Anyway, back to what I was saying.
It seems to me that by making these physical education exams and adding ‘physical literacy’ to the rhetoric, it might take away the twinge of self-pride that comes with doing well at the tested subjects, and certainly it could up the degree of alienation in those who cannot perform sporting events adequately. It does not make them illiterate because they don’t enjoy playing team sports, it does make you illiterate if you can’t read.
Forcing every child to join a team sport is not the way forward, when an idea like that is made it does not take into account those who do not perform well at them, and even get bullied as a result of being at the tail end of the performance spectrum in these.
Perhaps the people coming up with these ideas have made a vast assumption. Could it be that they truly can’t imagine a child who’s not so dedicated to sporting events that they shun learning on an intellectual level so that they are better equipped for running around in later life?
Is it truly just as important that the next generation can run for an extra few minutes as their abilities to function in a society where reading and maths are so necessary to making sense of the world around us?
Is it a worthy sacrifice to have the next generation scratching their heads as to how the economy could collapse, as to how all of the technology they take for granted works, as to the contents of the many volumes of literature and educational material provided speaks to us through symbols formed through ink on paper, or through black pixels against white on an image on a screen created by interpreting the spin of electrons?
I think I've made my point.