Aligning Critical Physical Education Teacher Education and Models-Based Practice

TL;DR: In this paper, a case study was conducted in New Zealand to examine the role of critical pedagogy in the preparation and professional development of physical education teachers in the New Zealand curriculum.

Abstract: In 1999, the New Zealand government released a new Health and Physical Education (HPE) curriculum that reflected a fundamental shift from the traditional and dominant skill mastery approach. The "new" HPE curriculum was based on humanistic principles and supported by constructivist notions of teaching and learning within a critical pedagogy. Since this time, and a subsequent curriculum revision in 2007, the HPE curriculum writers have suggested that physical education (PE) teachers and physical education teacher education (PETE) students in New Zealand have struggled to understand the epistemological complexities and pedagogical implications of critical pedagogy in their practice. Therefore, this paper highlights the findings of a study that explored a New Zealand PETE program, in light of HPE within the New Zealand Curriculum (NZC). Additionally, and in light of the findings, the authors consider an examination of Kirk's (2013) concept of models-based practice as it could apply to the preparation and professional development of physical education teachers in New Zealand. The case study included nine volunteer participants, from a cohort of 32 students, who were nearing graduation from a critically oriented PETE program in New Zealand. Semistructured interviews were deployed and analyzed and reoccurring themes central to the purpose of the study identified and explored. The participants viewed movement contexts as being pivotal for learning in physical education and that the NZC had multiple educational aims and purposes. Participants also believed that PE teachers were required to move beyond direct instruction and implement a variety of teaching styles to achieve these multiple aims. However, the participants also shared misunderstandings and paradigmatic uncertainty around the critical and humanistic underpinnings of the NZC and failed to demonstrate an understanding of how this is enacted through critical pedagogy. The implications of this theory to practice nexus are further discussed in light of recent research debate around models-based practice.

Summary

Introduction

• 24 Physical Education (HPE) curriculum that reflected a fundamental shift from the traditional and dominant skill mastery approach.
• Since this time, and a subsequent curriculum revision in 2007, the HPE curriculum writers have suggested that physical education (PE) teachers and physical education teacher education (PETE) students in New Zealand have struggled to understand the epistemological complexities and pedagogical implications of critical pedagogy in their practice.
• Semistructured interviews were deployed and analyzed and reoccurring themes central to the purpose of the study identified and explored.

In the latter part of 20th century, teachers, teacher educators,

• And scholars keenly debated what they believed to be the content and curricula of PE and physical education teacher education (PETE).
• Today, there is general agreement that movement is an appropriate context for PE, but a growing number of physical educators believe that PE curricular, defined by movement and the acquisition of physical skills alone, may reduce it to mere physical activity with little educative value (Culpan & Bruce, 2007; Fyall, 2017; Philpot, 2016; Philpot & Smith, 2011).
• These assumptions include identifying 26 Aligning Critical PETE and Models-Based Practice the educational needs of a community or society.
• Culpan (2004) also promoted that the notion of student-centeredness had epistemologically and pedagogically challenged the EF’s conception of teaching and learning, as, in their view, the teacher was necessarily the focal point of the teaching and learning process.

In the context of this paper, this point will be discussed further

• In subsequent sections, but it is worthy of mention that the release and subsequent implementation of the NZC has raised many concerns about the epistemological and pedagogical challenges now presented to physical educators in New Zealand (e.g., Barker, 2008; Burrows, 2005).
• More recently, growing evidence in New Zealand suggests that PE teachers and PETE students may struggle to understand the pedagogical complexities of PE within the NZC and the implementation of its critical foundations through a critical pedagogy (Fyall, 2016, 2017; Philpot, 2016; Philpott & Smith, 2011).

Critical Pedagogy

• CP arises from the need to create an environment where conscientization can occur and where social and cultural inequities can be exposed (Freire, 1970).
• The evolution of CP from critical theory consistently demonstrates a passion for devolving hierarchy and power inequity within an educational setting and a will for promoting social change (Fernandez-Balboa, 1997b; Freire, 1970; Giroux,.

In this sense, the authors suggest that those advocating for critical

• Perspectives within education may be seen as counterproductive to their intended aims because they attack the hierarchies, values, and 30 Aligning Critical PETE and Models-Based Practice beliefs of traditional educational settings.
• It is suggested that critical pedagogues assume a position of moral superiority and are often criticized and alienated for it (Sicilia-Camacho & Fernandez-Balboa, 2009).
• This apparent inability of PE teachers in New Zealand to align curricular aims with appropriate epistemological decisions and pedagogical strategies has the authors pondering the possibilities of models-based practice (MBP) within a critically oriented curriculum and associated PETE program.
• These possibilities may indeed enable PE teachers and PETE students to consider a more conciliatory and modest approach to CP (Tinning, 2002) and indeed begin to activate their own sense of agency (Sicilia-Camacho & Fernandez-Balboa, 2009).

Models-Based Practice

• Kirk (2013) wrote, A models-based approach has been advocated as a means of overcoming the serious limitations of the traditional approach to physical education.
• (p. 973) In a special edition of the Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, Dyson, Kulinna, and Metzler (2016) clarified that MBP can be applied on two levels—superordinate and instructional.
• Effective implementation of these models requires and encourages teachers to work collaboratively with students as a result of implementing constructivist-based learning environments.
• At superordinate and instructional levels, the models discussed included Health Optimizing Physical Education (Dudley, Goodyear, & Baxter, 2016), Cooperative Learning (Dyson, Colby, & Barratt, 2016), Personal and Social Responsibility (Gordon, Jacobs, & Wright, 2016), Sport Education (Hastie & Wallhead, 2016), Tactical Games (Harvey & Pill, 2016), and Outdoor and Adventure Education (Sutherland & Legge, 2016).
• The genesis of this paper originates from a research study looking to investigate the beliefs of a cohort of PETE students nearing graduation after having recently completed a 4-year critically oriented PETE program in New Zealand.

The Research Setting: The Critically Oriented PETE Program

• The participants were enrolled in the 4-year critically oriented PETE program.
• The program’s underpinning philosophy emphasizes emancipatory and transformative pedagogies (i.e., CP) that align with the successful implementation of the NZC.
• Students are required over the 4 years to complete 24 weeks of teaching practice in primary and secondary schools.
• These courses are considered pivotal in the deconstruction and any subsequent reconstruction of the taken-for-granted assumptions that many students have when entering PETE programs (Curtner-Smith, 2007; O’Sullivan, 2005).
• The pedagogy courses focus on a range of theoretical perspectives of learning and seek to align these perspectives of learning with appropriate pedagogical models and teaching styles.

In this case study research, voluntary participation was offered

• Purposeful sampling was then employed and nine information-rich cases who represented a “typical” Year 4 student cohort were sought (Gratton & Jones, 2004).
• A typical Year 4 student cohort reflected the following: gender (55% female, 45% male), an average age of 22.9 years, and an ethnicity makeup of 90% New Zealand European and 10% Maori or Pasifika origin.
• This resulted in four male and five female participants, with an average age of 23.1 years (SD = 1.4), being invited to participate in the study.
• Seven of the nine participants were of New Zealand European origin, one identified as being New Zealand Maori, and the other as Pasifika descent (See Table 1 for demographic details of the participants).
• 36 Aligning Critical PETE and Models-Based Practice Table 1 (cont.) Participant Gender Ethnicity Age Andrew Male NZ European 23 John Male NZ European 27 Robert Male NZ European 23 Note.

Ethical Considerations

• The study was reviewed and approved by the appropriate ethical committee at the university.
• Consent to participate was gained on a voluntary basis from each participant.
• The interviews were conducted by the lead author, and the participants were known to the researcher.
• Cognizant of considerations of power, gender, race, culture, religion, and class, and the implications of these during the research process, the researcher consequently adopted an inclusive, empowering and empathetic framework (Mutch, 2005).
• The researcher maintained confidentiality of the interview participants throughout the process, and this paper uses pseudonyms when identifying and reporting the interview data (Mutch, 2005).

