See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274639186

A teachers’ perceptions of the Sport Education

model as an alternative for upper primary
school physical education

Article · January 2008

CITATIONS READS

23 764

1 author:

Shane Pill
Flinders University
71 PUBLICATIONS 180 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Current writing projects View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Shane Pill on 08 April 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are added to the original document
and are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them immediately.
ACHPER HLJ Sept08:HL jnl 177 inner 9/9/08 1:09 PM Page 23

A teachers’ perceptions of the Sport

p hy s i c a l e d u c a t i o n
Education model as an alternative for upper
primary school physical education
Shane Pill, Flinders University

T his paper considers the Sport Education model (Siedentop, 1994; Siedentop, Hastie & van der Mars, 2004) as a
legitimate alternative for primary school physical education in a South Australian primary school. Physical education
curriculum models (such as Sport Education) legitimacy as contexts for teaching appropriately rest on a capacity to facilitate
teaching for student realisation of the relevant curriculum framework outcomes and as part of this, their capability to be
inclusive and engaging for students.
This paper reveals the elements that inhibited and supported a teacher during the implementation of a Sport Education
season as an alternative curriculum model. In contrast to findings from other studies, the participation of skilled and athletic
students was problematised by the teacher in that Sport Education contained the potential for the realisation of lower grades
when students did not adjust to new performance and assessment expectations. The study also suggests that there is the
potential for positive transfer of learning from the physical education context to the co curricular context. Further, the
interesting prospect for Sport Education to become a deliberate construction for personal and social skill teaching emerges.

INTRODUCTION capacity to facilitate teaching for a broad range of physical

The Sport Education model (SE) (Siedentop, 1994;
Siedentop, Hastie & van der Mars, 2004) is one of a number
of physical education curriculum models that need to be
incorporated into the teaching of physical education for the
realisation of specific student learning outcomes (Penney &
Brooker, 2002). While traditional approaches to physical
education have concentrated on sport skill acquisition in
decontextualised settings (Alexander, online 2008; Brooker,
Kirk, Braiuka and Bransgrove, 2000), SE is advocated as an
approach which aligns sport, as one of the appropriate
content forms for physical education, with current
educational trends in curriculum (Siedentop, Hastie and van
der Mars, 2004). There is some evidence to suggest that the
SE curriculum model is one that can be applied to other
physical education content forms, such as athletics,
gymnastics, outdoor education and swimming, for more
inclusive and educationally purposeful movement
experiences in physical education ( Penney, Clarke, Quill &
Kinchin, 2005). The application of SE to other physical
education content forms for the realisation of curriculum
standards and their associated outcomes remains an area for
further exploration. This paper will not address the
philosophy of SE nor its features and assumptions unless
relevant to the findings of this study as these have been well
covered in other literature.
Progressing SE as a legitimate context for physical
education in primary schools appropriately rests on its
education curriculum outcomes and, upon its’ capability to
be inclusive and engaging for students. SE was considered by
the teacher in this instance for its potential to be more
inclusive of the complete range of students and their needs
than the predominantly game and drill based curriculum
model previously employed. This is appropriate as literature
has previously suggested that SE in upper primary grades can
be considered a legitimate model (Strikwerda-Brown &
Taggart, 2001) for the effective teaching of modified sport to
“ensure full student participation in developmentally
appropriate activities” (Bell, 1998 p.36). Despite this
assertion there is limited direct reporting of that which
inhibits and supports primary years teachers to design
curriculum using SE.
While SE has continued to be discussed in the research
literature most of this is in relation to the assumptions and
features of the model. Literature related to use of SE and the
role of sport in pursuing current physical education
curriculum outcomes is sparse despite a need to be constantly
reviewing matters of curriculum form and content. There
remains therefore, a need for further understanding about
school implementation of SE and the issues associated with
doing so, in reference to current Australian curriculum
frameworks if SE is to be more broadly considered by primary
years teachers for its potential for developmentally
appropriate physical education. This study therefore has the
potential to be of both interest and relevance to teachers

ACHPER Healthy Lifestyles Journal 55 (1) 23

ACHPER HLJ Sept08:HL jnl 177 inner 9/9/08 1:09 PM Page 24
unfamiliar or inexperienced with the use of SE in primary
school settings as it will discuss its legitimacy and that which
supports and inhibits its adoption as an alternative physical
education model.
