in defence of dodgeball?

Transcription

IN DEFENCE OF DODGEBALL?
PHYSICAL & HEALTH
Education Journal
LA REVUE D’ÉDUCATION PHYSIQUE ET À LA SANTÉ
VOLUME 76 NO. 2 — SUMMER / ÉTÉ 2010
Feature Articles:
Measuring Outcomes: A Review of
Interprofessional Collaboration in Schools
More Than 'Just a Game': History,
Pedagogy and Games in Physical Education
PUBLICATION MAIL AGREEMENT NO. 40064538
REGISTRATION NUMBER 09328
Mark your calendars!! Next year's At My Best Day will be on June 9th 2011
Order today at www.atmybest.ca
Published by/Publié par
RETURN UNDELIVERABLE CANADIAN ADDRESSES TO
CIRCULATION DEPT.:
2197 Riverside Drive, Suite 301, Ottawa, ON K1H 7X3
Tel./Tél. : (613) 523-1348 Fax/Téléc. : (613) 523-1206
E-mail/Courriel : [email protected]
www.phecanada.ca
Executive Director / Directrice générale
Andrea Grantham
Editor in Chief / Rédacteur-en-chef
John Maker, Ph.D.
Communications Manager / Gestionnaire de communication
Angela Abbott
PHYSICAL & HEALTH
Education Journal
VOLUME 76, NO.2 ISSN 1498-0940
PEER REVIEWED ARTICLES /
ARTICLES VEDETTES RÉVISÉS PAR LES PAIRS
6 Measuring Outcomes:
A Review of Interprofessional Collaboration in Schools
By Twyla Salm
© PHE Canada / EPS Canada
Published quarterly, individual subscription rate $80.00 + GST (Canada only) per year; $100 + GST
for libraries and institutions per year. U.S. and International add $18.00 per year. Six month limit
for claiming issues not received.
24 More than ”Just a Game”:
History, Pedagogy, and Games in Physical Education
By Ellen Singleton
Publication trimestrielle, tarif de l’abonnement individuel 80,00 $ + TPS (Canada seulement)
par année; pour les bibliothèques et institutions 100,00 $ + TPS. États-Unis ou autres pays,
ajouter 18,00 $ par année. Les numéros non reçus doivent être réclamés dans les six mois suivant
la date de publication.
Date of Issue/Date de publication :
June 2010/juin 2010
Production & Design/Conception graphique :
Daren MacGowan Graphic Design
Cover Photo/Couverature :
John Maker
For advertising information please contact:
PHE Canada
2197 Riverside Drive, Suite 301, Ottawa, ON K1H 7X3
(613) 523-1348 ext. 224
www.phecanada.ca
Board of Directors 2009/2010
Conseil de direction 2009/2010
Louise Humbert, President / Président
Mark Jones, Past-President / Président sortant
REGULARS / CHRONIQUES
2
3
4
5
12
A Word from the President
Mot du président
Editorial
Éditorial
QDPE: Can Anyone Plan a Quality
Physical Education Program?
16 Dance: Critical Issues In
Physical Education
32 QSH: Building Health & Physical
Literacy for Schools & Communities
across Ontario
32 Hot Topics: In Defence of Dodgeball
37 QSH: Enrichir la littératie en
matière d’éducation physique
et santé dans les écoles et les
communautés ontariennes
20 QSIR: More than the Traditional
Intramurals
Don Hutchinson, British Columbia and Yukon /
Représentante de la Colombie-Britannique et du Yukon
Heather Rootsaert, Alberta and NWT / Représentante de l’Alberta et des T.N.O.
Reg Leidl, Saskatchewan / Représentant de la Saskatchewan
Jacki Nylen, Manitoba and Nunavut / Représentant du Manitoba et Nunavut
IN THIS ISSUE / DANS CE NUMÉRO
Ted Temertzoglou, Ontario / Représentant de l’Ontario
Sandy Farr, Québec / Représentant du Québec
Fran Harris, New Brunswick/ Représentant du Nouveau-Brunswick
Daniel Robinson, Nova Scotia / Représentant de la Nouvelle-Écosse
Antony Card, Newfoundland and Labrador /
Représentant de Terre-Neuve et du Labrador
41 Yoga for Mind, Body, Soul,
and School
43 CUPR
44 CPCU
Cheryl Tanton, Prince Edward Island / Représentant de l’Île-du-Prince-Édouard
SUMMER • ÉTÉ 2010 1
A WORD FROM THE PRESIDENT
I
don’t know about you, but I am frequently amazed at how much
of what I learned as a child I still think about and do today; like
giving thanks. I have vivid childhood memories of sitting at our
kitchen table to write thank you notes for gifts, kindness, and
generosity. I was taught at a young age, to give thanks and, when
times were tough, I was always reminded that I had much to be
thankful for.
It is in the spirit of gratitude that I start my term as president of
PHE Canada. As I look at my journey to this day, I have many
people to thank. Let’s start with a few of my teachers, since we
all know that the impact of a teacher can be profound! Thank
you Ann McKinnon my first “real” phys-ed teacher, for believing in me when I was 13 years old. Thank you Don Williams
for demonstrating what passion for physical education looks
like. Thank you Andrea Borys for sharing with me your vision
for equity in education. Last but not least, thank you Larry
Beauchamp for helping me to make my dreams come true. To
all of the teachers reading this – thank you! You just never know
where that self conscious, gangly, shy, grade 7 student in your
class will end up!
Over the past few years I have had the opportunity to work with
many of the incredible people who make up the PHE Canada
family. The gifts and talents of our staff and volunteers make our
organization strong; their work helps to support all of us in our
efforts to provide quality physical and health education for every
child in Canada. I have also had the privilege of working with
and being mentored by three special people. To Grant and
Mark, thank you for everything you have taught me – stay close
to the phone! Andrea – your leadership inspires me – I look
forward to our journey! Thanks also to friends from coast to
coast that support all of us in our work at PHE Canada. Finally,
to my family, thank you for letting me take this on, you are my
world, and I thank you.
This edition of our journal focuses on many aspects of our daily
work with children and youth. The importance of working in
interprofessional teams is emphasized in Twyla Salm’s article, as
she inspires us to look for ways to work with other professionals
to bring about social change. Ellen Singleton offers us a historical
look at the role of games in physical education and the important role that games can play in a physical education program.
David Chorney examines the state of the Quality Daily
Physical Education initiative and Jill Kiley, a recent graduate of
St. Francis Xavier University, shares her experiences teaching
dance and the importance of developing confidence in an area
2 PHYSIC AL AND HEALTH EDUC ATION
that many students love, but is often not offered in our physical
education classes.
The integral role that health and physical literacy play in the life
long learning of students is examined in the Ontario Health and
Physical Education Association’s (Ophea) article. The opportunity for schools to offer learning experiences in these two very
important forms of literacy is reinforced in many newly
developed curricula across Canada.
All of these articles remind us that school-based physical and
health education programs play a critical role in enhancing
students’ health. Highlighting this responsibility, PHE Canada
presented a session on Health Promoting Schools at the
International Congress on Physical Activity and Public Health
in Toronto this past spring. Over 300 delegates from more than
60 countries attended this session; the recognition of the
importance of teachers and schools, and the need to support
their work, was overwhelming.
This fall we eagerly anticipate gathering, once again, in Toronto
for our national conference. PHE Canada is thrilled to be working with Ophea, and we look forward to connecting with all of
our friends and colleagues from across the country. The theme,
Healthy Schools, Healthy Communities, addresses and supports
the important work that is done by teachers, volunteers, and
professionals on a daily basis. By working together, we can build
healthy schools and healthy communities for Canadian children
and youth. I hope you can attend our conference as it will be an
experience you will never forget. The learning, laughter, and
friends made will enhance your work and your world – I
guarantee it!!
In closing, I encourage you to always remember that the important work we do every day can change lives. This is something
else for which we can be thankful!
Best wishes,
Louise Humbert
PHE Canada President
MOT DU PRÉSIDENT
J
e ne sais pas si vous êtes comme moi, mais même à mon âge, je continue de m’émerveiller de
toutes les choses apprises dans l’enfance qui me restent en tête et que je continue d’appliquer
aujourd’hui, comme le fait de dire merci par exemple. Je me revois, toute jeune, assise à la table
de cuisine en train d’écrire des notes de remerciement pour des cadeaux, des pensées délicates ou
des gestes généreux. Très tôt dans la vie, on m’a appris à dire merci et dans les moments
difficiles, on me rappelait tout ce dont je pouvais être reconnaissante.
C’est dans cet esprit de gratitude que j’entame mon mandat à titre de
présidente d’EPS Canada. Examinant le parcours que j’ai suivi
jusqu’ici, il est clair que beaucoup de gens méritent de sincères
remerciements de ma part. J’aimerais commencer par les éducatrices et
éducateurs qui ont eu la plus profonde influence sur moi car, après
tout, n’est-ce pas l’héritage d’un bon enseignant? Merci d’abord à Ann
McKinnon, ma première « vrai prof » d’éducation physique, pour avoir
cru en l’adolescente de 13 ans que j’étais. Merci aussi à un autre de mes
profs d’éducation physique, Don Williams, être toujours passionnant
et passionné au service de sa matière. Merci à Andrea Borys d’avoir
partagé sa vision de l’équité en éducation, de même qu’à Larry
Beauchamp de m’avoir aidé à concrétiser mes rêves. Et finalement,
merci à toutes les enseignantes et à tous les enseignants qui lisent cet
article. On ne sait jamais où pourrait bien aboutir cette jeune ado de
7e année maladroite et timorée que vous avez choisi d’épauler!
Depuis quelques années, j’ai eu le plaisir de travailler avec les membres
de la formidable équipe d’EPS Canada. Il est clair que ce sont les talents et les compétences du personnel et des bénévoles qui assurent la
solidité de notre organisme. Leur travail sous-tend tous les efforts
engagés pour garantir une éducation physique et une éducation à la
santé de qualité à tous les enfants du Canada. J’ai aussi eu le privilège
de collaborer avec trois mentors bien spéciaux. Grant et Mark, merci
du fond du cœur pour tout ce que vous m’avez enseigné – et ne vous
éloignez pas trop du téléphone! Andrea – votre direction éclairée
continue de m’inspirer et j’ai très hâte de faire un bout de chemin avec
vous! Merci aussi à tous mes amis qui, d’un océan à l’autre, continuent
d’appuyer l’œuvre de l’équipe d’EPS Canada. En dernier lieu, il
m’importe de dire à ma famille combien j’apprécie que vous m’ayez
permis de relever ce défi; vous êtes mon univers et je vous en remercie.
Ce numéro du journal aborde plusieurs aspects de notre travail
quotidien auprès des enfants et des jeunes. L’article de Twyla Salm
confirme l’importance de travailler au sein d’équipes interprofessionnelles, sans compter que l’auteure nous encourage à trouver des façons
de collaborer avec d’autres professionnels pour instaurer des
changements sociaux. Ellen Singleton donne un aperçu historique du
recours aux jeux en éducation physique et de leur rôle clé au niveau des
programmes d’éducation physique. David Chorney examine l’état de
l’initiative sur l’éducation physique quotidienne de qualité. Pour sa
part, Jill Kiley, une nouvelle diplômée de l’université St Francis Xavier,
relate son expérience comme professeure de danse et réitère
l’importance de favoriser une activité à laquelle bien des jeunes aiment
s’adonner, mais qui est rarement offerte dans le contexte des cours
d’éducation physique.
L’article de l’Association pour la santé et l’éducation physique de
l’Ontario (Ophea) examine le rôle crucial du savoir-faire physique et du
savoir-faire en santé dans l’apprentissage à vie des élèves. De fait,
beaucoup de nouveaux programmes-cadres offerts à l’échelle
canadienne encouragent les écoles à mettre l’accent sur ces deux
importantes formes de savoir-faire.
Tous ces articles nous rappellent que les programmes d’éducation
physique et d’éducation à la santé en milieu scolaire jouent un rôle de
premier plan en vue d’améliorer l’état de santé des élèves. Mettant
l’accent sur cette responsabilité, EPS Canada a fait une présentation sur
les écoles axées sur la promotion de la santé lors du Congrès
international sur l’activité physique et la santé publique qui se déroulait
à Toronto le printemps dernier. Plus de 300 délégués de plus de 60
pays étaient au rendez-vous. Tous convenaient fortement du rôle
fondamental des enseignants et des écoles, et de la nécessité d’appuyer
leurs efforts.
Nous anticipons avec enthousiasme notre rencontre d’automne à
Toronto à l’occasion de la conférence nationale. EPS Canada est ravi de
collaborer avec l’Ophea et prendra grand plaisir à prendre contact avec
des amis et collègues de partout au pays. La thématique de cette année,
Écoles en santé, collectivités en santé, vise à appuyer et confirmer
l’important travail quotidien accompli par les enseignantes et
enseignants, les bénévoles et les professionnels. Ensemble, nous saurons
bâtir des écoles et des collectivités en santé au profit de tous les enfants
et les jeunes du Canada. J’espère que vous serez en mesure d’assister
à cette conférence, qui promet de vous faire vivre des expériences
inoubliables. Le savoir acquis, les rires partagés et les amitiés forgées
ne pourront qu’enrichir votre travail et votre univers – je vous en donne
la garantie!
En guise de conclusion, je vous enjoins à ne jamais oublier que le
travail crucial que nous abattons tous les jours peut réellement changer
des vies. Voilà bien une autre raison d’exprimer notre reconnaissance!
Merci
Louise Humbert,
Président, EPS Canada
EDITORIAL
A
nother summer is here, bringing with it all the wonderful
opportunities to enjoy some fun and engaging physical pursuits.
I expect to see many children out on the soccer pitch this summer
practicing their game, motivated on the one hand by the 2010 FIFA
World Cup in South Africa, and on the other by the skills they will
so recently have learned in their physical education classes. Soccer has
long enjoyed popularity among school-aged children in Canada,
if not having achieved the same kind of spectator appeal it enjoys
outside North America.
It is perhaps fitting that in a summer that will likely be dominated by
a storied and popular international pastime, Ellen Singleton’s article
examines the history of games pedagogy. In her address, our new
president notes the importance of this article and Twyla Salm’s feature
article which supports the growing trend towards an inclusive
pedagogical and administrative approach. These two articles, while
different on the surface, both advocate the continued adoption of
newer pedagogical models that offer the greatest and most equitable
benefit to all students.
One way to increase such opportunities for all students, argues
Cheryl McCombe in our QSIR article, is to improve intramural
programs. She advocates for the inclusion of games and activities that
have proven controversial or inappropriate in the PE class per se, but
which might be more appropriate in intramural sessions because of
their voluntary nature. One such game is dodgeball, which forms the
focus of our new “Hot Topics” section. In this section we aim to
highlight issues that have formed part of a considerable debate in the
academic and practical world of Physical and Health Education.
Practitioners and academics are invited to respond to any articles
published in this section, as they are in response to every article
published in the PHE Journal. Readers are also encouraged to submit
articles for inclusion in future issues on topics of special relevance that
form part of a debate in the field. The first “Hot Issues” article
addresses the debate over the incorporation of dodgeball in PE
classes across North America. In this article, Bobby Fagogenis offers
some alternative rules for the game that he argues make it more
inclusive, less confrontational, and which increase dodgeball’s value as
a pedagogical and physical endeavour.
Finally, I would like to close by noting that we failed to include the
Sport Canada logo in our last issue. This oversight was all the more
egregious given the generous funding and support they provided to
make possible our special Physical Literacy issue last April. I would
therefore like to take this opportunity to thank Sport Canada for their
ongoing support and specifically for supporting our special issue,
which was a great success.
Thanks also to our readers for your ongoing support. Enjoy this issue
and please join me in extending a heartfelt and warm welcome to
PHE Canada’s newest president. Welcome Louise – it is a privilege to
have you on board!
Editorial Board
Rick Bell, D.Ed.
Pierre Boudreau, Ph.D.
Shannon S.D. Bredin, Ph.D.
Trent D. Brown, Ph.D.
Joy Butler, Ph.D.
David Chorney, Ph.D.
Roger T. Couture, Ph.D.
David Erikson, Ph.D.
Nick Forsberg, Ph.D.
Nancy Francis, D.Ed.
Sandra L. Gibbons, Ph.D.
Johanne Grenier, Ph.D.
Joannie Halas, Ph.D.
Clive Hickson, Ph.D.
Tim Hopper, Ph.D.
University of Victoria
University of Ottawa
University of British Columbia
Monash University, Australia
University of British Columbia
University of Alberta
Laurentian University
Trinity Western University
University of Regina
Brock University
Université du Québec à Montréal
University of Manitoba
M. Louise Humbert, Ph.D.
Anna H. Lathrop, Ph.D.
Rebecca Lloyd, Ph.D.
Ken Lodewyk, Ph.D.
Chunlei Lu, Ph.D.
Moira Luke, Ph.D.
James Mandigo, Ph.D.
Nancy Melnychuk, PhD
Francine Morin, Ph.D.
Joanne Y. Pelletier, Ph.D.
Twyla Salm, PhD
Ellen Singleton, Ph.D.
Stephen Smith, Ph.D.
University of Saskatchewan
Brock University
Brock University
Brock University
University of British Columbia (Emerita)
Brock University
University of Manitoba
Laurentian University
University of Regina
University of Western Ontario
Simon Fraser University
Amanda D. Stanec, Ph.D.
Aniko Varpalotai, Ph.D.
St.Francis Xavier University
University of Western Ontario
ÉDITORIAL
L
’été est enfin arrivé, garant de joyeuses occasions de s’amuser
dehors et d’être plus actifs physiquement. Comme d’habitude, je
m’attends à voir plein de jeunes envahir nos champs de soccer, plus
que jamais motivés et inspirés par la tenue de la Coupe du monde
2010 de la FIFA qui aura lieu en Afrique du Sud, et forts des
nouvelles habiletés physiques acquises dans leurs cours d’éducation
physique. Même si le soccer séduit moins les foules nord-américaines
que ses millions d’autres partisans à travers le monde, il n’en reste pas
moins que ce sport est devenu extrêmement populaire auprès des
jeunes Canadiens d’âge scolaire.
Il semblait dont tout à fait approprié qu’en l’honneur d’un été
vraisemblablement dominé par ce fascinant passe-temps international,
l’article d’Ellen Singleton examine l’histoire de la pédagogie des jeux.
