Sunday, July 02, 2006

U.K.: School swimming lessons dropped -- apparently for cost reasons

Those pesky school pools cost too much to run. Who cares if a few kids die?

Swimming has been dropped from the list of sports that pupils are expected to practise in PE lessons at secondary school. New guidelines published by the Government’s curriculum watchdog omit swimming in favour of “fitness and health activities” for pupils. Officials at the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA) said that they wanted schools to have more freedom to offer activities that suited the interests of individual pupils; but safety campaigners said that the downgrading of swimming lessons would have potentially fatal consequences.

Children who had met the requirement at primary school to be able to swim 25 metres would have misplaced confidence in their abilities unless they continued to practise at secondary level. Seventy children drown each year and five had been killed in the past month alone.

The QCA published the draft “programmes of study” as part of proposed reforms to the national curriculum for pupils aged 11 to 14, known as Key Stage 3. They will be put out for consultation next February for introduction in schools in September 2008. The new guidance makes no mention of swimming, but tells schools that the PE curriculum should enable “all pupils to enjoy and succeed in physical activity.” It sets out a list of desirable skills for pupils to learn and recommends that schools develop “at least three” through participation in games, gymnastics, dance, athletics, outdoor adventure activities or “fitness and health activities”.

A QCA spokesman said that swimming would fit into the last category if schools chose to offer it, but he acknowledged that it would no longer be listed specifically in the secondary curriculum. “The context of this is that we are designing a curriculum that creates more space for individualised learning,” the spokesman said. “This is about looking at the principles that we need to think about in providing these subjects while schools decide how what is taught fits in with other aspects of what they do. “One of the key things to motivate kids to get involved in physical activity is to find things that they enjoy doing and getting better at. We want schools to look at facilities and build a curriculum that is much more localised and personalised.“

The move appears to contradict a 5.5 million pound government initiative announced last month to ensure that all pupils left primary school able to swim. The national curriculum requires that pupils can swim 25 metres by age 11, but one in five currently fails to meet this target. Jim Knight, the School Standards Minister, launched the two-week programme of intensive “top-up” lessons for children who had not met the standard. He said then: “Every child should learn to swim. It is an essential skill and is a fun way to exercise. We want to give as many pupils as possible confidence in the water.”

Officials at the Department for Education and Skills are known to be concerned about the QCA’s decision and are likely to press for an explicit commitment to swimming to be restored in the curriculum; but the move to downgrade it won support from the Association of School and College Leaders, which represents most secondary heads. John Dunford, its general secretary, said: “Heads would much prefer a Key Stage 3 curriculum that is much more flexible. “While it is widely accepted that children should learn to swim for their own safety, I don’t think that necessarily means that it should be part of the curriculum every year in schools. It should be left to the head teacher to decide.”

The English Schools Swimming Association estimated last year that the number of school pools had fallen from 5,000 in 1972 to just 2,000 now. A growing number of local authority baths have either shut or face the threat of closure, leaving schools in many areas unable to find a pool within reasonable distance. Peter Cornall, head of water and leisure safety at the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents, said that on average about 70 children drown in inland waters, especially in the summer and during the May and August bank holidays. He said that the requirement for pupils to leave primary school able to swim 25 metres was inadequate to ensure their safety in water.

Source






Creation gets a mention in British university

No such thing as bad publicity?

Creationism is finding its way into university lecture halls, raising concerns with some academics that the biblical story of creation will be given equal weight to Darwin’s theory of evolution. Compulsory lectures in intelligent design and creationism are going to be included in second-year courses for zoology and genetics undergraduates at Leeds University, The Times Higher Education Supplement (June 23) reveals.

But there’s a twist: lecturers will present the controversial theories as being incompatible with scientific evidence. “It is essential they (students) understand the historical context and the flaws in the arguments these groups put forward,” says Michael McPherson, of Leeds University.

Despite the clear anti- creationist stance of these lecturers, the move has set warning bells ringing across the UK science community. “It would be undesirable for universities to spend a lot of precious resources teaching students that creationism and intelligent design are not based on scientific evidence,” says David Read, the vice- president of the Royal Society.

Yet other academics are keen to see evolutionary theory challenged in university lecture halls. “The scientific establishment prevents dissenting views,” says Professor Steve Fuller, Professor of Sociology at the University of Warwick. “I have a lot of respect for those who have true scientific credentials and are upfront about their views.”

Students, though, seem open to creationism. One study, carried out by Professor Roger Downie, of the University of Glasgow, found that one science student in ten did not believe in evolution. “This gives a very poor prognosis for their understanding of what science is and their ability to be scientists,” Prof Downie says.

Source

***************************

For greatest efficiency, lowest cost and maximum choice, ALL schools should be privately owned and run -- with government-paid vouchers for the poor and minimal regulation.

The NEA and similar unions worldwide believe that children should be thoroughly indoctrinated with Green/Left, feminist/homosexual ideology but the "3 R's" are something that kids should just be allowed to "discover"


Comments? Email me here. For times when blogger.com is playing up, there is a mirror of this site (viewable even in China!) here. My home page is here

***************************

No comments: