<p>This came up in the ‘Sports’ thread.</p>
<p>I believe it was Opie that commented about how the soccer program outside the school had to add practices during the week in order for the players (at a young age) to get their exercise because the school was not providing adequate PE time.</p>
<p>So, my question is how do we use PE time to the best use to help cut obesity in society?</p>
<p>I don’t know, but my son really loves his PE class, and he loves to exercise. He is not obese. He says that he gets a workout no matter what the activity is bc he is self motivated to try his best. My son does not have natural ability, but he has a lot of heart. He finds that his PE teachers and coaches recognize this, and that encourages him even more. My son works out on his own at home too. He also makes sure that he eats lots of fruit and veggies, and he has tried hard to cut down on the amount of ice cream he eats (yes, he is a kid, and enjoys dessert as much as anyone). He has about 4 hours of PE per week in school (except if he is in a health class, which is 1/4 of the school year).</p>
<p>I think the approach taken by our public school district works pretty well. Instead of a single choice called PE, students can choose aerobics, weight training, fitness walking, something strange called “body sculpting”, a team sports variety pack, etc. Something for everyone.</p>
<p>My non-athlete son took weight training, got excellent and encouraging instruction. </p>
<p>This whole approach is about a million times better than what I experienced in high school.</p>
<p>The themed approach like midmo suggested would work.
One of the popular “PE” classes at my kids college is Ballroom Dancing. That would be a blast! Not sure it would go over very well at the high school level, though.
Aerobics, Weight Training, Fitness Walking (or Personal Fitness), Team Sports, Body Sculpting (?)…
My addition: Yoga</p>
<p>Dodgeball. ;)</p>
<p>I loved dodgeball, but it was outlawed in school by the time my kids got there. My H and the kids and I played dodgeball regularly in our driveway; I guess the neighbors thought we were meanies.</p>
<p>Well, let me tell you, it is a FAVORITE at the all-boys HS. Now, there’s a surprise, huh?</p>
<p>At least at the elementary to high school levels in Illinois, PE is a mandated requirement.</p>
<p>My private high school back in the dark ages - you signed up for a sport (tennis, field hockey, lacrosse etc.), horseback riding, an exercise class (think calisthenics) or modern dance.</p>
<p>My kids played WallBall. I guess it was similar to DodgeBall but you stand in front of a wall.</p>
<p>This is an interesting article on revising PE. I love what it offers, but with a $450,000 price tag, “utopia” is apt. <a href=“http://edutopia.org/new-p-e-curriculum[/url]”>http://edutopia.org/new-p-e-curriculum</a></p>
<p>Most districts probably have a long way to go to move their programs away from the round robin playing of soccer-basketball-softball-tennis team approach and toward a personal fitness-sport-for-life approach. Our district is old school, but there are a few alternatives to the traditional PE that h.s. students can choose for the required eight semesters — dance and weight-lifting, for example. The worst thing about the PE program at our h.s. school is that there’s a certain amount of indifference to it on the part of the teachers (who tend to be coaches also). Basically, as long as you dress out, you get an A in the class, even if all you do is sit down the whole time. Not really sure why this is except for the fact that the classes are large, probably 60-70 per teacher and they figure they’ll work with the kids who want to work. </p>
<p>My older son didn’t like the sports PE approach, so he took the first year during summer school when you could satisfy the whole year in a couple months. For the second year, he took weight lifting and liked it. He was also taking throughout high school a martial arts class twice a week so he could earn a black belt. My younger one didn’t mind the sports-round robin version of PE (except for b-ball) and also liked the weight lifting. He still lifts with a group of friends on their own two or three times a week and has become very health conscious. </p>
<p>The ironic thing about addressing the obesity problem is that in a relatively affluent community like ours, you could probably drop PE altogether and no kids would get fat. Or very few. The majority do something outside school: club soccer, club volleyball, club waterpolo, club tournament tennis teams, travel baseball, gymnastics, weighttraining, martial arts, and there’s also a recreational and competitive rowing program nearby. Parents have the resources to keep their kids active, and they do this even with the required PE requirement (which is more than enough, imo). </p>
<p>Unfortunately, in CA, it is in the poorer neighborhoods, with many recent immigrants, where the school districts are cutting back on PE and recess to give more time to raising basic skills in reading and math, driven by NCLB and the CA testing requirements. It’s in these communities where the parents can’t provide private sports experiences and the diets are more inclined toward fats and carbs. It’s a more difficult trade off for school administrators who have to decide between spending more time on teaching kids healthy lifestyles or teaching them to read and do math on the level that lets them move on to higher education.</p>
<p>I hated PE all through elementary and middle school and into high school, until we had electives. Basically, the entire philosophy of physical education has to change in order to instill positive feelings about physical activity and exercise in children. What I got from PE is that I was slower than most of the other kids, not as coordinated, not an asset to anybody’s team, and that I might as well not even try because I would just get hurt, screw up the team’s chances, be embarrassed in front of everyone by not performing well, and leave the class feeling horrible about myself. That is what many children get from PE, those who aren’t naturally athletic or who don’t do sports outside of school (and are therefore behind most of the class). </p>
<p>To this day I detest competitive sports, and I attribute this in part to the disastrous PE curriculum at my schools (high school did much better with electives–in effect, tracked classes that separated those interested in group sports). I was fortunate to find dance as an alternative way to be physically active–school PE certainly didn’t help me do that. </p>
<p>Mandating so many hours per week of PE isn’t going to curb any obesity problem in a permanent way. The method of instruction has to change so that every child feels included and feels that they are capable of finding some activity to maintain their physical fitness.</p>
<p>etselec, I could not agree more with your post! BTW, my PE classes were run the same way as yours, in three different school districts, several decades ago.</p>
<p>My 9-year old came home the other day with one of my pet elementary school peeves: the gym teacher who spent 3/4’s of the class talking about the rules of the game while the kids sit there squirming, desperate to get their mitts on the balls and run. You finally get to play, and the bell rings…</p>
<p>And didn’t anyone else call it BOMBARDMENT?? “It” being dodgeball.</p>
<p>I loved gym (with the exception of dance and rope climbing) all the way through high school, and never utilized the varsity athlete exemption. There’s a lot more variety now-- European handball is a new favorite with our HS kids. Currently it’s interspersed with science labs, so it’s 2 or 3X per week.</p>
<p>Well thanks for the mention to start this post. What I was really speaking out about are young children grades k-5 and what they get timewise and opportunity wise regarding exercise. It’s extremely limited at these ages. </p>
<p>As some have posted HS’s are now introducing new activities to get kids “involved” with better health maintence. My point is why are we waiting 14-15 years to create those opportunities? Why not take the time to introduce new things during the formative times at the younger ages? </p>
<p>“hated PE all through elementary and middle school and into high school”
“To this day I detest competitive sports, and I attribute this in part to the disastrous PE curriculum at my schools”</p>
<p>I can totally understand your points because during the ages where you should be shown different things individual and team activities you probably only experienced what would keep the majority of kids busy. </p>
<p>“The method of instruction has to change so that every child feels included and feels that they are capable of finding some activity to maintain their physical fitnes”</p>
<p>I agree but I think this should start very young. An hour a week doesn’t make it happen. We don’t take it seriously at the younger ages and we end up with kids that haven’t found their grove simply because they haven’t experienced it.</p>
<p>As I posted on the other one, we called our D the “Whitman Chocolate Sampler” during her K- rest of her life… ages. Try different things, like em do it again, don’t like em, now ya know…and sometimes what she didn’t like at 5 (soccer) she took up again in college (coed, cute boys a bonus) and she still hasn’t tired of trying new. </p>
<p>I would like to see kids by the time they hit HS have a basic understanding of several individual and team sports or activities. Then hopefully they will be open to trying even more things. </p>
<p>“European handball is a new favorite with our HS kids” I remember in 7th grade our pe teacher introduced the game to us (early 70’s) It was a blast. I guess I think the way I do because during my formative years my pe teachers actually introduced new stuff all the time. They are still some of my favorite educators of all time.</p>
<p>lspf - Good point. Does anybody remember reading about that recent study where they found that for every 45 minutes of gym class, kids spent like 12 minutes actually moving? (Can’t recall the exact numbers.)</p>
<p>etselec: I totally agree. Story of my life.</p>