The BBC News website reported (1st December) that David Cameron has ordered a rethink on school sports cuts. Such a U-turn, if it comes, should be applauded and would be a tremendous victory for common sense.
However we should not celebrate. School sport should be no different from elite sport in that we should always be striving to do things better, a Government turn-about will only return us to where we were.
The debate over whether to keep School Sports Partnerships (SSPs) or to dispose with them has put us in danger of getting back what we had and, mistakenly seeing it as a step forward, settling for where we were as that step forward.
This blog has recently tackled the absence of proper Physical Literacy development in our primary schools, absent despite having School Sports Partnerships (SSPs). We have also asked whether ‘cuts or no cuts’ is even the right question.
And asking the right question(s) is key to moving sport forward. As any good consultant will tell you, asking questions is easy, it is in asking the right questions and in asking the right follow-up questions that we establish facts and in matters of strategy (which this is) gain the depth of intelligence we need in order to progress in the right direction, at the right pace and with the right resources.
So when Michael Gove tells us that he would like schools to focus on more competitive sport I worry that the so-called ‘experts’ advising him have not asked him how he intends to provide the structure that supports this, a structure largely serviced by SSPs? Where is the structure that supports the development of people so that beyond simply taking part in competitive sport they can enjoy and even excel at it? If Mr Gove and the Government want a legacy then they should be told by someone who actually ‘gets’ sport that prolonged participation is far more likely among people who have the basic skill set to enjoy sport.
Another question for Mr Gove might also be; what about young people who don’t enjoy competitive sport? Why are they going to take up, let alone stay in, sport?
It is a question I asked myself 17 years ago and which, in part, led to my coming up with the idea for, designing and launching the Race For Life. Through my involvement in organising other running events I had noticed that the percentage of female participants was generally extremely low and although there were/are other societal issues and, although not enjoying competitive sport is not limited solely to women, I came up with the idea of a less challenging distance (5km, which was very rare back then) and removing the ‘testosterone’ of competition by making the event female only.
The Race For Life has gone on to become a huge success but I wonder whether it would have even got out of the starting gate had the current Department for Education had any involvement, insisting on it being competitive. That would mean hundreds of thousands of women might not have taken part in sport, hardly the stuff of legacy!
I am a purist and of course, at its heart sport is competitive and that must be one focus but it can’t be the only one.
Back to the SSPs. When/if we get them back the important question of how do we improve from here must be asked. Also asked must be how do we meaningfully measure that improvement for some of the figures thrown about it the last few weeks are not believable and undermine a sound argument (e.g. a spokesman on the BBC claimed 46% of young people between 14 and 16 are members of a sports club; patently nonsense).
From a long-term strategy point of view it will be essential that a vertically integrated structure is applied to sport in the UK. The Government have already made a small first step towards this with the announcement of the merging of UK Sport and Sport England (although, unfortunately, not for a few years). However, as long as school sport is seen as separate to the rest of sport the system will never operate at its most economic, efficient or effective and the proper planning of fully inclusive sports development along the sports development continuum will be undermined.
The likely U-turn from the Government should be welcomed and undoubtedly School Sport Partnerships have a large, long-term role to play in the development of sport. But, if we are serious about developing sport, including the equipping of young people to participate (and enjoy participating) for life we must not settle for getting back to where we were. We should always be asking; “how do we do this better?”
© Jim Cowan, Cowan Global Limited, 2010
Twitter @cowanglobal





SCHOOL SPORTS U-TURN FURTHER EVIDENCE THAT GOVERNMENT LACKS SPORTS STRATEGY
20 12 2010Michael Gove - was it really a u-turn?
Michael Gove, the Government’s Education Secretary yesterday made the expected announcement that his department is to do a U-turn on Schools Sports Partnerships.
Or did he?
Looking behind the headlines, what Mr Gove has actually announced amounts to little more than a stay of execution, a temporary extension of funding while the fuss dies down or, in his words; “…..I’m pleased to be able to confirm some funding for school sports partnerships during this transition. But I’m looking to PE teachers to embed sport and put more emphasis on competitions for more pupils in their own schools and to continue to help the teachers in local primary schools do the same…..”
The transition to which he refers is that from School Sports Partnerships to some, as yet undefined, new system in which schools will be funded to release one PE teacher for one day a week to promote pupils’ participation in PE and sporting activities.
In my 2nd December blog I suggested that the likely u-turn would beg the bigger question of how to we then do things better? However, instead of returning us to that point, Mr Gove has returned to a temporary place half way back, not so much how do we improve the model but more how far back can we take the model to dupe the public into believing the Government has listened while they decide what alternative they can come up with.
It owes more to Big State than to Big Society. Not only have they not listened, they are trying to pretend they have.
Of course, one thing that MUST happen if sports development is to again become a meaningful term in the UK is the creation of a fully, vertically integrated strategy for the development of sport. Trying to run school sport separately from main stream sport smacks only of horizontal integration at best and with little evidence of ANY strategy from either Department for Education (DfE) or DCMS it is not even that.
Mr Gove has yet to propose anything to address the lack of teaching of Physical Literacy in our primary (and secondary) schools, a fundamental component of the foundations of any long-term sports participation. He has yet to propose anything that addresses the woeful lack of PE training undergone by those training to become primary school teachers. So far his sole offering is the Minister for Sport’s pet initiative, the Schools Olympics, he is offering nothing for those who are not competitive or even those who like competing but are only moderately talented.
Hugh Robertson - told us he has a strategy for sport in July but has yet to produce it
Hugh Robertson (Minister for Sport) tells us the Government has a strategy for sport. Mr Gove tells us they are devising plans for school sport. Which is it? Does the Government have a strategy or is it still at the planning stage? Or do they see school sport as remote, separate from main stream sport?
Mr Gove and Mr Robertson need to get their heads together and start thinking about more than initiatives that look good and can be dressed as serving ‘legacy’ (but please don’t look too closely) and start thinking about how best to serve the long-term interests of sport in this country and thereby the people of this country.
That means a strategy for the development of sport which is vertically integrated. That means properly addressing every stage of the sports development continuum. It also means making the provision of sporting facilities, the support of clubs with community roots and backing for the development of sport a statutory requirement of local authorities (in line with most of Europe).
If the two Ministers do that then legacy would take care of itself but they need to act fast before we lose faith completely.
© Jim Cowan, Cowan Global Limited, 2010
info@cowanglobal.net
Twitter @cowanglobal
Comments : 1 Comment »
Tags: Big Society, Consultant, Consulting, DCMS, Department for Education, Education, Education Secretary, Horizontal Integration, Hugh Robertson, Legacy, Leisure, Minister for Sport, News Comment, PE Teachers, Physical Education, Physical Literacy, Planning, Political Comment, Primary School Sport, School Sports Partnerships, Sport, Sport England, Sport Politics, Sports Development, Sports Development Continuum, Strategy, Vertical Integration, Youth Sport Trust
Categories : All Blogs, Consulting, News Comment, Sport, Strategy