Back to basics?

This blog has emerged out of a manufactured chance retweet on twitter. My preferred means of access my twitter account is through tweetdeck as it allows me to view concurrent columns very easy and navigation between them is simple. One of my column is a search on the term "phys ed" in the hope of getting a feel for what people are saying about my subject. Late last night I spied this tweet:

 

rickweinberg said:

Working on school work. Should kids ever fail Phys. Ed because they refuse 2 change their cloths? Please help me w/ your thoughts

My first reaction was to retweet the message to my followers (knowing that I had a number of physical education teachers following who might offer an interesting and considered opinion) and to offer a reply myself.

@rickweinberg Phys Ed should be about helping kids be lifelong participants in physical activity and that take attitude not kit. #inspire

However as soon as I posted these words I wondered if they were the politically correct reply of an academic sitting in an ivory tower rather than the true feelings of a PE teacher. Did I answer to save face? Is that the way to address issues like this? Was I becoming a fence-sitter? It took a counter question for me to ponder the truth of my reply and ultimately to write that blog (so thanks Jonesy).

 

jonesytheteachr said:

@DrAshCasey I'll ask you a Q back. Should maths students fail coz they don't bring books? Prob not, but do they meet course outcomes either?

 

This seemed to me to be a more honest reply. Would a kid fail maths if he or she refused to bring their books? Or indeed if they brought their books but refused to get them out of their bag or out of their locker? Is there a requirement in school for kids to match the expectation of the teachers and the school as 'learners'? There is certainly an expectation in society that school is a place of honesty, awareness and responsibility where people look after each other and themselves. Indeed much of the order of school life is built on discipline and this is certainly a trait in schools and individuals that is admired. It is a two way process and the school and its teacher as have a responsibility to cajole and encourage students to be involved.

 

ConservativeFBC said:

@DrAshCasey No...but they should be disciplined...we give 2 freebies, then a detention

 

This sounded more like me as a PE teacher. Did I honestly think that lifelong learning could be achieved without some cooperation between teacher and student? This was more of the truth. I vehemently believe that learning is about cooperation and mutual respect. I acknowledge that my teaching was a one-way process (i.e. one that came from me and went smoothly to the students) but that is why I engaged in a seven-year self-study to ensure that learning became a mutually constructed process that occurred between my students and me. I also acknowledge that while I loved physical education – regardless of the pedagogical approach used – many of my students hated it because of the instructor-led and drill-focus nature of the subject.

 

Then two new colleagues joined the discussion and started to debate the situation; allowing me to see physical education from the position of one who didn't always aspire to make the subject his and her career.

 

MitchSquires said:

@DrAshCasey @rickweinberg I almost did in HS. Lugging that bag around all day made me far more resentful than doing sport ever should.

 

DrAshCasey said:

@MitchSquires @rickweinberg you won't be alone but we need to make phys ed somewhere all kids enjoy being.

 

MitchSquires said:

@DrAshCasey @rickweinberg I agree! Also to be avoided: a handful I kids involved and the other 25 lining up. Noone enjoys that.

 

shhartley said:  

@MitchSquires @DrAshCasey @rickweinberg I hated public humiliation of PE. Can't catch. Can't run. If not changing wd save me, I'd choose it

 

MitchSquires said:

@shhartley @DrAshCasey @rickweinberg How much could you get away with that?

 

shhartley said:

@MitchSquires @DrAshCasey @rickweinberg About 1 week in 4.

 

rickweinberg said:

@MitchSquires @DrAshCasey I got it now. r there any educators that think "ya know, if a kid is 2 lazy 2 dress than mayb they should fail

 

MitchSquires said:

@rickweinberg @DrAshCasey I guess it somewhat depends on your system's version of what fail means

 

rickweinberg said:

RT @MitchSquires: @DrAshCasey I guess it depends on your system's version of what fail means.~how abt get an F and going 2 summer school

 

DrAshCasey said:

@shhartley shame to hear that but this is not uncommon and we need to find a way of teaching Phys Ed that doesn't humiliate

 

MitchSquires said:

@DrAshCasey @shhartley I find at Primary level when all kids are involved no one has time to watch, so no one feels embarrassed - eventually

 

 

This made me think about the amount of money we spend on technology in education and more recently in physical education and wondered if this is still appropriate when the situations mentioned by shhartley and MitchSquires continue to happen in classrooms around the world. Could the money be spent in better ways to alleviate the commonality of these issues? Should we buy iPads and heart-rate monitors when we need to redesign physical education kits to allow students to feel comfortable in lessons and then need to provide this sort of kit for those who struggle to bring it to school (for whatever reasons)?

 

Yes we should!

 

Why?

 

Because these are tools to help us broaden the appeal of physical education for all – especially (perhaps) the least able. These are ways to inspire children to be involved and to understand themselves as physical learners. However, these are not the solutions but are important tools in the journey towards a more inclusive approach to learning in physical education. Others supported this notion (although I apologise if I am putting words into their mouths).

 

MatthewKoogler said:

@DrAshCasey kids shld nvr fail, but look at it in context of being prepared for lifetime of activity r u ready to hit the gym or go play?

 

MatthewKoogler said:

@DrAshCasey look at standard of lifetime activity or being ready to participate. its legitimate life skill to be sweaty and in school/work

 

rickweinberg said

@DrAshCasey thank you so much for responding. Gym should b designed 2 avoid humiliation & advocate participation. Remove obstacles

 

Filling a gap (or just another brick in the wall)

Websites. We see lots of them every day; scores in a week, hundreds in a month (you get the idea) but what makes the good ones stand out? Why do people return to a website? We are supposed to be in an age of web 2.0 where everything is about interaction and yet a lot of websites annoy me still. They about a message – well actually several messages – put rather than refine and concentrate that message websites seem to be web:utations. It’s like powerpoint and keynote presentations where people replicate their entire work into a 20 second presentation. I am put off my poor websites and tend to go somewhere else. Either that or I simply start my whole experience on a downer.

So...imagine my motivation to create a high impact, simple and usable website that actually gets used. Likewise...imagine my trepidation as I now come to unveil the storyboard via my blog.

The idea of this website is that it is simple to look at. It is easy to navigate. It is a place where people want to spend some time. That’s it really. So can I ask for some comments based on three factors:

1) Looks good

2) Looks easy to navigate around

3) Might be somewhere I am interested in visiting more than once.