The Study Site
The study involved one combined Year 6 and 7 mixed ability
coeducational class of 27 students and their teacher in an R-
7 metropolitan Primary School. The Sport Education (SE)
season was conducted during Term 3 and consisted of one 45
minute lesson per week for ten weeks. Basketball was chosen
by the teacher as the sport for the season, with 5 mixed ability
and mixed gender teams developing towards self
responsibility for a half court basketball competition. The
modification of basketball to half court is consistent with the
“small group learning” pedagogical element of SE which aims
at maximising active participation and learning (Siedentop,
Hastie and van der Mars; 2004 p.25).
The SE season was focussed by student achievement of
outcomes from the ‘Physical Activity and Participation’ and
‘Personal and Social Development’ strands of the Health and
Physical Education South Australian Curriculum Standards
and Accountability framework (DECS, 2005). Physical
education at the school had, until the year of this study, been
taken by the class teachers. Curriculum innovation and the
consideration of alternatives to game and skill drill models in
physical education could therefore be reasonably considered
as new to both the school and the culture of the students.
Methodology
Curriculum development in school settings is contextual and
informed by its implementation (Alexander & Penny, 2005).
The methodology of this study recognised this as the design
followed that of a local ‘teaching experiment’ (Hastie &
Curtner – Smith, 2006). A teaching experiment involves a
sequence of teaching episodes, a method of recording what
transpires in each episode and, a retrospective analysis of the
data collected. This type of research therefore, can reasonably
be considered a form of qualitative research in the ‘pedagogue
tradition’ (Bishop, 1992). Studies covered by the pedagogue
tradition are exploratory in nature and concerned with
classroom practicalities. Qualitative methodology of this type
is particularly relevant when researching collaboratively with
teachers as they find it more applicable than other approaches
as they “see themselves in it” (Nickson, 2000 p.176). When
employing this research design, researchers work with a teacher
to develop a curriculum and study the teaching and the
teachers responses to the curriculum (Hastie & Curtner –
Smith, 2006). Research in the pedagogue tradition is similar
to action research as it also involves the systematic study of the
insight and practice of individuals within the context of a local
setting, leading to better understanding and greater insights
about a situation or program (Thomas & Nelson, 2001).
Consistent with procedures in qualitative research the
problems to be considered were defined (Thomas & Nelson,
2001). Two problems were identified; firstly, the construction
of a curriculum that could address teaching that could
legitimately consider more than one outcome from the
curriculum framework (DECS, 2005) and secondly, a
curriculum model that provided an increased likelihood for
planned inclusion of students considered by the teacher as
socially isolated and marginalised during previously during
physical education. After attending a generative conference
24 ACHPER Healthy Lifestyles Journal 55 (1)
workshop, the teacher hypothesised that the SE would
provide an alternative that was legitimate relevant to the
curriculum framework (DECS, 2005) and for its theorised
positioning as potentially more inclusive of all students needs
(Siedentop, Hastie & van der Mars, 2004).
During the planning and the teaching phases of the
project there existed open dialogue between the teacher and
the researcher to verify that the features of SE were being
understood and adhered to by the teacher. As this was the
first time the teacher had developed physical education
curriculum using SE it was important to validate that the
curriculum was consistent with the model (Hastie &
Sinelnikov, 2006). Feedback and counselling about the
construction of SE seasons and the pedagogical elements of
SE were provided to the teacher continuously throughout the
implementation of the curriculum plan. Together with the
teacher diary the opportunity for analysis of adherence to SE
features was available.
Diaries are a valid form of data collection in qualitative
research (Thomas & Nelson, 2001). During the SE season the
teacher was asked to compose a reflective diary recording
responses to perceptions, interpretations and awareness of the
total class situation and of the interaction of the students as
they experienced this new (to them) physical education model.
Reflective diaries focus the direction of personal reflection
about lessons through a process that provides for a connection
of theory and practice through scrutiny of the teaching and its
context (Mallett, 2004). At the conclusion of the SE season
and after an initial analysis of the teachers’ diary a ‘person to
person’ open ended conversational style interview with the
teacher occurred. This type of interview is a common form of
data collection in qualitative research (Thomas & Nelson,
2001) and permits further consideration of the themes which
are generated from the analysis of other sources.
Data categorization is a key component of qualitative
research as it allows information to be retrieved and analysed
as part of the inductive process. The data from the teacher’s
journal and interview were therefore analysed using
comparative systematic interpretation to reveal recurring
themes. The categorisation by themes permitted a recount of
the knowledge generated from the study in a manner that
portrays explicit awareness of the perspectives which emerge
from the data and the validity of the assertions that this
generates (Thomas & Nelson, 2001).
Discussion
The following analytical narrative (Thomas & Nelson, 2001)
has emerged from the analysis of the teacher’s journal and
interview. It reveals SE potential for the development of a
climate of inclusion, the facilitation of a broader range of
curriculum outcomes and, the illumination of the elements
which assist and hinder the implementation of SE as a
legitimate alternative physical education model in a primary
school setting.
SE contains the potential to develop an enhanced
motivational climate
The teacher identified heightened attention and motivation
levels for most students during the SE season compared to
previous physical education curriculum. There was a
perceived decrease in behaviour management instances and
in their severity, with a decreased number of students
recorded as being asked to sit out for periods of the lesson or
ACHPER HLJ Sept08:HL jnl 177 inner 9/9/08 1:09 PM Page 25
to attend the ‘buddy’ class. The possibilities for an enhanced
motivational climate is an exciting possibility of the adoption
of SE as students who are unmotivated do not tend to learn
(Slavin, 1984).
In this study, the teacher particularly noted that students
who in the past would never join in were more engaged
through the adoption of specialised roles as part of a team. To
illustrate, the teacher noted in the interview;
‘One student that is not highly motivated and generally
struggles to fit in socially is the first to design the team logo,
which was a high quality. He went away after the first
lesson and by lunch time had showed me the team logo he
developed. Furthermore, the student also designed a team
song. This effort impressed the team mates who previously
did not wanted this student in their team during lessons.
This student use to go walkabout during the lesson and I
would some times have to send other students of to look for
him. From the first Sport Ed lesson there were no
participation problems for me with this student’.
Literature suggests that physical education curriculum models
can be dysfunctional for students not particularly capable or
confident in their movement skills (Siedentop & O’Sullivan,
1992; Laker, 2003). The result is that many students struggle
to see a sense of purpose and personal relevance in physical
education (Flintoff & Scratton, 2001). The above teacher
reflection intimates that this may not be so for physical
education experiences in primary school settings constructed
using SE. SE was considered in this study to be a legitimate
model for the planned inclusion and enhanced performance
and participation of previously disaffected students (Holland,
2006). Further, evidence suggested that the potential exists
for enhanced student situational interest for previously
marginalised students.
Situational interest has been identified as a theoretical
framework for SE (Kirk & Kinchin, 2003). Situational
interest is that which is derived from person – activity
interaction (Chen, Darst & Pangrazzi; 1999) and it is a
“motivator elicited by content and/or context rather than
personal preferences” (Chen, Ennis, Martin & Sun; 2005).
The team identification feature of SE has previously been
forwarded as the context providing for enhanced student
situational interest, connecting students’ heightened
engagement in SE seasons in physical education to an
enhanced sense of purpose (Clarke & Quill, 2003). The
inference from this study is that the tasks associated with the
team roles feature (Siedentop et al, 2004) of SE offer a means
through which situational interest can be developed for
students previously marginalised during other forms of sport
experiences in primary school physical education. The
potential for SE to develop an enhanced motivational climate
for previously disaffected students was considered to be a
legitimising feature and a reason to continue to use the model
for future physical education curriculum planning.
SE contains the potential to develop a
more inclusive climate
While it has been documented that physical education can be
an exclusive practice (Evans, 1993) it was noted by the
teacher that generally, students appeared more supportive and
inclined to help each other during the SE season than during
previous physical education teaching episodes. This was
described in the teacher diary as a climate where ‘helping others
helped the team achieve’. Additionally, ‘a stronger sense of
belonging, particularly for those less skilled and less confident’ was
also noted in the diary during the SE season. This is an
important consideration for physical education as students
are not all equally positioned to participate in sport
experiences in school physical education and yet, in order for
students to feel as if they belong they need to feel competent,
useful and potent (Sagor, 2005). It emerged during this study
that SE’s potential to realise these feelings for otherwise
disaffected students was a supportive reason for the continued
use of the model.
Team affiliation has previously been postulated as a SE
feature promoting a sense of belonging and security
(Alexander & Luckman, 2001). It was used in this instance
to provide additional (to sport skill competency) possibilities
for students to demonstrate competencies and usefulness and,
to feel potent in sport experiences in physical education.
Team affiliation and the individual role responsibilities
required of students during the SE season provided a physical
education context with a broader range of possibilities to
connect students through their personal learning styles,
preferences and abilities. The teacher reported during the
interview that it was observed that students ‘normally socially
isolated in physical education were more included and their
contributions more valued during the SE unit’ as a consequence
of the team affiliation and role responsibilities required during
the SE season.
SE’s potential for the promotion of an inclusive climate
for those students normally observed as socially isolated
during other forms of student grouping in physical education
was highly valued by the teacher. It was likely to be
influential in the consideration as to whether to continue to
use SE in the future.
SE facilitates a broader range of curriculum outcomes
The SE was found to provide a context for the teaching for
student achievement of an expanded range of curriculum
outcomes because of its requirement for tasks and activities in
addition to the normative singular physical education role
requirement of game player. Additionally, SE calls for an
expanded duration of teaching through the feature of seasons
and as such, the SE season also allows for an expansion of the
range of outcomes to be catered for and the depth to which
they can be considered. This is supported by literature which
suggests that teachers’ perception of what is learnt by students
shifts towards the inclusion of personal and social skill
development during a SE season (Alexander & Luckman,
2001).
In this study, SE was considered for its potential to
deliberately facilitate a broader range of curriculum outcomes,
including outcomes from the Personal and Social
Development as well as Physical Activity and Participation
Strand of the curriculum framework (DECS, 2005) ( see
Figure 1). It was identified during the interview that the
teacher felt there existed an enhanced capacity to plan for
student achievement and, teacher collection of evidence of
achievement of outcomes from the ‘Personal and Social
Development’ Strand of the curriculum framework (DECS,
2005). SE therefore assisted the teacher in intentionally
pursuing student personal and social skill development during
the teaching of a sport in physical education. The potential
for SE to provide an appropriate context for the realisation of
ACHPER Healthy Lifestyles Journal 55 (1) 25
ACHPER HLJ Sept08:HL jnl 177 inner 9/9/08 1:09 PM Page 26
evidence of student demonstration of outcomes from more
than one Strand of the curriculum framework was deemed to
be an element legitimising the use of SE in primary school
settings. It was noted in the teacher diary that as the unit
progressed there was ‘more time to observe, reflect and collect
evidence of student achievement of outcomes’ as a consequence
of the shift to SE. The provision of time to observe and more
accurately consider evidence of student achievement of the
learning outcomes was highly valued by the teacher. It is
consistent with SE’s theorised positioning of the teacher as a
facilitator of learning (Siedentop et al, 2004).
STRAND: PHYSICAL ACTIVITY AND
PARTICIPATION
3.1 Demonstrates a range of specialised individual and
team movement skills that enhance their sense of
personal and group identity.
4.1 Reflects on the use of specialised skills in various
social contexts (including teams) and is able to
modify skills to improve performance.
STRAND: PERSONAL AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT
3.5 Assumes different roles when working as part of a
cooperative group or team to achieve a shared goal
and understands the effects on relationships
4.5 Develops skills for working effectively in groups and in
teams, explores different constructions of group
dynamics such as leadership and identifies qualities
for good leaders
Figure 1. SACSA Curriculum Outcomes relevant to Year 6/7
Physical Education
The explicit pursuit of a broader range of curriculum
outcomes was considered by the teacher as presenting the less
‘movement skill competent’ students with an opportunity for a
higher grade than when movement skill competency alone
was used as the focus learning outcome. During the interview
it was stated, ‘Because personal and social skill development was
being assessed as well as basketball game and skill development this
time, the students who hadn’t done so well in the past when the
grade was based only on game skill, achieved a higher grade’.
SE foregrounding of student self responsibility and
initiative is suggested as providing possibilities for teachers to
pursue the development of student personal and social skills
(Alexander et al, 1997). While the capacity for the students
previously presenting as less athletic, confident and capable
movers realised an enhanced grade because of an assessment
based upon an expanded range of curriculum outcomes, it was
noted that the move to SE as an alternate model contained
the potential for the realisation of lower grades for some
students.
While opportunities for students normally considered
marginalised during traditional skill focussed physical
education teaching might be enhanced by SE, evidence
emerged during this study to suggest the assessment of the
more athletic students, previously the recipient of high grades
in physical education, suffers if they are unable to adapt to the
new expectations. This is somewhat contradictory to evidence
previously forwarded (Kinchin, 2001). During this study a
26 ACHPER Healthy Lifestyles Journal 55 (1)
number of students who would have previously considered
themselves high achievers in physical education were observed
as ‘resistant to the team roles and requirements of Sport Education
outside of the player performance role’, with a subsequent lower
mark at the end of the SE season. These students were noted
as appearing ‘quite anxious to play games’ and only reluctantly
participated in the team planning and role responsibilities
allocated to them. It was explained that, ‘these students didn’t
want to help others, probably because they were use (sic) to being
the dominant figures in class and now they no longer were because
other aspects of participation were equally important’.
The teacher reflection during the interview attributed the
reluctance to the cultural change of SE from that previously
experienced in physical education lessons. The ‘athletic’
students’ marks were compromised by their perceived
reluctance to fulfil the requirements of their team roles and to
contribute to the team in a manner that benefited all students
learning. In the diary it was noted by the teacher that, ‘I had
to explain to the students that they didn’t do as well as in the past
because they didn’t achieve as a high grade on the personal and
social skill aspects’. This finding does not align with claims
that during SE skilful players embrace all team members, as to
do so provides a better opportunity for success (Hastie, 2003).
It is also not consistent with previous studies suggesting
highly skilled students are well catered for and enjoy the SE
experience (Alexander & Luckman, 2001).
Recent reporting of the potential for SE to be disruptive
to the student social system in physical education classes
provides some corroboration that the SE experience may not
enhance achievement or participation for all students
(Sinelnikov & Hastie, 2008). Changing the delivery of sport
teaching in physical education so that it was more inclusive
and engaging for an identified group of marginalised students
while allowing teaching for, and assessment of, a broader
range of curriculum outcomes did not make the physical
education experience necessarily more rewarding for all
students. Nor did it necessarily mean all students’ needs were
catered for. This is an intriguing consideration for teachers
considering adopting SE as an alternative for physical
education. While the worth of a class structure that prevents
more skilful students from dominating games is identified as
an issue for SE (Hastie, 1998), the observation of reluctance
from previously high achieving students highlights that, while
much of the literature concerning students perception of SE
is positive, success in ensuring the claims of SE is not
guaranteed. While the teacher involved in this study did not
consider the lower grades of a number of previously higher
achieving students a limiting factor of SE, it may well be
considered oppositely by others.
The Sport Education model led to an intensification
of the teacher’s work
An intensification of the teacher’s work was cited during the
interview. Work intensification occurring from the
implementation of SE, particularly when doing so for the first
time, emerges as a potential barrier to a teacher taking on the
challenge of a new curriculum model. A teachers’ willingness
to ‘buy into’ SE as an alternative model and see it as
something worth changing to (McCaughty et al, 2004) was
compromised by the additional procedures and class processes
that have to be learnt, developed and refined through
practice with SE.
ACHPER HLJ Sept08:HL jnl 177 inner 9/9/08 1:09 PM Page 27
While the teacher in this study had an awareness of SE
from a generative conference workshop there was an absence
of a working familiarity with its intricacies. During the
interview the teacher discussed that, compared to previously
employed approaches, the implementation of SE required
more planning and preparation time during both the
curriculum design and implementation phases.
‘Time was a barrier. Extra planning time to set up initially.
Student meetings outside of class time were also an extra
call on my time. Changing the students’ perception of PE
and introducing ‘homework’, work outside of PE class
time for the first time, mentoring and assisting students so
they could do their roles competently intensified early
lessons’.
Alternative curriculum models are worth little if teachers
perceive the added workload associated with learning and
implementing them for the first time exceed the potential
benefit to students. Fortunately, in this study the teacher
perceived that the enhanced inclusion of students identified
as previously marginalised and SE’s capacity to develop a
context for the teaching and assessment of an expanded range
of curriculum outcomes was worth the work intensification.
It should be noted however, that the decision to take on the
challenge of implementing a new curriculum model would
have been more problematic without the professional support
provided by the context of collaborative research study.
The adoption of alternative physical education
curriculum models is assisted when there is peer
support
The support of the class teacher in providing extra class time
to supplement the physical education time was considered
influential in the teacher persisting with SE for the duration
of the intended SE season. When lessons were lost due to
unanticipated and unplanned school events or wet weather
the class teacher implemented a SE lesson so that the season
would not loose momentum. The teacher noted during the
interview that SE may be easier to adopt “when schools have a
middle school focus on curriculum integration or when taken up by
a (generalist primary) classroom teacher as they have the
potential for greater timetable flexibility’. SE has been presented
as a vehicle for curriculum integration (Siedentop et al, 2004)
but its potential in this area is yet to be fully explored and
should be a particular focus for research considering
legitimate middle schooling pedagogy.
The role of the research partner was also considered by
the teacher as influential in sustaining the SE season. During
the interview it was asserted,
‘Your role was important. Having a mentor with
experience, to bounce ideas off regarding ways of
implementing definitely helped. Without it, there would
have been a lot more hurdles, lot more things would have
gone wrong and less outcomes achieved. I can imagine that
without that support many teachers would go ‘too hard’.
The availability of mentors to guide and assist primary
years curriculum initiatives is an important consideration in
advancing the use of alternative physical education
curriculum models in primary schools. While the pressure to
produce publications may serve to elevate the product of
research collaboration above other aspects of school – tertiary
collaboration, leading, facilitating and mentoring curriculum
and pedagogical initiatives is an important element of the
school - tertiary relationship. Without access to this
association primary school based curriculum initiatives may
not move beyond the stage of teacher conceptualisation
because of the time pressures inherent in the daily routine of
the teachers. Unlike secondary teachers who frequently work
alongside subject specialisation colleagues, key teachers of
physical education and classroom teachers interested in
physical education curriculum initiatives often will not have
experienced and knowledgeable colleagues with which to
converse to clarify and depth their understanding. Tertiary
institutions play an important role in supporting and
progressing physical education curriculum and pedagogical
initiatives through the research relationship.
Evidence of transfer of learning by the students and
the school
An unanticipated result of the SE season experience by the
students was the teachers’ observation of improved student
independence in the co curricular sport setting. It was noted
in the diary that,
‘When we did athletics training at lunch and after school, the Year
6 and 7 students were taking responsibility for beginning stretching
and warming up prior to my arrival. This hadn’t happened before
we did Sport Education. They were getting equipment out, setting
up and allocating each other roles like measurer and recorder
without being asked by me, which is not behaviour I had noticed
prior to the Sport Education experience. Students’ were taking
what they were learning in class into the co curricular setting’.
While transfer of learning from the physical education
setting to sport settings is one of the ambitious goals of SE
(Siedentop et al, 2004) there is little in the research literature
related to this aspect of student learning. The potential for
student exposure to a season of SE to benefit their self
reliance, initiative and responsibility in school co curricular
and community sport settings emerged during this study. The
possibilities for SE acting to enhance the practice of sport
outside of curriculum time is presented in the literature as a
prominent reason for SE to be taken up by teachers
(Siedentop et al, 2004). The observation of students as more
self reliant in the co curricular setting was deemed by the
teacher to be supportive of a continuation of the employment
of SE in the future and another element legitimising its use.
Conclusion
SE appears complementary to the education of personal and
social skills outcomes. It has been noted however, that the
teaching for personal and social skills in physical education
will not be achieved unless subject to an explicit focus for
planning and teaching (Penney, 2006). This is supported by
the observations of this study. An interesting development
arising from this study has been the awakening of awareness
by the school leadership team of the possibilities for SE to be
used to teach for whole of school interpersonal social skill
development. The school has decided to trial SE with
selected vertical groupings of Year 4 and 5 boys for the
explicit development and maturation of their personal and
social skills. SE has been considered as a school social
behaviour intervention for at risk adolescent youth (Hastie &
Sharpe, 1999) and it has been presented as a model for the
development of social responsibility (Hastie & Buchanan,
2000), but there is limited literature in this area. Research
investigating SE’s possibility for the teaching of personal and
ACHPER Healthy Lifestyles Journal 55 (1) 27
ACHPER HLJ Sept08:HL jnl 177 inner 9/9/08 1:09 PM Page 28
social responsibility skills leading to enhanced student
behaviour in other school social settings, such as the
playground, is recommended.
It was speculated by the teacher during the interview that
by Term 3, when this SE season took place, students had
become acculturated to an experience of physical education
and, their ‘place’ within the experience. In essence, the
teacher had established a way of doing things with the class
which, upon reflection, privileged a group of students and SE
disrupted this privilege, but to the benefit of another group of
students. The teacher discerned that ‘next year when I do Sport
Education I will do it at the start of the year so that I can create a
more inclusive environment from the start, highlight personal and
social skill development from the beginning and establish this is the
way we do PE this year’. Research investigating the effect that
the timing of a SE season has on class culture, students peer
status and privilege, lesson engagement and achievement of
learning outcomes is recommended. Timing a SE season as
students initial physical education experience, deliberately
positioned to create a particular class climate and a culture
situated as inclusive and engaging of all students, warrants
further investigation.
“No research study by itself can ever be conclusive”
(Rink, 2006, p.45) and while the limited scope of this study
prevents definite claims from being forwarded, the study does
provide a point of difference to other reports commenting
upon the engagement of skilled and athletic students during
a SE season. In addition, the study provides evidence of an
observed transfer of learning from the physical education
setting to the co curricular setting and, an awareness by the
school leadership team of SE’s potential for the development
of personal and social skills for an enhanced school climate
across the year levels. Despite the potential benefits of SE,
the teacher involved in this study reports an intensification
of workload as a consequence of implementing a new physical
education model. This problematises the use of SE and is
identified as a barrier to its continued operation.
The findings from this study indicate that for the targeted
group of students, SE achieved its purpose of providing an
enhanced climate of inclusion and motivation. Further, this
study indicates that SE provides the capacity for the teaching
and collection of evidence of student achievement of a
broader range of curriculum outcomes, particularly those
aligned with personal and social skill development.
Interestingly, it was observed that students were taking
aspects of personal and social development learning from the
physical education SE season and applying them in the co
curricular context.
Further research collaborations with teachers new to SE
in primary school settings is recommended to expand
understanding related to the problematic issues in the
implementation of SE.
28 ACHPER Healthy Lifestyles Journal 55 (1)
References
Alexander, K. (2008) Is there a role for tactical and sport education
models in school physical education? ‘Play to Educate’ FIRST ASIA
PACIFIC SPORT IN EUCATION CONFERENCE 21st January
2008. Sturt Campus, Flinders University School of Education,
Adelaide. Keynote Address. Online.
http://caef.flinders.edu.au/sie2008/Presentations/
Ken%20Alexander%20Keynote%20Address.pdf
Alexander, K., & Luckman, J. (2001). Australian teachers’ perceptions
and uses of the sport education curriculum model. European Physical
Education Review, 7(3), 243-267.
Alexander, K. & Penny, D. (2005) Teaching under the influence: Feeding
games for understanding into the Sport Education development –
refinement cycle. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 10 (3), 287-
301
Alexander, K., Taggart, A., & Thorpe, S. (1997). Teacher renewal
through curriculum innovation: Changing teachers’ pedagogies and
programs. Issues in Educational Research, 7(1), 1-18. Online.
www.iier.org.au//iier7/alexander.html
Bell, C. (1998) Sport Education in the Elementary School. Journal of
Physical Education, Recreation and Dance. 69 (5), 36-43.
Bishop, A. (1992). International Perspectives on Research in
Mathematics Education. In Grouws, D. (Ed.), Handbook of Research
on Mathematics Teaching and Learning. Macmillan Publishing
Company, New York.
Brooker, R; Kirk, D; Braiuka, S; & Bransgrove, A. (2000) Implementing a
game sense approach to teaching junior high school basketball in a
naturalistic setting. European Physical Education Review. 6 (1), 7-26.
Carlson, T. (1995). Now I Think I Can- The reaction of 8 low skilled
students to Sport Education. Healthy Lifestyles Journal, 42(4), 6-8.
Chen, A., Darst, P., & Pangrazi, R. (1999) What Constitutes Situational
Interest? Validating a Construct in Physical Education. Measurement
in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 3(3), 157 - 180
Chen, A., Ennis, C., Martin, R. & Sun, H. (2005) Situational Interest: A
Curriculum Component Enhancing Motivation to Learn. Online.
http://aahperd.confex.com/aahperd/2005/preliminaryprogram/abstrac
t_6975.htm
Clarke, G., & Quill, M. (2003). Researching sport education in action: a
case study. European Physical Education Review, 9(3), 253-266.
DECS (2005) South Australian Curriculum, Standards and Accountability
Framework: the required elements. Digital Documents, South
Australia.
Evans, J. (1993) Equality, Education and Physical Education. Falmer Press,
London.
Flintoff, A. & Scratton, S. (2001) Stepping into active leisure: Young
women’s perceptions of active lifestyles and their experiences of
school physical education. Sport Education and Society. 6:1
Hastie, P. (1998). Skill and tactical development during a sport education
season. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 69(4), 368-380.
Hastie, P. (2003) Teaching for Lifetime Physical Activity through Quality High
School Physical Education. Benjamin Cummings. San Francisco
Hastie, P., & Sharpe, T. (1999). Effects of a Sport Education Curriculum
on the Positive Social Behavior of At-Risk Rural Adolescent Boys
Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 4(4), 417-430.
Hastie, P., & Buchanan, A. (2000). Teaching responsibility through Sport
Education: Prospects of a
coalition. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 71, 25-35.
Hastie, P., & Curtner – Smith, M. (2006). Influence of a hybrid Sport
Education-Teaching games for
Understanding unit on one teacher and his students. Physical Education
and Sport Pedagogy, 11(1), 1-27.
Hastie, P., & Sinelnikov, O. (2006). Russian stuents’ participation in and
perceptions of a season of Sport Education. European Physical
Education Review, 12(2), 131-150.
Holland, E. (2006) Sport Education: a vehicle for the inclusion and
performance of your underachieving and disaffected pupils. National
Teacher Research Panel, Teacher Research Conference, 2006.
http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/ntrp/lib/pdf/holland.pdf
Kinchin, G. (2001) A high skilled pupil’s experiences with Sport
Education. Healthy Lifestyles Journal. 48(3-4), 5-9
Kirk, D., & Kinchin, D. (2003). Situated learning as a theoretical
framework for sport education. European Physical Education Review,
9(3), 221-235.
ACHPER HLJ Sept08:HL jnl 177 inner 9/9/08 1:09 PM Page 29
Knichin, G., & Clarke, G. (2001). Teaching the National Curriculum
Physical Education. Try Sport Education. British Journal of Teaching
Physical Educational 32(2), 41-44.
Laker, A. Ed. (2003) The Sociology of Sport and Physical Education.
RoutledgeFalmer, London.
Mallett, C. (2004) Reflective practices in teaching and coaching: using
reflective journals to enhance performance, in Wright, J.,
MacDonald, D., & Burrows, L. (Eds) Critical Inquiry and Problem
Solving in Physical Education. Routledge, London.
McCaughtry, N., Sofo, S., Rovegno, I., & Curtner-Smith, M. (2004).
Learning to teach sport education: misunderstandings, pedagogical
difficulties, and resistance. European Physical Education Review, 10(2),
135-155.
Nickson, K. (2000). Teaching and Learning Mathematics: A Teacher’s Guide
to Recent Research and its Application. London: Cassell Education.
Penney, D., & Brooker, R. (2002). Sport Education in Physical
Education: An exploration of place, purpose and pedagogy., AARE
Conference December 2002. Brisbane:
Online. http://www.aare.edu.au/02pap/pen02258.htm.
Penney, D., Quill, M., & Kinchin, G. Eds. (2005) Sport Education in
Physical Education. Research Based Practice. Routledge, Oxon.
Penney, D. (2006) Pursuing HPE Outcomes Through Sport Education
and School Sport in Tinning, R.,
McCuiag, L., & Hunter, L. (Eds) Teaching Health and Physical Education in
Australian Schools. Pearson Education, Australia. 173-179.
Rink, J. (2006) Teaching Physical Education for Learning. McGraw Hill.
New York.
Sagor, R. (2005) The Action Research Handbook: a four step process for
educators and school teams. Corwin Press, California.
View publication stats
Siedentop, D. (1994) Sport Education: Quality PE through positive sport
experiences. Human Kinetics. Champaign, Illinois
Siedentop, D., Hastie, P., & Mars, H. v. d. (2004). Complete Guide to Sport
Education. Human Kinetics. Champaign, Illinois
Sinelnikov, O., & Hastie, P. (2008). Teaching sport education to Russian
students: An ecological analysis. European Physical Education Review,
14(2), 203-222.
Slavin, R. (1984) Special Edition: Motivation. The Elementary School
Journal. 85(1)
Strikwerda-Brown, J. & Taggart, A. (2001) No Longer Voiceless and
Exhausted: Sport Education and the Primary Generalist Teacher.
Healthy Lifestyles Journal. 48 (3-4), 14-17
Thomas, J. & Nelson, J. (2001) Research Methods in Physical Activity 4th
Edition. Human Kinetics, Champaign, Illinois.
About the author
Shane Pill is a lecturer in Physical Education and Curriculum
studies at Flinders University. Prior to this Shane was a
physical education teacher with school leadership experience
in HPE, Pastoral Care/Student Welfare and Curriculum
Development. His research interests include; curriculum
construction and pedagogy, and physical education and sport
pedagogy, particularly game and tactical centred approaches.
Contact shane.pill@flinders.edu.au
ACHPER Healthy Lifestyles Journal 55 (1) 29