Data Collection

• This research employed a semistructured interview method commonly engaged in by educational researchers (Cohen, Manion, & Morrison, 2007).
• The main purpose of the interview was to gain an in-depth understanding of the participating students’ perspectives, beliefs, and experiences in an environment where they felt at ease to express their understanding in their own terms (Gay, Mills, & Airasian, 2009).
• Preceding the interviews, a semistructured interview schedule was developed and piloted with three students from a different year group.
• Feedback resulted in some minor adjustments to the schedule mainly to reduce repetitiveness (Gay et al., 2009).
• This enabled the researcher to ask each participant “the same basic questions in the same basic order” (Cohen et al., 2007, p. 353), but allow flexibility as the conversation evolved.

3. What do you believe are the pedagogical (teaching) approaches that best suit and are consistent with implementing critical pedagogy and HPE in the NZC?

• The interviews followed the conventional sequence—a personal introduction, a statement assuring the confidentiality of the interview, and double-checking the student’s permission to have the interview audio taped.
• Each interview was recorded digitally for accuracy and lasted between 45 min and 1 hr, enabling the researcher to replay and improve the quality of the transcripts (Silverman, 2006).
• All participants were comfortable with the original transcripts being used for the analysis phase of the study.
• Information for each interview participant was then included in the thematic analysis and resulting reporting of the data.
• 38 Aligning Critical PETE and Models-Based Practice.

Data Analysis

• Data generated from the semistructured interviews were analyzed and reoccurring themes identified and explored (Mutch, 2005).
• This process of analysis was aided by Rossman and Rallis’ (1998) coding system, where text information from each transcript and from each question were categorized according to the frequency of re occurring words or phrases.
• The final decision on a theme was considered and only determined if at least seven of the nine participants articulated the coded theme.
• Further analysis and coding revealed two subthemes within the second major theme, HPE in the NZC: An Area of Paradigmatic Uncertainty.

Movement and the Multiple Aims of Health and Physical Education

• The evidence presented by the participants suggests they were developing a broader definition of health and PE, as promoted in the PETE program at the center of the study and that supported and promoted the NZC’s multiple aims and objectives.
• The most notable discourse that emerged in this theme was that the participants believed that movement and activity were an important context for learning and implementing the NZC objectives— therefore, an important aspect for teachers to consider in their pedagogical choices.
• This was constantly referred to throughout the interviews.
• Pauline, for example, referred to the physical context as an overarching term:.
• It’s Physical Education, [we] learn to relate to other people, manage themselves with, like, inter-personal skills and stuff, all within the physical context, yeah I reckon movement, like sports and dance and outdoor recreation and being involved physically is really important for learning in PE.

HPE in the NZC: An Area of Paradigmatic Uncertainty

• Subsequent interview questions explored the concepts of critical theory, CP, and humanism in relation to HPE within the NZC.
• Participants were asked to define and discuss how these concepts are embedded in HPE in the NZC.
• Additionally, participants were asked to draw on course and practicum experiences, which promoted these concepts, to further articulate their understanding and implementation of these concepts in practice.

Critical Theory and Critical Pedagogy as Challenging Inequality

• These questions resulted in one unanimous subtheme.
• The following interview excerpts reflect this theme well.
• Alice, for example, saw critical theory as an examination of those who are advantaged and those who are disadvantaged: I also see like critical theory as critically analyzing something, looking at both sides of the fence.
• When asked to consider his teaching practicum experience and relate this to CP, Robert was not specific, but he stated:.

I think it’s around health and wellbeing and it was all around critical thinking, critical knowledge . . . you know, it allowed

• You don’t have to agree with it . . . they had to critically think themselves, with shared learning, think about it and delve deeper yeah.
• I think it’s important to incorporate that into my teaching, that is, one thing I think is important.
• So, just looking at things from a much wider perspective.
• Looking at who’s advantaged, who is disadvantaged and the sort of balances of power and hegemonic relationships and all sorts of things.

Looking at who’s advantaged and who is disadvantaged . . .

