scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Journal ArticleDOI

Between hope and happening : Problematizing the M and the P in models-based practice

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors highlight the importance of advocacy through the work of many scholars in physical education and sport pedagogy and highlight a significant direction towards which physical education is moving in light of calls for c
Abstract: Background: Advocacy through the work of many scholars in physical education and sport pedagogy highlights a significant direction towards which physical education is moving in light of calls for c
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, a systematic review aimed to examine the main findings concerning to the investigations focused on compare, within Physical Education context, the influence of sport education (SE) and traditional teaching (TT) on students' learning outcomes.
Abstract: This systematic review aimed to examine the main findings concerning to the investigations focused on compare, within Physical Education context, the influence of Sport Education (SE) and Traditional Teaching (TT) on students' learning outcomes. A literature search was conducted on nine electronic databases (PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Science, SCOPUS, Academic Search Ultimate, ERIC, Education Source, APA PsycINFO and APA PsycARTICLES). Inclusion criteria were defined before the selection process. Accordingly, were only included articles that (i) were published in peer-reviewed international journals indexed in Journal Citation Reports or Scientific Journal Rankings; (ii) were available in full-text; (iii) were published in English, Portuguese or Spanish; (iv) were performed within Physical Education context; and (v) provided specifically a comparison between the effects of SE and TT on students' learning outcomes. Globally, twenty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria. The manuscripts' methodological quality was assessed through Downs and Black checklist, with all studies displaying moderate quality. Results showed that comparisons among SE and TT tend to analyze team sports activities sampling high-school students via quasi-experimental designs, with more than half of them were published over the past five years. Also, these investigations typically focused on the differences between both models on the development of personal and social skills, as well as its impact on the motor and cognitive domains. In this respect, although the results tend to point out increases in both SE and TT, superior values are achieved when SE is implemented. The analysis of the teaching-learning process using alternative research methods and designs (i.e., experimental studies, qualitative data, longitudinal analysis, action-research and case studies), longer units with appropriate planning, and the report of model's fidelity so that robust findings can endorse the teachers' praxis, must be a concern in future studies.

13 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper , the authors present an umbrella review of pedagogical models in physical education and identify strengths, weaknesses and gaps of this methodological approach, which can be used to provide a broader and contemporary picture on their implementation.
Abstract: Background Research on pedagogical models in physical education has exponentially increased over the last two decades [Casey, A., and D. Kirk. 2020. Models-Based Practice in Physical Education. London: Routledge]. Moreover, several literature reviews on the effectiveness of the different pedagogical models have been conducted. Due to the large amount of research conducted on pedagogical models, there seems to be a need to organize and evaluate the existing evidence to assimilate the main ideas, produce higher-level synthesis of evidence and provide a more solid identification of strengths, weaknesses and gaps of this methodological approach.Purpose To critically examine what is currently known on pedagogical models to provide a broader and contemporary picture on their implementation conducting an umbrella review. This paper aimed to answer the following research questions: (RQ1) Which pedagogical models have been systematically reviewed? (RQ2) Which strengths have been observed? (RQ3) Which weaknesses have been perceived? (RQ4) Finally, which research gaps have been identified?Method The protocol was registered at the International Platform of Registered Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (INPLASY) with the number 202130025 and the DOI number 10.37766/inplasy2021.3.0025. Review studies met the following inclusion criteria: (1) Peer-reviewed journal articles (Journal Citation Reports) published and written in English before 31 December 2020, (2) included participants from elementary, middle and/or high school, (3) conducted in the physical education context, and (4) interventions studies implementing one, several or combined pedagogical models. Exclusion criteria were (1) Not review studies, and (2) Not about pedagogical models’ implementation.Findings and conclusion Seventeen review articles were identified, involving 22,109 students (elementary, middle, high school), 1050 teachers and 171 preservice teachers. Two hundred and nine studies involved Sport Education, 84 Games-Centred Approach, 74 Cooperative Learning, 48 Teaching Personal and Social Responsibility, and 23 hybridizations among pedagogical models. A comprehensive literature synthesis is presented on the different pedagogical models and their learning outcomes. Findings showed strong evidence supporting the effectiveness of pedagogical models’ implementation to improve students’ learning in the different domains (cognitive, social, physical, affective). Nevertheless, some weaknesses were also uncovered by the umbrella review: length of the implementation, time for skilful play, struggle to implement pedagogical models, poor performance of student-coaches and model fidelity. Teachers and researchers must be aware of these weaknesses uncovered to conduct intervention programs that can really work and produce the claimed outcomes. Finally, reviews also identified several gaps in our understanding of pedagogical models: individuals with special educational needs, girls, low-skilled children, the dynamics of the peer-teaching tasks, body expression and individual sports, and what happens after the initial unit of implementation. They are all discussed to provide guidelines and future lines of research.

10 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
05 Apr 2021
TL;DR: In this article, the authors reflect on SHAPE America's K-12 National Standards and its connection to physical literacy and argue physical educators in the United States have primarily engaged with the term p...
Abstract: In this paper, we reflect on SHAPE America’s K-12 National Standards and its connection to physical literacy. We argue physical educators in the United States have primarily engaged with the term p...

8 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors provided a map of 89 articles that accessed student voice in primary physical education, highlighting a need for democratic possibilities for primary students to engage and contribute to their physical education learning experiences as well as a continued exploration of the implementation and impact of authentic methods of accessing and responding to student voice.
Abstract: The past decade has seen an increased focus on student voice in physical education; yet, the majority reflects the thoughts, feelings, and experiences of agency of secondary-level students. It has been suggested that the perspectives and experiences of students in primary physical education remain largely absent from the literature. Therefore, the purpose of this review was to answer the question “what peer-reviewed data on student voice in primary physical education was published between January 1990 and March 2020?” This article provides a map of 89 articles that accessed student voice in primary physical education. Conclusions highlight a need for democratic possibilities for primary students to engage and contribute to their physical education learning experiences as well as a continued exploration of the implementation and impact of authentic methods of accessing and responding to student voice in primary physical education.

3 citations

References
More filters
Book
01 Jan 1976
TL;DR: This fourth edition contains 16 new and revised chapters on areas such as anti-bias teaching, added to previous editions that provided a framework within which future physical educators can plan and improve their teaching skills.
Abstract: Provides a framework within which future physical educators can plan and improve their teaching skills Emphasis is on practice and evaluation and systematic observation of classroom experiences This fourth edition contains 16 new and revised chapters on areas such as anti-bias teaching, added cove

819 citations


"Between hope and happening : Proble..." refers background in this paper

  • ...They contended that main-theme curricular models had been ‘developed, tested, refined, and further tested in a variety of school settings’ (Siedentop and Tannehill 2000, 146)....

    [...]

  • ...…2011, 324) Haerens et al. (2011) advocacy, alongside the work of many scholars in physical education and sport pedagogy (e.g. Jewett et al. 1995; Metzler 2000; Siedentop and Tannehill 2000), highlights a significant direction towards which physical education is moving in light of calls for change....

    [...]

  • ...At the turn of the twenty-first century, both Metzler (2000) and Siedentop and Tannehill (2000) took up the baton of models in physical education, albeit it in different ways, i.e. instruction and curriculum respectively....

    [...]

  • ...Conversely, it could represent a framework in which teachers and students are encouraged to explore the enactment of the specific elements most relevant to their local teaching and learning context (Jewett and Bain 1985; Kirk 2013; Siedentop and Tannehill 2000)....

    [...]

  • ...Be they curriculum models (Jewett and Bain 1985; Siedentop and Tannehill 2000), instructional models (Metzler 2000) or pedagogical models (Haerens et al. 2011), they represent a contested field (see e.g. Casey 2014; Landi et al. 2016)....

    [...]

Book
01 Jan 2011
TL;DR: Most chapters include "Overview," "Suggested Readings," "Learning Activities," and "Chapter Summary."
Abstract: Most chapters include "Overview," "Suggested Readings," "Learning Activities," and "Chapter Summary." Foreword by Dr. Lawrence F. Locke, Professor Emeritus, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. I.FOUNDATIONS FOR MODEL-BASED INSTRUCTION IN PHYSICAL EDUCATION. 1.Contemporary Physical Education Programs and Instruction. The Evolution of Goals for U.S. Physical Education. The Evolution of Program Content in U.S. Physical Education. The Evolution of Instruction in Physical Education: From Methods to Models. No "One Best Way" to Teach. Instructional Models: Tools for Teaching and Learning. Model-Based Instruction for Physical Education. The Need for Multiple Models in Physical Education. Overview of This Book. 2.Knowledge Areas for Models-Based Instruction in Physical Education. Shulman's Knowledge Base for Teaching. A Proposed Knowledge Base for Physical Education Instructional Models. Developing Expert Physical Education Teachers. 3.Model-Based Strategies for Teaching Physical Education. Managerial Strategies. Instructional Strategies. 4.Effective Teaching Skill Areas for Model-Based Instruction. Planning for Instruction. Time and Classroom Management. Task Presentation and Task Structure. Communication. Instructional Information. Use of Questions. Lesson Review and Closure. 5.Planning for Effective Instruction in Physical Education. Why Plan? Guidelines for Planning. Planning as a Blueprint for Action. Unit Planning. Lesson Planning. The Unwritten Parts of a Lesson Plan - Being Completely Prepared. Lesson Planning as Question-Asking. A Generic Lesson Plan Template for Physical Education. 6.Components and Dimensions of Instructional Models. Instructional Models as Blueprints for Teaching. Advantages of Using Model-Based Instruction in Physical Education. Components and Dimensions of Instructional Models for Physical Education. Component 1: Foundations. Component 2: Teaching and Learning Features. Component 3: Teacher Expertise and Contextual Needs. Component 4: Verification of Instructional Processes. Component 5: Assessment of Learning. Component 6: Contextual Modifications. Selecting an Instructional Model. II.SEVEN INSTRUCTIONAL MODELS FOR PHYSICAL EDUCATION. 7.Direct Instruction. Overview. Foundations of the Direct Instruction Model. Teaching and Learning Features. Teacher Expertise and Contextual Needs. Teaching and Learning Benchmarks for Direct Instruction. Assessing Learning in Direct Instruction. Selecting and Modifying Direct Instruction for Physical Education. A Sample Unit and Lesson for Direct Instruction. 8.Personalized System for Instruction. Foundations of the PSI for Physical Education. Teaching and Learning Features. Teacher Expertise and Contextual Needs. Teaching and Learning Benchmarks for PSI. Assessing Learning in PSI. Selecting and Modifying PSI for Physical Education. A Sample Student Workbook for PSI. A Sample PSI Course Sequence. 9.Cooperative Learning. Overview. Foundations of the Cooperative Learning Model for Physical Education. Teaching and Learning Features. Teacher Expertise and Contextual Needs. Teaching and Learning Benchmarks for Cooperative Learning. Assessing Learning in the Cooperative Learning Model. Selecting and Modifying Cooperative Learning for Physical Education. Sample Unit and Lesson Plan for Cooperative Learning. 10.The Sport Education Model. Overview. Foundations of Sport Education for Physical Education. Teaching and Learning Features. Teacher Expertise and Contextual Needs. Teaching and Learning Benchmarks for Sport Education. Assessing Learning in Sport Education. Selecting and Modifying Sport Education for Physical Education. A Sample Unit (Season) Plan for Sport Education. 11.Peer Teaching Model. Overview. Foundations of the Peer Teaching Model in Physical Education. Teaching and Learning Features. Teacher Expertise and Contextual Needs. Teaching and Learning Benchmarks for Peer Teaching. Assessing Learning in Peer Teaching. Selecting and Modifying Peer Teaching for Physical Education. A Sample Unit Plan for Peer Teaching. 12.Inquiry Teaching. Overview. Foundations of the Inquiry Teaching Model. Teaching and Learning Features. Teacher Expertise and Contextual Needs. Teaching and Learning Benchmarks for the Inquiry Model. Assessing Learning in the Inquiry Model. Selecting and Modifying Inquiry Model for Physical Education. Sample Unit and Lesson Plan for Inquiry Teaching. 13.The Tactical Games Model. Overview. Foundations of the Tactical Games Model for Physical Education. Teaching and Learning Features. Teacher Expertise and Contextual Needs. Teaching and Learning Benchmarks for the Tactical Games Model. Assessing Learning in the Tactical Games Model. Selecting and Modifying the Tactical Games Model for Physical Education. Sample Unit and Lesson Plan for Tactical Games Model. References.

793 citations


"Between hope and happening : Proble..." refers background or methods in this paper

  • ...…content and teaching environment, student developmental stage in readiness, student learning preferences, domain priorities, task structure and organisational patterns, sequencing of learning tasks, assessment of learning outcomes, and assessment of instructional practices (Metzler 2000, 16)....

    [...]

  • ...…2011, 324) Haerens et al. (2011) advocacy, alongside the work of many scholars in physical education and sport pedagogy (e.g. Jewett et al. 1995; Metzler 2000; Siedentop and Tannehill 2000), highlights a significant direction towards which physical education is moving in light of calls for…...

    [...]

  • ...Metzler (2000, 15), declaring that the ‘organizing center for instruction is most often determined by the content’, decried the sameness inherent in physical education programmes and argued that instruction followed a universal tried and tested pathway....

    [...]

  • ...At the turn of the twenty-first century, both Metzler (2000) and Siedentop and Tannehill (2000) took up the baton of models in physical education, albeit it in different ways, i.e. instruction and curriculum respectively....

    [...]

  • ...In contrast, Metzler (2000) focused on the types of instruction that teachers use in physical education....

    [...]

Book
01 Jun 1994
TL;DR: In this article, the authors describe the sport education model and the curriculum and instructional methods used to implement it and present examples of how the model has been used effectively in school settings.
Abstract: This text details how sport can help students learn fair play, leadership and "followship" skills and self-responsibility in addition to becoming competent players. It shows physical educators how to implement effective sport education programmes within their physical education classes to achieve these goals. The author explains his sport education model and provides school-tested plans for applying the model to specific sports and activities. Part 1 describes the sport education model and the curriculum and instructional methods used to implement it. Part 2 presents examples of how the model has been used effectively in school settings. Part 3 explains models of evaluation and assessment. A chapter in this section shows how the sport education model can be used to develop an "Olympic" curriculum that incorporates the global education, multicultural education and personal development goals of "Olympism" and provides a unifying theme for the sport education proramme.

521 citations


"Between hope and happening : Proble..." refers background or methods in this paper

  • ...The legacy of physical education models Writing at a time before Thorpe et al. (1986) and Siedentop (1994) published their first formal texts on teaching games for understanding and sport education respectively, Jewett and Bain (1985) published The Curriculum Process in Physical Education....

    [...]

  • ...As such, Sport Education becomes a specific approach to teaching that turns students into ‘competent, literate and enthusiastic sportspeople’ (Siedentop 1994, 4) regardless of context, rather than being a pedagogical action or undertaking aimed at inviting students to become various things, one…...

    [...]

  • ...…inherent in an essentialist notion of models (i.e. by nouning or proper nouning them), and by remembering the roles that Thorpe et al. (1986) and Siedentop (1994) set aside for teachers in the development of their models, it is important that the practising of MbP always retains a very real…...

    [...]

  • ...In their own monographs – presented here as early examples of curriculum and instructional models in physical education – both Thorpe et al. (1986) and Siedentop (1994) lauded the importance of working with teachers to trial and modify their respective models....

    [...]

  • ...Developing the language used by Jewett and Bain (1985), Siedentop (1994) and Thorpe et al. (1986), Siedentop and Tannehill (2000, p. 146) coined the term ‘main-theme’ to describe certain curriculum models....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors argue that the extent to which teachers are able to achieve agency varies from context to context based upon certain environmental conditions of possibility and constraint, and that an important factor in this lies in the beliefs, values and attributes that teachers mobilise in relation to particular sit
Abstract: In the wake of new forms of curricular policy in many parts of the world, teachers are increasingly required to act as agents of change And yet, teacher agency is under‐theorised and often misconstrued in the educational change literature, wherein agency and change are seen as synonymous and positive This article addresses the issue of teacher agency in the context of an empirical study of curriculum making in schooling Drawing upon the existing literature, we outline an ecological view of agency These insights frame the analysis of a set of empirical data, derived from a research project about curriculum making in a school and further education college in Scotland Based upon the evidence, we argue that the extent to which teachers are able to achieve agency varies from context to context based upon certain environmental conditions of possibility and constraint, and that an important factor in this lies in the beliefs, values and attributes that teachers mobilise in relation to particular sit

494 citations

Book
25 Aug 2009
TL;DR: The Social Construction of Physical Education: Present, Past, and Future as discussed by the authors defines Physical Education and the Possibility of the Id2 3. Futures Talk in Physical Education 4. Continuity and Discontinuity: The Residue of the Past in the Present 6. Four Relational Issues and the Bigger Picture 7. Physical Education Futures? 8. Securing the Conditions for Radical Reform
Abstract: 1. The Social Construction of Physical Education: Present, Past and Future 2. Defining Physical Education and the Possibility of the Id2 3. Futures Talk in Physical Education 4. The Id2 of Physical Education-as-Sport-Techniques 5. Continuity and Discontinuity: The Residue of the Past in the Present 6. Four Relational Issues and the Bigger Picture 7. Physical Education Futures? 8. Securing the Conditions for Radical Reform

484 citations


"Between hope and happening : Proble..." refers background in this paper

  • ...most models encourage and promote alignment between their main idea, critical elements, learning aspirations and pedagogical process (Casey and Kirk Forthcoming) and have been successfully implemented in multiple contexts (Siedentop and Tannehill 2000). However, there can be a distinct difference between what the models set out to do (the hope) and the consequences they have in physical education practice for teachers as well as students (the happening). Tannehill et al. (2015), in this vein, argue that each model should involve the students to varying degrees as active learners, allowing...

    [...]

  • ...First, they respond to a technique focused physical education practice with little regard to diversified teaching (Kirk 2010)....

    [...]