The images are currently just flats. The links don’t work and are really just images. So as they say ‘the first taste is with the eye’ – what is the first visual impression like?

Homepage

http://www.phlite.co.uk/peprn/index.html

Research Network

http://www.phlite.co.uk/peprn/network.html

Blog

http://www.phlite.co.uk/peprn/blog.html

Research into the use of technology in Physical Education

The dominant discourse in physical education over the last three decades has been focused on the staid pedagogical foundation of the subject. The teaching of physical education seems to have been set and generations of teachers have been content to replicate the practices of their teachers and their teachers' teachers. This traditional, teacher-led embodiment of physical education has been described as 'not fit for purpose' by numerous academics (see Kirk, 2010; Lawson, 2009; Siedentop, 2002 as examples in the last decade alone). In his recent book physical education futures Kirk (2010) described the current and very dominant pedagogy that thrives in the gymnasium and on the sports field around the world as "physical-education-as-sport-techniques." This approach foregrounds the teaching of the isolated techniques of games and activities ahead of understanding and game appreciation. Furthermore, Kirk (2010) believed that the ability to compartmentalise physical education as a technique-based subject into the rigorous time demands of the timetable has further exacerbated the dominance of this approach to teaching. In proffering other approaches, or models of instruction (hereby called models-based practices) Metzler (2005) argued that current instructor-led approaches to teaching in physical education placed content (i.e. the area of activity i.e basketball, athletics, gymnastics etc) at the operating centre of physical education rather than aligning teaching, learning and content. Matters are further confused when considering Lawson's (2009) argument that physical education is not capable of educating in a post-industrial age.

The demands of the 'digital age' prompted Richard Riley, the former United States of America's Secretary for Education, to suggest that we are currently preparing students for jobs that don't yet exist, using technologies that haven't been invented in order to solve problems we don't even know are problems yet. The disparity between this message and the current use of technology in physical education is stark. Up to now, using technology in physical education may have actually reinforced the "physical-education-as-sport-techniques" concept by often focusing on the micro analysis of skill learning, giving the impression that this is the only valid application of technology in physical education. However, the use of technology in schools is expanding at an exponential rate and yet its beneficial use in physical education is barely known. A number of innovative practitioners from around the world have started to incorporate interactive web 2.0 applications (e.g. blogs, wikis, iPads and iPods, flip cameras, online documents and surveys) into their teaching of physical education but do these work? In some reasons technology is seen more than an add on:

In New South Wales we have a multi faceted syllabus designed to explore the individual and their interaction with the world holistically - relationships, sound decision making, individual and community health to name a few. Using technology to complement and enhance our work as teachers seems to be an imperative, not a choice. (Jones, 2010)

In other global discourses mandatory physical education classes have been identified as the key opportunity to 'encourage' school-age children to be involved daily in 60 minutes or more of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (Chow, McKenzie, & Louie, 2009; Strong et al., 2005). Indeed such physical activity engagement is seen as an primary goal of physical education (National Association for Sport and Physical Education, 2004; Puhse & Gerber, 2005; World Health Organization, 2004) in light of growing obesity and type II diabetes epidemics (Chow, McKenzie, & Louie, 2009). In light of the changing health climate is there is a strong increase in technology in schools who are seeking to use technology tools that promote activity engagement.

Despite considerable funding to allow information and communication technology (ICT) to make "a significant contribution to teaching and learning across all subjects" (Department for Education and Skills, 2003, p. 7) physical education was, until the recent national curriculum revamp in 2007, the only subject without a statutory requirement for its use (Tearle & Golder, 2008). Unfortunately, and despite the explicit need for ICT to be used in physical education at Key Stage 3 (11-14 years old), the extent to which it is recommended is for recording and reviewing performance and tracking personal progress (Tearle & Golder, 2008). It must be acknowledged that ICT hardware and software cost money which in terms limits the ability of schools to purchase and maintain up-to-date equipment. Furthermore some physical education teachers see the use of any technology or innovation as detracting from the core purpose of the subject i.e. to get people moving to learning (Casey, 2010). Finally there is as yet little evidence that shows that a) students engage with technology in its many forms and b) how the use of technology in physical education might impact on their i) dispositions to be physically active and ii) their embodied self-identities. Indeed, does such micro-analysis and assessment technology lead to greater involvement in physical activity and does it enhance – or merely reinforce – the staid pedagogies of physical education?

This PhD will critically explore the impact of technology on teaching and learning in physical education in enhancing student understanding and disposition towards the subject. It will be about exploring and discovering what works, what doesn't and what works best. This "will certainly be a question on many PE teachers' lips as they strive to introduce technology into their classroom in a meaningful and valid way. Is it worth it? Should I do it? Will it help?" (Jones, 2010).

References

Casey, A. (2010). Practitioner research in physical education: Teacher transformation through pedagogical and curricular change. Unpublished PhD thesis, Leeds Metropolitan University.

Chow, B.C., McKenzie, T.L., & Louie, L. (2009). Physical activity and environmental influences during secondary school physical education. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 28, 21-37.

Jones, B. (2010, July 21). [Comment to blogpost: research into use of technology in physical education]. Physical education practitioner research network. Retrieved July 21, 2010, from http://www.peprn.com/2010/07/research-into-use-of-technology-in.html#comments

Kirk, D. (2010). Physical education futures. London: Routledge.

Lawson, H. A. (2009.) Paradigms, exemplars and social change. Sport, Education & Society, 14(1), 97-119.

Metzler, M.W. (2005). Instructional models for physical education. Scottsdale, AZ: Holcomb Hathway.

National Association for Sport and Physical Education (2004). Moving into the future: National standards for physical education (2nd ed). Boston: McGraw Hill.

Puhse, U., & Gerber, M. (Eds.). (2005). International comparison of physical education: Concepts, problems, prospects. Oxford, UK: Meyer & Meyer Sport.

Siedentop, D. (2002). Content knowledge for physical education. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 21(4), 368.

Strong, W.D., Malina, R.M., Blimkie, C.J., Daniels, S., Dishman, R., Gutin, B., et al. (2005). Evidence based physical activity for school-age children. The Journal of Pediatrics, 146, 732–737.