• Yeah I think it’s quite hard to incorporate it sometimes you need to know your students quite well cause it’s deeper like even myself I’ve found it hard sometimes to think of things critically . . . to critically think.
• It appeared that the participants were only beginning to grapple with the notion of critical theory and had limited or no knowledge of its application to CP.
• The participants believed that critical theory embedded itself in wider societal issues, in essence, as a topic for discussion.
• Brigid’s interview excerpt reflects this common position by all nine participants:.
• So, like critical pedagogy, on TP [Teaching Practicum] the authors looked at the rules of sport and applied the ethics associated with that … … so being able to look at both sides of it and not just one side and making sure that no one is unfairly advantaged.

Humanism: Complexity or Confusion?

• Further interview questions explored the concept of humanism, the second paradigmatic concept underpinning HPE in the NZC and embedded in the NZC philosophy.
• All of the participants, despite prompting from the interviewer to draw on their practicum experiences, struggled to offer substantial information around humanism and its relationship to PE in the NZC.
• Candice, who appeared the least confident of the participants, offered, Uumm, humanism is like humans so I guess like people and relating to people and, uumm , humanistic values I don’t know (sigh, ) . . .
• Brigid, who with previous questions had been very free to converse and “think out loud,” took a different approach to this question and appeared to be less keen and sure of herself.
• When questioned, she stated, 43Fyall and Metzler.

The Teaching Continuum and Moving Beyond

• The common belief held by the participants reflected that a variety of pedagogical strategies may be required for implementing HPE in the NZC.
• Analysis also suggested that the participants were describing a continuum of teaching styles, consisting of a teacher-centered approach at one end and a learner-centered approach at the other.
• Uumm specific examples, I don’t know, I guess doing things in groups or doing tasks individually, doing in pairs, cooperatively, working as a whole class, having discussions or play-teach-play stuff works.
• Commonly, the participants eluded to “different ways of teaching” and articulated these to learning theory.
• Alternatively, depending on what you are doing, students might get more of an understanding of something as a result of learning through constructivism, like TGfU and experiential learning, cooperative learning and group work, inquiry stuff, you know, so they can link old information to new and build on it.

Discussion

• Based on these findings, several conclusions may be drawn from this study.
• Therefore, consistent with the critical and humanistic aims and intentions of the NZC, the participants’ beliefs suggested that they had a clear understanding that the HPE curriculum philosophy extends beyond the traditional sport performance discourse.
• The participants believed that critical theory embedded itself in wider societal issues, in essence, as a topic for discussion.
• The authors suggest that this may, in no small part, be attributed to the PETE programs inability to inform and equip the participants with appropriate knowledge around critical theory and CP.
• If the need is to develop independent thinking, self-esteem, or self-confidence, the teacher and perhaps the student would agree to use a more learner-centered approach.

A continuum approach appears to have resonance with the EF

• (1998), which voiced significant critique around the draft HPENZC.
• In the EF’s (1998) view, teachers, who are considered authorities in both “content and procedures,” are professionally equipped to identify individual learning needs and task requirements.
• Therefore, in the best interests of the student, the notion of student-centeredness relies on the teachers’ decisions to align the learners’ needs, the content, and the task requirements to an appropriate “style,” or “model” as the authors have argued, of teaching.

Concluding Remarks

• This discussion does not seek to be an everythingism with regard to CP, but rather an alternative where PETE students can begin to “. . . explore their own ethics and activate their own sense of agency” (Sicilia-Camacho & Fernandez-Balboa, 2009, p. 456).
• Indeed, the argument presented subscribes more to van Nieuwerburgh’s (2010) and the EF’s (1998) definitions of student-centeredness, and therefore conflicts with the curriculum architects’ definition and subsequent dismissal of the EF’s position (Culpan, 2004).
• Given the academic discourse calling for a reasonable and more conciliatory approach to implementing CP (Bain, 1997), and one that modestly (Tinning, 2002) promotes CP as the coming together of critical theory, humanism, and pedagogy (Kincheloe, 2008), the researchers believe that MBP may provide an appropriate vehicle to do so.
• The researchers believe that this compromise is a beginning point where PETE students can feel more confident and competent when conceptualizing and implementing CP within the NZC.

Figures

Table 1 Demographic Information for the Nine Case Study Interview Participants

Table 2 Semistructured Interview Question Schedule

Full text

24
PEDAGOGY
Aligning Critical
Physical Education
Teacher Education
and Models-Based Practice
Glenn Fyall and Michael W. Metzler
Abstract
In 1999, the New Zealand government released a new Health and
Physical Education (HPE) curriculum that reected a fundamental
shi from the traditional and dominant skill mastery approach. e
“new” HPE curriculum was based on humanistic principles and sup-
ported by constructivist notions of teaching and learning, within a
critical pedagogy. Since this time, and a subsequent curriculum revi-
sion in 2007, the HPE curriculum writers have suggested that physi-
cal education (PE) teachers and physical education teacher education
(PETE) students in New Zealand have struggled to understand the
epistemological complexities and pedagogical implications of critical
pedagogy in their practice. erefore, this paper highlights the ndings
of a study that explored a New Zealand PETE program, in light of HPE
within the New Zealand Curriculum (NZC). Additionally, and in light
of the ndings, the authors consider an examination of Kirk’s (2013)
concept of models-based practice as it could apply to the preparation
and professional development of physical education teachers in New
Zealand. e case study included nine volunteer participants, from a
cohort of 32 students, who were nearing graduation from a critically
Glenn Fyall is a lecturer in Physical Education and Sport Curriculum and Pedagogy,
College of Education, Health and Human Development, The University of Canterbury,
Christchurch, New Zealand. Michael W. Metzler is a professor (emeritus) and associate
director, Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning, Georgia State University. Please
send author correspondence to glenn.fyall@canterbury.ac.nz
e Physical Educator Vol. 76 • pp. 24–56 • 2019
https://doi.org/10.18666/TPE-2019-V76-I1-8370

25Fyall and Metzler
oriented PETE program in New Zealand. Semistructured interviews
were deployed and analyzed and reoccurring themes central to the
purpose of the study identied and explored. e participants viewed
movement contexts as being pivotal for learning in physical educa-
tion and that the NZC had multiple educational aims and purposes.
Participants also believed that PE teachers were required to move
beyond direct instruction and implement a variety of teaching styles
to achieve these multiple aims. However, the participants also shared
misunderstandings and paradigmatic uncertainty around the critical
and humanistic underpinnings of the NZC and failed to demonstrate
an understanding of how this is enacted through critical pedagogy. e
implications of this theory to practice nexus are further discussed in
light of recent research debate around models-based practice.
Physical education (PE) has no essential transcendental
characteristics. Since the historical records show it has
changed over time, how then can we avoid the position at the
other extreme, that it has no meaning at all, at least, only the
meaning that we arbitrarily select or choose to give it? (Kirk,
2010, p. 11)
In the latter part of 20th century, teachers, teacher educators,
and scholars keenly debated what they believed to be the con-
tent and curricula of PE and physical education teacher education
(PETE). Unfortunately, the debate largely remained unresolved
(Fernandez-Balboa, Barrett, Solomon, & Silverman, 1996). However,
some consensus emerged, suggesting that “movement” is fundamen-
tal to any description or conceptualization of PE (e.g., Jewett, Bain,
& Ennis, 1995). Fernandez-Balboa et al. (1996) stated that “although
we agree that movement is the common thread of our content, many
of the shapes that content has taken may not be appropriate” (p.
54). Today, there is general agreement that movement is an appro-
priate context for PE, but a growing number of physical educators
believe that PE curricular, dened by movement and the acquisition
of physical skills alone, may reduce it to mere physical activity with
little educative value (Culpan & Bruce, 2007; Fyall, 2017; Philpot,
2016; Philpot & Smith, 2011).
Siedentop and Tannehill (2000) suggested that curricular models
are founded on assumptions. ese assumptions include identifying

26 Aligning Critical PETE and Models-Based Practice
the educational needs of a community or society. Intuitively, the
educational community or societal needs will be inuenced socially
and culturally and therefore will be interpreted in a variety of ways.
For example, in the United States, Metzler, McKenzie, van der Mars,
Barrett-Williams, and Ellis (2013) promote the Health Optimizing
Physical Education curriculum model, highlighting the need “for
children and youths to be more physically active and more regu-
larly engaged in other healthy behaviors” (p. 42). e justication
by Metzler et al. (2013), to emphasize health promotion in the PE
curriculum, was founded on evidence-based, public health needs.
In the context of this study, in Aotearoa New Zealand during the
1990s, PE curriculum writers considered and advocated for—or in
Kirk’s (2010) words, “arbitrarily selected” (p. 11)—PE content and
aligned pedagogies that drew from the critical and humanistic para-
digms (Gillespie & Culpan, 2000). In this sense, the New Zealand
Curriculum (NZC) writers interpreted a physically educated per-
son from a sociocultural perspective, where physical contexts pro-
vided the backdrop for learning “in, through and about movement”
(Culpan & Bruce, 2007, p. 6). Most notably, the NZC architects
considered the work of Freire (1970), Giroux (1983), Kirk (1988),
Tinning (1991), Lawson (1992), Sage (1993), van Holst, (1993),
Jewett (1994), McLaren (1995), and Fernandez-Balboa (1997a), who
promoted critical pedagogy (CP) in PE, as an alternative to existing
Western political and educational philosophy (Culpan, 2004; Culpan
& Bruce, 2007).
Consequently, in 1999, aer signicant educational debate and
political contestation, the New Zealand government released a
radically dierent Health and Physical Education (HPE) curricu-
lum. Fundamentally, the principles and objectives of this docu-
ment reected a shi from the entrenched skill mastery approach,
supported by technocratic perspectives of teaching and learning
(Tinning, 1991), to one that was informed by notions of humanism
and CP. e concept of CP was aligned with and supported by con-
structivist perspectives of teaching and learning (Culpan & Bruce,
2007; Ministry of Education, 1999, 2007).
Culpan (2004), one of the curriculum writers, suggested that
leading up to its release, “the major critique [of HPENZC] was e
Education Forum, a select group of conservative school principals,

27Fyall and Metzler
with strong aliations to the New Zealand Business Round Table
(prominent businesspeople with strong new right views)” (p. 238).
Culpan (2004) proposed that the Education Forum’s (EF, 1998) cri-
tique included the suggestion that health and PE should be restricted
“to a traditional paradigm of skills development” (p. 239). Culpan
(2004) also promoted that the notion of student-centeredness had
epistemologically and pedagogically challenged the EF’s conception
of teaching and learning, as, in their view, the teacher was neces-
sarily the focal point of the teaching and learning process. In the
EF’s (1998) view, teachers are professionally equipped in knowledge
and procedures and are capable of making eective pedagogical
decisions in the best interest of the individual learner. is perspec-
tive considers that eective student-centered teaching identies the
learners dierent modes of learning and consequently implements
a variety of teaching styles appropriate to the learner’s needs. is is
evidenced in the following excerpts from the EF’s (1998) submission
on the dra curriculum:
Far from recognizing its fallibility, the dra elevates the
“needs” notion to the prime determinant of a needs-based
curriculum poised on the principle of student-centeredness . . .
a consequence of this needs-based approach is the signicant
side-lining of the work of the teacher to that of facilitator . . .
the notion of student-centered learning is woolly, imprecise,
unanalysed and undefended. (EF, 1998, p. 33)
Additionally, the EF dismissed the concept of student-centeredness
as promoted in the dra curriculum, and recommended to the gov-
ernment that it
. . . reject the notion of child-centeredness as promoted within
the dra . . . [and] note that there is a more academically
credible and rigorous “student-centered” approach which
seeks to identify dierences in modes of learning and
consequently in eective teaching styles, maintains the
importance of knowledge and disciplinary procedures,
upholds the need for teachers who are authorities in both
content and procedures. (p. 38)

