Teaching outdoor and adventure activities: an investigation of a primary school physical education professional development p

Research questions (secondary). 
Stage 1 
What were the practices and perspectives of the teachers during the 
implementation phase of the programme? 
What types of support were requested and around which areas most 
support required? 
Was support required to be contextualised and sustained? 
Were there indications being exhibited that either supported the 
programme or otherwise? 
What were the children’s opinions regarding the programme? 
What was the impact of the programme on the physical activity of the 
children, and the various lesson contexts, during physical education 
lessons? 
The follow-up study, stage two had the following additional research questions: 
Did teachers’ knowledge systems expand? 
Did contextualised professional development work? 
Did the teacher, school and facilitator partnership work and to what 
extent? 
Were there barriers to effective professional development? 
Did teachers become more effective in their teaching of O&AA? 

---

161 
What were the participants’ (teachers’ and children’s) reactions to the 
programme? 
What were the Principal’s thoughts and perspectives on the programme? 
Facilitation of the professional development programme.
The PDP delivered 
during both stages was provided on an individualised contextualised basis on site for 
approximately one hour a week for each teacher. This was facilitated according to the 
school’s physical education timetable (Appendix O). The researcher/facilitator was on 
site for the duration of the PDP to either, model lessons, team teach, offer a minor level 
of support or observe lessons and provide feedback in non-evaluative way. There were 
further opportunities for reflection during the focus groups, pre and post each stage of 
the PDP. Incidental conversations contributed to more informal support guided by 
social constructivist theory. Teachers were also provided with schemes, lesson plans 
and other necessary resources to help inform their learning. The lesson plans were 
linked to the curriculum and allowed for continuity and progression. The study was 
designed to cater for all circumstances, such as teachers changing class levels, facilities 
being unavailable due to other activities, teachers out sick etc. The support provided 
during the PDP changed as the programme progressed and this was anticipated when 
designing the programme. As the teachers continued to learn, their needs developed 
and changed. This change required the support to move from a more direct 
methodology of knowledge transfer, through modelling (stage 1), to a more indirect 
methodology, where-by the teachers began to plan and organise for themselves with the 
facilitator providing feedback (stage 2).