Tearle, P., & Golder, G. (2008). The use of ICT in the teaching and learning of physical education in compulsory education: how do we prepare the workforce of the future? European Journal of Teacher Education, 31 (

World Health Organization (2004). Global strategy on diet, physical activity and health. Geneva: World Health Organization, The Fifty-seventh World Health Assembly.

Being a Piano Player

When I was a young rugby player someone said to me "there are two types of Rugby players: Piano Carriers and Piano Players and you, my son, are a carrier; now let the players' play and the carriers' carry." He was less than subtly telling me that as a forward I should do the heavy lifting and haulage work while those fleeter of foot (and of thought) did the virtuoso stuff. I have always remembered that analogy (and as a back row forward tried to ignore it) but it recently struck me as an apt way of considering my change of direction.

Before I started my further education soiree I was a piano carrier. I was happy doing the work at the coal face: teaching the lessons that I needed to before going outside to shoulder an extra-curricular workload that was worthy of my position as physical education teacher/sports team coach. I didn't baulk at these demands; in fact I embraced them as the most important aspect of my choosen vocation. I loved the role and was happy to carrying the responsibilities of 1^st XV coach and join my peers in other schools in this prestige position among coaches.

It wasn't until I began to look at my role as a teacher of physical education through my master's degree that I began to even acknowledge the role of carrier that I had assumed upon graduating as a physical education teacher. I was happy with my role as a doing, and none thinking (apologies to any piano carriers reading this), teacher who did everything he could to maintain the status quo. However, the more I read and began to understand the more I wanted to play a different role. I didn't just want to be the 'fella' who moved the piano about I wanted to tickle the ivories. The problem was that I didn't know anything but the carrier's role I was taught by my teachers (in other words to teach as they had taught). I needed a new way of thinking if I was going to aspire to be a pedagogical virtuoso (or even just a journeyman). Therefore I had to learn. Indeed I would almost argue that I had to learn a new trade from the ground up and that was where my Master's helped to generate a little momentum and my PhD allowed me to really study – not only a new trade but also the ways in which I started to implement the new tricks and 'ways' of teaching I was undertaking.

So in summary. Further education helped me to see the piano as an instrument to be played in many different ways rather than simply as something to be hauled about in the time honoured way. This was a gift that placed me on a long pathway towards become a better teacher.

Student-designed games

I started working with student-designed games (SDG) last year and was excited by the depth of learning it engendered in my pupils. I have subsequently left secondary education and now work in a university but my interest in SDG has remained. We have started to use snippets of these ideas with our student teachers and I have been exploring the finding from my research on these SDG units but most interestingly I have persuaded and encouraged a school near the university to try it for themselves. This blog has emerged as a result of the interviews I conducted on Tuesday and the response on twitter to my tweet about it by @Darcy1968 who said that this "sounded like a good conversation to share."

Physical education, it seems, is like marmite i.e. you either love it or you hate it. As I have said before the talk about it on twitter is not often positive. The school I am working with had a group of 13-14 year old students who were taking phys ed because they had to and were predominately in the 'hate it' camp (either that or the "I want to be 'busy and happy and then I might be good' category"). In other words they were disaffected. The teachers reported that the pupils in the year above were a similar group and that their attitude to phys ed had crumbled into dissent or an unwillingness even to bring kit. In an effort to avoid the disillusionment of another group of students the phys ed department, after seeing a session on games-making that I had done, wanted to be involved.

This unit has been running for seven weeks now (or twenty-one 45 minute lessons) and the games are now ready to be played. The basic structure of the unit was for the students to design a game, from scratch, that could be played by small groups of their peers. They started the designs of their games on paper and then tried them out on the school's netball/tennis courts. Through cycles of testing, trialling (where other teams played their games and gave feedback) and re-design the students now have a 'new' game. These games will be played, each in turn, in a sport education season next academic year.

I was privileged enough to interview the teachers on Tuesday and I was intrigued by their responses to two questions: 1) How did you perceive the students' responses to the unit? 2) What differences did you find between participation in this unit and their previous games participation?

Both teachers felt that the unit had worked well but that it had been a challenge. This challenge had emerged from a number of significant factors. Firstly their role had changed. They didn't teach in the way they normally did and their voice was no longer dominant. They were taking more of a back seat in terms of classroom management, which in turn allowed them to work more closely with their students. However, this also meant that the relationship between teacher and student changed. It was this change that baffled them at first as they tried to reconsider the language and approach that they should now use in their teaching. Secondly, they felt that they weren't giving enough to these lessons. It was almost as if they felt that they had to work even harder because they were being studies by me (and a colleague) and were also studying their own teaching. They were disappointed that their other teaching responsibilities sometimes got in the way of the work they were doing with these students. This mirrors my PhD findings. Teachers want to succeed and when given the opportunity they want to throw themselves into the enhancement of teaching and, more importantly, student learning. Thirdly, they were delighted by the change in response by some of the most disaffected kids (i.e. those who thrive in the classroom but shy away from the physical nature of phys ed). They were being challenge to think and this appealed to them. Conversely, those in the "I want to just play" group didn't want to think and found that game-design got in the way of playing. Ironically, there was a reversal in the students who were enjoying physical education. However, from the anti-ablest perspective I have argued from earlier, this might not be considered a bad thing (?). Fourthly, the teacher felt that the students' enjoyment and elarning was sustainable and they were looking forward to next year when the games would be played rather than dreading the lessons that the older pupils were experiencing.

New ideas seem to drive enthusiasm. What's more new ideas and practices challenge teachers and students to consider things, in this case physical education, in a different light. The social construction of the subject is changed and with it so is the type and quality of the learning experience.

If you are interested in trying SDG them leave me a message or contact me on twitter at @DrAshCasey and I'll do what I can to help.

New ways to the problem of living

As those who follow me on twitter will know I have been at the 16 International Reflective Practice Conference this week exploring with other practitioners in nursing and education the notion of 'Reflection in Action.' I felt that it would be useful, and possibly mildly interesting, to try and tie the ideas I have encountered together in one place. This is not a rehearsed or re-written reflection/blog and therefore it will be emotive and unpolished. However, my twitter feed has served as a value place to start to consider my personal outcomes from the conference. I will relate my thoughts the tweets I have made about my experiences to date and the wonderful keynotes delivered by Ben Okri and Jenny Moon.