Dans son message, notre nouvelle présidente souligne l’importance de
cet article et de celui de Twyla Salm qui appuie la tendance croissante
à favoriser des approches pédagogiques et administratives plus
inclusives. Quoique différents à première vue, ces articles réclament
tous deux l’adoption permanente de nouveaux modèles pédagogiques
qui s’avèrent les plus bénéfiques et les plus équitables qui soient pour
tous les élèves.
Selon l’auteure de l’article sur les loisirs intra-muros de qualité dans
les écoles (LIQE), Cheryl McCombe, une façon d’offrir d’autres
choix d’activités aux élèves consiste à offrir des programmes
intra-muros de meilleure qualité. Elle recommande l’inclusion
d’activités et de jeux controversés ou qu’on juge mal adaptés au
contenu des cours d’éducation physique comme tels, mais qui
conviennent bien aux loisirs intra-muros, puisque la participation des
enfants est facultative. Mme McCombe mentionne, entre autres, le
jeu de ballon chasseur qui fait également l’objet de notre nouvelle
rubrique « Dossiers chauds » consacrée à des sujets d’actualité qui
alimentent le débat entre les théoriciens et les praticiens de
l’éducation physique et de l’éducation à la santé. De fait, ces derniers
sont invités à réagir à tout sujet « chaud » abordé dans cette rubrique,
de la même façon qu’on les prie de faire valoir leur opinion sur tout
autre article publié dans le Journal EPS. Nous encourageons aussi les
lecteurs et lectrices à nous fournir des articles sur des sujets
controversés qui suscitent de vives réactions chez les artisans du
domaine, à d’éventuelles fins de publication. Le premier article
vedette de la rubrique « Dossiers chauds » porte sur l’inclusion du
ballon chasseur aux cours d’éducation physique à travers l’Amérique
du Nord. Dans cet article, Bobby Fagogenis propose de nouvelles
règles pour calmer le débat, rendre le jeu plus inclusif et moins
agressif, et faire du ballon chasseur une activité pédagogique et
physique valable.
En terminant, j’aimerais souligner que nous avons malheureusement
omis d’apposer le logo de Sport Canada dans le dernier numéro du
Journal EPS. Cette omission est fort déplorable, compte tenu du
généreux soutien financier que l’organisme nous a accordé et qui a
rendu possible la publication de notre numéro spécial d’avril dernier
sur le savoir-faire physique. Nous profitons donc de l’occasion pour
remercier sincèrement Sport Canada de son aide soutenue et, en
particulier, de sa participation à ce numéro spécial qui a connu un vif
succès auprès de notre lectorat.
Merci aussi à vous tous de votre constant appui. Nous espérons que
le présent numéro saura vous plaire. Entretemps, je vous prie de
joindre vos vœux aux miens pour accueillir chaleureusement la
nouvelle présidente d’EPS Canada. Bienvenue à bord, Louise...
ce sera un réel plaisir de naviguer avec vous!
Comité de rédaction
Rick Bell, D.Ed.
Pierre Boudreau, Ph.D.
Shannon S.D. Bredin, Ph.D.
Trent D. Brown, Ph.D.
Joy Butler, Ph.D.
David Chorney, Ph.D.
Roger T. Couture, Ph.D.
David Erikson, Ph.D.
Nick Forsberg, Ph.D.
Nancy Francis, D.Ed.
Sandra L. Gibbons, Ph.D.
Johanne Grenier, Ph.D.
Joannie Halas, Ph.D.
Clive Hickson, Ph.D.
Tim Hopper, Ph.D.
Université de Victoria
Université d’Ottawa
Université de la Colombie-Britannique
Université Monash, Australie
Université de la Colombie-Britannique
Université de l’Alberta
Université Laurentienne
Université Trinity Western
Université de Regina
Université Brock
Université du Québec à Montréal
Université du Manitoba
M. Louise Humbert, Ph.D.
Rebecca Lloyd, Ph.D.
Anna H. Lathrop, Ph.D.
Ken Lodewyk, Ph.D.
Chunlei Lu, Ph.D.
Moira Luke, Ph.D.
Université de Saskatchewan
Université d’Ottawa
Université Brock
Université Brock
Université Brock
Université de la Colombie-Britannique, (émérite)
James Mandigo, Ph.D.
Nancy Melnychuk, PhD
Francine Morin, Ph. D.
Joanne Y. Pelletier, Ph.D.
Twyla Salm, PhD
Ellen Singleton, Ph.D.
Stephen Smith, Ph.D.
Amanda D. Stanec, Ph.D.
Aniko Varpalotai, Ph.D.
Université Brock
Université du Manitoba
Université Laurentian
Université de Regina
Université Western Ontario
Université Simon Fraser
Université St. Francis Xavier
Université Western Ontario
PEER REVIEWED ARTICLE
Measuring Outcomes:
A Review of Interprofessional
Collaboration in Schools
By Twyla Salm
I
Twyla Salm is an assistant
professor at the University of
Regina. She teaches health
education in the Faculty of
Education and is Director of
the Professional Development
Office.
nterprofessional collaboration (IPC) is widely invoked as a means to
enhance health and social care and improve educational opportunities
for children’s learning and development (Barr, Koppel, Reeves, Hammick,
& Freeth, 2005; Brabeck & Latta, 2003). In an education setting, the
school is typically seen as the hub of a coordinated network of service
providers who focus on prevention and overcoming barriers that interfere
with school readiness and academic success for children, youth, and their
families. The call to mobilize professional resources and political power to
develop new ways of working together is strong. This forms part of a
Comprehensive School Health (CSH) framework, which is familiar to
health and physical educators, yet the strategies to achieve change and
evidence that CSH improves outcomes for children is more illusive. In the
first part of a two-part literature review, this article discusses the definition,
importance, and measurement of interprofessional outcomes in education
settings and concludes by outlining the implications for IPC in policies
committed to social change.
Interprofessional collaboration (IPC) is
widely invoked as a means to enhance
health and social care and improve
educational opportunities for children’s
learning and development (Barr, Koppel,
Reeves, Hammick, & Freeth, 2005;
Brabeck & Latta, 2003). In an education
setting, the school is typically seen as the
hub of a coordinated network of service
providers who focus on prevention and
overcoming barriers that interfere with
school readiness and academic success for
children, youth, and their families. The
call to mobilize professional resources
and political power to develop new ways
of working together is strong. This forms
part of a Comprehensive School Health
(CSH) framework, which is familiar to
health and physical educators, yet the
strategies to achieve change and evidence
that CSH improves outcomes for
children is more illusive. In the first part
of a two-part literature review, this article
discusses the definition, importance,
and measurement of interprofessional
outcomes in education settings and
concludes by outlining the implications
for IPC in policies committed to social
change.
Refining the Definition of
Interprofessional Collaboration
The literature reflects a paradigmatic
shift in the way scholars think about
collaboration, which emerges in the
discourse used to describe it. For
example, Lawson and Sailor (2000)
necessarily distinguish service integration
and interprofessional collaboration because
they are not synonymous. Two professionals who communicate effectively can
integrate services, but this should not
imply that they are collaborating.
Reciprocally, professionals may define
collaboration as improving communication or cooperation, but they may not be
integrating services. This distinction is
important to differentiate between an
integrated services model that characteristically “serves” its clients and interprofessional collaboration that moves in the
direction of “transformation of the
professional role to being an equal partner
with clients and community, a partner in
growth rather than a prescriber of solutions” (Brandon & Knapp, 1999, 879).
Within interprofessional collaboration
literature, subtle differences emerge in
what it means to work in this way but,
generally, it appears to reflect a facilitative
role that professionals assume when they
work together with families for organizational and systems change towards
ensuring and promoting the well being of
children, youth, and their families
(Dinnebeil, Hale, & Rule, 1999).
Typically, the defining characteristics of
interprofessional collaboration call for a
dynamic, interactive process where there
is genuine shared ownership for decision
making, action taking, and outcomes
(Walsh & Park-Taylor, 2003). Mostert
states:
Interprofessional collaboration, in
teaching, can be defined as a mutual,
reciprocal effort among professionals,
families and other caregivers to deliver effective interventions to children
and their increased physical, emotional and academic well-being.
(Mostert, 1996, 135)
Many scholars describe integrated
approaches that span a collaboration
spectrum, where concepts such as coordination, cooperation, and collaboration are
differentiated by the degree of partnership and the structure of the integration
(Corrigan, 2000; Davoli & Fine, 2004;
King & Meyer, 2006; Lawson, 2003;
Park & Turnbull, 2003).
The Importance of Interprofessional
Collaboration
The need for interprofessional collaboration is often described in relation to the
multiple health-related domains and
conditions that children face outside
the classroom which affect learning
(Corrigan, 2000). Alarming health, social
conditions, and high-risk behaviour
statistics are often provided to demonstrate the critical state of affairs and, as
Lawson (2003) states, collaboration may
be the only way to improve results. The
reciprocal relationship between health
and learning is long established, as
authors frequently paraphrase the expres-
Interprofessional collaboration (IPC) is widely invoked as a means to enhance health
and social care and improve educational opportunities for children’s learning and
development. The call to mobilize professional resources and political power to develop new ways of working together is strong, and part of a Comprehensive School
Health framework - familiar to health and physical educators, yet the strategies to
achieve change and evidence that it improves outcomes for children is more illusive.
In the first part of a two part literature review this article discusses the definition,
importance and measurement of interprofessional outcomes in education settings and
concludes with implications for IPC in policies committed to social change.
sion “inextricably intertwined” (National
Commission on the Role of the School
and the Community, 1990; Papa, Rector,
& Stone, 1998), and currently this
understanding of health and learning is
reified in Raphael’s (2004) work which
identifies education as a primary social
determinant of health.
Currently there is a shift in ideology
which recognizes the role of IPC in the
early prevention of social exclusion which
is connected to unemployment, poverty,
high crime, poor housing, and school
exclusions. Reducing school exclusions is
a priority since it is clear that exclusion
from school can have long-term effects
beyond poor academic performance,
including increased likelihood of teenage
pregnancy, unemployment, and homelessness (Milbourne, Macrae, & Maguire,
2003).
For some time, the gap in academic
achievement between children and
families with agency and those without
agency was understood as a result of
nonacademic barriers to learning and was
not related to inadequate teaching and
learning practices. As Walsh and ParkTaylor emphasize:
While excellent instructional practices
contribute substantially to academic
outcomes, the school, home and
neighbourhood climates in which the
child is developing clearly moderate
those outcomes. (Walsh and ParkTaylor, 2003, 10)
On invoque souvent la collaboration interprofessionnelle (CIP) comme un moyen
qui s’offre de rehausser les soins sanitaires et sociaux et de maximiser le potentiel
éducatif pour améliorer l’apprentissage et le développement des enfants. De fortes
pressions s’exercent en vue de mobiliser les ressources professionnelles et les instances
politiques pour mettre au point de nouvelles façons de collaborer. Ceci s’inscrit dans
un cadre de santé globale en milieu scolaire avec lequel les enseignants de santé et
d’éducation physique sont très familiers. Malgré tout, il existe peu de stratégies pour
amorcer ces changements et les données confirmant leurs effets positifs sur les enfants
demeurent rares. Dans la première partie d’une étude en deux volets axée sur la
documentation à ce sujet, l’article se penche sur la définition, l’importance et la
mesure des résultats interprofessionnels dans des contextes éducationnels. Il termine
en explorant les effets possibles d’une intégration de la CPI aux politiques axées sur
le changement social.
Successful IPC requires new roles and responsibilities
for all levels of school personnel which inherently
merges interprofessional collaboration and school
reform efforts (Jehl & Kirst, 1992).
Given the complexity of the issues, it is
not surprising that the antidote for
vulnerability, poor health, and the ability
to learn is equally complex. Marks
and Lawson (2005) introduce the term
co-production to redefine families and
youth as partners in recognizing that
services alone will not alleviate the harms
associated with poverty and social
exclusion. Co-production is about “manufacturing” new environments when
protective factors are not occurring naturally but are being created by forming
new inclusive structures. Corrigan
(2000) underscores the need for new
structures to be created through interprofessional collaboration, marked by public
awareness, financial support, and a
renewed commitment to family-centred,
community-based health and education
systems. Successful IPC requires new
roles and responsibilities for all levels of
school personnel which inherently
merges interprofessional collaboration
and school reform efforts (Jehl & Kirst,
1992).
Measuring Improvements
in Schools
Ironically, interprofessional collaboration
research tends to be presented in
traditional silos, the very same silos that
interprofessional collaboration is meant
to break down. In education, the notion
of interprofessional collaboration is often
couched in broader reform efforts related
to education that have focused on
coordination among schools, families,
and communities (Crowson, 2003;
Dryfoos, & Maguire, 2002; Kritek,
1996; Lawson, 2003; Walsh, Brabeck
and Howard, 1999).
Although there is abundant literature
that supports interprofessional collabora-
This team of professors teach together at the University of Regina in an interprofessional collaboration course designed
to improve learning outcomes through interprofessional collaboration in schools. Left to right: Marlene Smadu (Nursing,
UofS), Doug Cripps (Kinesiology and Health Studies, UofR), Twyla Salm (Education, UofR), Myrna Pitzel, (Social Work,
UofR), Hirsch Greenberg (Justice Studies, U of R).
tion and a growing body of literature that
guides interprofessional education (IPE)
in health-care settings, there is little
information to guide the process of IPE
in schools (Tourse, Mooney, Kline &
Davoren, 2005). According to Lawson
and Briar-Lawson (1997), teachers have
the most extensive background knowledge of children and their families but,
compared to other social service professionals, are the least prepared to work in
interprofessional teams. In a review of six
years of staff-development publications,
Palmer, McCorkle, Durbin and O’Neill
(2001) note the dearth of articles that
specifically address the changing role of
the teacher in working with service agencies or in interprofessional collaboration
between health and education professionals. The findings of their study reveal
that 70% of the teachers report they had
not received pre- or in-service preparation related to working with community
services for children and their families.
Spratt, Shucksmith, Philip, and Watson
(2006) conducted a study that explored
the ways in which the presence of
workers from other agencies affected
the capacity of schools to respond to
challenging behaviour related to poor
mental health. They conclude:
Schools are traditionally the domain
of teachers, so any new ways of working, located on the school premises,
threaten long-held perceptions of
educational priorities and professional responsibilities. Any challenge to
the existing practices of teachers
encounters resistance that is reinforced by the dominance of the
educational field and its well established habitus. Consequently, the
non-teaching interprofessional team
often supported young people in spite
of the school, rather than in a spirit of
co-operation. (Spratt et al., 399-400)
Although many scholars advocate for
human-service preparation programs to
develop curricula that provide opportunities for students to learn together,
Corrigan and Bishop (1997) specifically
make this call to teacher preparation
programs.
Even though student well-being is a primary concern for educators, schools
are under increasing pressure to improve academic outcomes and have
consequently partnered with communities and other sectors to mobilize
human and material resources to improve learning.
Influence of IPC Related to
Learning Outcomes
Implications for IPC and Social
Change
The value of IPC is often measured by
assessing administration and human
resource concerns such as improving
assessments and referral procedures,
shortening waitlists, prioritizing cases
more accurately, and improving recruitment and retention (Cottrell, Lucey,
Porter, & Walker, 2000; Walker,
2003; Lawson, 2003). Additionally,
Cummings, Dyson, Papps, Pearson,
Raffo & Todd (2005) report considerable
benefits in terms of coordinating
approaches to vulnerable children and
their families, improving informationsharing procedures, targeting services
appropriately, and enhancing children’s
and families’ access to services.
The notion of “real change” is at the
heart of current provincial priorities
related to supports for learning and
academic achievement and school
improvement frameworks. At the same
time there is a dearth of evidence of the
sorts of major social transformations or
educational achievements that one might
expect, given the claims made by some
calls for community-schooling and
interprofessional collaboration. What is
one to make of an approach that seems so
rooted in common sense, yet has so few
empirical studies to support its claims?
Even though student well-being is a
primary concern for educators, schools
are under increasing pressure to improve
academic outcomes and have consequently partnered with communities and
other sectors to mobilize human and
material resources to improve learning.
Stocitschek, Smith, and Armijo (1998)
describe C-STARS (Centre for the Study
and Teaching of At-Risk Students) as a
successful program designed to have
more than one effect. C-STARS is
a school-based, interprofessional casemanagement model where IPC teams
work intensively with particular youth.
Their findings show improvements in
attendance rates, grade levels, and behaviour. Wang, Haertel, and Walberg (1993)
also report that their review of students
who had been a part of an integrated
service protocol had better grades and
attendance and lower drop-out rates. In
Williams and Pritchard’s (2006) study,
annual data was collected and after three
years in IPC schools there was less truancy,
significantly fewer fights, less bullying,
and children reported they liked school
more. The use of cannabis, solvents,
and hard drugs also decreased in the
secondary school. Most significantly,
educational outcomes improved dramatically for the IPC schools. Teachers
indicated that the following scores
improved significantly at the conclusion
of the project:
• more likely to feel recognized for good
teaching
• parents more responsible for child’s
behaviour
• pupils were less noisy
• pupils had a better attitude towards
work
• better classroom management
• better staff relationships
• better support from parents
• more inclusive practices regarding
decisions about children in their classrooms.
That being said, without further quality
research that demonstrates not only the
value of IPC, but also the best “quality
and dose,” there will be little impetus to
change systems, structures, and policies
that might improve care for youth
through IPC.
Dyson and Raffo (2007) address this
question by suggesting that communityoriented schools, including the idea of
interprofessional collaboration, have a
focus on “proximal” rather than “distal”
factors, which draws attention from the
underlying causes of marginalization,
oppression, and exclusion. Schools focus
primarily on proximal factors that affect
learning, such as classroom processes and
the health and social needs of the family.
Almost totally absent from the discussion
are distal factors such as social class and
race, which underpin the proximal
factors. While it is clear that schools are
expected to contribute to overcoming
multiple problems related to the disadvantaged, it is less clear how schools
might prevent disadvantage in the first
place. Dyson and Raffo state:
There is no sense in government
guidance that schools should be
linked to local housing, community
development or regeneration strategies
aimed at dispersing concentrations of
disadvantage and reducing the
incidence of disadvantage overall –
much less that they should contribute
to subregional or regional strategies in
the field. On the contrary, their
emergence in areas of disadvantage
seem to indicate an acceptance that
such areas must inevitably exist and
that the only strategy available is to
concentrate service provision to match
the concentration of disadvantage.
