Faculty reflect on course planning

Faculty members' beliefs about educational purpose and the nature of their academic fields strongly influence how they plan introductory courses. Interviews with 89 faculty members teaching in diverse colleges and representing eight fields also identified faculty attention to student preparation, available textbooks, and locally important factors, but little attention to alternative instructional strategies during course planning. Based on the findings, the authors have developed a tentative general model of course design and related questions to guide future study.     

Revisiting the Narrative about Least Restrictive Environment in Physical Education

ABSTRACT

Since 1975, the implementation of the Least Restrictive Environment, a federal mandate of Public Law 94–142, has been historically challenging for physical educators and adapted physical educators. Confusion and misinterpretation of the law’s intent, as well as competing ideologies, have perpetuated failed Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) practice in the United States. The purpose of this essay is to revisit the conversation about LRE in PE and to provide direction for higher education’s role in addressing the issues. In doing so, a detailed historical context of the LRE is provided, followed by a discussion of the issues associated with the law that have emerged in the literature. Finally, future research directions to address these contemporary issues are presented to the readers.     

Testing a Model of Program Curriculum Leadership

This study tests the curriculum leadership framework that Stark and Lattuca adapted from Quinn's model of management styles. Chairpersons of departments nominated as effective in curriculum planning answered a survey about their leadership activities and styles. Factor analysis partially supported the model. Activities that chairs reported did not correspond well, however, with leadership styles they chose as most effective.     

Maximalist shoes do not alter performance or joint mechanical output during the countermovement jump

ABSTRACT

This study examined potential differences between maximally cushioned (MAX) shoes and standard cushioned (STND) shoes during countermovement vertical jump (CMVJ) performance. Twenty-one males (23[2] y; 86.5[15.4] kg; 179.8[6.3] cm) completed eight jumps each in MAX and STND shoes while three-dimensional kinematic and kinetic data were collected. Paired-samples t-tests (α = 0.05) and Cohen’s d effect sizes (ES) were used to compare the following variables: vertical jump displacement, jump time, hip, knee and ankle joint angles at the start of the countermovement, the end of the unloading phase, the end of the eccentric phase, and at takeoff, peak joint power, and the joint contributions to total lower extremity work during the eccentric and concentric phases. The ankle was more dorsiflexed at the end of the countermovement in the MAX shoe (p = 0.002; ES = 0.55) but greater plantarflexion occurred in the STND shoes at takeoff (p = 0.028; ES = 0.56). No other differences were observed. The result of this study suggests that unique ankle joint angular positioning may be employed when wearing MAX versus STND shoes. Since the unique ankle joint positioning did not alter jump performance, potential MAX footwear users might not need to consider the potential for altered CMVJ performance when determining whether to adopt MAX footwear.