The Problems with Summer Sports for Girls
The summer term games programmes of many schools present problems for many schools. Even for boys, the historic supremacy of Cricket is no more, with an estimated average of 25% of boys choosing to stay with the game once the gates of compulsion are thrown open.
But for girls it is worse. There never was a girls' equivalent to Cricket, which occupied most pupils at various levels of competence, and held an unquestioned primacy in the summer term. Most co-educational independent schools were boys schools which - for various reasons - took girls. A parallel games programme for girls was felt necessary, and this was easily achieved in the first two terms, with Hockey and Netball readily assuming the same status as Rugby and Hockey/Soccer did for boys. But the summer term never offered an equivalent to cricket.
Research shows that most schools offer an uneasy combination of Rounders, Athletics and Tennis. Why three? Because none is especially satisfactory, nor commands a majority appeal. The popularity of Rounders is based more on its relative lack of physical demand, and the opportunity for unpressured fun, rather than its contribution to either health or skill development. In the average Rounders game, a participant may strike, throw and catch about half a dozen times each. Not enough to improve those capacities. At worst, its end product is daisy chains, not enhanced motor skill. The average heart rate of a girl taking part in a school Rounders lesson is about 90 bpm. Hardly enough to be included with "physical" education.
Athletics, especially field events, hold appeal to a very small number of girls, typically the most able. Tennis has a minimum skill level to make any sort of game work, and is therefore often either reserved for the more capable girls, or conducted at a dismal standard, with little in the way of positive outcomes.
All of these activities are inherently undemocratic. They favour the biggest, strongest and most able girls, who consequently dominate the opportunities, and run from one school team to another. The less able are often confined to limited roles, even more limited success and low levels of physical activity.
Of course, all of these activities could be delivered in creative and imaginative ways, ensuring high levels of physical activity, individual and experimental learning and improved motor skill through intensive practice. Too often though, it is a heavily diluted version of the Olympic Games or Wimbledon with girls struggling to meet the requirements of a technical activity. There are few smiles on red faces or glowing pride whilst collecting tennis balls from the stop netting, or measuring a four metre shot putt. Teachers estimate that fewer than 40% of Year 8 girls could high jump one metre
What are the alternatives? Clearly, one possibility is that the same activities could be delivered in a more imaginative way, freed from governing body rules and competitive practices, with adapted equipment and a focus on activity and learning. The other is that the programme could feature alternative activities. What might they be? Soccer might be an opportunity for greater activity and success. Possibly even progress, activity and fun. More radically, Netball might be better suited to May than January, as an outdoor game played on a small area in skimpy kit. The enthusiasm of the Goal Shooter might be enhanced by warm sunshine.
Summer is the time when sport should be most enjoyable, and children should be at their most enthusiastic. Static activities, with a high minimum threshold of skill and uneven opportunity to contribute are unlikely to maximise that. Maybe in the clash with exams, the latter might occasionally be more fun for some girls