Reflection is part of my role as a teacher and the TDA standards for teachers has reflection embedded within it so I do feel that this a relevant discussion to have on this blog. I realise that this might not be everyone 'cup of tea' but I also felt that it was too good an opportunity to pass up.

So what has reflection meant to me this week? Ben Okri's keynote explored 'new ways to the problem of living' (as my title suggests) and, in my interpretation sought to examine the current problems he envisioned with the life lived as a human being. However, in respect to Ben's opening thoughts i.e. brevity is the missing quality of our age, I will try to keep my ideas short.

Jenny challenged the delegates to think of reflection as a different 'thing' depending on the medium through which is presented i.e. thinking, speech, writing, drawing, poetry, performance, acting, dancing etc and that it means different things in these different mediums. However, I am uncomfortable with the notions of drawing, poetry, performance, indeed anything but writing (or typing) as a vehicle for my own reflections. I guess, naively I suppose, that this relates to Ben's profound concern about what it means to be human and to live as a human inasmuch as I have become disassociated with these other forms of expression to such a degree that I am uncomfortable with the level of ineptitude I might show in using them. Ben suggested that there has been a fundamental disconnect between the arts and philosophy, and living as a human being. These things are no longer interconnected but instead we have become concerned with being artist rather than living as an artist. In other words, art is a means to an end rather than a lifestyle choice.

Being aware of my promise of brevity I will conclude in this paragraph with three fundamental concerns that Ben expressed: Failure, actuality and listening. Failure has become an end point. When we fail we stop. However, for those who strive and aspire to something 'else' failure is not an end point but just a landmark on the road to success. Drawing on the musings around Leonardo de Vinci Ben suggested that de Vinci knew what he would achieve before he started in. Therefore, failure should not be seen as a obstacle but should instead be seen as something to learn from and use as a springboard for future, and inevitable, success. Actuality, Ben suggested, was what we see i.e. I see hundred white swans and therefore all swans are white, and subsequently remains unchallenged. Actuality is Plato's shadows on the cave wall. In contrast reality is 'how things actual are' i.e. not All swans are white. Yet it is the disconnect between actuality and reality that hampers our ability to live. Finally, Ben suggested that listening with an empty mind was more important than hearing. He felt that we could hear things but not listen to them. I guess that that relates to our own reflection. We can write (or perform) but listen to our own voices. Yet it is in really listening that we find the reasons and ability to live life like a human being.

I am not sure that I have done justice to these ideas and on re-reading these words I am sure to want to explore them again in my own private spaces but they serve as a record in time of my ideas. I will leave you with a twitter poem written by Ben a line a day on twitter in January 2010 and which he open his keynote.

As clouds pass above our heads

So time passes through our lives.

Where does it go,

And when it passes,

What do we have to show?

We can plant deeds in time

As gardeners plant roses.

We can plant thoughts, or good words too

Especially if they are noble and true.

Time is an act of consciousness:

One of the greatest forces

Of the material world.

We ought to use time

Like emperors of the mind:

Do magic things that the future,

Surprised, will find.

We could change our life today

And seek out a higher way.

The Buddha sat beneath a tree

And from all illusion became free.

And as we travel on this life that is a sea

We can glimpse eternity.

We can join that growing fight

To stop our world being plunged into night.

We can wake to the power of our voice

Change the world with the power of our choice.

But there is nothing we can do

If we don't begin to think anew.

We are not much more than what we think;

In our minds we swim or sink.

If there is one secret I'd like to share

It's that we are what we dream

Or what we fear.

So dream a good dream today

And keep it going in every way.

Let each moment of our life

Somehow help the good fight

Or help spread some light.

The wise say life is a dream;

And soon the dream is done.

But what you did in the dream

Is all that counts beneath the sun.

The dream is real, and the real is a dream

Each one of us is a powerful being.

Wake up to what you are,

You are a sun, you are a star.

Wake up to what you can be.

Search, search for a new destiny

The hardest part...

And the hardest part

Was letting go, not taking part

Was the hardest part

And the strangest thing

Was waiting for that bell to ring

It was the strangest start

I could feel it go down

Bittersweet, I could taste in my mouth

Silver lining the cloud

Oh and I

I wish that I could work it out

Coldplay released this song (the hardest part) on the X&Y album and the lyrics always struck me as poignant. I felt that they reflected of my desire to change my position within the classroom and the difficulties that I experienced in shifting from the spotlight and into the wings. If, as William Shakespeare wrote, all the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players, then in my teaching I didn't fully understand when to enter and when to exit or that there were many roles for me to play. I had always believed that I wanted to teach and teaching for me was standing in the at the centre of learning and directing it like a conductor controls an orchestra. However, the more I read and the more I did, the more my lessons look like a jazz ensemble (i.e. an apparent jumble of sounds that looks effortless , sounds great and yet takes years of practice and a huge amount of practice).

The legendary golfer Gary Player once said, "The more I practice, the luckier I get" and this was certainly the case for me. However it was hard. Letting go of centre stage and allowing the pupils to control the pace of their learning was hard. I did feel that I was waiting for the school bell to ring as I watched them work. Yet my work, although done on the periphery, was now even more important. I was the script writer planning for the actors to get involved. I designed the stage and arrange for the props. I adapted when something went wrong and I prompted when the students forgot their lines. I managed the learning environment but I didn't coach the learner. I planned meticulously and I timed by interventions and developed the ability to question not answer. Finally, as Gary Player said I practiced and my lessons (somehow) got better and the learning got deeper and the pupils got more involved.

Change takes time and yes it can be like a rest. But in the long term it is hard and it takes practice and it is hard...however, it is worth it.

The Appliance of Science

I received my iPad a couple of days ago and I keep trying to find reasons to use it. It is wonderful as a toy but I am yet to really make it work for its money. I have an idea that it will work wonderfully and make the technologically enhanced (and maybe dependant) parts of my day even more enjoyable. However, it took me an hour (and a conversation with a very helpful lady at apple care support) this morning to get it to talk to iTunes this morning and on Tuesday it took me an hour or so to get the micro SIM I needed to make it work. I have shown as many people as I can make look how wonderful it is but I have yet to make an initial decision. Don't get me wrong...I love it...but what does it do? Over the last week or so, with the mad rush to get exams and assignments marked and cross-marked before the deadline on Monday I have had other technological hurdles to overcome that have slowed my progress and frustrated me.