28 Aligning Critical PETE and Models-Based Practice
In the context of this paper, this point will be discussed further
in subsequent sections, but it is worthy of mention that the release
and subsequent implementation of the NZC has raised many con-
cerns about the epistemological and pedagogical challenges now
presented to physical educators in New Zealand (e.g., Barker, 2008;
Burrows, 2005).
More recently, growing evidence in New Zealand suggests that
PE teachers and PETE students may struggle to understand the ped-
agogical complexities of PE within the NZC and the implementation
of its critical foundations through a critical pedagogy (Fyall, 2016,
2017; Philpot, 2016; Philpott & Smith, 2011).
Critical Pedagogy
CP arises from the need to create an environment where con-
scientization can occur and where social and cultural inequities can
be exposed (Freire, 1970). e evolution of CP from critical theory
consistently demonstrates a passion for devolving hierarchy and
power inequity within an educational setting and a will for promot-
ing social change (Fernandez-Balboa, 1997b; Freire, 1970; Giroux,
1983; Kincheloe, 2008; McLaren, 1995). Gur-Ze’ev (n.d.) accurately
described this as
a critical dialogue between educators and educated that (are)
committed to demolishing hierarchies and power relations,
within which students are empowered (ideally) to the degree
of being able to decipher the hidden codes, power relations,
and manipulations that build and represent reality, knowledge
and identities. (“Critical eory’s Critiques,” para. 6)
Culpan and Bruce (2007) described CP, as it is intended for PE
within the NZC, as emancipatory and empowering. It is emancipa-
tory in the sense that CP “enables people to obtain the knowledge,
skills and power necessary to gain a greater degree of control over
their individual and collective lives” (Culpan & Bruce, 2007, p. 3).
It is empowering, enabling individuals and groups to identify hege-
monic practices and take action to promote social change.
Essential, then, to the educational success of CP is providing
students with an appropriate environment and accompanying learn-
ing opportunities that promote critical thinking, questioning, and

Frequently asked questions

Q1. What have the authors contributed in "Aligning critical physical education teacher education and models-based practice" ?

Therefore, this paper highlights the findings of a study that explored a New Zealand PETE program, in light of HPE within the New Zealand Curriculum ( NZC ). Additionally, and in light of the findings, the authors consider an examination of Kirk ’ s ( 2013 ) concept of models-based practice as it could apply to the preparation and professional development of physical education teachers in New Zealand. 

Q2. What is the role of the course in the study?

Course content is promoted through a combination of lectures and practical workshops where students are required to “micro-teach” and critically reflect on their ability to conceptualize and implement the course content. 

Q3. What did the participants think of the apprenticeship model of learning?

In conceptualizing a teaching continuum consisting of teacher-centeredness at one end and student-centeredness at the other, the participants believed that by49Fyall and Metzleraligning learning theory and a variety of teaching styles, with an appropriate instructional model they could effectively teach and implement the NZC. 

Q4. What was the key context for learning within the NZC?

all the other participants referred to “movement” (consisting of a variety of movement-related contexts, such as sport, outdoor education activities, recreational activities, and dance) as being the key context for learning within the NZC. 

Q5. What was the EF’s view of teaching and learning?

Culpan (2004) also promoted that the notion of student-centeredness had epistemologically and pedagogically challenged the EF’s conception of teaching and learning, as, in their view, the teacher was necessarily the focal point of the teaching and learning process. 

Q6. What did Emily think of the definition of critical theory?

Unlike the descriptions and definitions given for critical theory, where the students were confident in expressing their views, albeit with limited insight, the students appeared to struggle with the concept of humanism and had much difficulty defining it, let alone articulating their ability to enact it when teaching. 

Q7. What is the author’s view of the apprenticeship model of learning?

The authors propose that neophyte PETE students and early career PE teachers may be subjected to political manipulation, as this lack of content knowledge may “open the way” for an apprenticeship model of learning (Lave & Wenger 1991). 

Q8. How many students were invited to participate in the study?

This resulted in four male and five female participants, with an average age of 23.1 years (SD = 1.4), being invited to participate in the study. 

Q9. What did he think was the difficulty in implementing this in his teaching practicum classes?

When asked to give examples, he continued the theme of advantaged versus disadvantaged and expressed the difficulty in implementing this in his teaching practicum classes: 

Q10. What is the reason why the participants were struggling to make appropriate adjustments?

Despite the espoused “critically oriented” philosophy of the program, and the emphasis on criticality within the pedagogy and sociology courses, it appears that the participants were still struggling to make appropriate adjustments and connections.