The debate between where to allocate valuable teaching resources probably started with the first educational institutions. In present-day society the conflict continues and rightly so. In my opinion converting sports classes to more traditional subjects has two significant advantages. Firstly, it is a more effective use of a student’s time. Secondly, in the future, academic skills are more useful.
Switching time spent on sport in a school to time spent on more academic activities is a wise and cost-effective solution. Firstly, academic studies are inherently less expensive to perform when compared to physical education. For example, to play almost any sport one has to invest in the appropriate equipment, ranging from shorts, t-shirts to rackets and balls. Furthermore, excess time is spent in the changing rooms or washing afterwards. In more traditional subjects, students merely enter the classroom and are learning within minutes.
Secondly, sport can be argued as an activity practised naturally by children, especially boys. In every school at break time many children engage in energetic activities, whereas hardly any are studying algebra, biology or physics. Because these subjects are less popular more resources should be allocated to teaching them. In addition, academic skills could be argued as more important due to the small number of people in society currently using sport skills in a work environment. Thus, focussing on skills demanded by the labour market would benefit students’ lives dramatically in the future.
To conclude, young learners going through school would finish much better prepared for life avoiding sport tuition. Furthermore, they would have taken full advantage of their school years through more time spent learning.
The debate between where to allocate valuable teaching resources
probably
started
with the
first
educational institutions. In present-day society the conflict continues and
rightly
so
. In my opinion converting
sports
classes to more traditional subjects has two significant advantages.
Firstly
, it is a more effective
use
of a student’s
time
.
Secondly
, in the future,
academic
skills
are more useful.
Switching
time
spent
on
sport
in a
school
to
time
spent
on more
academic
activities is a wise and cost-effective solution.
Firstly
,
academic
studies are
inherently
less expensive to perform when compared to physical education.
For example
, to play almost any
sport
one
has to
invest in the appropriate equipment, ranging from shorts, t-shirts to rackets and balls.
Furthermore
, excess
time
is
spent
in the changing rooms or washing afterwards. In more traditional subjects, students
merely
enter the classroom and are learning within minutes.
Secondly
,
sport
can
be argued
as an activity
practised
naturally
by children,
especially
boys. In every
school
at break
time
many
children engage in energetic activities, whereas hardly any are studying algebra, biology or physics.
Because
these subjects are less popular more resources should
be allocated
to teaching them.
In addition
,
academic
skills
could
be argued
as more
important
due to the
small
number of
people
in society
currently
using
sport
skills
in a work environment.
Thus
, focussing on
skills
demanded by the
labour
market would benefit students’
lives
dramatically
in the future.
To conclude
, young learners going through
school
would finish much better prepared for life avoiding
sport
tuition.
Furthermore
, they would have taken full advantage of their
school
years through more
time
spent
learning.