 

Perhaps it is the efficiency of technology that when it goes wrong it is unexpected and therefore it is frustrating. Perhaps the fact that booting up a computer doesn't take the same amount of time as making an espresso (but rather it takes less time than it takes to drink one) that exacerbates our annoyance with any hiccups we encounter. Perhaps we are so caught up in technology that we want it to better than 'old fashioned' approaches that we make it do things that it is not yet capable of undertaking.

 

In physical education we are beginning to explore technology and my involvement as a blogger and a tweeter encourage me to get the iPad to see how far I could take it all. But when I mentioned flipcams to an experienced member of a local school he wondered what their use was outside of performance analysis. I said that we were using them for Vidpods and in game-making but that got me thinking. Where do we take them? A colleague described the use of camera's in Australia a decade and more ago to film a sport 'walk through.' The concept is that the camera goes through a game with students and they use them to voice the decisions that they are making in the game at the time they are making them. Almost like 'thinking out loud.'

 

It made me wonder where the other opportunities were for technology. How do we apply the science in teaching?

 

What can I do with the iPad in my work as a lecturer and teacher educator that I couldn't do with anything else? Imagine the resource I have in my hand in a practical where I show the students a exemplar and then send it to their mobile devices to use in their work. By syncing our technology we create and use opportunities that never existed before...now that is the appliance of science.

 

Is it time for an anti-ablest pedagogy?

We traditionally have an ablest approach to teaching. We definitely have an ablest approach to teaching physical education. Those who can are encouraged to do and those who don't or won't well there just not trying despite our best efforts. But it is these 'best' efforts that encourage those who can and discourage those who can't.

Let me explain my reasoning. 'The best' and 'the best of the best' are celebrated in physical education and we teach in such a way that it allows them to massage their egos. Take track and field athletics. We teach the athlete and laud the fastest, furthest and highest while those placed other than first are left trailing in the ego of the winner. The same in cross-country i.e. everyone starts together and the first placed runner gets to watch everyone else run in behind him or her. Are we encouraging the ablest to do well and discouraging the less able? Is it time we forgot about the best and helped everyone else? Is it time to forget about the egos of those who already love physical education and who would take part in anything regardless of the activity and concentrate on those whose egos we have constantly hammered throughout school physical education? Is it time to adopt an anti-ablest pedagogy?

A bit radical maybe but would we be better encouraging the least and less able to enjoy physical education and hope that we can inspire them to lead a healthy and active life-style? Should we focus on developing their mastery of an activity that they might enjoy and follow through as a lifelong activity? Is the established player less in need of our support? Should we be massaging a different ego? These are strange idea to a teacher who came into the subject with a coaches role in mind but I just wonder now if we have our priorities wrong. Are the ablest simply better disposed to lifelong physical activity? Research suggests that physical education has concentrated on sports technique for so long that a 'one-size fits-all' approach to teaching has become the norm. This hasn't discourage the ablest but has alienated the majority of less-able students. Should we throw the pedagogy out and prioritise those who 'just CAN'T do it?'

Let me know your thoughts?

Teaching Games for Understanding

This approach to teaching put the game first. However this is not a playing games just to keep students 'busy, happy and good' this is putting the game first so as to help students become intelligent performers. Teaching games for understanding (or TGfU) was developed at Loughborough University in the early 1980s as an alternative to the 'skills and drills' approach that dominated (and many would argue still does dominate) the practice landscape of physical education. Len Almond, David Bunker and Rod Thorpe offered and extolled this alternative approach to teaching games because of the one-size fits all approach to teaching in physical education. They argued that teachers taught techniques – like the overhead clear in badminton – when they were ready but not when it was developmentally appropriate. Furthermore they felt that in any given class there might be a student who had mastered the clear years previous while others would never master the shot. Finally, Bunker, Almond and Thorpe suggested that the clear was a pointless shot if a player didn't know when to use it effectively in the game.

 

Instead of this emphasis on techniques they developers of TGfU put the game first. Badminton (like other net and wall games) is about hitting the shuttle so your opponent(s) can't hit it back and returning all your opponents viable shots. By teaching students to understand this concept and apply their skills to the achievement of this aim Bunker, Almond and Thorpe believed that thinking players would be developed. The idea, therefore, was to teach game appreciation through the use of modified games. The following example (taken from a coach sessions I lead for teachers on Saturday) helps to frame my argument.

 

Basketball

The immediate emphasis was on a hierarchy of decisions based upon the role that the player was undertaking. There were four roles: 1) on the ball attacker (the player with the ball) 2) the off the ball attackers (all the other players on the ball carrier's team) 3) the on the ball defender (the player marking the ball), and 4) the off the ball defender. Each student had priorities based upon their role:

1) on the ball attacker (the player with the ball) – Scored, passed to someone in a better position to score, or dribbled to improve either their teams ability to score.

2) the off the ball attackers (all the other players on the ball carrier's team) – found space to receive a pass in

3) the on the ball defender (the player marking the ball) – Either tries to deny the score or gets the ball for his or her team.

4) the off the ball defender – denies the attacker space.

 

With the roles established split the group into four teams we played two half court 3v3 games. The modified rules were 1) no dribbling 2) if you shot and hit any part of the backboard or ring then you scored one point 3) if you scored a basket then you scored three points 4) a ball turned over when you were defending had to be passed out of your half before an attack on the basket could be made. In between the games I used question and answer sessions to get the student teachers to develop a basic understanding of the modifications. They suggested that they were trying to score from everywhere because it was easier to score but that they were very inaccurate.

 

We played 3 games and all the while I asked players to wear different coloured bibs. These bids represented the player's ability and the level of pressure the defence could put on the ball carrier. A red bib meant fully defence (i.e. the player could defend to the very best of their ability); a yellow bid meant partial defence (i.e. defenders could not get closer than 0.5 metre and could only use their hands to block and not steal the ball); a green bib meant that the player could not be marked closer than 1 metre and that the defender could only shadow them. Every player wore a different colour in each game to decide where the pressure was most suitable for them. For the rest of the session the players then wore their favoured colour (which they could modify by task i.e. good players but poor shooters might wear a different colour to buy themselves a little more time).

