regardless of that child's development and it's simply not working. Children at the same age still develop at different speeds and for a curriculum to say that a 7 year old is expected to do this, this and this isn't taking in to account that child's capabilities.

The best person to ask how a child is doing and what a child needs to learn, is the person that's teaching them on a daily basis, and while organising a lesson plan for every child would be impossible to do, it could be done for certain children in certain circumstances whereas now they aren't given that option.
 
It would be nice to have a good variety of physical education classes as well, though I do know budgets are quite tight for schools. Kids would be more likely to be active if you offer classes of what they're interested in. Instead of forcing them all to a standardized gym class, maybe cater to their interests instead. Offer some soccer classes, or basketball classes, or whatever. At least, that way, they wouldn't feel forced into it.
 
I agree and it's important for schools to remember that while I think everyone agrees that physical education classes are important, not all children are going to be naturally good at it so they are going to need to be encouraged by making sure the activities they're participating in they actually enjoy. Even if the children aren't interested in sport, as long as they are active for certain amount of time during a week, then that's the main thing.
 
I agree with both of you. :) I remember way back then when I was still a student, I'm not really a sporty person so I never really excelled in my Physical Education classes. I also didn't enjoy the standardized activities we had during our P.E. lessons because I wasn't into them. I'm seeing quiet a difference now that my son is the one who's now in school. I noticed how much he enjoys his Physical Education class because he just loves playing interactive games with his classmates.
 
Not all children are the same, and that's one of the joy's of teaching, but at the same time it can also cause the most problems. Physical education is important, and if we could tailor the classes to suit each child individually then that would be ideal, but with classes getting larger, and the curriculum becoming more and more restrictive, it's simply not possible and that infuriates the teachers as much as it does the children an the parents.
 
True indeed. Classes are significantly getting larger these days that it's really hard for teachers to be able to focus on the individual needs of their students. Where I live, the number of students significantly increase each year but the number of teachers seem to slowly increase, making it hard for everyone involved to give the ideal needs of students when it comes to educating them according to their individual characteristics and needs.
 
In most parts of the UK I think the same trend is happening, and most schools these days are relying on supply teachers in order to fill their vacancies. Now I have nothing against supply teachers, and a lot of them do a fine job without getting the necessary acknowledgment they should get, but at the same time if the students don't know who's going to be teaching them from one week to the next, that can only be detrimental to their education.
 
I also think it makes a very big impact on the students to always deal with different teachers most of the time, especially when they have already been accustomed to one teacher then the next thing they know they will be having a new teacher again. I could just imagine how hard it is for students.
 
We've both said in the past how big a set routine plays in a child's education, and especially at the younger ages when it takes a child and teachers time to develop a bond. If those children are having a different supply teacher from one week to the next, that bond will never be established and while it must be inconvenient for the supply not knowing what school they are working at, or if they've even got a job at all to go to, it's the children that will suffer the most.

More money needs to be spent on attracting more teachers into the profession, but at the moment it's more important to save money it seems, and even though by replacing full time teachers with supply, actually costs more, they don't seem to understand (or care) what other implications it has other than financial on the actual welfare of the children.
 
That's the thing because I notice that most schools are becoming more and more about the money than the students they serve. What schools and other concerned authorities don't realize is the negative impact on the quality of education they provide for their students. What's really sad is the fact that the students are the ones who are suffering from the actions of people who are expected to cater to the greater good of these children.
 
Back
Top