A Christian Response to Competitive Sport in School

Rupert Kaye writes:

Every so often, a politician or journalist decides the world would be a much better place if 0-19 year olds were forced to play competitive contact sports, come rain or shine, for six or more hours every week. (I exaggerate.)

Competitive sport is, we are told, the way to eliminate:
      •         Childhood obesity, low self-esteem and poor exam performance
      •         Teenage pregnancy
      •         Juvenile criminality
      •         Adult binge-drinking and smoking (of tobacco, cannabis, crack cocaine, etc.)

Equally irritating, is the contention that there is a simple correlation between the amount of competitive sport taught to 0-19 year olds and the number of Olympic medals and World Cups won by a nation. In the minds of some commentators, when plotted on a graph, the line increases exponentially - approaching the vertical when every newborn child is able to effortlessly swim, run, jump, throw, catch, kick, head and dribble (not the sort that requires a bib; the sort that allows a Premiership striker to glide around defenders as though the football is glued to his feet).

I am not denying that Physical Education (PE) has a great deal to offer young people and wider society. I am, however, sceptical when politicians and journalists tell schools and colleges that competitive sport is a magical cure-all for a complex matrix of social ills and personal problems. As a primary school teacher of ten years standing (with experience of coaching rugby league, rugby union, football and netball in the 3-11 age range), I found that many more students enjoyed sport and were motivated by it when lessons focused on skill acquisition and personal improvement rather than out-and-out peer competition.

I believe that, whilst competition does have a legitimate role to play in school and college life, PE and games lessons should, first and foremost, be about nurturing the physical, mental, emotional, spiritual, moral, social and cultural development of all children rather than emptying police cells or grooming an elite few to be mega-rich Olympic champions.

A more realistic goal would be for every school and college to play a part in helping young people to enjoy physical activity … and to remain active throughout their adult life. If we accept this as our goal, we then need to reflect whether humiliating young people by force-feeding them a diet of relentlessly competitive sport may actually be counter-productive. A range of research, surveys and reports (including papers published by the UK Sports Council) clearly indicates that too much competition turns students (whether they are girls or boys ... aged 5 or 15) off sport for life!

A PE curriculum ought to be balanced and varied. Lessons should include individual, paired and small group activities that focus (in primary and secondary school ... and beyond) on skill development and enjoyment. Yes, there is a place for win-or-lose games, but they are not the be-all and end-all of PE.

Whenever PE lessons encourage students to improve their own performance (i.e. by comparing and contrasting what they can do now with what they could or could not do last lesson / last term / last year) rather than encouraging them to constantly compete with their classmates, they tend to grow in confidence and are better able to take risks, learn new skills and cope with possible failure. Conversely, whenever PE lessons focus primarily on encouraging peer competition most students (especially teenage girls) lose confidence, are less inclined to take risks, are reluctant to learn new skills and become fragile in the face of failure ... and, regrettably, resolve to give up sport completely.

A critic once said to me, “You teachers are all the same … you just want to attack competition and criminalise success!"  I replied, “Firstly, all teachers are not the same, and neither are all children. Secondly, I am not saying that competition or success are always wrong. I am saying that, as a rule, too much emphasis on competition or success can damage children.”

My critic retorted, “But wrapping children in cotton wool all the time can be even more damaging in the long-run. Children should be forced to live in the real world and deal with real failure and real success.” I replied, “That's a fair point. I simply want to stress that competitive sports should always be organised in such a way that they are appropriate to the age, maturity, ability, experience, physical fitness and state of mind of the children involved. After all, some children - and some adults - will never be able to cope with real failure and real success … not without God's help anyway.”

Perhaps many more students would benefit from half a term of power-walking, hiking, jogging or dry-slope skiing rather than hurdling, triple jumping, sprinting or Fosbury Flopping. Likewise, why not spend more time on ten-pin bowling, skate boarding, cycling, darts and snooker, and less time throwing a javelin, hammer, shot-put or discus? I do not mean any disrespect to track and field sports per se, but I do question whether PE activities are always fit for purpose - where that purpose is to help young people to enjoy physical activity now … and to remain active throughout their adult life. After all, how many adults high jump or hurdle or throw the javelin in their spare time? How many enjoy bowling or skiing or rambling? Precisely!

Once again, I would like to stress that I am not saying that competitive sports corrupt children. I am saying that too much emphasis on competitive sports can be a fruitless, self-defeating waste of time for children and teachers alike. I believe that, at the present time, there is too much emphasis on competition in school PE and games lessons in the UK and that this (i.e. too much competition) is tragically turning more and more young people off physical activity than exciting them about it.

If we are serious about challenging the lifestyles of increasingly sedentary youths who are more likely than ever to be obese, binge-drinking, smokers, we have to fight much, much harder to make the case for increased physical activity, better nutrition and responsible social activity. But such a move might involve radically rethinking how, why, what, when, where and how much PE is resourced and taught. After all, the evidence suggests that making school PE a little less competitive might actually make it much more attractive to more young people.

Originally posted online on Tuesday 11 March 2003
Expanded and updated on Monday 12 March 2007 

Rupert Kaye was interviewed: 
  *  on the Jeremy Vine Show on BBC Radio 2 on 3 March 2003
  *  by Nicky Campbell on BBC Radio 5 Live on 5 September 2008
  *  on BBC Three Counties (Beds, Herts and Bucks) on 5 September 2008