 

Such a modification allows students to be fully engaged in an adapted game (we later went on to change the target for the shot to the inner black box and the top part of the hoop, and the shooting range from anywhere, down through the three point line and then to the key; and finally introduced dribbling). Throughout the session (which was 3 hours long) players played in and against mixed ability teams and yet all profited from this system. In this way players were taught to think intelligently about the game, they started to 'read' the triggers that come from match play rather than doing everything in static drills. We covered shooting as a technique, and dribbling and then put it them quickly into a modified game.

 

For more information see: http://www.tgfu.org/ and download the Bunker, Almond and Thorpe's original paper.

 

Does Continued Professional Development do anything?

I am just reading up about continued professional development (CPD) and it simply doesn't seem to achieve anything of note. Of course I am talking in general terms but the research I am reading is certainly worrying. My own CPD, well at least until I started my personal higher degree acquisition programme, was simple. Normally it was a governing body award in a sport (i.e. Rugby Level 2, Hockey Level 1) or a qualification (i.e. bronze lifeguard or emergency first aid in the workplace) or occasionally it was a course that the school wanted me to do for my professional advancement (managing from the middle or leadership in physical education). With the exception of the 'doing things' qualifications such as being a first aider these were one day courses that never needed redoing and which stayed on my every increasing CV. Yet they were everything that they shouldn't really have been and very little of what they might have been.

 

• They were fun (which isn't a bad thing but I now feel it might have skewed by end-of-course evaluation which was judged predominantly on my satisfaction)
  
• They were one day and one-off courses with no follow-up
  
• The impact on teaching and learning in my classroom or department were never checked or monitored
  
• The impact on my long-term behaviour as a teacher was miniscule (and this was certainly never checked)
  

 

Since then I have engaged in a handful of what I consider highly ineffectual courses (not because of what I learnt but because of what I have forgotten as a result of their solitary impact in my very busy working life) and two highly effectual and satisfying courses. These two combined to last over 2000 days and were regularly followed up, they had a huge impact on the teaching and learning in my classroom and their impact on my behaviour as a teacher was so huge that it is hard to quantify at this time as I am still enjoying the results. The CPD I am talking about is action research.

 

CPD as action research allowed me, in the words of Kemmis (2009), to change my practice as a practitioner, understand my practice, and explore and appreciate the conditions in which I work. It was an opportunity to become aware of the potential benefits of educational research findings and it stimulated reflection and professionalism on my part rather than simply teaching me another way of doing the same again and again. I was not conscious of the ways in which I constructed my personal and practice knowledge about and around teaching before I engaged in action research. It was only through sustained and supported research that I can to fully appreciate what it was that I did as a teacher only to find out that I wanted to change what I did. However, action research was there to support me during the change for it allowed me to understand the long term behavioural and pedagogical changes that I was enacting.

Birth of the un-modern school?

In his book Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison Michel Foucault (1977) suggests that schools adopted their current form at around the same time as prisons, factories and barracks. Foucault's chapter Docile Bodies (pp. 135-169) supported the idea that the labour process (Hamilton, 1990) was at the heart of schooling. He indicated that the innovators of the eighteenth century believed that soldiers, prisoners and pupils alike could all be constructed out of "formless clay" by turning them slowly into the desired archetype through "automatism of habit" (p. 135). The manufacture of the pupil was thus achieved, Foucault believed, through the discipline of the minute:

Gradually – but especially after 1762 - the educational space unfolds; the class becomes homogeneous, it is no longer made up of individual elements arranged side by side under the master's eye. In the eighteenth century, 'rank' begins to define the great form of distribution of individuals in the educational order: rows or ranks of pupils in each class, corridors, courtyards; rank attributed to each pupil at the end of each class and each examination; the rank he obtains from week to week, month to month, year to year; an alignment of age groups, one after another; a succession of subjects taught and questions treated, according to an order of increasing difficulty. And, in this ensemble of compulsory alignments, each pupil, according to his age, performance, his behaviour, occupies sometimes one rank, sometimes another; he moves constantly over a series of compartments – some of these are 'ideal' compartments, marking a hierarchy of knowledge or ability, other express the distribution of values or merits in material terms in the space of the college or classroom. It is a perpetual movement in which individuals replace one another in a space marked off by aligned intervals. Foucault (1977, p. 147)

This extensive quotation shows that much of the eighteenth century notion of schools and schooling survives to the modern day. There are few inventions that have had such longevity and yet the social construction and reconstruction of the school has survived. I am not suggesting that the educational space described in Foucault's book endures unchanged, but there are substantial and fundamental similarities that have survived for nearly two hundred and fifty years.

[an extract from my PhD]

Creating a virtual staffroom

As I have said previously, I have secured funding available to create a physical education practitioner research network to serve the schools and teachers in the local area. However, I want to help to built something that:

• Is transformative
  
• encourages collaboration
  
• is inclusive
  
• is supportive of all those who get involved
  
• encourages a pedagogy of physical education that is innovative and student-centred
  
• allows teachers a platform for personal and professional development
  
• is flexible enough for a post-industrial age
  

Yet, now I am at an impasse. I don't want to rush into anything and am looking for help. I have a rough idea of how I might like the website to look but the content is still unclear. This is where I seek help. Please comment on this blog, or on your own blog, about the skeleton upon which to hang these aspirations:

• What simple, easy to navigate and inclusive facilities should be housed on this website?
  
• What should teachers be able to access from here?
  
• What support do I need to offer?
  
• What tools can I use to invite busy teachers into this virtual learning environment?
  
• How do I create a PLN?
  

Thanks, in anticipation of your help

Ashley

I'm a teacher….get me into here!

This is the sentiment that I would like to inspire in the teachers in the local community. Continued Professional Development (CPD) in Education and physical education has been derided and some have described it as being ineffectual (at best). Why?

Because it's:

• a one-off
  
• content rather than practice orientated
  
• unsupported past the actual course
  
• chosen by the school rather than the teacher
  
• its poorly delivered
  
• expensive to go on the course
  
• expensive to cover the teacher with a supply teacher in school
  
• often a national governing body award
  
• renowned as being good if it finishes early and has a nice lunch
  

The aim of the physical education practitioner researcher network is to support the CPD of its members. How?

By being:

• free
  
• providing free supply cover that is paid out of the funding grant
  
• sustained over four, related and supported workshops across the academic year
  
• delivered by physical education teacher educators
  
• supported by practitioner researchers with experience of research physical education in school
  
• a potential part of a higher degree
  
• followed by a nice lunch
  
• supported through a Professional Learning Network (PLN)
  
• supported through a bespoke website
  

It is the last two that I need help with. I have used a wiki before to support my secondary school students when they were making their own games (see Hastie, Casey and Tarter, 2010) but I haven't instigated a PLN or, to use @TomFullerton's words, developed an inquiry group with a virtual extension. The conceptualisation and design of this extension (in the form of a webpage) is the position that I am currently in and to which I am turning to a wider community for help. What follows is the original proposal that secured the first year's funding.

Proposal

Introduction

The purpose of the project is to contribute to the development of new and innovative approaches to teaching and learning of physical education by facilitating the creation of a collaborative network of practitioner researchers in local schools (Bedfordshire and environs). The practitioner research network (PRN) will be a means of supporting teachers' continuing professional development in becoming reflective practitioners and in conducting systematic practitioner research. As such, the PRN is intended to provide a location for developments in physical education, in particular through models-based practice (Metzler, 2005; Kirk, 2010). The recent PhD study undertaken and completed by Casey (2010) has shown the difficulties of undertaking a sustained practitioner research project in isolation. This remoteness, which could liken to the loneliness of the long distance runner, would be lessened, rationalised or removed through the PRN.

Practitioner research can be defined as: "a deliberative process for emancipating practitioners from the often unseen constraints of assumptions, habit, precedent, coercion and ideology." Carr and Kemmis (1986, p. 192)

A useful summary of the way the term 'practitioner research' is used was given by Cochran-Smith and Lytle (2007, 25) when they described it as "a conceptual and linguistic umbrella to refer to a wide array of education research modes, forms, genres, and purposes." They argue that the expression encompasses a range of educational research methods including: action research; teacher research; self study; narrative (or autobiographical) inquiry; the scholarship of teaching and learning; and the use of teaching as a context for research (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 2007, 25).

In grouping these six genres of research Cochran-Smith and Lytle (2007) went on to justify their choices by exploring the shared features that cut across the various versions and variants. The primary aspect of all forms of practitioner research, they said, is the notion that the practitioner himself or herself takes on the role of researcher. Secondly, practitioner research works on the premise that in order to comprehend, and therefore improve practice, the interplay of power relationships and the workplace have to be expressly understood in the context of daily work. Finally, the very same professional context is the site of any practitioner inquiry and the "problems and issues that arise from professional practice are taken up as topics of study" (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 2007, 26). It is this investigation of 'problems and issues' that is missing from our understanding of teacher development through school-based research.

There is an abundance of research in education about the effectiveness of this approach yet there has been little written in physical education to indicate that such a process is as effective. Indeed, as Armour (2006) recently wrote, practitioner research in its many guises is research that begins with "I" but ends with "you" and "we" as a profession. There is currently a dearth of literature around sustained programme of practitioner research in physical education. Many studies have involved physical education practitioners (See as examples: Almond, 1986; Dyson & Rubin 2003; Dyson & Strachan 2000; McMahon & MacPhail, 2007) but have been written for a different purpose. Little research has shown how the school as an institution facilitates and constrains the development of teachers through their own actions. Yet, as Almond (1986, 4) surmised:

Teachers cannot be expected to monitor and appraise all the time, but planning, teaching and thinking about one small unit of work can have a powerful effect. The course participants expressed the view that they had learning more about their teaching, their understanding of games and their pupils. They identified a change in their thinking as a consequence of examining their practice.

Objectives of the project

The principal objective of the project is to create a PRN that strives to improve the quality of physical education in schools. The funding gained would allow us to offer continued professional development (CPD) to practitioners through the establishment of the PRN. We will do this initially by establishing a series of four half-day workshops for teachers centred on practitioner research. The need for such CPD is important given the recent indication that recent provision has been "woefully inadequate" (Borko 2004, 3) and that the traditional "sporadic one-off, one-day, off-site courses contradict everything we know about the ways in which people are most likely to learn" (Armour 2006, 204). In contrast, the PRN would allow us to engaged teachers in meaningful and sustainable collaborations that gave us the opportunity to locate CPD in the community. Furthermore it would allow us to attract teachers to engage in masters or research-based higher and become partners in our own research.

References

Almond, L. (1986). Coventry Curriculum Development, Games: Coventry teachers explore...teaching for understanding. Coventry, England: Elm Bank Teachers' Centre.

Armour, K.M. (2006). The way to a teacher's heart: narrative research in physical education. In D. Kirk, D. Macdonald, & M. O'Sullivan (Eds.) The Handbook of Physical Education. (467-485). London: Sage

Armour, K. (2006). Physical education teachers as career-long learners: A compelling research agenda. Physical Education & Sport Pedagogy, 11(3), 203-207.

Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3-15.

Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming Critical: Education, knowledge and action research. London: Falmer.

Casey, A. (2010). Practitioner Research in Physical Education: Teacher Transformation through pedagogical and curricular change. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis: Leeds Metropolitan University.

Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S.L. (2007). Everything's ethics. In A. Campbell & S. Groundwater-Smith (Eds.). An ethical approach to practitioner research: Dealing with issues and dilemmas in action research, 24-41. London: Routledge.

Dyson, B., & Rubin, A. (2003). How to implement cooperative learning in your elementary physical education program. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance 74, 48-55.

Dyson, B., & Strachan, K. (2000). Cooperative learning in a high school physical education program, Watikato Journal of Education, 6, 19-37.

Kirk, D. (2010) Physical Education Futures London: Routledge.

McMahon, E., & MacPhail, A. (2007). Learning to teach sport education: The experiences of a pre-service teacher. European Physical Education Review, 13(2), 229-246.

Metzler, M.W. (2005) Instructional Models for Physical Education, Scottsdale: Holcomb Hathaway (2nd Edition).

The expertise of the practitioner

Teachers have suffered from bad press of late (and some would argue not just of late). Their professionalism has been questions and every kind of third party, from politicians to business 'gurus', has lined up to take a shot at them and find ways of limiting their creativity and controlling their development. The ability of the teacher to make decisions about the learning of their pupils has been eroded and the confidence of the practitioner is being systematically dismantled by a succession of governments, ministers and departments keen to find scapegoats for falling social standards and anti social behaviour under a mantra of 'it wasn't like this in my day.' The recent example of a science teacher being goaded and manipulated by his class, drawing upon their knowledge of his previous ill-health, to service their desire for 'a laugh' is an example of the pressures of modern teaching. I do not condone his behaviour just hold this case up as a sad indictment on the modern world. Yet, will such revelations of structured and vindictive 'teacher bullying' led to greater autonomy for teachers or greater attempts at control by our governments?

