Basic HTML Version
hitting or kicking a ball, catching a
pass, shooting a basket or running
fast are not welcome on the team.
Many youngsters experience their
first memories of rejection because
of competitive sports.
Perhaps those who are not ath–
Ietic take up music. Competition
again manifests itself. Who will
play first chair? Who will get the
solo part? Who will be drum major
of the band? As in sports, those
with the greatest ability "win. "
For those who are neither athlet–
ically or musically inclined, perhaps
a studious, academic life is the
answer. Again competition rushes to
the fore . Who can make the highest
grades on the test? Scholarships to
prestigious universities are granted
on highly competitive test scores. l t
even starts in the early grades with
spelling contests, essay contests,
competitive science projects.
Why do there always have to be
winners and losers?
Why can' t there simply be par–
ticipants? Men and women who
play a sport, a musical instrument
or learn a subject .to achieve their
own personal goals, pleasure and
satisfaction? Or as a service to
others?
As one of the United States tele–
vision networks begins its sports
coverage, athletes are shown in the
' 'thrill of victory or the agony of
defeat." To lose puts one in the
depths of despair. To win means
recognition. Perhaps fame and for–
tune.
T hose who excel in competitive
fields find rewards. As youngsters
they are more popular, respected
and looked up to by their peers.
Later in Iife they find success in
college scholarships, professional
contracts, often national attention.
And the only way to such success
seems to be through competition.
Seldom do we see cooperation as
an alternative way to success.
J
have never seen a scholarship
granted to the student who most
contributed to the success of fellow
students.
1n many circles of business,
sports and the arts the spirit of
cooperation- helping someone else
to do his or her best-is even sub–
jected to ridicule.
Why, if we cooperate someone
else may get that big sale. Someone
14
else might score the winning goal.
Someone else might get a higher
test score, or win the lead part in
the school play, or be chosen to
play the solo in the concert.
Far too few people have experi–
enced the thrill of assisting, helping
and encouraging another person
achieve success.
Herein Iies the key to a better
way.
Alternativa to Competition
Slowly and gradually educators and
parents in our modern world are
coming to see there is a great deal of
work yet to be done in the field of
cooperative athletics and games.
There are whole new vistas to be
explored.
lt's only natural for all of us to
desire acceptance. From the ear–
liest age of recollection we wanted
to be part of the family, the neigh–
borhood, tbe school.
For many, the first memory of
rejection had to do with games and
play. Perhaps an older brother or sis–
ter would not Jet you play with him
or her. You were too little-not good
enough to compete at their levels.
And your friends might have chosen
someone else who was bigger and
better at playing a game in the park
or at school.
By the teen years, many young
people try out for a competitive
athletic team. Anyone who has
worked at practice and then sat at
the team meeting when the coach
selected the final team has known
the thrill of being chosen or the
discouragement of rejection.
Usually the chosen few become
popular and accepted by fellow stu–
dents, as well as schoolteachers and
administrators. Far too often the
not-so-popular slink off into tbe
background. Personality growth
can be stifled.
Yes, it is high time to take a long
and hard look at sports, competi–
tion and games.
One pioneer in the field of co–
operative athletics is Canadian edu–
cator Terry Orlick. In his book
The
Cooperative Sports
&
Games
Book
he notes: " Pitting children
against one another in games where
they franticaiJy compete for what
only a few can have, guarantees
failure and rejection for the many.
Many children's games and pro-
grams are in fact designed for elim–
ination. Many ensure that one wins
and everyone else loses, leaving
sport 'rejects' and 'dropou ts' to
form the vast majority of our North
American population. "
Mr. Orlick goes on in this most
helpful book to outline a bold new
(or is it old?) approach to children
and games.
I was first introduced to the con–
cept of "new games" about five
years ago while
l
was serving as
director at Vail, Colorado, for more
than 1,000 families at an eight-day
convention. On my staff was a
young man wbo worked with the
Aurora (suburb of Denver) Recre–
ation Department.
For the convention we were
planning the traditional competi–
tive games for young and old
alike-basketball, softball, tennis,
golf.
One day he carne to me with
what seemed like a radical propos–
al. He said:
" 1
have been working
with young people in my job at the
Aurora Recreation Department the
past few years and we have found
that cooperative games provide a
much healthier atmosphere than
competitive games.
1
would like to
see us plan our convention recre–
ation schedule around these games.
I think you will be pleasantly sur–
prised at the results."
At first
1
was skeptical. But after
sorne thought and further staff
meetings we decided to give ita try.
During the convention,
1
went to
the playgrounds where scores of
children learned these " new
games."
1
watched this young man
lead small children like the Pied
Piper of Hamelin through obstacle
courses, snake lines, parachute
tosses, water-balloon races, egg–
passing relays and a variety of other
fun and cooperative games.
1
was now convinced there was a
better way. Children could play
together. EvERY child could partici–
pate. T here were no losers. Everyone
was a winner. Because winning was
not the goal. Participation was.
There is even a national founda–
tion (New Games Foundation, P.O.
Box 7901, San Francisco, CA
94120, U.S.A.) that promotes and
publishes information about non–
competitive sports.
(Continued on page 38)
The
PLAIN TRUTH