(Dyson and Raffo, 2007, 306)
There is little point in expecting schools
to have a transformative effect on their
own students or families unless their
efforts form a wider policy committed to
social change. In other words, rather than
looking narrowly at a school-improvement framework or policy directions
within one government ministry, the
question should be focused on how the
education sector can become involved in
the development of more equitable social
and economic policies. “Real change” in
education will require a broader economic
and social vision and pressure from all
societal forces to become mainstream.
There appears to be two implications for
health education. First, although there is
much to be done by committed, culturally relevant educators, schools cannot
accept full responsibility for improving
outcomes for children without being part
of a wider social movement that includes
material redistribution and cultural
recognition. Despite their scepticism,
Dyson and Raffo concede that it is
possible that schools might open up “new
democratic spaces,” share control, and
reconstitute resources for locals to overcome their disadvantage. The paradox is
that for real change to occur it appears
that transformation will begin in those
proximal places, in a small-scale way,
engaging marginalized groups that may
pave the way for wider ranging policies.
Research and evaluation have reinforced
that for change to be sustainable, it must
be underpinned by systemic structural
change within each ministry (Anning,
Cottrell, Frost, Green & Robinson,
2006). Often partnerships may be too
loose to be effective in long-term formal
policies and budgetary decisions are not
established to manage a sustainable
system. Anning et al. write:
The challenge is to move from isolated IPC cases
and projects to transforming whole-service sectors
at regional, provincial, and possibly federal levels.
A key requirement for sustaining
systemic, structural changes is that
representation on and attendance at
partnership boards responsible for
reconfiguring services for children
should include senior officers within
local or regional authorities. Without
their experience, commitment and
power at the macro level of local
policies, complex decisions about
budgets, capital investment and
sustainability of services are likely to
be fudged. (Anning et al., 2006, 95)
These authors further explain how
“fudging” decisions is most frequently
manifested. First, when sectors are
reluctant to commit to long-term
funding for staff committed to interprofessional teams, they are brought together
for short-term flagship projects. According to Anning et al., being on a temporary or seconded contract has a profound
effect on the individual’s impact and
commitment. These concerns are
compounded when staff feel as if they are
“loaned” to another sector and have
conflicting lines of accountability.
Managers also struggle with deploying
workloads because they have little
evidence base to help them make
decisions. Related to the workload issue,
professionals feel that their specialist
expertise is squandered on endless team
meetings to rethink workloads and
protocol. Finally, the issue of relocation
and the impact of allocation of physical
space significantly affect a professional’s
level of comfort.
Conclusion
The challenge is to move from isolated
IPC cases and projects to transforming
whole-service sectors at regional, provincial, and possibly federal levels. Considering the context and priorities of other
sectors is paramount, not only within
macro government ministries but also at
micro and meso levels and, most importantly, how those levels intersect with
communities and families. In an upcoming issue of this journal, part two of this
survey will explore the characteristics and
organizational structure of effective IPC
initiatives.
REFERENCES
Anning, A., Cottrell, D., Frost, N., Green, J., & Robinson, M. (2006). Developing multiprofessional teamwork
for integrated children's services. New York: Open University Press.
Barr, H., Koppel, I., Reeves, S., Hammick, M., &
Freeth, D. (2005). Effective interprofessional education:
Argument, assumption & evidence. Oxford: Blackwell
Publishing.
Brabeck, M. M., & Latta, R. E. (2003). Meeting at the
hyphen. Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of
Education, 102(2), 1-7.
Brandon, R. N., & Knapp, M. S. (1999). Interprofessional education and training: Transforming
professional preparation to transform human services.
American Behavioral Scientist, 42(5), 876-891.
Corrigan, D. (2000). The changing role of schools and
higher education institutions with respect to
community-based interagency collaboration and
interprofessional partnerships. Peabody Journal of
Education, 75(3), 176-195.
Corrigan, D., & Bishop, K. K. (1997). Creating family-centered integrated service systems and interprofessional educational programs to implement them. Social
Work in Education, 19(3), 149-163.
Cottrell, D., Lucey, D., Porter, I., & Walker, D.
(2000). Joint working between child and adolescent
mental health services and the department of social
services: The Leeds model. Clinical Child Psychology
and Psychiatry, 5(4), 481-489.
Crowson, R. L. (2003). Empowerment models for
interprofessional collaboration. In M. Brabeck, M.
Walsh & R. Latta (Eds.), Meeting at the hyphen: Schoolsuniversities-communities-professions in collaboration for
student achievement and well being (pp. 74-93).
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Cummings, C., Dyson, A., Papps, I., Pearson, D.,
Raffo, D., & Todd, L. (2005). Evaluation of the full service extended schools project: End of first year report. London: University of Manchester.
Davoli, G. W., & Fine, L. J. (2004). Vocational education for youth in juvenile justice commitment facilities.
Health Promotion Practice, 5(3), 266-270.
Dinnebeil, L. A., Hale, J., & Rule, S. (1999). Early
intervention program practices that support collaboration. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education,
19(4), 225-235.
Dryfoos, J., & Maguire, S. (2002). Inside full service
community schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Dunst, C. J., & Bruder, M. B. (2006). Early
intervention service coordination models and service
coordinator practices. Journal of Early Intervention,
28(3), 155-165.
Dyson, A., & Raffo, C. (2007). Education and disadvantage: The role of community-oriented schools.
Oxford Review of Education, 33(3), 297-314.
Jehl, J., & Kirst, M. (1992). Getting ready to provide
school-linked services: What schools must do. The
Future of Children, 2(1), 95-106.
King, G., & Meyer, K. (2006). Service integration and
co-ordination: A framework of approaches for the
delivery of co-ordinated care to children with
disabilities and their families. Child: Care, Health and
Development, 32(4), 477-492.
Kritek, W. (1996). Introduction. In J. Cibulka & W.
Kritek (Eds.), Coordination among schools, families and
communities: prospects for educational reform (pp. ix xxiii). New York: SUNY Press.
Lawson, H. A. (2003). Pursuing and securing collaboration to improve results. Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, 102(2), 45-73.
Lawson, H., & Briar-Lawson, K. (1997). Connecting
the dots: Progress toward the integration of school reform,
school-linked services, parent involvement and community schools. Oxford, OH: Miami University, The
Danforth Foundation and the Institute for Educational
Renewal.
Lawson, H. A., & Sailor, W. (2000). Integrating services, collaborating, and developing connections with
schools. Focus on Exceptional Children, 33(2), 1-22.
Marks, M. B., & Lawson, H. A. (2005). Co-production dynamics and time dollar programs in community-based child welfare initiatives for hard-to-serve
youth and families. Child Welfare, 84(2), 209.
Milbourne, L., Macrae, S., & Maguire, M. (2003).
Collaborative solutions or new policy problems:
Exploring multi-agency partnerships in education and
health work. Journal of Education Policy, 18(1), 19-35.
Mostert, M. P. (1996). Interprofessional collaboration
in schools: Benefits and barriers in practice. Preventing
School Failure, 40(3), 135-138.
National Commission of the Role of the School and
the Community. (1990). Code blue: Uniting for healthier youth. Alexandria, VA: National Association of State
Boards of Education.
Palmer, D. J., McCorkle, L., Durbin, S. B., & O’Neill,
K. (2001). Preparation and experience of elementary
teachers to work with community services for at-risk
children, Education, 121(3), 554-565.
Papa, P. A., Rector, C., & Stone, C. (1998). Interdisciplinary collaborative training for school-based health
professionals. Journal of School Health, 68(10), 415-419.
Park, J., & Turnbull, A. P. (2003). Service integration
in early intervention - Determining interpersonal and
structural factors for its success. Infants and Young
Children, 16(1), 48-58.
Raphael, D. (2004). Social determinants of health:
Canadian perspectives. Toronto, ON: Canadian Scholars
Press.
Spratt, J., Shucksmith, J., Philip, K., & Watson, C.
(2006). Interprofessional support of mental well-being
in schools: A Bourdieuan perspective. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 20(4), 391-402.
Stocitschek, J. J., Smith, A. J., Jr., & Armijo, E. (1998).
Organizing, implementing, and evaluating schoolbased case management: The C-STARS experience.
Preventing School Failure, 42(2), 73-79.
Tourse, R. W. C, Mooney, J. F., Kline, P., & Davoren,
J. A. (2005). Collaborative model of clinical preparation: A move toward interprofessional field experience.
Journal of Social Work Education, 41(3), 457-478.
Walker, S. (2003). Multidisciplinary family support in
child and adolescent mental health services. Clinical
Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 8(2), 215-226
Walsh, M. E., Brabeck, M. M., & Howard, K. A.
(1999). Interprofessional collaboration in children's
services: Toward a theoretical framework. Children's
Services, 2(4), 183-208.
Walsh, M. E., & Park-Taylor, J. (2003). Comprehensive schooling and interprofessional collaboration: Theory, research, and practice. Yearbook of the National
Society for the Study of Education, 102(2), 8-44.
Wang, M. C., Haertel, G. D., & Walberg, H. J.
(1993). The effectiveness of collaborative school-linked
services. Philadelphia, PA: National Research Center on
Education in the Inner Cities.
Williams, R., & Pritchard, C. (2006). Breaking the
cycle of educational alienation: A multiprofessional
approach. Columbus, OH: Open University Press.
QUALITY DAILY PHYSICAL EDUCATION
Can Anyone Plan a Quality
Physical Education Program?
A Q&A Session with Dr. David Chorney
F
or many years now, PHE Canada has advocated for
quality daily physical education. Has this advocacy helped
to ensure that all students from coast to coast receive quality
daily physical education? The answer is no, but should this
answer imply that the advocacy and belief that QDPE across
Canada for every boy and girl attending school is unattainable? Again, I say the answer is no. As a former teacher of only
physical education for seven consecutive years, I was fortunate
to have the support, understanding, and finances to
implement a physical education program that benefited all
students in the community in which I was employed. Did
every one of the 450 students in my school have access to a
physical education class each day? No, they did not.
What they did have was access to an intramural program, a well-equipped and educationally stocked equipment room, and
an educated professional in the field of
physical education who was hired for the
intent of planning and teaching a program that followed the provincially-mandated curriculum. Could every student in
my former school have received quality
daily physical education? The answer is
yes; but numerous issues would have had
to be addressed for this to occur. Is the
location or age range of students where I
taught physical education any different
from other locations across Canada? No,
but the issues of addressing and implementing quality daily physical education
are the same.
To be responsible for planning and organizing a school physical education program is a challenging, demanding, yet
potentially very rewarding opportunity.
Should one’s view of teaching a single
physical education class differ from one’s
view of having the responsibility of planning an entire school physical education
program? In each scenario children are at
the heart of the matter and are the essential component of why we, as teachers, are
even employed. The difference for some
people who are responsible for teaching
one physical education class versus having
the responsibility of planning an entire
school PE program is that they may not
see the “big picture” or they have simply
been assigned one PE class without hav-
Dr. David Chorney is an Assistant
Professor in the Department of
Secondary Education, Faculty of
Education at the University of Alberta.
Teaching responsibilities and research
interests include curriculum and
instruction in physical education,
curriculum theorizing in physical
education, along with technology
integration in physical education.
ing the required skills, knowledge, or educational background to adopt such a
responsible position. Thus, this single PE
class for which they are responsible may
take on a more recreational style. There
may be little emphasis on personal skill
acquisition or improvement and little
attention paid to appropriate assessment
and evaluation. The teacher might
employ a programmatic approach using a
“sport model” style whereby every student
in class is asked to engage in warm up
games followed by more traditional games
as the primary emphasis of the lesson.
What does a typical physical education
program look like across Canada today?
Regardless of the children’s race, colour,
socioeconomic status, or location, many
programs across the country have an eerily similar tone. Having discussed the
issues related to the field of physical education and the teaching of physical education with colleagues from across Canada
and abroad for almost twenty years, it is
apparent that many of the same issues and
concerns have been continuously raised.
These issues include:
• Too many PE teachers teach only traditional sports to all students year after year.
• Not enough attention is paid to helping each student improve his or her
skills and to improving their personal
self-worth.
• Assessment and evaluation are an afterthought as opposed to an essential
primary goal in the overall planning
process.
• Appropriate and detailed planning for
every PE class does not really occur;
provincially-mandated outcomes or
grade level standards are overlooked.
• By devoting as much time and effort to
their coaching responsibilities as their
teaching responsibilities, teachers would
help many students to improve and,
subsequently, a better PE program
would likely result.
• Some PE teachers never take their
students outside of the gymnasium for
their physical education classes. Many
physical education programs ignore
content focusing on dance education,
outdoor education, gymnastics education, and non-traditional individual or
team activities.
The list of issues and concerns is lengthy
and I simply wanted to convey some of
my opinions, and those developed
through discussion with other professionals in the field. When someone within our
fraternity reads the aforementioned list of
concerns and issues, what do they think?
Are they offended? Do they agree? Do
they try to justify any of these issues and
concerns to make themselves feel better
about the job they are doing? Answers to
these questions vary even among PE specialists. Is it any wonder, then, that teachers outside the field of physical education
are often unable to provide the type
of quality physical education that we
advocate?
The question goes deeper than whether a
quality daily physical education program
can be offered to all students across
Canada. The question may not even be
whether a quality physical education
program can be offered to all students
across Canada, since many schools
currently employ teachers with no
physical education background at all.
Rather, the question may be who is
running the school’s physical education
What does a typical physical
education program look like across
Canada today? Regardless of the
children’s race, colour, socioeconomic
status, or location, many programs
across the country have an eerily
similar tone.
program? And who is accountable for
ensuring that physical education is being
planned for and taught as required by the
province or territory within which the
school is located? If it is run by teachers
with a physical education background,
educated in the pedagogy and knowledge
within a respected PETE program, then
hopefully the list of aforementioned issues
and concerns are irrelevant; hopefully
these teachers offer a quality physical education program. However, if a school
physical education program is left to the
responsibility of teachers with no physical
education background and who have little interest in improving their personal
knowledge base in the area, can we honestly believe things will change in those
particular schools anytime soon?
If it is run by teachers with a physical education
background, educated in the pedagogy and knowledge
within a respected PETE program, then hopefully the list
of aforementioned issues and concerns are irrelevant...
Editor’s Note: Dr. Chorney raises a number
of interesting and important questions in
this article. We invite readers to respond
to this article and offer their opinions or
reactions to the important issues raised.
Register as a Full Conference Delegate
(with accomodations) for a chance to
W I N an Apple iPad!
2010 Ophea & PHE Canada
National Conference
October 21-23, 2010
The Westin Harbour Castle • Toronto, Ontario
Delegates for this year’s national conference will include
elementary and secondary teachers, administrators,
health and physical education consultants,
public health professionals, recreation leaders,
and others interested in the health of children and youth.
For more information:
www.phecanada.ca/toronto2010/eng/main.htm
DANCE
Dance: A Risk Worth Taking
By Jill Kiley
I
n a society where media and social
pressures often dictate how gender
should be expressed, both males and
females frequently feel coerced into
fitting the idealized identity that accompanies their gender. Physical educators
have emphasized the development of
physical skills that can be replicated during traditional sport experiences. Dance
in physical education has also focused on
the development of pre-determined,
controlled movement patterns. Line
dancing, jive and swing dancing, and
aerobic dancing are examples of dance
forms that have been included in physical education. In this model, which
includes the styles traditionally used
in PE class, creativity is limited and
traditional gender roles are reinforced
(Rutledge, 2007, 88-91). These forms
of dance can contribute to the development of physical fitness but, “the experience of the expressive body is almost
non-existent” (Rutledge, 88). Thus, in
order to improve the current status of
dance in physical education, a shift
towards more creative dancing must take
place to enable students to express,
through dance movements, their
emotions and thoughts (Bergman
Drewe, 1996, as cited in Rutledge, 89;
Lussier, 2010, 40-44). The debate about
whether dance should be included in
physical education class poses one key
question: “If physical educators are often
uncomfortable with their own expressive
bodies, how can they bring students to
an appreciation of their expressive,
aesthetic bodies?” (Rutledge, 90). In this
article, I discuss my own experiences
with dance in physical education as a
student and as a student-teacher and
Jill Kiley is a physical educator who recently graduated from St. Francis Xavier University in Antigonish, Nova Scotia. Her main goal as an educator is
to encourage and motivate students to engage in lifelong and life-wide physical activities. Jill was
inspired to write this article based both on her own
experiences as a student-teacher and her reading of
M. Rutledge’s chapter, “Dancing is for Sissies”.
“aspire to reach those who would shine
if you added dance”
(Baker, 2008)
outline my intention to overcome the
current obstacles facing dance educators.
Personal Experiences as a Student
My experiences with dance in physical
education are minimal. In fact, I cannot
remember a single lesson that included
dance. I had male physical education
teachers every year except one until high
school. My grade 5 and 6 homeroom
teacher incorporated ballroom dancing
into her educational program for two
main reasons. First, she viewed dance as
a component of the arts. As a student in
her class, I was exposed to dances from
various cultures and learned how to
appreciate the aesthetic aspect of dancing.
Second, my classroom teacher saw the
lack of dance in physical education and
sought to expose her students to dance as
an expressive form of movement, even
if outside the PE class per se. For me,
dancing in her class provided a number of
benefits: improved social interactions
among opposite-sex peers, overcoming
anxiety (i.e., by asking others to dance),
making eye contact with my dance
partner (i.e., improved communication),
and it also helped me to become a wellrounded student. All of the things that
made me uncomfortable at first were
based on my lack of exposure to dance at
an earlier age. My teacher effectively modeled appropriate dance behaviours and
always made a point to use teachable
moments to talk to her students about the
things that made us uneasy about participating. Dancing with same or opposite
sex peers, making eye contact, the fear
of having sweaty hands, and the fear of
failing to perform were among the topics
my teacher addressed. Holding my class
to a high standard and expecting maturity
from all of us, she helped make the most
of our dance time. My experience with
dance, while not in physical education,
was a positive one.
