38
those activities which the class teacher undertakes within the school during physical
education classes (Martin, 2000). Using this definition it is clear to see how such an
area is as applicable to infants as it is to sixth class. Perspectives in the 1971 curriculum
suggested that senior pupils only should experience outdoor activities. This may be due
to the fact that the activities specified were of the ‘outdoor pursuits’ type as opposed to
school-based activities. The Physical Education Curriculum (Government of Ireland,
1999b) on the other hand recommends that much of the O&AA strand can take place in
the school itself, particularly at infant level, where basic skills are taught. Martin (2000)
agrees that the most dominant feature of O&AA for infants and older children alike is
the
adventure aspect, as the ‘outdoorness’ is not as crucial. Of all the strands, O&AA
seems to fair the worst with 89% (N=1,135) of fifth and sixth class children reporting
no exposure to the strand during physical education over the previous twelve months
(Woods et al., 2010). One of the reasons why O&AA may not be taught is that of all
the strand areas it is the one area where a teachers ‘apprenticeship of observation’
(Lortie, 1975) is of little help as few if any teachers would have experienced O&AA in
school (or out). In the Irish colleges of education, the O&AA module, as part of the
physical education undergraduate programme, only came into being in 2004.
In summary, it is apparent that there are a variety of areas of learning within the
physical education curriculum for children of all ages. What
appears crucial in terms of
physical education is the concept of a breadth of activities rather than depth at this age.
It is very evident, from the studies cited above, that children (especially those in the
senior classes) are not receiving the recommended allocation of physical education time.
We can also see that these children are not receiving a broad and balanced programme
which would involve experiencing at least five if not all six strands of the curriculum
over an academic year. Some improvements have been noted in recent research (Woods
et al., 2010) and at primary level that there has been an increase in children’s
experiences of some of the strands. However, it should be noted that in these studies
cross-sectional data are being used, so its purpose is to highlight trends,
and not track
children over time, therefore they do not provide accurate reflections of improvement in
children’s experiences. All studies reported above, which involve children, are based
on the responses of children aged 10-12 years whereby it is assumed that they will have
the ability to complete questionnaires and contribute to interviews. Children’s
comments on their experiences of physical education may also provide different
information than if their teachers were asked. This limitation and the lack of
39
observational data do not allow for objective evaluations. These qualitative methods are
expensive and time-consuming and require detailed training and
accurate assessment
tools. Establishing reliable research methods which can produce valid results from
young children ensuring the entire primary school voice is heard and acknowledged,
giving a more complete picture of the primary physical education landscape are
warranted.
‘Historically, elementary physical education programs have largely been left
untouched by efforts to evaluate their effectiveness or to hold schools or teachers
accountable for providing students with effective instruction’ (Rink & Hall, 2008, p.
217). In the United States, it is only South Carolina (as of 2008), that has a
comprehensive assessment program in primary physical education with ‘legislated
provisions for accountability at the school level’ (Rink & Hall, 2008, p. 217). There is a
dearth of independent evaluation of primary physical education practice in Ireland.
Further research should be longitudinal, to establish how content
and quality of physical
education provision changes over time. This would provide a more comprehensive
view of the status of physical education practice in primary schools. The issue of what
is quality physical education also needs to be addressed. A recent study in the UK
(Keay, 2011), evidenced best practice in physical education in 198 primary schools.
When asked to qualify what they meant by best practice, the respondents (partnership
development officers, teachers, coaches and local authority representatives from eight of
the English regions) identified competition and extra-curricular activities as indicators
of best practice. Whether these indicators can be considered best practice for 4-12 year
olds is questionable and there is a danger that it just caters
for the sporting or motor
elite. Another indicator highlighted in the study, was having a broad curriculum, but the
identified schools often focussed on specific activities. Child learning or achievements
were not mentioned as quality indicators. There is a gap between perceptions of
quality/best practice and what occurs in practice, and problems exist even where there
are clear structures and performance indicators. Research is needed that will examine
what is meant by quality physical education or best practice in
primary physical
education, and to what extent it is being achieved.
Dostları ilə paylaş: