School sports: not exactly a free-for-all
A school in England has introduced a new sports kit - nothing new in that, but they’ve decided to use brand-name kit. Nike, to be exact.
Some of the parents are complaining, because they reckon ?80 is a bit steep for a school sports kit. They’ve got a point.
The school has defended itself by saying that the outfits are not compulsory, that students can still choose to wear the “traditional” sports kit.
Now hold on - isn’t one of the most common reasons given in support of school uniform that it makes everyone equal? Takes away the pressure to wear brand-names and expensive stuff? Stops students who don’t have the money for trendy clothing from feeling left out?
I don’t happen to agree with that argument - I’m not in favour of school uniforms at all and don’t think any of the arguments in their favour are true - but if you’re going to have a uniform, shouldn’t it be a) the same for all, and b) something everyone can afford?
The head teacher’s reply is as good a bit of politician-speak as I’ve heard in a while: the school “is delighted that there is such an interest in one of the strategies initiated to further improve pupil participation, learning and enjoyment in PE.”
Bwaahaahaa.
And: “Pupils may still wear the traditional kit, however the school is delighted that the uptake of the new standard kit has been so high.”
Right. No pressure to buy the expensive kit then.
What planet are we on again?
In: opinion
248 Views
Posts
a planet where cashmas lasts two months
And sorry, but what a load of BS that Nike weren’t involved in the decision - I am sorry but I’m totally untrusting of anything that big multinationals say and if my children were at that school I’d be getting them out if it asap as I wouldn’t want to think of what other corruptions were going on behind scenes!