Activating the curriculum: a socio-ecological action research frame for health and physical education

The health and physical education (HPE) profession needs to find alternatives to its individualistic and performative focus if it is to remain relevant and meaningful for all learners. This paper presents a way of framing HPE that helps to shift the focus from the individual as autonomous decision-maker, and goes beyond sport and fitness testing as the main contexts for learning. To do this we present the socio-ecological action research (SEAR) frame for unit development that was co-created and enacted over a six-month period involving dialogue between teachers, students, parents, researchers and community. This paper presents findings from semi-structured interviews, student artefacts and field notes collected as one component of a broader three-phase study which spanned three years. The data describe how generalist primary teachers (n=4) from a small Victorian community and their students (aged 8–10 years) tackled a unit of work that positioned centrally the everyday physical experiences of active school travel (AST). Teachers supported students in exploring barriers to their AST, and developing strategies that would counteract some of the negative perceptions that had limited their AST in the past. The findings suggest that the unit of work evolved from an exploration of AST into a much broader exploration of the whole community. This paper does not provide evidence for an alternative way to view HPE, rather it represents an embryonic exploration of how a SEAR frame might support teachers in applying inquiry-based pedagogies that extend beyond the individual as autonomous decision-maker, and promote opportunities for exploration and understanding of environmental, social and personal factors that influence our health and everyday physically active lives. Despite students being positioned as central actors within the SEAR frame, obtaining genuine student voice throughout the process proved challenging.     

Authentic inquiry-based learning in health and physical education: a case study of ‘r/evolutionary’ practice

Background: Greater understandings about how progressive pedagogies are interpreted and practiced within schools will be required if international calls to enhance relevance and meaning in Health and Physical Education (HPE) are to be realised. Little is understood about how inquiry-based units of work connected to real-life issues are enacted, engaged with, and generate deeper knowledge within a HPE context.

Purpose: This study explores learner outcomes and perceptions of engagement with an inquiry-based unit of work, Take Action, that aimed to provide young people with an opportunity to critically reflect on movement, investigate an issue important to them, and enhance their capacity to enact positive change for themselves and others.

Participants and setting: Forty-four students and three teachers from two secondary school settings participated in the research. Both schools were located in relatively low socio-economic status areas in southern metropolitan Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Data collection and analysis: An exploratory and evaluative study design that employed naturalistic inquiry, using qualitative semi-structured interview data, observational data, and analysis of learner-produced artefacts were used. Analysis drew upon authentic learning frames to explore elements of knowledge construction through disciplined inquiry and real-life application.

Findings: Take Action provided a unique experience of HPE for the students and teachers who engaged with it. It was a collaborative, learner-centred inquiry-based experience that most learners found to be engaging and authentic. Both teachers and learners lacked the foundational knowledge of the discipline and a sound understanding of a critical-inquiry process that would have allowed them to deconstruct and reconstruct new ideas in deep interconnected ways.

Conclusions: More support for teachers and students is needed to legitimate these types of approaches within broader curriculum contexts to support student learning. Specifically, foundational understandings of: socially critical approaches to critical inquiry that serve to enhance knowledge relating to learner-identified topics; learning intentions and authentic assessment and how these might align with inquiry-based learning; forming connections with external experts to support learners early in an inquiry process; and how to extend explorations and elaborations within the constraints of a congested and contested curriculum.     

Teachers as policy actors: co-creating and enacting critical inquiry in secondary health and physical education

Background: Critical inquiry approaches have been presented as one way of enhancing relevance in school-based education, and there have been calls from academia for its systematic use within health and physical education (HPE).

Purpose: This research explored how three Secondary HPE teachers co-constructed and enacted a unit of work (Take Action) that was underpinned by critical inquiry approaches. Drawing on the work of Stephen Ball we focus here on the different ways in which the three teachers interpreted, translated and enacted ‘Take Action’, and negotiated a shift away from the performative pedagogies of traditional HPE. Take Action is a co-constructed, inquiry-based unit of work that sought to provide an alternative to traditional and often exclusive HPE.

Data collection and analysis: A participatory action research approach was undertaken. Data were uncovered from qualitative interviews, classroom observations and field notes before, during and after the enactment of Take Action. Data were analysed using the qualitative data analysis software ‘Dedoose’ which facilitated coding. Data were analysed inductively across all sources utilising a constant comparative method. Analyses consisted of three phases of coding: open, axial and selective. Open coding involved the categorisation of data into themes and axial coding considered connections across the themes. Selective coding involved a refining and development of the previously identified themes, and then bringing the themes/codes together to tell a story about the teachers and their perspectives on the enactment of Take Action.

Findings: Three teachers co-constructed, translated and enacted Take Action, and whilst some challenges were universal, the process and outcomes unfolded quite differently for each. The two contextual factors that emerged as most influential were: (i) the structural support available for teachers and learners and (ii) the time available for the unit to be enacted, and for the teachers’ philosophies to be challenged and transformed. Take Action was one way of supporting teachers in responding to calls from policy-makers for more critical inquiry in HPE. Interpreting, translating and enacting Take Action challenged how teachers viewed their role in the learning process, the nature of HPE, and the breadth of their pedagogical repertoire.

Conclusions: The findings confirm that curriculum and policy are volatile and rarely mobilised as the creator/s intended. They highlight that the ‘fluidity’ of curriculum mobilisation persists, irrespective of whether the teachers have mental ownership over the process and/or are involved in its co-creation. The complexity that accompanies a shift towards ‘alternative’ ways of understanding and teaching HPE, however, means that calls from academia and policy-makers are unlikely to be fruitful unless: (i) there is an appreciation for each teacher's philosophies; (ii) each school culture is fully understood; (iii) the inevitable challenges are viewed as spaces to learn, reflect and move forward; and (iv) support comes in many forms depending on the teacher and the school. The findings confirm that whilst policy creates a particular context, it is the ideologies and histories that permeate teachers’ philosophies and school context that will ultimately dictate the policy process. This is not a problem to be solved but a process which we can learn in, through and about.     

Re-theorising inclusion and reframing inclusive practice in physical education

Inclusion remains a key political agenda for education internationally and is a matter that teachers across subject communities and phases of education are challenged to respond to. In physical education specifically, research continues to highlight that current practice often reaffirms rather than challenges established inequities. This paper critically explores the understandings of inclusion that contribute to this situation and addresses the challenge of advancing inclusion in physical education from conceptual and pedagogical viewpoints. DeLuca’s [(2013). “Toward an Interdisciplinary Framework for Educational Inclusivity.” Canadian Journal of Education 36 (1): 305–348] conceptualisation of normative, integrative, dialogical and transgressive approaches to inclusion is employed as a basis for critical analysis of current practice and for thinking afresh about inclusive practice in physical education in relation to curriculum, pedagogy and assessment. Analysis informs the presentation of a set of principles that are designed to assist teachers and teacher educators to transform inclusive practice in physical education and in doing so, realise visions for physical education that are articulated in international policy guidelines and contemporary curriculum developments.     

Breaking and making curriculum from inside ‘policy storms’ in an Australian pre-service teacher education course

ABSTRACT

How teacher educators respond as policy actors from inside spaces where multiple policies and discourses collide provides insights into the ways in which policy plays out in educational contexts. By engaging and working within the uncertain space of our own contextual ‘policy storm’ we provide a narrative of enactment highlighting the roles and actions of policy actors simultaneously constrained and inspired by policy. We use the policy actor framework [Ball, S.J., Maguire, M., Braun, A., & Hoskins, K. (2011a). Policy actors: Doing policy work in schools, Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 32(4), 625-639] to unpack policy meaning-making within university and faculty climates, teacher education, and curriculum reform in Health and Physical Education (HPE) in Australia. This paper has three tasks. Firstly, we set-up the conditions of uncertainty and possibility as a ‘policy storm’ and place where four disparate policies converged. Secondly, we provide an empirical and theoretical account of policy interpretation and enactment from the actors perspective. Finally, we test the policy actor framework to determine if it adequately describes our insider policy work. In moving beyond reductionist policy narratives we provide policy possibilities that illustrate enactment, are innovative, and explore the productive potential inside policy reform.     

Beyond games and sports: a socio-ecological approach to physical education

Acknowledging the performative sporting discourses which continue to dominate physical education, and the emerging focus on disease prevention within this context, this paper presents a socio-ecological framework for physical education that aims to shift the focus towards more multidimensional understandings of what it means to be ‘physically educated’. In doing so, we hope to prompt physical educators in schools and undergraduate programmes to more confidently employ intra-personal, inter-personal and environmental lenses through which to view and understand physical education, and therefore extend the gaze beyond activity-driven practice and ‘downstream’ exercise for health. The proposed framework draws upon established socio-ecological models and encompasses functional, recreational, health-related and performance-related physical activities. The multi-layered complexity associated with the field of physical education is reflected within the proposed socio-ecological framework. Through embracing complexity, particularly the interactions between layers of influence, the framework encourages exploration of the ‘physical’ beyond its subordinate components like fitness, body mass index, tactical awareness or motor skills. The framework is inclusive of games and sports but questions how these activities can be connected in the everyday lives of the learners. Importantly, the framework provided is not an approach to teaching and learning and, on its own, will do little to address the ongoing critique about the privileging of performative and health discourses within physical education. As they have in other fields, socio-ecological frames can provide a useful reference for the teaching and learning of physical education. To produce physically educated citizens in the broadest sense, teachers need to be supported, across multiple levels, to reposition their field to that of a connected specialism contributing to the whole curriculum and the communities within which they are located. It is our contention that socio-ecological frames can serve as useful tools to facilitate such a repositioning.