Name (Registered users only):

  Expression ^{(Optional mood/title along with your name) Examples: (happy, sad, The Joyful, etc.) help)}

  E-mail address (optional):

* Type your message here:
>> Thank you for thinking of me. Most educators, >> especially British ones, think that playing team >> sports teaches teamwork and kids who don't play are, >> as you put it, "not team players". This is said as a >> condemnation, something bad, but why? If someone >> doesn’t play baseball, does that mean he can't >> cooperate on, say, manufacturing an automobile? So >> long as the non-team player is not actively >sabotaging >> the team's effort what's so wrong? Physical education >> is supposed to be about education. What's being >> taught here? The only thing I have learned in PE is >> how to let other, more skilled people do my work for >> me. > >Well, that's part of the answer to the question >"what's so wrong?" If this is at a low amateur skill >level then "I expect other team members to do the work >for me" means you're lazy and selfish. > >Or maybe your school handled it badly? At my school, >even at elementary school ages, the boys who were >really good at football (the sport with which everyone >here is obsessed) were taken off to train separately, >in every "proper" sports lesson. This continued >through secondary school (what you would call middle >school and high school). > >This left the rest of us - ranging from semi-competent >people to wholly incompetent people - to play "team >sports" against each other. And tbh it's just like >what Connor once said. Limited competence is the world >of "see ball, kick ball". The more confident (or more >swift-footed) boys would be chasing after the ball >with great rapidity, while the rest of us would be >playing "defence". But that meant that, if the ball >did come towards us, we were expected to at least >*attempt* to kick it! > >An honest attempt would result in due respect, whether >we connected or not. A successful tackle would result >in great excitement - David brings down Goliath! > >There were just a very few people in my year whose >response to this was to *run away from the ball* (or >just freeze and ignore the ball) if it came near them. >It's these people that received the greater share of >insults and indignation. Can you see why? > >Connor would add that he has great anger for fielders >"missing an easy catch". But we need to politely >explain to him that easy for him, is not the same as >easy for us. He has a right to expect that fielders >should at least *try* to catch the ball. > >> If my team wins a game despite my being on it, we >> all get a good grade. If we lose because I was on >it, >> we all get a bad grade and my teammates blame me and >> the only thing I learn is that I am hopeless, so I >> might as well give up. > >That's a strange way of doing things. My PE teachers >assessed us individually, and I always got a C for >ability and a 1 for effort, except when I got a 2 for >effort and then Mum gave me a huge massive hairbrush >spanking over her knee. > >If I'd applied to a sixth form college (I didn't), >they would not have been shown those grades, I think. >Certainly the universities that I'm applying to won't >see them. > >> Someone like me who is "sports >> illiterate" needs help in building up his skill set. > >Agreed. At one point (I think what you would call >middle school age, maybe elementary) there was some >"sports day" thing where all kids had to show off >their supposed sports skills. > >The more talented kids demonstrated winning football >games, and I was told to practice dribbling a ball >between markers. So, it upped my game... very slightly. > >> Maybe I'm wrong here. British educators once >(still?) >> thought that teaching students Latin and Greek >> sharpened their wits like lifting weights builds >> muscles, while teaching chemistry and physics was >> neglected. And yet the Brits produced Newton, >Darwin, > >This seems to be a misunderstanding. Before Newton, >physics didn't really exist. Before Darwin, biology >was mostly limited to anatomy (Leonardo da Vinci wrote >in Latin) and classification (Linnaeus wrote in, yes >you guessed it, Latin). > >Newton and Darwin got their fame by observation, >description, theories, and description of those >theories. All of that required a keen eye for detail, >logical thinking, and the ability to present a case to >an audience. > >In other words, Latin and Greek served them well. > >> Maxwell, > >Not sure who that is, unless it's the first name of >that guy who's the son of that famous TV doctor? >Maxwell House? > >> So in the end I have to deal with the fact that I am >> an odd duck, an outsider, not a team player. > >Eventually, Jerry, we come to realise that we're all >odd ducks - even those talented in sport or literary >matters or business or war....
Choose Message Icon: None :-) Happy ;-) Wink :-D Joy :} Smirk <:-} Innocent ☮ Peace >:) Mischief B-) Shades <3 Heart |O Yawn <:P Sick >:-( Angry :~( Sad ? Question *!* Alert Thumbs Up Thumbs Down (!) Idea [Info] Info Oo. Talk [ View Emoticons ]

Notice: Copies of your message may remain on this and other systems on internet. Please be respectful.