Personal Experiences as a
Student-Teacher
In my first-year practicum, I was assigned
a male cooperating teacher who told me I
must teach dance because he had no
intention of doing so. Interestingly,
during the following year, that same
cooperating teacher was paired with a
male student-teacher and he was not told
that he had to teach dance. This made me
realize that Rutledge was correct in
asking: “Is the dominant, often unspoken
judgement that ‘dancing is for sissies’
undermining dance in physical education?” (Rutledge, 91). Just because I am a
female does not mean I am inherently
better able or suited to teach dance. Based
on my non-existent dance background in
elementary, junior high, high school, and
throughout most of my undergraduate
studies, I am still not prepared to teach
dance. This is the reality for young physical educators today. For those of us who
wish to try, we must somehow figure out
how to teach dance effectively on our
own. While I was working in my first
school placement last year, I knew that I
needed the experience of starting from
scratch, but because I was not confident
in my ability to dance, I was very anxious.
I taught line dances, circle dances, and
encouraged creative dancing by teaching
students about contrasting shapes, moving at different speeds and heights, and
moving in whichever way the music
made them feel. The students’ favourite
activities included creating contrasting
shapes with a partner, competing in the
“best robot” dance off, and participating
in a lesson I created that uses only a
tambourine. In my experiences teaching
lower elementary dance, the boys seemed
to enjoy dancing just as much as the girls.
The hardest part for me was coming
up with age-appropriate ideas that were
creative and fun.
In my second year of practicum, I had the
opportunity to team-teach grade 11
dance. I was very happy to be involved in
that course because it gave me a foundation that I did not previously possess. I
learned about the importance of beat
count, the most appropriate types of
dances with which to start, how to
include students in the whole dance
process (i.e., choosing songs and creating
moves and putting it all together). I
realized how much effort it takes to put
together a dance routine, and also how to
choose songs that are based on popculture movies and songs with choreographies already assembled. Such routines are
often effective because students are
already familiar with, and likely to enjoy,
these arrangements and songs. My cooperating teacher told me that many dance
professionals will help physical educators
to create hip-hop choreographies or other
types of dance routines that the teacher
wishes to incorporate into his or her PE
class. Chris Samson, an outdoor educator
in Nova Scotia, gave me some quality
advice: “Do what you do best, and
partner for the rest.” I remembered this
and thought maybe I do not have to do
this entirely on my own. Overall, my
experience in team-teaching grade 11
dance was very meaningful.
Kellie Baker, author of the article “So You
Think You Can(‘t) Dance!” explains that
“the decision to include or exclude dance
is most likely related to your feelings of
confidence” (Baker, 2008, 32). She goes
to start my journey to becoming an
effective dance educator.
Intentions
As a physical educator who values the
importance of teaching the entire spectrum
of the curriculum, I am committed to
finding ways to engage and encourage all
students to participate meaningfully in
my class. This section outlines ways in
which I will strive to improve dance
experiences, especially for the males in
my classes.
My classroom environment will encourage male students to participate in dance
while maintaining the expectation that it
is normal and acceptable for males to
dance. I agree with Taschuk, who states:
“The earlier boys have a positive experience with dance, the more likely it is that
they will have more success with it”
(Taschuk, 35). Providing examples from
popular culture and various media that
highlight male dancers is another way for
me (as a female) to model positive dance
behaviours for males. Rachel Hutchinson
stated that “boys’ experience with dance is
different from that of girls, so the classroom approach also needs to be different”
(Jobbins, as cited by Taschuk, 35). One
possible way to draw males into dance is
by incorporating ways of moving that
challenge them. Teachers can reinforce
this strategy by highlighting the strength
it takes for a male dancer to complete the
amazing lifts that are seen in ballet and
contemporary dance genres, as well as the
“Start believing that you can teach dance
and you will”
(Baker, 2008)
on to say how the teacher’s mindset of “I
can’t dance” affects students’ views of
dance and could “stifle student development, particularly at a time when dance is
becoming so popular” (Baker, 32).
Changing my own attitude towards dance
was the first step I needed to take in order
partner work found in swing dancing.
Males can also be engaged when teachers
choose genres of dance and songs that
have strong beats to provide opportunities
for males to elicit strong, powerful movements while still encouraging them to
express their subjective selves. Choosing
dances from different cultures where gender roles are expressed differently may
help students think differently about
dance and act to break down existing
stereotypes in our culture, specifically, the
homosexual label that is often applied to
males who dance.
I believe that dance units featuring music
forms with strong beats, such as hip hop,
appeal to both males and females. John
Ryan, a high school teacher from Spruce
Grove Composite High School in
Edmonton, Alberta, created a dance unit
plan that incorporated Olympic events to
inspire and engage his students (Taschuk,
37). This type of planning enables all
students to be creative and provides
opportunities for them to explore new
movements. Allowing students to provide
input into their dance experience will not
only help me know what is culturally
relevant to them, but will also enable
them to explore something in which they
are already interested. Showing students a
clip from the animated feature film
Happy Feet, for example, could motivate
and encourage them to explore movement and rhythms with their feet, such as
tap dancing and/or flamenco. By using
socially relevant, challenging, and
engaging materials I hope to motivate all
of my students to participate. Providing
students with a comfortable and safe
environment will encourage them to take
educational risks while dancing. While I
recognize that it will take effort and time,
it is important for teachers to bear certain
factors in mind such as professional development, the experience of trying things
“teach dance in a positive way”
(Taschuk, 2009).
out, and maintaining a positive attitude.
Above all, it is essential to remember
that we all have the capacity to either
negatively or positively affect our students’
perceptions of dance. n
REFERENCES
Baker, K. (2008). “So you think you can(‘t?)
Dance!” Physical & Health Education Journal,
74(3) 31-32.
Jobbins, V. (2009) “Entitled to Dance: Boys in
Schools (An interview with Rachel Hutchinson).”
Foundation for Community Dance. http://www.
communitydance.org.ukmetadot/index.pl?id=224
27&isa=DBRow&op=show&dbview_id17860.
January 19, 2009
Taschuk, H. (2009). “Dance is not a four-letter
word! Motivating teenage boys to dance.” Physical
& Health Education Journal, 75(2), 35-37.
Lussier, Chantale. (2010) “Aesthetic Literacy: the
gold medal standard of learning excellence in
dance.” 76(1), 40-44.
Rutledge, M. (2007), “Dancing is for sissies”, In E.
Singleton, & A. Varpalotai, Stones in the sneaker:
Active theory for secondary school physical &
health educators. London, Ontario, The Althouse
Press, 87-100.
Inscrivez-vous à titre de délégués à temps plein
(avec hébergement) pour une chance de
g a g n e r un iPad!
Conférence nationale de
l’Ophea/EPS Canada 2010
Du 21 au 23 octobre
Hôtel Westin Harbour Castle • Toronto (Ontario)
Les délégués pour note conférence nationale cette année
comprennent des enseignants/enseignantes au palier
élémentaire et secondaire, des administrateurs, des conseillers
en éducation physique et en santé, des intervenants dans le
secteur de santé publique, des chefs de sports et loisirs,
ainsi que d’autres intéressés à la santé des jeunes.
Pour en savoir plus au sujet de cette conférence,
consultez le site suivant :
http://www.phecanada.ca/Toronto2010/fra/main.htm
QUALITY SCHOOL INTRAMURAL RECREATION
More than the Traditional Intramurals
By: Cheryl McCombe
I
ntramurals have certainly changed over the years. Changes have
taken place based on facility time, facility space, as well as changing supervisor and student interests and availability. Intramural
grassroots still exist, but the way they are implemented differs from
school to school. Taking the long view, over the years, intramurals
have evolved significantly. The people organizing intramural
programs must invest a good deal of time and effort, but in some
areas, numbers continue to decrease. Representation is often not
strong enough across genders and grades. Conversely, some teachers
just want a new challenge. Hopefully some of the ideas in this
article can work for you or spark new ideas to enhance your
intramural program. The traditional sport activities that have, and
are being, offered still represent the foundation of many programs
but this article intends to explore other paths for offering
intramurals. The ideas that are included are drawn from colleagues,
workshops, and my school’s intramural program.
Although our Physical Education classes
have moved away from using dodgeball,
my school does offer it as an intramural
activity. This is one of our popular
intramural events. When we let the
students sign up in teams representing
their grade level (and we make sure we
have a teacher’s team), students come out
that we have never seen during lunch hour
intramurals. Some teams will have a team
cheer or uniform and the games can get
very spirited. Unsurprisingly, most (if not
all) of the student teams are more excited
about triumphing over the teacher team
than any other (which is my excuse why
the teacher team never makes it to the
playoffs!).
More success in your intramural program
can be achieved by incorporating activities
from the different ethnic cultures
represented in your school. If the ideas
from your organizing group seem to be
the same every year, offer students an
evaluation form and seek their feedback.
People generally tend to shy away from
activities with which we are unfamiliar,
but we often forget that students can be
our greatest source of information. For
example, cricket and cultural dances were
two lunch hour activities that students
organized and instructed within our
school.
To meet the different interests of the
students, periodically offering more than
one activity at a time has been successful.
Where we have the space and supervisors,
we have offered table tennis in one half of
the gym and dance or fitness class in the
Cheryl McCombe is a Physical Education & Student Leadership Teacher
with Fort Richmond Collegiate.
other half. Another example is to simultaneously provide an outdoor activity, such
as touch football, and an indoor activity
like lacrosse. There are many good
combinations but this depends on the
supervisors’ abilities, schedules, as well as
the weather.
Teacher teams, like that in dodgeball,
really boost the participant numbers,
and can be a real benefit in terms of
supervision duties. Often, the teachers
that play in the intramurals like to hang
out with the students or, as the teachers
say, “see the competition”.
This was a stronger year for female intramural participation at our school. In some
of the activities we offered a “female only”
league. This provided a double bonus;
besides the increase in female students
participating, we also saw an increase in
female staff member participants. Our
co-educational league still existed but we
Intramurals can be offered after school hours
and on specific days of the week.
did not stipulate a set number of males or
females that had to play each game. We
noticed a slight increase in female participation within each co-ed team. Honestly,
we would like to see more females
participating but a small increase was still
a wonderful change.
Intramurals can be offered after school
hours and on specific days of the week.
Similar issues exist in most schools in
terms of extracurricular activities, but it is
certainly possible to keep a specific day
and time slot open for active time outside
of the regular school day. According to this
system, teams are given their schedule
ahead of time and know what time they
need to be present. Student volunteers run
the scheduling, refereeing, and publicizing
of our programs. Teacher volunteers
donate their time each week for the one to
two hour time slots. The program changes
activities approximately every six weeks
and takes into consideration the “busy”
times of the school year when student
attendance may drop. During those times,
the intramurals still run but teams are
often created each night, on an ad hoc
basis.
Another style of programming offers
intramurals once a month after school in a
three to four hour time slot. During this
time a variety of activities are offered. For
instance, for the first hour we might run
floor hockey, the next hour will be Zumba
fitness class, the third hour might see
four-on-four volleyball, and so on.
Students sign up ahead of time for
activities in which they want to get
involved. This particular school is looking
at offering a yoga class in the theatres as a
second choice to one of the gymnasium
activities. To keep the student attendance
strong, a minimal fee is paid so the
students have some form of commitment
to show up. Often, this fee is collected and
donated to a charity. At this school, the
leadership students organize and run the
evening in conjunction with a teacher
supervisor.
Intramurals can even take the form of a
spirit week, day, or event. One such event
that has been ongoing in our school for 16
years, which we offer at the end of May, is
“Cardio Chaos”. Originally it was created
to mimic the “Jump Rope for Heart”
program developed by the Heart and
Stroke Foundation for elementary school
children. The focus of our event is to get
our school population active for two hours
during the day. Students get to choose
from numerous events during the spirit
days. The activity choices vary from year
to year. The student leadership committee
is responsible for choosing the events and
ensuring the volunteers publicize, organize, and run the entire spirit event. Local
businesses donate prizes that are raffled off
during the event or used to encourage
early registration. Some of the activities
offered in the past include floor hockey,
hip hop dancing, aerobic boxing, touch
football, ultimate, soccer, basketball, beach
volleyball, low organized games, and the
mega mountain (which is a huge inflatable
obstacle course). The school becomes a
hive of activity with staff members supervising an event. Near the end of Cardio
Chaos the students convene to watch or
participate in the highlighted event. In the
past, at our school, we have played a
massive dodgeball game and a game of
gauntlet using water balloons (in which
staff members were the targets). This year
the highlighted event is the Mega
Mountain, in which teams will race
through an obstacle course. It is also great
for the community to see the school spirit
created in these events; they also serve as
a fun wind-up or wind-down for the
students as they head into their exams.
As we approach the end of our school year,
teachers often feel too busy with reporting,
ordering equipment, course planning, and
the list goes on. It is really worthwhile,
however, to take some time out to highlight the success of your intramural year
and to plan for the upcoming 2010-2011
school year. n
PEER REVIEWED ARTICLE
More than "Just a Game":
History, Pedagogy, and Games
in Physical Education
By Ellen Singleton
G
Ellen Singleton is an Associate
Professor in the Faculty of Education
at the University of Western Ontario.
Her research is focused on modern
and vintage sport literature for
juvenile readers, the effects of
competition in physical education,
and the pedagogical challenges of
Teaching Games for Understanding.
ames permeate every aspect of school physical education.
They are used as warm-ups or modified instructional tools as
well as taught as complex activities worth learning for their own
merits. Even if the activities taking place in class happen to
be dance, gymnastics, outdoor pursuits, fitness, recreational, or
individualized competitive sport such as wrestling, some form of
game is very often used to help students learn concepts that are
fundamental to the movement or activity being learned. Games are
taught as a means of enabling students of all ages to achieve a range
of ‘core competencies’ specified in contemporary curriculum
documents across Canada. Through games, students in physical
education learn not only how to partake in a wide range of enjoyable activities, they also are exposed to behavioural, philosophical,
and conceptual concepts of increasing complexity as they progress
through school.
If taught well, participation in games
enables students to improve their fitness,
learn new skills, cooperate with teammates, and challenge their intellect by
solving problems of strategy and tactics.
If poorly taught, students may learn that
winning is everything, that cheating is a
viable strategy, and that only the strong
prevail. The question of how games
should be taught has proven to be a controversial subject for physical educators,
and one that continues to be debated
today.
In fact, what we as physical educators
think of games, and how we choose to
teach them to our students defines what
we believe and value about physical activity. As well, how we teach games to our
students clearly demonstrates what we
believe about gender, diversity, and learning. The following brief historical
overview will trace some of the ways in
which games, and the ways they have
been taught, have made a significant
impact on Canadian physical education.
Games and sports – what’s the
difference?
Although we often use the words ‘sport’
and ‘game’ interchangeably in conversation, on closer examination it is easy to
see that they actually mean quite different things. Briefly, a sport can be
described as a game that has formalized
its structure. That is, sport develops from
games, but has particular defining
features that distinguish it from the
game. Sport is comprised of a game that
is competitive; that involves, for the most
part, physical skills; and that is widely
practiced over a long period of time
(Tamburrini, 2000). Sheryll Bergmann
Drewe (2003) notes the particular significance attached to the necessity for an
activity to have a history before being
called a sport because, “…it eliminates
games children make up during play time
from being called a sport” (Bergmann
Drewe, 12). Sport is more than a set of
rules, and an incidence of casual play.
Sport is an institutionalized version of a
particular game, one that implies a tradition of past instances of play, and that has
definite guidelines for future play (Loy,
1968).
Games are so integral to physical education today that it is difficult to believe
there was a time when they were not
regarded as an important part of the PE
curriculum content. One of the first text
books available in Ontario for “Colleges,
Collegiate Institutes, High Schools,
Public, Separate and Private Schools and
Gymnastic Organizations” and authorized by “The Minister of Education for
Ontario” was Physical Culture: First Book
of Exercises in Drill, Calisthenics, and
Gymnastics. First published in 1886, this
text was described as, “…a practical text
book embracing nearly all the elementary
exercises required to make physical
education efficient, interesting and
popular…” (Houghton, 1891, 1). The
main body of the book is devoted to
descriptions of three kinds of activities drill, calisthenics, and gymnastics - with
specific exercises under each heading
deemed suitable for boys or girls.
At this time, games were something to be
played at recess or before or after classes.
While they were useful for dissipating
‘high spirits’ and providing entertainment for children, they were not considered part of the academic program
(Cartu, 1980).
British editions of the Syllabus of Physical
Exercises for Public Elementary Schools
(Board of Education, 1909), the
first comprehensive curriculum guides
published for physical educators in
Britain, were repackaged for Canadian
educators by the Executive Council
of the Strathcona Trust as Syllabus of
Physical Exercises for Schools (1911). As
Maker states, the Strathcona Trust was,
“the earliest program for the national
proliferation of PE to [all] provinces [and
was] initiated in 1909” (Maker, 2009,
What we as physical educators think of games, and how we choose to teach them to
our students defines what we believe and value about physical activity. As well, how
we teach games to our students clearly demonstrates what we believe about gender,
diversity, and learning. Over time, the emphasis on games in physical education has
shifted from the question of whether games should be included in the curriculum,
to questions about how games should be taught. This article is a brief history of how
games pedagogy in physical education has progressed from play-time for the masses
to constructivist approaches for cooperatively solving tactical and strategic problems
across four distinct categories of games.
17). Games were included in these texts
in the appendices, and listed under
the heading “Supplementary Physical
Exercises”. Only two or three pages out
of over 150 was devoted to this subject,
but it is clear from the following comments that contemporaneous physical
educators believed that the introduction
of games to the curriculum content was
an important step forward:
The value of introducing games into
a scheme of physical training [is] by
no means the least service a school
can render to implant in the children
a love for healthy and wholesome
play. … There is also the actual physical effect on the body as a whole,
and in this connection it may be
remembered that in playing games it
is possible to procure a considerable
amount of physical exercise with
comparatively little effort and
fatigue, this being in a great measure
because the exercise is spontaneous
and thoroughly enjoyed (Executive
Council of the Strathcona Trust,
155)
It was not until 1919 that the section,
‘Games (organization)’ appeared under a
new heading, “General Activity Exercises”
in the new, revised Syllabus. According to
the unacknowledged authors of this new
edition,
À titre d’enseignants d’éducation physique, notre façon de percevoir et d’enseigner
les jeux en dit long sur nos croyances et valeurs en matière d’éducation physique. De
fait, notre manière d’enseigner aux élèves à jouer démontre clairement ce que nous
pensons des sexes, de la diversité et de l’apprentissage. Au fil du temps, l’accent sur
la place des jeux en éducation physique a dévié. Alors qu’on tentait autrefois
d’établir si les jeux avaient une place au sein des programmes scolaires, on cherche
maintenant à déterminer comment enseigner ces jeux aux élèves. Cet article décrit
brièvement l’évolution de la pédagogie du jeu en éducation physique au fil du
temps, qui est passée d’une simple période de jeu pour la masse des élèves à une
approche constructiviste qui encourage la résolution collaborative de problèmes
stratégiques et tactiques selon quatre grandes catégories de jeux.
...for more than seventy years, physical education textbooks were written mostly with a
male audience in mind. Further, physical education classes were routinely segregated
and male and female instructors conducted almost completely separate programs.
….As far as possible, the formal
nature of the lessons has been reduced
to a minimum and every effort has
been made to render them enjoyable
and recreative. It is suggested that not
less than half the lesson should be
devoted to active free movements,
including games and dancing (Board
of Education, Syllabus of Physical
Training for Schools 1919, 4).
Finally, games were officially part of the
Canadian school program.
Play, games, and Progressivist
points of view
In the United States educational theorist
John Dewey (1899, 1908, 1916), greatly
influenced by research in the new science
of psychology - particularly in the areas of
child development and in learning began to advocate a move away from regimented approaches to schooling that
expected children to sit still for long periods of time, to progress through course
content in identical lockstep formation,
and to memorize lessons for class
‘recitations’. Dewey’s approach saw the
emphasis on schooling turn to a childcentred approach that fostered personal
learning based on individual readiness,
interest, and motivation. Dewey and
others contributed to a social movement
known as Progressivism that began
around the turn of the twentieth century.
In an era of rapid social, scientific, and
medical change, doctors, politicians, and
educators advocated for physical activity
to bring about “improved individual
living conditions, health, and well-being”
(Azzarito, Munro & Solomon, 2004,
377). As a result of these concerns,
organizations such as the Playground
Association of America were formed.
Throughout the 1920’s in the United
States, educational reformers who were
also involved in the national playground
movement, succeeded in influencing
legislation to establish physical education
in American schools that incorporated
play (Azzarito et al, 2004; Ennis, 2006).
Armed with modern psychological and
social theories concerning the needs of
the child, American educational theorists
influenced elementary physical education
curricula by proposing a ‘play-oriented’
approach to school activities. According
to Ennis, these new curricula stipulated
“… that the activity forms of games,
dance, and sport were natural extensions
of play and, therefore, fundamental to
the development of the child. … Play
became a valuable educational experience
rather than an activity in and of itself.”
(Ennis, 2006, 44).
In the secondary schools, the notion of
“play” took on a different form. Where
elementary students were expected to
engage in various forms of play through
games, dance, and sports to learn,
“…physiologically sound movement
patterns, building them into avenues
of expression essential in performing
activities at home, in professions and
vocations, and in leisure activities” (Weston,
1962, 72), secondary PE teachers used
the concept of play to justify the introduction of more intense forms of competition into their classes, particularly into
classes for male students (Mitchell &
Mason, 1934; Nixon & Cozens, 1935),
The individualistic games of the
grade school allowed but limited
possibilities, and so the child’s interest
could only be maintained by using a
lot of them. But now come the team
games, in which there is no end to the
combination of play, or to the
possibilities of experiment; and so the
student will want to pick favorite
pursuits, and play these intensively
(Mitchell & Mason, 1934, 288).
“The basket-ball field”
Hill, L.E. (Ed.) (1903). Athletics and Out-Door Sports for Women. pp. 228.
New York, NY: The Macmillan Company.
In fact, for more than seventy years,
physical education textbooks were
written mostly with a male audience in
mind. Further, physical education classes
were routinely segregated and male and
female instructors conducted almost
completely separate programs. Intense
competitive team sport was, by the
middle of the twentieth century, a
mainstay in American and Canadian
male physical education programs.
Female physical educators in the United
States, and to some extent in Canada,
however, (Hall, 2002; Lenskyj, 1982,
1986) interpreted the notions of play and
competitive team sport quite differently
for the girls they taught. These educators
resisted the trend evident in male
physical education classes to increase the
amount and intensity of competitive
team sport in the curriculum. Female
educators were passionate in their beliefs
that traditional masculine competition
was completely unsuitable for young
women, and that most young women,
however enthusiastic they might be, were
unsuited to masculine-style competition
(Somers, 1936). That is, competitive
practice that focused attention merely on
ability and skills training, while ignoring
the interests and needs of the whole
person, was unacceptable to these educators. Further, some sports were regarded
as simply not,
…physiologically or psychologically
suited to the girl and woman.
Basketball, lacrosse, soccer, volleyball
and others have been studied, …and
have been changed to meet the
specific needs of girls. Several track
and field events have been discarded
entirely and others are not recommended for girls. The play element of
swimming is being promoted rather
than swimming for speed and
endurance (underlined in text)
(Somers, 1936, 10).
Physical education classes for females
continued to concentrate on fitness,
calisthenics, gymnastics, dance, and
individual or paired sports that included
only mild competitive experiences. As
recently as 1969, American textbook
authors Margaret Meyer and Marguerite
Schwartz noted that female physical educators were reluctant to include more
team sports in their programs. They
noted, “Concentration on individual and
dual sports because of their greater ‘carryover’ value (and preoccupation with the
dangers of team competition) generally
characterize the programs of physical
education and recreation for girls and
women” (Meyer & Schwartz, 1969, pg.
1). Human Rights legislation in Canada
gradually provided girls and young
women with increased opportunities for
competitive sport participation in class
and extracurricular programs. It was not
until the introduction of Title IX in 1972
(Title IX, Education Amendments of
1972) an educational amendment which
specified that publicly funded educational
programs could not discriminate on the
basis of sex that additional opportunities
became available for girls in American
schools.
The changing pedagogy of games
in Canada
Over time, the emphasis on games in
physical education has shifted from the
question of whether games should be
included in the curriculum, to questions
“Skills test for a badge, 1931”
Brandreth, W.G. (1931). The Canadian
Book of Games. pp. 259. Toronto, ON:
The Ryerson Press.
about how games should be taught. In
Britain, the United States, and Canada,
changing perceptions of work, play,
sport, and gender affected the pedagogical approaches for games favoured by
physical educators. In Canada, games
pedagogy over the past half century has
been profoundly influenced by the
child-centred theories of Progressivism,
“Basket-ball has been changed to meet the specific needs of girls”
Hill, L.E. (Ed.) (1903). Athletics and Out-Door Sports for Women. pp. 231.
NewYork, NY: The Macmillan Company.
American approaches to competitive
team sport, the highly analytical
approaches of movement education, and
recently, the conceptual pedagogical
approach encapsulated in Teaching
Games for Understanding (TGfU).
In the late 1960’s, physical educators’
attention began to focus on a new and
radical way to teach students about
movement. In a 1972 article, Patricia
Crehan notes, “…in the late
sixties…there has been a[n] influence –
one which has left a marked impression
on us – the arrival of teachers trained in
England. They have brought to us the
concept of ‘movement education’ in
which self exploration and self-discovery
are implicit” (Crehan, 1972, 14).
‘Movement education’ in fact formed
part of an increased emphasis on more
theoretical aspects of human movement
studies that some educators attempted to
introduce into the pedagogical practice of
Canadian physical educators. In using
this highly analytical approach, physical
educators were encouraged to incorporate the physical principles of body
awareness, space awareness, relationships,
and effort (including time, weight, space,
and flow) (Hill, 1979; Staniford, 1978;
Wilson, 1979) and, “…the fundamental
laws of motion and the biomechanical
principles associated with their application” (Staniford, 1978), into gymnastics,
dance, and games lessons that were child
centred, experiential, and guided through
discovery. Games skills, for example,
were deconstructed into the constituent
movement principles noted above and
into actions that could be learned and
applied to a variety of situations. Competition and winning were downplayed,
and participation and progressive skill
development using small group modified
games were highlighted (Bean, 1985;
Docherty, 1980). While many instructors
wholeheartedly incorporated movement
education into some or all of their
program activities, others struggled with
language and concepts they found to be
unfamiliar and unwieldy (Anderson,
1978; Murray, 1981).
“Games were useful for dissipating high spirits”
Bingham, N.W. Jr. (1895). The Book of Athletics and Out-of-Door Sports.
pp. 27. Boston, MA: The Lothrop Publishing Company.
Usually associated with elementary
programs, movement education was
claimed to be suitable for secondary classes
as well (Hill, 1979; Staniford, 1978;
Murray, 1981) although secondary
instructors were not quick to adopt this
teaching approach, preferring to continue with programs that emphasized
teacher-centred games instruction that
focused on competition, excellence, and
winning (Anderson, 1978; Bell, 1979;
Cosentino, 1977, 1978; Docherty &
Turkington, 1986; Macintosh, 1979;
1982). Notwithstanding the recent introduction of outcomes-based curriculum
documents into Canadian programs, traditional games pedagogy has continued
into the present time in many secondary
physical education classes across Canada,
even as declining enrollments and
research with many female and male
students indicate their dissatisfaction
with this approach (Gibbons, Wharf
Higgins, Gaul & VanGyn, 1999;
Humbert & Blacklock, 1998; Portman,
1995; Robinson & Melnychuk, 2006).
games instruction that originated in
Britain and is slowly gaining international attention (Mandigo, Butler & Hopper,
2007). In the TGfU approach, games are
divided into categories, and game actions
are deconstructed into skills, strategies,
and tactics characteristic of the category
into which the game has been placed.
Students are encouraged to improve their
“movement literacy” (Kentel, 2007) by
utilizing concepts of game play to meet
core movement competencies outlined in
broad curricular outcomes as they
employ specific skills, guided by sound
pedagogical principles. While competition is recognized as an integral aspect of
game-playing, in this pedagogical
approach it is not highlighted as the
major goal of games participation.
TGfU offers engaging and challenging
possibilities for students in all levels of
schooling (Canadian Association of
Health, Physical Education, Recreation
& Dance, 2007).
Movement education opened the door to
a method of games pedagogy that is gaining increasing attention among physical
educators today. Echoing Canadian PE
curriculum influences from the past,
Teaching Games for Understanding
(TGfU) is a pedagogical approach to
Games were not initially a part of the
accepted school physical education
curriculum, but their usefulness as a
means of assisting teachers to achieve
pedagogical goals, and the enjoyment
they provide students has ensured them a
permanent place in PE classes at all levels
Conclusions
of schooling. While justification for the
inclusion of PE in the general school
program is largely provided by the
physical, cognitive, and social benefits
educators claim students gain from the
various games in which they participate,
the presence of games in the PE curriculum has not been without controversy. In
1979 Donald Macintosh recommended
that “elementary school programs should
reduce the emphasis on competition,
excellence, and winning” (Macintosh,
1979, 38). Recommendations published
in 1982 for physical education in
Ontario secondary schools by Donald
Macintosh and John Albinson listed the
need for programs that would, “…minimize the inclusion of traditional competitive games and sports” (Macintosh and
Albinson, 1982, 16).
While controversy has contributed its
share, it is only a part of the overall
impact games have had on school physical education at all levels of schooling.
Changes in games pedagogy have often
been the first signal that changes are
occurring in the PE program as a whole,
because we have learned of new ways to
think about students, or about learning,
or about physical activity, or about the
place all of these things may hold in our
society. Games are such a large and
integral part of the content of PE classes
that any change in the pedagogical
approach to games indicates changes in
our shared educational philosophy about
student needs - their methods of learning, their interests and attitudes, and
their physical capacities. Changes in
games pedagogy affect class environments, and the comfort level of our
increasingly diverse student population.
From the beginning games have held an
important place in elementary and
secondary school physical education.
Games are where physical educators “play
out” what they have learned and what
they know. What does the future hold for
physical education?
Game on!
REFERENCES
Anderson, C.S. (1978). Movement educators Beware! Cahper Journal, 45(1), 42-44.
Azzarito, L., Munro, P. & Solomon, M.A. (2004).
Unsettling the body: The institutionalization of
physical activity at the turn of the 20th century. Quest,
56, 377-396.
Kentel, J.A. (2007). The literate mover: Strategies
for developing movement understanding in learners.
Physical and Health Education Journal, 72(4), 20-25.
Lenskyj, H. (1982). Femininity first. Sport and physical education for Ontario girls, 1890-1930. Canadian
Journal of History of Sport, 13(2), 4-17.
Bean, D. (1985). Movement education: Potential and
reality. Cahper Journal, 51(5), 20-24.
Lenskyj, H. (1986). Out of Bounds. Toronto, ON: The
Women’s Press.
Bell, R.D. (1979). An approach to teaching team
games. Cahper Journal, 46(2), 3-5&41-42.
Loy, J.W. Jr. (1968). The nature of sport: A definitional effort. Quest Monograph, 10, 1-15.
Bergmann Drewe, S. (2003). Why sport? An Introduction to the Philosophy of Sport. Toronto, ON: Thompson Educational Publishing, Inc.
Macintosh, D. (1979). The next decade: Issues for
school physical educators. Cahper Journal, 46(2), 30-38.
Board of Education. (1909). The Syllabus of Physical
Exercises for Public Elementary Schools 1909. London,
UK: Eyre and Spottiswoode, Ltd.
Board of Education. (1919). Syllabus of Physical
Training for Schools 1919. London, UK: His Majesty’s
Stationery Office.
CAHPERD. (2007). Physical and Health Education
Journal, Issue devoted to Teaching Games for Understanding, 73(3).
Cartu, L.P. (1980). Social and political changes and the
development of physical and health education within the
Ontario public education system 1841-1918. Unpublished master’s thesis, College of Education, Brock
University, St. Catharines, ON.
Cosentino, F. (1977). The essence of physical education. Cahper Journal, 44(1), 27-29.
Cosentino, F. (1978). Sports, awareness, values and
education. Cahper Journal, 45(2), 6-12.
Crehan P. (1972). “Physical education – a contributor
or a deterrent?” Cahper Journal, 38(3), 13-16.
Dewey, J. (1899). School and Society. Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
Dewey, J. (1908). The Child and the Curriculum.
Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and Education. Boston,
MA: Houghton Mifflin
Docherty, D. (1980). Effective development of games
skills for elementary school children. Cahper Journal,
46(6), 30-36.
Docherty, D. & Turkington, H.D. (1986). A model
for the sequential development of sport skills. Cahper
Journal, 52(2), 16-19.
Ennis, C.D. (2006). Curriculum: Forming and
reshaping the vision of physical education in a high
need, low demand world of schools. Quest, 58, 41-59.
Executive Council, Strathcona Trust. (1911). Syllabus
of Physical Exercises for Schools. Toronto, ON: The
Copp, Clark Company, Limited.
Gibbons, S., Wharf Higgins, J., Gaul, C. & VanGyn,
G. (1999). Listening to femalestudents in high school
physical education. Avante, 5(2), 1-20.
Hall, M. A. (2002). The Girl and the Game. Peterborough, ON: Broadview Press.
Hill, R. (1979). Movement education: What’s in a
name? Cahper Journal, 46(1), 18-24.
Houghton, E.B. (1891). Physical Culture: First Book of
Exercises in Drill, Calisthenics, and Gymnastics. Toronto, ON: Warwick & Sons.
Macintosh, D. (1982). Facts, figures, and fancies for
the 1980’s. Cahper Journal, 48(3), 3-6.
Macintosh, D. & Albinson, J. (1982). Physical education in Ontario secondary schools. Cahper Journal,
48(3), 14-17.
Maker, J. (2009) Hand grenades and hockey sticks:
the positive influence of the military on physical education and sport in Canada, 1900 –1945. Physical &
Health Education Journal, 75(1), 16-19
Mandigo, J.; Butler, J. & Hopper, T. (2007). What is
Teaching Games for Understanding? A Canadian
perspective. Physical & Health Education Journal,
73(2), 14-20.
Meyer, M.H. & Schwartz, M.M. (1969). Team sports
for girls and women. Philadelphia, PA: W.B. Saunders
Company.
Mitchell, E.D. & Mason, B.S. (1934). The Theory
of Play. New York, NY: A.S. Barnes and Company
Incorporated.
Murray, N. (1981). Movement education: A factual
statement. Cahper Journal, 48(2),15-17.
Nixon, E.W. & Cozens, F.W. (1935). An Introduction
to Physical Education. Philadelphia, PA: W.B. Saunders
Company.
Portman, J. A. (1995). Who is having fun in physical
education classes? Experiences of sixth-grade students
in elementary and middle schools. Journal of Teaching
in Physical Education, 14, 445-453.
Robinson, D.B. & Melnychuk, N.E. (2006). A call
for PE consultants and specialists: Let’s get serious
about implementing quality PE. Physical and Health
Education Journal, 72(3), 6-11.
Somers, F.A. (1936). Ideals for girls’ athletics. Canadian Physical Education Association Bulletin, 3(9), 9-10.
Staniford, D.J. (1978). Personalized physical education: A child centred movement approach to learning.
Cahper Journal, 44(6), 3-5 & 40-41.
Tamburrini, C.M. (2000). The “hand of God?”: Essays
in the Philosophy of Sports. Goteborg, Sweden: Acta
Universitatis Gothoburgensis.
Title IX, Education Amendments of 1972, Title 20
U.S.C. Sections 1681-1688, http://www.dol.gov/
oasam/regs/statutes/titleix.htm), Accessed May, 2010.
Weston, A. (1962). The Making of American Physical
Education. New York, NY: Appleton Century Crofts.
Wilson, V. J. (1979). Turn-on turn-off. Cahper Journal, 46(1), 39-41.
Humbert, L. & Blacklock, F. (1998). Girls in Action:
Speaking out. Video. Ottawa, ON: CAHPERD.
n
QUALIT Y SCHOOL HEALTH
Building Health & Physical Literacy for Schools
& Communities across Ontario
How Ontario’s Revised H&PE Curriculum Can Foster the Well-being of a Generation
I
n Ontario, 2.1 million children and youth are about to adopt a
new way of looking at health and physical education, as are their
teachers and communities. With the release of the Ministry of
Education's revised elementary Health and Physical Education
(H&PE) Curriculum on January 18th, 2010, Ontario educators
teaching grades 1 – 8 will soon find it easier than ever to adopt a
broader, more balanced approach to health and physical Education;
students will experience a program that is more engaging,
energizing, and personally enriching than ever before. The elementary curriculum must be implemented by fall 2010, and the
secondary curriculum will be released later in 2010. Perhaps most
importantly, the effects of this program are likely to change not only
the health-related behaviours and attitudes of students, but those of
their families and communities as well.
"(The revised curriculum) stands to be
the most significant health promotion
initiative the province has ever seen,” says
Chris Markham, executive director and
CEO of Ophea, a not-for-profit organization dedicated to supporting healthy
schools and communities through quality
program supports, partnerships, and
advocacy.
A curriculum with a vision of
building physical and health
literacy
What is so ground-breaking about the
revised curriculum? One factor is its
focus on building literacy. Teachers across
all grades and subject areas understand
the importance of fostering literacy in
children when it comes to reading and
writing, but the idea of physical literacy
(the ability to move with competence in
a variety of physical activities) and health
literacy (the skills needed to get, understand, and use information to make good
decisions for health) are newer concepts.
And, luckily for Ontario’s educators and
students, they are both concepts which
the revised H&PE curriculum clearly
defines and fully supports.
Far from viewing H&PE class solely as a
forum for playing team sports and
teaching didactic health lessons, both the
revised elementary curriculum and
secondary curriculum (set to be released
later this year) are based on the vision
that the knowledge and skills acquired in
the program will benefit students
Ophea is a not-for-profit organization
led by the vision that all kids value,
participate in, and make a lifelong
commitment to healthy active living.
Ophea works in partnership with school
boards, public health, government,
non-government organizations, and
private sector organizations to develop
groundbreaking programs and services
that support healthy active schools and
communities.
throughout their lives and help them to
thrive in an ever-changing world. By
helping students acquire physical and
health literacy, the curriculum not only
ensures that they participate effectively in
the sport or activity at hand, it also helps
them to develop the comprehension,
capacity, and commitment needed to
lead healthy, active lives and to promote
the benefits of healthy, active living to
others.
A holistic, community-based
approach
The revised curriculum also presents
exciting opportunities for engaging
community partners and views each
school as a potential hub for a healthier
community.
“The revised curriculum is best implemented as one of the four pillars of
Healthy Schools,” explains Heather
Gardner, Ophea's H&PE curriculum
consultant, referring to the Ontario Ministry of Education and Ministry of
Health Promotion’s resource entitled,
Foundations for a Healthy School. This
resource provides a philosophy and
framework for healthy schools in Ontario
in the following four areas:
1. High quality instruction and programs;
2. A healthy physical environment;
3. A supportive social environment, and;
4. Community partnerships.
The curriculum obviously relates most
directly to the first pillar (high quality
instruction and programs), but,
comments Gardner, “its vision cannot
be fully achieved unless it is delivered
within a healthy school and healthy
community.”
Making living skills a priority
Perhaps one of the most exciting program
changes is the strong emphasis now
placed on living skills (i.e., personal skills,
interpersonal skills, and critical and
creative processes). These skills, which
include communication, self monitoring,
decision making and goal setting, are so
essential to a student’s ongoing wellbeing and personal success, both inside
and outside the classroom, that they are
infused into all areas of the revised
H&PE curriculum and are addressed
across all strands.
Developed in partnership with key
stakeholders
The revised curriculum was developed by
the Ministry of Education with input
from many education and health promotion organizations, including Ophea, the
Ontario Association for the Supervision
of Physical and Health Education (OASPHE), and others. It underwent an
extensive review, consultation, writing,
and revision process which began in
2007. This process involved feedback
from many professional organizations, as
well as teachers, students, and other
stakeholders. Together, these groups and
individuals examined the 1998 curriculum, preserved the best parts of it, and
made recommendations for change.
A fresh approach and a renewed
focus
The revised H&PE curriculum is made
up of three distinct but related strands:
1. Healthy Living
2. Active Living
3. Movement Competence: skills, concepts
and strategies.
The approach to Healthy Living has
changed in the revised curriculum, and
is not about just teaching facts and
information. The new Healthy Living
strand focuses on helping students use
their understanding of health concepts to
make healthy choices and to understand
the connection between their personal
health and well-being and that of others
and of the world around them. The
Active Living strand (formerly called
the Active Participation strand) focuses
on teaching students about the joy of
physical activity while developing
personal fitness and responsibility for safe
participation in physical activity. And,
finally, the Movement Competence
strand (formerly called the Fundamental
Movement Skills strand) focuses on
developing movement skills, concepts,
and strategies that prepare students to
participate in lifelong physical activity.
Specific updates have also been made to
the content in order to reflect current
health topics (e.g., healthy eating,
personal safety and injury prevention,
substance use, addictions and related
behaviours, and human development
and sexual health). Mental health and
emotional well-being are addressed across
all topic areas and the curriculum as a
whole is based on more of a continuum,
helping students to build on the skills
they have acquired as they move through
the elementary grades and on to
secondary education. To help achieve this
continuum, topics have been shifted
between grades and levels to improve
developmental appropriateness and to
ensure that students have the opportunity
to learn and practice skills before they are
required to apply them. The revised
curriculum’s healthy living framework is
flexible, allowing for emphasis on topics
of greater priority with different student
populations or in different regions across
the province, and to allow for the
integration of future health priorities. It
also integrates Daily Physical Activity
(DPA), a policy mandated in 2005 which
requires all elementary school students to
undergo a minimum of 20 minutes of
moderate to vigorous physical activity
each day during instructional time.
The shifts in approach described above
are also reflected in the five fundamental
principles on which the curriculum is
based.
1. Health and physical education
programs are most effective when
school staff, families, and communities support the students’ learning.
In other words, the revised H&PE program is best implemented within the
context of a healthy school. Not only
does involving community partners –
such as sport and recreation organizations, public health, and local businesses
– help to validate and reinforce what
students are learning in H&PE classes, it
has the potential to improve the health of
entire communities.
And while the healthy schools approach
may take a concerted, consistent effort
on the part of all school community
members, the payoffs are well worth it.
When children see the values and healthy
habits they are learning at school reflected in school policies, at home ,and out in
their communities, these experiences
becomes more than lessons – they
become a way of life.
2. Physical activity is the key vehicle
for student learning.
This principle refers to the well-supported
fact that students learn about healthy
activities best by doing them. Based on
the Teaching Games for Understanding
(TGfU) model, the premise stresses the
use of tactical problems and solutions
that can be applied to a variety of games.
As they learn by doing, students come
not only to understand what they need to
know to be successful in a particular
game or sport, but, more importantly,
they learn to use critical and creative
thinking skills to make decisions. It is an
approach that not only creates better and
more knowledgeable game players, but
also motivates active participation and
encourages fun.
3. Physical and emotional safety is a
precondition for effective learning
in health and physical education.
This principle relates once again to the
Healthy Schools framework (i.e., the
need for a supportive social environment). It recognizes that children partici-
pating in H&PE are taking part in activities that involve inherent risk and that
they are doing so in a space where their
peers can see them explore, succeed, and
make mistakes. For this reason, a focus
on safety and inclusivity is essential and
the program aims to accommodate
the strengths, needs, and interests of all
students.
4. Learning in health and physical
education is student-centred and
skill-based.
The revised curriculum recognizes that
the physical and emotional development
of students will vary widely. For this
reason, the curriculum has shifted from a
content-focused approach to a skill-based
approach which allows for differentiation
of instruction. Teachers are guided
through examples and teaching prompts
to modify lessons according to a student’s
readiness, interest, and learning preference in order to help them reach their full
potential.
The curriculum has also been developed
in such a way that students of all
backgrounds and abilities (including
First Nations, Métis and Inuit students;
students from a variety of cultures;
students who are learning English, and
students with special needs), should find
the program accessible, and should
be able to see themselves reflected in its
content.
5. Learning in health and physical
education is balanced, integrated,
and connected to real life.
Learning in the revised H&PE curriculum is balanced in that it addresses physical, cognitive, and social needs. It is integrated because connections between all
strands of the curriculum – Healthy
Living, Active Living, and Movement
Competence: Skills, Concepts and
Strategies – and between the content of
the strands and Living Skills are made
whenever possible. And, finally, the
topics covered reflect the situations
students face and the choices they must
make in today’s world.
Implementation will take
teamwork
Effective implementation of the revised
curriculum is a shared responsibility
requiring collaboration between educators, administrators, public health, sport
and recreation, provincial government,
and non-government organizations.
As they begin to use the new curriculum,
educators will find this support, both
from community partners (including
“It’s about
helping kids
learn to make
healthy choices.”
public health, sport and recreation, and
other community leaders with whom
they will collaborate in order to implement the curriculum), as well as from
organizations like Ophea who have
comprehensive support resources at-theready.
“In my objective opinion, the Ophea
H&PE support documents are the most
valuable resource to which I have ever
had access,” says Andrea Pivetta, a primary/
junior teacher from York Region District
School Board. She is referring to the
“Ophea binders” which have been helping teachers to deliver the 1998 H&PE
curriculum for the last 10 years.
Ophea has been working in partnership
with OASPHE and various other partners
including school boards, public health
units, sport and recreation organizations
across the province, as well as provincial
government and non-government
organizations to develop new Ophea
H&PE Curriculum Support Resources
(Grade 1–8), which are set to be released
in fall 2010 to coincide with the mandatory implementation of the revised
elementary curriculum. Ophea has
engaged 46 writers, over 100 partners
who are reviewing areas relevant to their
areas of expertise, and over 200 educators
who are pilot testing the resources across
the province in this development process.
Like the “Ophea binders” which came
before them, these resources will help
teachers make a smooth transition to the
revised curriculum and will provide a onestop-shop for all educators, particularly
generalist teachers, to access high quality,
grade-specific support. The resources will
encompass all strands of the revised curriculum and will include approximately
120 lesson plans for each grade level.
A curriculum with the potential to
create a healthier Ontario...
If effectively and consistently implemented within a healthy schools framework,
Ontario’s revised H&PE curriculum
stands not only to change the way
Ontario students look at H&PE classes,
but also the way entire communities look
at health – and not just because the
curriculum’s structure and content
encourages partnerships between schools
and community partners.
When schools are able to help students
become physically and health literate,
they are, in essence, handing them a key
to a lifetime of increased well-being. Not
only do these students acquire a love of
physical activity and a wealth of transferable movement skills, they also learn to
apply these skills in a variety of settings.
Likewise, when a student comes to
understand the connections between the
living skills they are learning and what
they are experiencing on a day-to-day
basis, real changes in their outlook begin
to take place. Suddenly, what is learned
inside H&PE classes has the potential to
encourage healthy active living outside
school walls, with effects that last well
beyond the school-age years.
As one health promotion specialist put it
quite simply: “It’s about helping kids
learn to make healthy choices.” While
today’s students are busy growing into
the adults who will build the communities of tomorrow, that is perhaps the most
valuable thing we can teach them.
The revised elementary Health and
Physical Education Curriculum
Grades 1-8 is available online at
www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/curriculum/
elementary/health.html.
For more information please visit
www.ophea.net.
H O T
T O P I C S
In Defense of Dodgeball
By Bobby Fagogenis
I
n recent years the game of dodgeball has been attacked as being harmful to the development of children. Some consider dodgeball to be a
detriment to children’s psychological and physical well being (Maurer, 6;
NASPE Forum). More importantly, in the United States, the National
Association for Sport and Physical Education (NASPE) recommended the
removal of the sport from physical education classes, “as it puts children
in the uncomfortable position of being a target, even if they feel comfortable with the situation” (Deutsch, 48; NASPE, 1). This is an important
debate that goes to the heart of the place of competitive sports in physical
education programs. Joe MacDonald points out that anti-dodgeball
research literature suggests the activity has many disadvantages including
its overly competitive nature and the promotion of violence. MacDonald
adds that dodgeball provides insufficient participation opportunities
(MacDonald, 18). Opponents of dodgeball highlight important
potential drawbacks of this sport in an educational setting. Yet the game
remains immensely popular despite it being banned in many schools and
districts across North America. Likewise, the game continues to grow with
large numbers of people signing up for leagues across the world.
This article examines some of the
drawbacks of dodgeball. It will also
consider adaptations that will address the
valid criticisms that many in the physical
education community have raised, while
still maintaining aspects of the game that
children find motivational and fun.
Dodgeball critics argue that the game is
counter-productive to many of the goals
outlined in curricula due to the general
down time students experience during a
game. In a traditional dodgeball game it is
common to see students sitting for long
periods after being tagged out, waiting for
a new game to begin. What benefit does
dodgeball have to the student that is
tagged in the first ten seconds of the game
and then must sit out for the remainder?
Given the traditional play model of the
game, the answer is simple: none!
One potential solution to this problem is
to implement a “rotational bench”. In this
variation, when a student is tagged,
instead of sitting on the floor for the next
ten minutes, the tagged student will head
to the sideline and begin a particular
exercise of the teacher’s choosing (or one
selected by the students collectively), such
as jumping jacks, skipping rope, squats,
and endless other possibilities. The
rotational aspect initiates when that
student’s next two teammates have been
tagged out, join the bench, and begin
participating in the designated exercise.
Once the two other teammates have
joined the side, the first teammate can
rejoin the game, thus ensuring that only
two teammates are on the side at a time.
When another teammate is struck out,
the second person tagged rejoins the game
and so on. This creates a loop; players are
struck out, participate in a side task, and
Bobby Fagogenis is the head of physical
education at the Korea International
School in Bundang, South Korea. He is
currently in the process of publishing
a book about dodgeball adaptations
entitled Dodgeball Evolution.
then re-enter the game once two other
teammates have joined.
When this system is first introduced, the
question is often asked: “But how do we
win?” This question actually leads into the
next problem that many have expressed
with the play of dodgeball in a curricular
sense: the high-stakes, competitive nature
of the game.
The role of competition in physical
education classes has been a hot issue for
some time now (S.A. Capel & S.
Piotrowski, 2000, 144). In dodgeball,
teachers can use the rotational bench
concept to keep a continuous loop of fun
and activity going without isolating
players or creating the “big let down”
where the last few students are verbally
attacked for letting down the team if they
are tagged out. Often, students are happy
This new “Hot Topics” section of the journal seeks to highlight issues
that have formed part of a considerable debate in the academic and
practical world of Physical and Health Education. Practitioners and
academics are invited to respond to any articles published in this
section. Readers are also encouraged to submit articles for inclusion in
future issues on topics of special relevance that form part of a debate
in the field. The views expressed in this section do not necessarily
reflect those of PHE Canada; herein we intend to provide a platform
for debating important topics.
just playing the game and lose the focus
on winning when a rotational bench is
employed. Usually, after a two to four
minute game (which is the recommended
length of one dodgeball game) of high
activity and minimal down time, students
are not as concerned about who won as
they are about beginning the next game.
However, if students need another sense
of satisfaction, outside of simple participation, ask them to keep track of how
many times they were tagged out, keeping
a mental tally from game to game. Another
option is that the teacher can count how
many people were tagged out and joined
the rotational bench on each team. The
teacher can then announce how many
“outs” were made and declare a winner
after each two to four minute game.
However, the introduction of a participatory dodgeball game, like rotational
bench dodgeball, versus the traditional
dodgeball model, is usually met with little
disappointment.
Another legitimate concern about dodgeball is the jargon that has been used to
describe aspects of the game (NASPE, 1).
Dodgeball is a game and, as such, should
not be used as a metaphor for war. The
terms “head-shots,” “kill ratios,” “hits” or
“shooting,” an opponent have no place in
a physical education class. A straightforward conversation about appropriate
dodgeball jargon is the best way for an
educator to address the issue. Brainstorming
for appropriate words can be an effective
way of including students in the process
of eliminating the perception of violence.
For example, students can use the word
The first “Hot Topics” article addresses the debate over the incorporation of dodgeball in PE classes across North America. While the
author acknowledges the potentially harmful effects of dodgeball, he
argues that these are present in many competitive sports and suggests
that the answer does not lie in banning the game. Instead, he proposes a set of changed rules and emphasizes the need to create awareness
and understanding in the PE class to reduce the potential for aggressive or bullying behaviour. Readers may also note Cheryl McCombe’s
recommendation (on page 20) for incorporating dodgeball into
school intramural programs.
“tagged” or “matched” instead of the
more traditional “hit.” Violence, and the
perception that dodgeball is unsafe and
can lead to injury, is probably the most
significant obstacle facing the sport, and
is the most critical issue that needs
addressing.
The responsibility of creating a safe
learning environment is at the core of any
educator’s belief system and curricular
design. This is why so many have voiced
their disapproval with integrating dodgeball into the classroom. Many educators,
parents, and students have voiced
their dislike for dodgeball
because of the fact that
students can get hurt. Safety is
definitely jeopardized when:
a) inappropriate equipment is
used b) rule making is done
irresponsibly or hastily and c)
the concept of bullying is not
addressed and stomped out early.
students to develop both skills and confidence, while participating in a highly
engaging activity.
In terms of defining rules, it is important
to gauge the group’s ability and comfort
level. For a more cautious group, it is a
good idea to implement a “legs only” zone
that opponents can strike. For more
When it comes to playing a safe game of
dodgeball, it is imperative that basketballs, utility balls, and soccer balls are
never used as the key piece of equipment.
In a situation that these are the only balls
available, then it is entirely reasonable and
understandable to ban dodgeball. Several
companies exist that produce speciallydesigned dodgeballs (for example see:
www.wintergreen.ca or www.gophersport.com). They are soft, low-density
foam balls with a low bounce aspect that
are perfect for dodgeball games. Combining
appropriate equipment with well-defined
rules is a significant step towards creating
a safe environment that will allow
and the rules are aligned with minimizing
risk, dodgeball comes on par with most
sports taught in elementary physical
education programs in terms of safety.
advanced students, a “below the navel
zone” is sufficient and at no time should
students be permitted to aim anywhere
higher, particularly above the shoulders.
Headshots are one reason that the
game has been deemed dangerous and
intimidating. When both the equipment
As many advocates of the game have
stated, dodgeball is highly motivating for
most students and can develop a variety of
skills (Shoemaker, 2001, 1). Yet many of
these advocates have neglected to address
the key issues that have reduced support
for dodgeball in many legitimate physical
education institutions. The use of a
rotational bench (versus the traditional
dodgeball model), the elimination of
violent language, as well as the use of
appropriate equipment and well-defined
rules are essential to changing perceptions
and bringing the benefits of dodgeball to
a wider constituency. Further, it may be
possible to situate dodgeball, and the
essential skills involved in the sport
(catching, running, dodging, throwing,
lateral movement), in the maturing
Teaching Games for Understanding
(TGfU) literature (Hopper, Butler, and
Storey, 2009).
Echoing the argument in the current
article, Joe Deutsch adds that, “the gator
skin balls used in the 21st Century are not
inflicting pain, harm or injury when the
game is managed correctly” (Deutsch,
49). This author agrees that proper game
and class management are key to success.
Deutsch also offers an alternate version of
the game in which students aim at a
“caged ball” that is set on the half-court
line. Each team lines up as in traditional
dodgeball and, when the game begins,
each team tries to “push” the caged ball
entirely over the line by hitting it with the
ball to win the game. In this version, the
target is an inanimate object (Deutsch,
18-49). Consider this version a sort of
“tug-of-war” dodgeball style.
If the NASPE online forum is any indicator, many PE teachers continue to include
dodgeball in their classes despite the
profusion of anti-dodgeball literature.
Again, such literature raises important
questions. All physical educators would
do well to familiarize themselves with the
arguments against the inclusion of dodgeball, which will raise awareness of the
sport’s potentially negative aspects and
will better equip teachers to properly
monitor the play of this sport in the
school setting. My belief is that dodgeball,
ball” version of the game, and yet another
is the possibility of opening an ongoing
dialogue about the use of intimidating
tactics and behaviour in the PE class and
in life more generally. It is important to
remember also, that without proper classroom management, any PE activity, not
just dodgeball, has the potential to
become a bully haven. Teachers must take
care to guard against this eventuality in all
classroom activities.
In an era when children’s health is being
compromised by the lack of participation
in general fitness activities, dodgeball, in
this modified and less-confrontational
format, may be reintegrated into the PE
class, as long as care, attention, prudence,
and teacher awareness are observed from
the outset.
The PHE Journal would like to thank
Dr. Ellen Singleton for reading this article
and providing constructive criticism.
REFERENCES
like virtually any other PE activity, can be
used as a vehicle for intimidation and
threatening behaviour if teacher awareness (i.e., teacher classroom management)
is insufficient. Not recognizing when a
student is being unfairly and constantly
tagged can lead to disappointment,
resentment, bullying and, in extreme
cases, injury. In contemplating this issue,
I draw a link between confrontation and
competition. However, rotational bench
dodgeball allows for a fun, low-stakes
activity, that de-emphasizes traditional
modes of winning and losing. This creates
an environment that is less confrontational because of the lower-stakes nature of
the game. Importantly too, rotational
bench dodgeball allows enough competition to provide those “teachable moments”
to occur and facilitates the teacher’s ability
to teach the “overly aggressive” student to
learn about moderation, fair play, sportsmanship, and co-operation in an educational context.
The possibility remains, however, that
some students will be constantly tagged
out and their time exercising on the
sidelines might be viewed as a form of
punishment inflicted by other students. It
is in recognition of such possibilities that
class management becomes essential.
Usually, a simple discussion at the start of
the year about fair play, sportsmanship,
and bullying can reduce such problems
and increase the harmony of a PE class.
However, if the discussion does not
hinder bullying in the class, other
strategies are available before taking the
drastic step of eliminating the game
completely. One strategy is rotational
bench dodgeball, another is the “caged
Capel, S. A., & Piotrowski, S. (2000). Issues in
Physical Education. New York: Routledge Falmer.
Deutsch, Joe. “From Hall of Shame to Hall of
Fame: Transforming Traditional Elementary
Activities.” Missouri Journal of Health, Physical
Education, Recreation & Dance 2007, Vol. 17, 48.
Hopper, T., J. Butler & B. Storey (Eds.). (2009)
TGFU simply good pedagogy: Understanding a complex challenge (pp. 35-47). Ottawa: PHE Canada.
MacDonald, Joe. “Dodging 'Dodgeball.'. / La
chasse au « ballon-chasseur ».” Physical & Health
Education Journal Summer 2005, Vol. 71 Issue 2, 16.
Maurer, Marcy R., Teaching Elementary Physical
Education. January 2006, Vol. 17, Issue 1, 6.
MSNBC (2004). N.Y lawsuit questions safety of
dodgeball. Retrieved April 28, 2010 from MSNBC
website: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6535954/.
National Association for Sport & Physical
Education. “Position on Dodgeball in Physical
Education.” Retrieved April 28, 2010 from Blaine
School District website: http://www.blaine.
wednet.edu/bes/bespe/articles/Dodgeball%20
Position.pdf
National Association for Sport & Physical
Education Forum. “Elementary Physical
Education, Dodgeball Debate.” Retrieved April 28,
2010 from NASPE website: http://www.pelinks4u.
org/naspeforum/discus/messages/6/66.html?11678
38565
Shoemaker, M. (2001). “Is there a place for dodgeball in physical education?”. The Journal of Physical
Education, Recreation & Dance, Vol. 72.
QUALIT Y SCHOOL HEALTH
Enrichir le savoir-faire physique et en santé
dans les écoles et les communautés ontariennes
Les programmes-cadres en éducation physique et en santé de l’Ontario au service
du bien-être d’une génération
E
n Ontario, 2,1 millions d’enfants et de jeunes verront bientôt la santé et
l’éducation physique d’un nouvel œil. Il en sera de même pour leurs
enseignantes et enseignants et de leurs communautés. À la suite du lancement
de la nouvelles version du programme-cadre en éducation physique et santé de
l’élémentaire par le ministère de l’Éducation de l’Ontario, les enseignantes et
enseignants de la 1re année à la 8e année seront plus à même d’adopter une
approche globale et équilibrée en matière de santé et d’éducation physique. De
leur côté, les élèves profiteront de programmes plus dynamiques, participatifs et
enrichissants sur le plan personnel. Le curriculum destiné à l’élémentaire sera
offert d’ici l’automne 2010, alors que celui destiné au secondaire sera en vigueur
plus tard en 2010. Il importe de préciser que ces programmes visent à modifier
non seulement les comportements et attitudes des élèves à l’égard de la santé,
mais aussi ceux des familles et des communautés ontariennes.
« (Ces nouveaux programmes-cadres)
pourraient bien constituer le plus important
projet de promotion de la santé jamais
mis sur pied par la province » explique
Chris Markham, directeur général et
PDG d’Ophea, un organisme sans but
lucratif dont le mandat consiste à favoriser
des écoles et des communautés en santé,
à appuyer les programmes établis en ce
sens et à encourager les partenariats et la
revendication.
Une vision fondée sur le
renforcement du savoir-faire
physique et en santé
Qu’est-ce qui rend ce nouveau programmecadre aussi innovateur? D’une part, il met
l’accent sur le savoir-faire. Peu importe le
niveau scolaire ou la matière, les
enseignantes et enseignants comprennent
tous l’importance de doter les élèves d’un
solide savoir-faire en lecture et en écriture.
Par contre, les concepts du savoirfaire physique (l’aptitude à bouger
efficacement en s’adonnant à une gamme
d’activités physiques) et du savoir-faire en
santé (les compétences requises pour
comprendre et utiliser l’information afin
de prendre des décisions favorables pour
la santé) sont plus novateurs. Heureusement pour les éducateurs et les élèves
de l’Ontario, ce sont également deux
concepts que les nouveaux programmescadres en éducation physique et en santé
de l’Ontario définissent clairement et
appuient entièrement.
Au lieu de restreindre la portée des cours
d’éducation physique et de santé à la
création d’équipes sportives et aux cours
de santé magistraux, les nouveaux
programmes-cadres de l’élémentaire et du
secondaire (qui entrera en vigueur plus
tard cette année) reposent sur une vision
différente, à savoir que les connaissances
et les compétences acquises profiteront
toute la vie aux élèves et leur fourniront
des outils utiles pour faire face aux pres-
L’Ophea est un organisme sans but
lucratif dont la vision consiste à encourager tous les enfants à valoriser et
adopter à vie des modes de vie sains et
actifs. L’Ophea travaille en partenariat
avec les conseils scolaires, les bureaux de
santé publique, les instances gouvernementales, les organismes non gouvernementaux et ceux du secteur privé pour
mettre au point des programmes et des
services novateurs et avant-gardistes qui
favorisent des écoles et des collectivités
saines et actives.
sions d’un monde en constante évolution.
En permettant aux élèves d’acquérir un
solide savoir-faire en matière d’éducation
physique et santé, ces programmes
favorisent aussi leur participation efficace
aux activités sportives et autres qui leur
sont proposées, leur bonne acquisition
des connaissances et capacités nécessaires,
ainsi que leur engagement à vivre une vie
saine et active et à promouvoir ces modes
de vie dans leur milieu.
Une approche holistique et
communautaire
Les nouveaux programmes-cadres constituent
aussi une excellente occasion d’engager la
participation de partenaires communautaires et de transformer chaque école en
un lieu rassembleur au service de la santé
communautaire.
Selon Heather Gardner, consultante pour
Ophea en éducation physique et santé, «
la meilleure façon de mettre en oeuvre le
nouveau curriculum consiste à en faire
l’un des quatre piliers des écoles en santé
». Elle fait ainsi référence au document du
ministère de l’Éducation et du ministère
de la Santé de l’Ontario intitulé Fondements d’une école saine, une ressource qui
énonce la philosophie et le cadre qui
sous-tendent le concept des écoles saines
en Ontario dans les quatre domaines
suivants :
1. Enseignement et programmes de
qualité
2. Environnement physique sain et
sécuritaire
3. Milieu social favorable
4. Partenariats communautaires
Il va de soi que le nouveau curriculum est
surtout associé au premier pilier
(Enseignement et programmes de qualité). Par contre, précise Mme Gardner, «
la pleine concrétisation de cette vision est
nécessairement tributaire d’un environnement physique sain et dans un milieu
social favorable ».
Faire de l’autonomie fonctionnelle
une priorité
L’un des changements majeurs apportés
aux programmes-cadres porte sur
l’apprentissage de l’autonomie fonctionnelle (compétences personnelles, compétences interpersonnelles, procédés
critiques et créatifs). Ces compétences,
qui englobent la communication, le
contrôle de soi, les compétences décisionnelles et la détermination des buts, sont si
essentielles au bien-être soutenu et à la
réussite personnelle des élèves, tant à
l’intérieur qu’à l’extérieur de la classe,
qu’on les a intégrées à tous les domaines
du nouveau curriculum d’éducation
physique et de santé et que tous les volets
en tiennent compte.
Le fruit d’un riche partenariat avec
des intervenants clés
Le nouveau curriculum a été mis au point
par le ministère de l’Éducation avec l’aide
de nombreux organismes voués à l’enseignement et à la promotion de la santé,
y compris l’Ophea, l’Ontario Association
for the Supervision of Physical and
Health Education (OASPHE) et d’autres.
Depuis 2007, il a été assujetti à un intense
processus d’examen, de consultation,
d’écriture et de révision. Ce processus a
permis de recueillir les rétroactions de
nombreux organismes professionnels,
ainsi que du personnel enseignant, des
élèves et d’autres parties intéressées.
Ensemble, ces groupes et ces individus
ont examiné le curriculum de 1988,
retenu ce qu’il offrait de mieux et formulé
des recommandations en faveur du
changement.
Une approche vivifiante et une
orientation innovatrice
Le nouveau curriculum en éducation
physique et en santé est lié à trois volets
distincts, mais interreliés :
1. Vie saine
2. Vie active
3. Compétences motrices : habiletés,
concepts et stratégies
Dans le cas des programmes-cadres de
langue française, on propose également
des contenus d’apprentissage spécifiques à
chaque volet qui mettent l’accent sur le
développement personnel et identitaire.
Cette mesure vise à renforcer l’acquisition
de compétences en communication orale
chez les élèves qui fréquentent les écoles
de langue française de façon à optimiser
l’apprentissage et le développement
culturel et identitaire. Le nouveau
curriculum a modifié l’approche du
volet Vie saine et ne se contente plus
d’enseigner des faits et des données. En
effet, le nouveau volet Vie saine encourage
les élèves à mettre l'accent sur les concepts
de santé acquis pour faire des choix sains
et il les incite à établir des liens entre leur
propre santé et bien-être et la santé et le
bien-être des gens qui les entourent et des
habitants de la planète. Le volet Vie active
(autrefois le volet Participation active)
veut aider les élèves à découvrir les joies
de l’activité physique, à améliorer leur
condition physique et à développer le sens
des responsabilités nécessaire pour être
physiquement actifs en toute sécurité.
En dernier lieu, le volet Compétences
motrices (autrefois Habiletés motrices
fondamentales) met l’accent sur des
habiletés, des concepts et des stratégies
utiles qui inciteront les élèves à privilégier
l’activité physique la vie durant.
On a réaménagé spécifiquement le
contenu pour aborder des questions de
santé de grande actualité (p. ex., l’alimentation saine, la sécurité personnelle et la
prévention des blessures, la consommation
d’alcool et de drogues, la toxicomanie et
des comportements connexes, ainsi que le
développement humain et la santé
sexuelle). Les questions de santé mentale
et de bien-être émotionnel sont intégrées
à tous les sujets. L’ensemble du curriculum
s’inscrit dans un continuum qui permet
aux élèves de faire appel aux nouvelles
habiletés acquises à mesure qu’ils
progressent à l’élémentaire, puis arrivent
au secondaire. Pour que ce continuum
soit harmonieux, certains sujets ont été
déplacés d’une année à l’autre pour
garantir la concordance avec le niveau
de développement de l’élève et pour lui
donner la chance d’apprendre et de
pratiquer les habiletés acquises avant
d’avoir à s’en servir. Le nouveau cadre de
vie saine du curriculum est polyvalent. Il
met l’accent sur des sujets à priorité
élevée, d’après le groupe d’élèves, ou la
région de la province desservis, et permet
d’intégrer de futures priorités de santé. Il
inclut l’activité physique quotidienne
(APQ), une politique imposée en 2005
exigeant que tous les élèves de l’élémentaire s’adonnent chaque jour, en classe,
à 20 minutes d’activité physique modérée
à vigoureuse.
La réorientation des approches susmentionnée se reflète aussi dans les cinq
principes fondamentaux qui sous-tendent
les programmes-cadres.
1. C’est quand le personnel de l’école,
les familles et les communautés
appuient l’apprentissage des élèves
que les programmes d’éducation
physique et de santé sont les plus
efficaces.
En d’autres mots, ce sont les écoles en
santé qui offrent le meilleur contexte pour
l’implantation des nouveaux programmes
d’éducation physique et de santé. De fait,
la participation de partenaires communautaires – comme des organisations
récréatives, sportives et de santé publique
et des entreprises locales – aide à valider et
renforcer ce que les élèves apprennent
dans les cours d’éducation physique et de
santé. Plus encore, elle améliore la santé
globale des communautés.
Même si l’approche axée sur les écoles en
santé exige le déploiement d’efforts concertés et constants de la part de tous les
membres de la collectivité scolaire, il est
clair que le jeu en vaut la chandelle.
Lorsque les enfants constatent que les
valeurs et les bonnes habitudes apprises à
l’école sont reflétées dans les politiques de
l’école, à la maison et dans le milieu, leurs
expériences vont au-delà de simples
leçons pour devenir une façon de vivre.
2. L’activité physique constitue le principal outil d’apprentissage des élèves
Ce principe repose sur l’irréfutable
constat que la meilleure façon de sensibiliser les enfants à l’activité physique,
c’est de leur permettre de s’y adonner.
S’inspirant du modèle Apprendre et
comprendre par le jeu (ACJ), cette
prémisse souscrit à l’idée d’appliquer des
problèmes et des solutions tactiques à une
variété de jeux.
Ce faisant, les élèves arrivent non
seulement à apprendre ce qu’ils doivent
comprendre pour réussir dans un jeu ou
un sport particulier, mais aussi et surtout
à prendre des décisions fondées sur des
réflexions critiques et créatives. Il s’agit
d’une approche qui, en plus de produire
des joueurs plus compétents et renseignés,
favorise une participation active et
encourage les joueurs à avoir du plaisir.
3. La sécurité physique et émotive
constitue une condition préalable
pour garantir un apprentissage
efficace en matière d’éducation
physique et de santé.
Ce principe a trait, une fois de plus, au
cadre des écoles en santé (c.-à-d. la
nécessité d’un environnement social
favorable). Il reconnaît que les enfants qui
profitent de cours d’éducation physique
et de santé prennent part à des activités
assorties de risques inhérents et qu’ils s’y
adonnent dans des endroits où leurs pairs
peuvent les voir en train d’explorer, de
faire des erreurs et de réussir. Il est donc
essentiel de mettre l’accent sur la sécurité
et l’inclusivité. En outre, il importe que le
programme puisse accommoder les
forces, les besoins et les intérêts de tous les
élèves.
4. Les cours d’éducation physique et de
santé sont pleinement axés sur l’élève
et sur l’acquisition d’habiletés.
Les nouveaux programmes-cadres sont
sensibles au fait que le niveau de
développement physique et émotif varie
grandement d’un élève à l’autre. C’est
pourquoi le curriculum a modifié son
orientation. Dorénavant, il insiste moins
sur le contenu et plus sur une approche
pleinement centrée sur les habiletés
de manière à offrir un enseignement
différencié. On a recours à des exemples et
à des conseils pédagogiques pour guider
les enseignants et les aider à modifier leurs
cours selon le degré de réceptivité, le
niveau d’intérêt et les préférences
d’apprentissage des élèves pour les aider à
réaliser leur plein potentiel.
Le curriculum a aussi été conçu de façon
à être pleinement accessible à tous les
élèves, sans égard à leurs compétences ou
antécédents (y compris les membres des
Premières nations, les élèves Métis et
Inuits, les membres de diverses collectivités
ethnoculturelles, les élèves qui apprennent
l’anglais et ceux qui ont des besoins
spéciaux). Son contenu arrive à refléter la
réalité de chaque jeune.
5. Les connaissances transmises dans le
cadre des cours d’éducation physique
et de santé sont équilibrées, intégrées
et axées sur la vraie vie.
L’apprentissage associé aux nouveaux
programmes-cadres en éducation physique
et santé est équilibré puisqu’il cherche à
répondre aux besoins physiques, cognitifs
et sociaux. On parle d’intégration car,
dans la mesure du possible, il établit des
liens entre tous les volets du curriculum
(Vie saine, Vie active, Compétences
motrices : habiletés, concepts et stratégies)
et entre le contenu des volets et les aptitudes à la vie. En outre, les sujets abordés
ont trait à des situations auxquelles les
élèves d’aujourd’hui se heurtent et aux
choix qu’ils sont appelés à faire dans le
monde actuel.
Une mise en œuvre qui passe par
le travail d’équipe
La mise en œuvre efficace du nouveau
curriculum est une responsabilité conjointe
fondée sur la collaboration entre les
enseignantes et enseignants, les gestionnaires, les responsables de la santé
publique, des sports et des loisirs, le
gouvernement provincial et les organismes
non gouvernementaux.
À mesure qu’ils commenceront à utiliser
les nouveaux programmes-cadres, les
enseignants profiteront à la fois de l’appui
de partenaires communautaires (y
compris des chefs de file en santé
publique, sports et loisirs et autres
meneurs avec qui ils collaboreront pour
mettre en œuvre le curriculum) et
d’organismes comme Ophea qui dispose
de précieux documents d’accompagnement prêts à servir.
« Je peux dire, en toute objectivité, que les
ressources sur l’éducation physique et la
santé fournies par Ophea sont les plus
utiles que j'ai jamais utilisées », affirme
Andrea Pivetta, enseignante à l’élémentaire et à l’intermédiaire au Conseil scolaire de district de la région de York. Elle
fait référence aux cartables produits par
Ophea et qu’utilisent depuis 10 ans les
enseignantes et enseignants ontariens
pour livrer le curriculum d’éducation
physique et de santé de 1998.
Ophea travaille en partenariat avec OASPHE (l’Association ontarienne pour les
superviseurs en éducation physique) et
divers autres partenaires, y compris des
conseils scolaires (anglophones et francophones), des bureaux de santé
publique, des organisations sportives et
récréatives de partout en province, ainsi
qu’avec le gouvernement provincial et
divers organismes non gouvernementaux,
pour mettre au point des ressources
d’accompagnement à l’appui des nouveaux programmes-cadres en éducation
physique et santé (1re année à 8e année).
Ces ressources devraient être offertes à
compter de l’automne 2010 de manière à
concorder avec la date de lancement
obligatoire du nouveau curriculum à
l’élémentaire. Dans le cadre du processus
d’élaboration, l’Ophea a fait appel à 46
rédacteurs et à plus de 100 partenaires
dont la tâche consiste à réviser les
contenus pertinents à leur champ
d’expertise. Les services de plus de 200
enseignantes et enseignants ont été
retenus pour mener des essais pilotes à
l’échelle provinciale.
Tout comme les cartables d’Ophea
produits auparavant, ces ressources
faciliteront la transition harmonieuse du
personnel enseignant vers les nouveaux
programmes-cadres. Ainsi regroupées,
elles constituent un guichet unique
auquel pourront accéder tous les
enseignants, particulièrement les généralistes, pour obtenir une aide de haute
qualité adaptée à chaque niveau scolaire.
Ces ressources aborderont tous les volets
du nouveau curriculum et comprendront
quelque 120 plans de cours liés à chaque
niveau scolaire.
Un curriculum qui pourrait
améliorer la santé des Ontariens...
L’instauration efficace et uniforme de tous
les volets des nouveaux programmescadres en éducation physique et en santé
de l’Ontario dans un contexte d’écoles en
santé pourrait améliorer non seulement
la perception des cours d’éducation
physique et de santé des élèves, mais aussi
la perception de l’ensemble de la communauté envers la santé – et pas juste parce
que la structure et le contenu du curriculum favorisent les partenariats entre
l’école et ses partenaires communautaires.
Quand les écoles aident leurs élèves à
acquérir un solide savoir-faire en
éducation physique et en santé, elles leur
donnent du même coup la clé du mieuxêtre. En plus d’apprendre à aimer
l’activité physique et d’acquérir une série
d’habiletés motrices transférables, ces
élèves découvrent comment appliquer ces
habiletés à divers contextes.
De la même façon, quand les élèves
arrivent à bien saisir les liens entre les
aptitudes à la vie acquises et les
expériences qu’ils vivent au quotidien, ils
commencent à voir le monde d’un
nouvel œil. Soudain, ce qui a été appris
dans le cadre des cours d’éducation
physique et de santé peut les inciter
à opter pour des modes de vie actifs à
l’extérieur de l’école. Ces effets peuvent se
prolonger bien longtemps après la fin des
années d’école.
Simplement dit par un spécialiste en
promotion de la santé : « Tout se résume
à aider les enfants à faire des choix santé ».
Tandis que les élèves d’aujourd’hui
s’affairent à grandir et devenir les adultes
qui bâtiront la société de demain, ceci
pourrait bien constituer la plus précieuse
chose qu’on puisse leur enseigner.
Pour obtenir d’autres
renseignements à ce sujet, allez à :
www.ophea.net
Yoga for Mind, Body, Soul, and School
By Brenna Bellhouse
P
roviding the right tools for our youth can be rewarding and
challenging. My intention in this article is to outline a solid
foundation for providing yoga in the school setting. Like a ripple in
a pond, yoga has the potential to spread through the education
system uniting the body, mind, and soul.
Yoga has been taught and practiced for
centuries, and the practice provides many
positive outcomes. The nature of yoga
has long been debated: Is it a religion?
Should it be kept out of the school
system? Despite these disagreements,
yoga is not a religion; it is a philosophy,
which began in Indian 5,000 years ago.
Yoga sometimes incorporates tenets of
other philosophies, such as Hinduism or
Buddhism, but it is not necessary to
study those paths in order to practice or
study yoga. It is also not necessary to
surrender one’s own religious beliefs to
practice yoga.
Yoga has fast become a new fad in North
American society. A new fitness regimen
usually includes classes such as power
yoga, iron yoga, yoga for abs, and so
forth. In the rush to incorporate the
health benefits, we sometimes forget to
form this union of the body, mind, and
soul and have become accustomed to
focusing on one aspect, rather than the
whole. A similar tendency can be seen in
the school setting generally as we teachers
often focus on teaching the mind
separate from the body.
For example, in a typical high school
setting, each of the four periods is 75
minutes long and, in many classes,
students are not able to leave the class,
eat, or take a break. Their break time is
usually only the five minutes between the
bell and their next 75 minutes period.
Then, those teachers trained to teach the
bodies often focus on just that. Imagine a
physical education teacher in the elementary setting with a full course load and no
preparation time, with only enough time
to get the kids active without following
through with the why, when, how. After
grade 9 in Ontario, physical education is
not mandatory. There may be no school
time for any physical education at all!
The practice of yoga exercises body and
mind. Forming a union between the
body, mind, and soul will help each state
function on a higher level. Working and
training the body (the physical level) will
stretch the mind and facilitate blood flow
to the brain, which can help students
focus and learn at a faster rate. This
training of the body can also help ground
the soul, making possible inner peace
through the physical action of movement.
Working and training the mind through
breathing and setting goals (the psychological level) will focus the body and help
develop self-discipline and confidence.
This work also helps focus the body on
the task at hand. Yoga can lengthen the
soul through breathing, which can help
students create a positive inner dialog.
Working and training the soul will in
turn strengthen the body and calm
the mind. This helps students become
confident, self-directed learners.
Brenna Bellhouse is an Educator and
Fitness Trainer. She has spent the last ten
years doing professional development in
education and coaching. She received
her Bachelor of Education, in physical
education and business, from the
McGill University and additional basic
qualifications in science from the
University of Ottawa. Brenna has
worked with children and youth for ten
years as a teacher, seminar facilitator,
mentor, coach, fitness trainer, and motivational speaker.
There are great benefits to yoga in the
school setting for both educators and
students. These include: strengthening
core muscle groups, improving circulation, stretching the spine, and releasing
tension. Physiological benefits include
increased blood flow to the brain and
glands, which aids the learning process.
Yoga also improves digestion by compressing and massaging internal organs, which
in turn releases pent up toxins from the
body. Psychological benefits include
increased focus, calming the body and
mind, and grounding students in the
present moment. Taken together, yoga
Yoga has the potential to calm their mind and body
to prevent them from becoming overwhelmed
and to give them useful physical and psychological
coping strategies.
can effectively ground, focus, calm,
stretch, lengthen, and strengthen all
aspects of the self.
Yoga requires very little equipment and
space. All one really needs is a body,
mind, and soul. Many “asanas” or poses
can be done seated in a classroom chair
or standing at a desk. Students and teachers can practice together and receive the
benefits of yoga in as little as ten minutes
each day. Teachers can learn ten basic
poses at a half-day workshop or professional development day. Every age group,
race, and body type can practice yoga and
breathing techniques. The benefits are
similar for every person.
Students love to move. Different movement develops at different stages of
growth but when a child is taught to
move with confidence, the child moves
forever. Yoga is a way to teach every student how to move with confidence. It
also teaches students how to inwardly
focus their attention through connecting
with their own breathing patterns. This
can be a very effective technique that
students can use in or out of the
classroom. Connections with our breathing patterns tend to calm the mind and
body, which can be very beneficial in
times of stress.
Imagine grade 12 students in their first
semester; there is lots of pressure to get
the grades for acceptance into a postsecondary school. Yoga has the potential
to calm their mind and body to prevent
them from becoming overwhelmed and
to give them useful physical and psychological coping strategies.
Yoga also has the potential to revitalize
the body and mind. For example, picture
a math or science class in the last period
of the day. Students are often tired,
hungry, and drained. An uplifting
breathing exercise with some poses can
help them to regain focus as the final bell
approaches. This simple connection with
yoga can really make a difference in a
student's life. This includes benefits for
the body (strength and body image),
mind (academic focus), and soul (attention inward).
My students have said many great things
about the practice of yoga in school.
They have called it, “relaxing & enjoying,” “renewing and rejuvenating,”
“spiritual, a great way to stay in shape
with your body and mind,” “calming, it
helps you get in touch with yourself,”
“it brings inner peace,” “it is a good way
to connect body and mind and be on top
of your game.”
Teachers thrive in a learning environment. We understand how the cognitive
mind works, and we are often challenged
to teach 30 cognitive minds, giving each
one individualized attention. This is very
difficult. Yoga can help teachers draw the
student’s attention inward and focus
attention on what really matters in their
learning environment at the present
moment. It can also help teachers to
release tension and stress built up over
the course of a regular school day. The
2009 Active Healthy Kids Canada
Report Card on Physical Activity for
Children and Youth stated that children
who are more physically active also do
better academically. Similarly, yoga
increases blood flow to the brain and
glands for easier access to the cognitive
mind, which has real practical benefits
for learning in all subjects. Yoga is very
practical and is a great fit in the school
system.
Most provinces have a mandated allotted
time for daily physical activity (except
in high schools as noted earlier). This
normally takes the form of two 15-minute
blocks. Why not try some effective Yoga
techniques? There is no better time to
unite the body, mind, and soul.
Have you had success implementing yoga
or similar techniques in your school?
Please write us and tell us all about it!
CUPR
R E S E A R C H PAG E
Readers are invited to submit research summaries related to physical education
and physical activity. Summaries must be no longer than 400 words, and should
be submitted electronically to: John Maker, PHE Journal Editor, e-mail:
[email protected].
Specifics for generalists: Teaching elementary
physical education.
Lu, C., & De Lisio, A. (2009).
International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 1(3),
170-187. Full text [online]:
http://www.iejee.com/index.php/ojs/article/view/40/23
Quality physical education offered at the elementary school level
is critical for children to understand and develop healthy living. In
Canada and in most countries, physical education is taught by a
generalist teacher (i.e., an individual who has not undertaken
extensive training in physical education) particularly at the
elementary school level. Inadequate and inappropriate preparation
has been identified as a major barrier for an elementary generalist
to develop and implement a quality physical education program.
The purpose of this paper is to identify and discuss helpful strategies
used to employ each fundamental component of a quality physical
education program and is intended for a generalist audience. More
specifically, the paper explores: (a) the (dis)advantage of teaching
physical education as a generalist teacher; (b) the ability of
physical education to address the whole child; (c) the confusion
surrounding physical education and physical activity; and (d) the
strategies of a successful physical educator. n
Somatic/ing within the Physical Landscapes
of Literacy: Autobiography, Curriculum, and
Phenomenology
Authors: Rebecca J. Lloyd & Nicholas A. Ng-A-Fook,
Conference: Canadian Society for the Study of Education
(CSSE), Concordia University
Date of Presentation: May 31, 2010
Physical literacy is a central concept within the current
curricular revisions of physical education. Such political
aligning with inter-national hyperactive literacy movements
promotes inspirited holistic pedagogies for reading and writing
the aesthetic of physical experiences. Nonetheless, how do such
metaphors of reading and writing potentially contribute to
and/or reduce the aesthetics of our physical educative
experiences? We seek to understand the somatic aesthetics of
literacy both physically and figuratively through phenomenological and autobiographical writing. Furthermore, we attend
to the ways physical education might ‘inscribe’ its aesthetics
onto the landscape of educational experiences. Our curricular
inquiry thus adds a somatic dimension to literacy within and
beyond the physical education terrain. n
How Can We Build Coaching Capacity Within
the School Setting?
Peggy Gallant, St. Francis Xavier University
Conference: Canadian Society for the Study of Education (CSSE), Concordia University
Date of Presentation: May 31, 2010
This paper investigates the systemic and structural barriers that limit intersectoral
collaboration relative to coach capacity development, compares the state of coach
development between the sports engaged in this study at the school level and assesses the
potential of Provincial Sport Organizations (PSOs) and other sport stakeholders to
effectively and purposely effect change in coach capacity levels within school settings . n
The Council of University Professors
and Researchers (CUPR), supported by
PHE Canada, is made up of Canadian
faculty and graduate students interested
in research. CUPR provides a variety of
opportunities for members to exchange
ideas, such as: CUPR Forums at the
PHE Canada Conference; organizing
scholarly sessions at the PHE Canada
Conference; promoting the publication
of research articles in the PHE Journal;
and encouraging dialogue through the
CUPR listserv. As part of the PHE
Canada umbrella, CUPR facilitates the
exchange of ideas with other members
of PHE Canada.
COIN DES CHERCHEURS DU
La rubrique de recherche du Conseil des professeurs et des chercheurs universitaires vous présente
divers projets de recherche sur l’éducation et l’activité physiques. Nous invitons les lecteurs à soumettre une description de leurs travaux de recherche (300 mots ou moins) à l’attention de
John Maker, à l’adresse [email protected].
CPCU
Conseils précis aux généralistes sur
l’enseignement de l’éducation physique
à l’élémentaire
Somatisation au sein du paysage physique
du savoir-faire : Autobiographie, curriculum
et phénoménologie
Lu, C., & De Lisio, A. (2009).
International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 1(3),
170-187. Texte complet [en ligne] :
http://www.iejee.com/index.php/ojs/article/view/40/23
Rebecca J. Lloyd et Nicholas A. Ng-A-Fook, Université d’Ottawa
Conférence : Société canadienne pour l’étude de l’éducation
(SCEE), Université Concordia
Date de la présentation : Le 31 mai 2010
Une éducation physique de qualité à l’élémentaire est jugée
essentielle pour aider les élèves à comprendre ce qui constitue un
mode de vie sain et pour les encourager à vivre sainement. Au
Canada et dans beaucoup d’autres pays, les cours d’éducation
physique sont souvent donnés par des généralistes (c.-à-d. des
enseignants qui n’ont aucune formation poussée en éducation
physique), surtout dans les écoles élémentaires. On sait depuis
longtemps qu’un manque de préparation et de formation
adéquate constitue un obstacle majeur qui empêche les
généralistes de concevoir et d’offrir des programmes d’éducation
physique de qualité. Destiné aux enseignants généralistes, cet
article présente des stratégies utiles pour les aider à exploiter à
bon escient chaque composante fondamentale d’un programme
d’éducation physique de qualité. Il examine, en particulier : (a)
les avantages et désavantages qu’il y a à enseigner l’éducation
physique quand on est généraliste; (b) l’aptitude de l’éducation
physique de tenir compte de l’élève dans sa globalité;
(c) la confusion autour des concepts d’éducation physique et
d’activité. n
Le savoir-faire physique est au cœur des révisions actuelles
apportées au contenu des programmes-cadres en éducation
physique. Un tel alignement politique sur des mouvements
internationaux hyperactifs axés sur le savoir-faire favorise des
pédagogies holistiques inspirées pour les composantes de lecture et
d’écriture du volet esthétique de l’expérience physique. En quoi de
telles métaphores pour la lecture et l’écriture contribuent-elles
à accroître ou diminuer l’esthétisme de nos expériences dans
l’enseignement de l’éducation physique? Nous tentons de
comprendre l’esthétisme somatique du savoir-faire, tant figuratif
que physique, à l’aide de l’écriture phénoménologique et
autobiographique. Nous tentons également de voir en quoi
l’éducation physique peut réussir à « graver » son esthétisme sur
le paysage de l’expérience pédagogique. Notre étude des
programmes-cadres ajoute une dimension somatique au savoirfaire, tant à l’intérieur qu’à l’extérieur de l’univers de l’éducation
physique. n
Comment renforcer la capacité d’entraînement en milieu
scolaire?
Société canadienne pour l’étude de l’éducation (SCEE) Université Concordia
Date de la présentation : Le 31 mai 2010
Cet article examine les obstacles systémiques et structurels qui nuisent aux efforts de
collaboration intersectorielle engagés pour accroître la capacité en entraînement. Il
compare l’état actuel du développement de la capacité en entraînement en milieu
scolaire entre divers sports compris dans l’étude et évalue l’aptitude des organisations
sportives provinciales (OSP) et d’autres intervenants du domaine sportif à instaurer
des changements efficaces et ciblés de manière à modifier le degré de capacité en
entraînement dans les écoles. n
Le Conseil des professeurs et des
chercheurs universitaires (CPCU), qui
bénéficie de l’appui de EPS Canada,
est composé de professeurs et d’étudiants
et d’étudiantes de 2e et 3e cycles
s’intéressant à la recherche. Le CPCU
offre différentes occasions aux membres
d’échanger des idées, tels les forums du
CPCU à la conférence d’EPS Canada, et
les séances érudites à la conférence
de EPS Canada. Le CPCU assure la
publication d’articles sur la recherche
dans PHE Journal et favorise le dialogue
par l’entremise du serveur de liste
du CPCU. Au sein de l’organisation
cadre d’EPS Canada, le CPCU facilite
l’échange d’idées avec d’autres membres
de EPS Canada.

in defence of dodgeball?

Transcription

Similar documents

Westney Heights Plaza Ajax - December 10, 2015

Place des Arts

The Crêtes Itinerary

News Letters - Collections

Spring Programming - Cornwall Public Library

the press-release here!

Minnesota Union Women`s Retreat

Les Industries Fibrobec Inc.

CCFCC.ca - Canadian Culinary Federation