Slow Down at the Back

Schools are clear that one of their aims for their physical activity programmes is to instil lifetime habits of exercise amongst their pupils.  This is a logical and audible aim, and one that could impact upon the lives of all children - long after the results of school matches have been forgotten.

But programmes rarely appear to be designed with this in mind.  Most adults who exercise do so sub maximally, and outside the context of competition.  And yet much school activity is about exercising to exhaustion, and much teacher activity is about encouraging that.  Science is clear that competition stimulates some people to bigger efforts.  That is about 50%  of the population of males.  For another 25%, the impact is neutral and for 25%, the presence of competitors and encouragement to compete is a stressor which negatively impacts performance.  The proportion is bigger for females. 

Over 6.8 million adults in Britain ran, cycled or swam at least once a week in 2014/15 (Sport England survey). This compares with 1.8 million men and women who played Association Football regularly, much the biggest team sport.  Of those adult exercisers, the enormous majority exercise in steady state.  They avoid the stress of lactic acid build up and the pain of significant oxygen debt.  They compete, by and large, against themselves.  Or satisfy themselves with victory in the battle against inactivity.  Aerobic activity can be competitive, training or recreational.  For the enormous majority of adults, it is the latter.  But that isn't how it is always promoted in schools.

Children need to understand the concepts of steady state, and the impact of oxygen debt.  They need to be taught the impact of aerobic exercise on the body and the brain, and the benefits that it brings. But they need to feel that the level of stress is bearable, and that they are in control.  Do their experiences of running and swimming in school teach them this, and prepare them for involvement in these activities as a sub maximal, health promoting activity?

They also need to understand the difference between fast and fit.  VO2 Max differs significantly between individuals.  It is necessary to be aware that some children are faster than others, but that isn't necessarily a reflection of effort.  The use of heart rate monitors and understanding the significance of individual training impacts can allow the less athletic pupils to realise that their efforts have the same benefits as their faster peers.  That effort is not reflected in performance.  Like every other subject.  And that health impacts are universal, and not confined to the trophy winners.

In prescribing aerobic work for children, maybe the focus should be on the time for which they exercise.  If everyone runs or swims the same distance (as in "cross country" or "1500m"), then the less athletic exercise for twice as long as the fastest.  That is the equivalent of giving the bottom Maths set twice as much homework as the top set.  It neither helps them, nor motivates them.  When the results are put on the noticeboard, maybe they should include heart rates and time in training zones.

The target has to be realistic and achievable, to leave a sense of accomplishment. The rationale for exercise is an intellectual one,  but that on its own is not enough.  There has to be an emotional motivator.  It has to make individuals both feel better, and feel better about themselves.

For a minority of children, the need to compete and achieve will lead them to push themselves towards oxygen debt and exhaustion.  That's great.  For them.  They may well also bring the school competitive glory at various championships.  But that's only one way of enjoying physical activity, though one on which schools tend to focus.

So, rather than shout at the less able at the back to "push themselves", maybe they should be encouraged to slow down occasionally, and maintain their output at a sub maximal steady state.  That might be preparing them for a lifetime of health promoting activity.