Research has long suggested that the teacher works beyond the limits of their subject(s) – which is defined by knowledge and method – and works in a more general role that supports the mission of the school, the innate human desire of pupils and their parents towards learning and the need to cooperate with colleagues and other educationalists. The multifarious role of the teacher as subject and school expert places them in an ideal position to support and develop innovations in ways that best suit their particular environments. This degree of expertise is unprecedented in government and yet our school leaders are offered thousands of pages of systemic advice. Is not time that we acknowledged the bespoke knowledge of our teachers and trusted them to instigate practices that are particularly beneficial to their students?

Learning is not simply a case of mimicry. We need to challenge learners, regardless of their age, to confront their preconceptions and discover and construct new meaning from their experiences. If we know so much about how we learn, and if we acknowledge the localised expertise of teachers, then why do we persist with a 'top-down' system of educational reform? Is it not time that our 'leaders' acknowledge the 'nous', wisdom and common sense of our classroom practitioners and instead of giving them instructional diktats they are afforded the respect and encouragement that their professionalism warrants. Success comes in 'cans' not 'can nots' and if our childrens' teachers are continually devalued then we run the risk of paralysing them through fear of recrimination and indictment. The measures of adequacy that seem to have entered the vernacular of society have made commonplace a desire to blame the teachers for the moral decline that we are currently experiencing. Freedom to inspire rather than the compliance of mediocrity is what is required to redress issues of anti-social behaviour, poor health and fears of obesity and even to motivate the one child who might win Olympic gold or a Nobel Prize.

Acknowledge the expertise of the practitioner and watch these wonderful individuals inspire our children to do the rest!

Physical Education is…?

I saw this argument discussed (or mentioned) on twitter and thought I would try and answer it. I am not sure that there is a simple response but it tests my understanding and my ability to articulate a balanced argument. It is worth noting that (if you have even read this far) that I am not going to go back and edit this so you are getting my thoughts as 'shot from the hip.' I guess that that is my idea of what a blog should be. Not something rehearsed but something that comes from the heart and mind in one iteration. So…physical education is…?

This house believes that physical education is…

About doing …

• Physical education is a practical activity that serves as a break from the rigours of life (whether these are the stresses of work or the confusion and melee of school). It is a vehicle for healthy living and while it has long been associated with traditional team sports (like football, Hockey, basketball, rugby, cricket etc) and leisure activities (like running, cycling, aerobics etc) anything that improves our general well-being should be enough to satisfy the population.
  
• Sport is the essence of physical education. It is the doing or watching that is important and besides sport allows us to develop leadership skills, work cooperatively and prepares us for the cutthroat world outside the comfort of our own homes (or for some within their homes and neighbourhoods).
  
• Physical education is about national sporting success. If kids don't like competition or elite sports then they have to acknowledge that fact and find something else to do. As long as the country does well on the world stage then the forms of physical education as sports participation is a worth incarnation of sport in schools.
  
• No pain, no gain. If something is easily obtained then it is not as worthwhile. The struggles inherent in working hard (and beyond your comfort and ability range) are good for you and certainly builds character. Adversity will end your childhood and make an adult of you.
  

About informed participation …

• It is not enough to do. Those who engage in physical activity need to be, in the words of Daryl Siedentop, 'competent', 'literate' and 'enthusiastic' participants. They need to be able to improve their personal ability so that they can succeed to their best. They need to understand physical activity so that they can be critical consumers i.e. they can watch or play and understand the rules and the nuances of the activity. Finally they need to take part for taking parts sake not because someone tells them to. Coercion is not a pathway to lifelong physical activity but is a repeatedly reissued invitation for physical education to be mocked in the media and across social networking sites.
  

  
   

  From twitter over the last 24 hours
  

  • Physical
    education! Ugh
    
  • A very bad time at physical
    education class
    
  • physical
    education works sucks.
    

    
     

• A survey undertaken in the UK http://www.realbuzz.com/articles/top-10-most-popular-sports/ suggests that of the top ten most popular participation sports for men and women on one was a team game. Yet our schools teach team games ahead of anything else. Furthermore when we try something else we get lambasted by the press http://www.telegraph.co.uk/lifestyle/6338489/Yoga-and-circus-skills-replace-school-rugby.html .
  
• Does this mean that physical education is about sport and elite participation or does this mean that the way physical education is viewed is wrong? Take the example of exercise makes you thin and thin is healthy. How much of that statement is true? Looked at like that… then not much… but that is the crux of the argument that we put across on a daily basis. We have made associations so broad that anything seems to be possible and which leads people to extreme behaviours rather than healthy lives.
  
• We need to inform our children, parents and adults about what good and safe living is and surely that should start in physical education.
  

Is academic…

• Physical education and sport lends, borrows, gives, and shows (among other things) examples of the workings of the human body to the world. http://sportsmedicine.about.com/ Many of our passions about sport come through our heroes and role-models and a plethora of sports jobs have grown up around the field http://www.uksport.gov.uk/jobs/ . Indeed how many people went to the Beijing Olympics and how many were actual competitors? This is a huge employer and people should know the options.
  
• However, some don't think that physical education equates to being academic (Twitter: Joke for tomorrow: I'll be sitting for a PE theory test! Yes, physical
  education. HAHAHA!) yet with kinesiology departments and sport science departments and physical education and sports studies departments http://www.beds.ac.uk/departments/physical have we overlooked an important part of a children education?
  
• Some don't even know that PE means physical education – what went wrong (Twitter: pe?? as in physical education? Or oh PE is Physical Education xD like gym lol). It seems that gym has replaced lifelong physical activity or learning about how the physical occurs. There is an association with physical education as doing i.e. Correct me if I'm wrong but PE stands for PHYSICAL Education! (thanks to twitter for some life conversations) rather than understanding. Have we turned our subject into a 'doing' only subject?
  

  
   

  
   

  If you have got this far then thanks for sticking with me.
  

  
   

  Education has some issues to address and physical education has some decisions to make…i.e. what are we and what do we do?