Are we going the extra mile? The role of state and independent schools in Team GB's Olympics
Posted on 12th May 2017 in Sport
Malcolm Tozer reviews the school backgrounds of members of Team GB at the summer Olympic Games of 2016 in Rio de Janeiro...
The presence of privately educated sportsmen and sportswomen in Team GB, the Olympic representatives of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, continued to be as newsworthy and politically contentious before, during and after the Rio de Janeiro Olympic Games of 2016 as it had been four years earlier in London, but the tone of the observations and comments had changed. In 2012 there was the subliminal suggestion that private independent schools were hogging the sporting limelight and the outright complaint that state schools were not pulling their weight: by 2016, however, both stances had softened. Independent schools were now congratulated on their continued achievements and state schools were lauded for their greater contribution to the nation’s glory. Team GB won two more medals in Rio than in London and lifted its position in the medal table from third to second, overtaking China, but still well behind the USA.
Sir Peter Lampl, Chairman of the Sutton Trust – a ‘do tank’ that manages, develops and evaluates programmes to address educational inequality – reflected the new mood in a press release. ‘The success of Team GB in Rio has been a national triumph. It’s been fantastic to see a growing number of our national heroes coming from comprehensive and other state schools. But alumni of private schools are still over-represented among our medallists. Although some state schools have improved support for competitive sport over the last decade, they’re still more likely to benefit from ample time set aside for sport, excellent sporting facilities and highly qualified coaches’. Matt Dickinson, Chief Sports Writer at The Times was pithier. ‘No one can dispute that Team GB are remarkably successful. But there is a debate to be had over whether they are too posh, too privileged, and too white.’ His sub-editor coined the eye-catching headline, ‘Golds galore but are Team GB too posh?’
The number of privately educated members of Team GB steadily increased from 41 to 94 between 2000 and 2012, and then dipped to 85 in 2016. However, as Team GB for Rio was much smaller than that for London, the independent school contribution increased from 17.3% to 23.4%. The total for the five Games was 347, or 19.4% – one-fifth rather than the oft-quoted fraction of one-third. As around 7% of the total British school population is educated privately, the figure of 19.4% in Team GB lends support to the assertion that independent schools punch well above their weight in Olympic sports. However, since most pupils in independent schools stay on in full-time education until the age of 18, it might be more appropriate to compare that 19.4% with the percentage of the total school population over the age of 16 who are educated in independent schools. That figure is 18%. The Team GB percentage is just above that value for three Games and just below in the other two, which perhaps suggests that independent schools win their fair share of places – and no more.
Most observers will judge success in the Olympic Games by the number of gold, silver and bronze medals won. The total number of medals won by members of Team GB rises steadily from 48 at Sydney in 2000 to 130 at Rio in 2016, although it must be remembered that each member of medal-winning groups, for example relay squads in athletics and teams in hockey, receives a medal. Team members who had not been educated at independent schools saw their total increase from 32 in Sydney to 67 in London, and then leap to 85 in Rio. Their privately educated teammates increased their total from 16 in Sydney to 45 in London, but then it dipped to 42 in Rio. In percentage terms, however, the independent school total remains steady, 47.9% in London and 49.4% in Rio, whilst the state school total more than doubles, from 15.0% to 32.0.%. Although state schools have improved their contribution since London, the reduced team numbers and the higher selection criteria are the main factors that boosted performance. Team GB at Rio was much more efficient than its London predecessor.
British independent schools produced 21 Olympic champions at Rio and 66 overall in the period 2000-2016. Most notable amongst them are: Ben Ainslie (sailing), who won gold in four Games; Chris Hoy (cycling), who won six golds over three Games; and Andrew Triggs Hodge (rowing), who won golds in 2008, 2012 and 2016. British state schools produced 57 Olympic champions at Rio, their best performance of the five 21st century Games. There were four multiple champions: Jason Kenny (cycling) with three gold medals, and Mo Farah (athletics), Laura Trott (cycling) and Max Whitlock (gymnastics) with two each. In terms of gold medals, team members from British independent schools and British state schools performed equally brilliantly at a bumper Games.
That Team GB won more medals in Rio than in London, and lifted its position in the medal table from third to second, was indeed a national triumph, as Sir Peter Lampl has said. He is also right to draw attention to the fact that the biggest heroes of the Games – Jason Kenny, Mo Farah, Laura Trott and Max Whitlock – were all educated at state schools. They will surely inspire the next generation. But, since the one-quarter of Team GB who were educated at independent schools won one-third of the medals, his call to state schools to do more to support competitive sport is valid. And, he might have added, particularly so for girls.
How do things look from Matt Dickinson’s standpoint? ‘Too posh’ and ‘too privileged’ ie too many from independent schools? Perhaps, but their increased contribution to the success of Team GB at Rio was largely as a result of a drop in state school numbers boosting the independent school proportion. In particular, the culling of unsuccessful sports and the raising of the selection criteria after London had a negligible effect on the number of privately educated competitors selected for Rio.
That leaves ‘too white’. Information from the Independent Schools Council’s 2016 census shows that 70% of pupils at independent schools in Britain are classed as ‘White British’. Analysis by the Department for Education, published in January 2015, records that ‘White British’ children represent 70% of primary school pupils in England and 74% of secondary pupils. It seems that the ‘White British’ percentage at independent schools matches the national one. In addition, as it is highly unlikely that pupils from ethnic minorities are excluded from sport, independent schools are doing their bit to boost ethnic minority representation in Team GB.
In 2013, I wrote an essay entitled ‘One of the Worst Statistics in British Sport, and Wholly Unacceptable’: The Contribution of Privately Educated Members of Team GB to the Summer Olympic Games, 2000–2012, which was published in The International Journal of the History of Sport. In closing, I asked what enabled privately educated members of Team GB to make such a significant contribution at the quadrennial Olympic Games. Was it the time allocated to physical education and sport in the curricular and extra-curricular timetables of independent schools? Was it the provision of sports centres and playing-fields? Was it that boys and girls are equally willing to play sport? Was it the parental demand that all pupils should be offered the chance to compete in school teams? Was it the contribution of teachers and coaches? Was it the sporting tradition maintained by governors and head teachers? Was it the expectation of high achievement, or the regular competition and co-operation amongst pupils, or the collective ‘you can do it’ philosophy? Or was it a combination of some or all of these?
In May 2013, I sent a copy to Sir Michael Wilshaw, Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Education, Children’s Services and Skills, which was promptly acknowledged. At about the same time, Sir Michael commissioned a survey to compare the provision of sport at state and independent schools and the findings were published on 20 June 2014. In a section of the report titled ‘How do successful maintained schools and academies match the independent sector?’, two head teachers shared the secrets of their success. The first reported: ‘Sport is part of our culture of ‘going the extra mile’in order to provide additional opportunities for students, hence staff volunteer to help. Coaches are paid for their work, but teaching staff are not, regarding volunteering their time as part of the education of the whole person.’ The second added: ‘Staff see volunteering to provide competitive sport as part of their profession. They are highly committed.’
The report was given the title ‘Going the extra mile: excellence in competitive school sport’ (it can be viewed here).
This article first appeared in the summer 2017 issue of Conference & Common Room magazine, which is available now in print and online at www.candcr.co.uk