Search

The purpose of this paper is to introduce the First Special Issue of our Double Special Edition on LGBTQIA+ Topics in Health, Wellbeing and Education. This special issue focuses on LGBTQIA+ Topics in Physical Education. We introduce the Special Issue by describing the sociopolitical backdrop around the world more broadly and specifically in relation to LGBTQIA+ rights. Afterwards, we reflect on the process of choosing "Sport, Education and Society" as the journal to publish the Special Edition. Moving forward, we briefly summarise the different streams of LGBTQIA+ research in physical education and how this special issue extends our knowledge in these areas. Lastly, we contend that this Special Issue adds a new stream of research on LGBTQIA+ Topics in Physical Education. We conclude the introduction by considering how future research may continue to capitalise on the momentum that LGBTQIA+ research has built in the field.

This paper draws on two separate research projects, one with Black and Latinx youth in the United States and another with LGBTQ+ youth in New Zealand, to explore the affective experiences of young people with the FitnessGram® assessment. We specifically use affect theory through poetic inquiry to entangle interview data from young participants about their experiences with FitnessGram®. We then (re)present the data through poetic forms. We argue the turn to affect and poetic inquiry allows us, as researchers, to respond to dominant discourses around FitnessGram® (and young bodies) in critical and creative ways. And, we embrace the experimental, open-ended potential of poetic (re)presentation to bring awareness to the youths' experiences and to encourage others (researchers, educators, practitioners, policymakers) to engage differently as well. We hope, through such aesthetic forms, we can start to value the affects of FitnessGram® on youth and think divergently about this popular practice.

In this critical reflection, we consider physical education policy research in the United States (U.S.) using a sociocritical lens. Our aim is to extend the discussion and critiques of physical education policy research by exploring how it is conducted in the U.S. Instead of asking 'What is physical education policy research?', we are more concerned with the complex, imbalanced, and unpredictable affects of physical education policy research in the U.S. Thus, we ask questions like, 'How is physical education policy research working in different contexts?', 'What counts as policy research?' and 'Who is doing policy research?' We examine how physical education policy research is being taken up across the U.S. and the orientation -- or direction -- those studies take. As such, we conclude by considering what directions, people, and elements are not included in the current orientation.

In this paper, we reflect on SHAPE America's K-12 National Standards and its connection to physical literacy. We argue physical educators in the United States have primarily engaged with the "term" physical literacy without engaging with the theoretical and pedagogical depth of the "concept." Despite this, SHAPE America does explicitly endorse an adapted version of Whitehead's definition of the physical literacy "concept." In drawing on feminist intersectional thought, we make an argument that SHAPE America's adoption of physical literacy has produced an era of 'disorientation' in United States physical education. Within this disorientation, much of the advancements made in theory, pedagogy, sociocultural issues, as well as curriculum have been lost. We conclude by calling for a revamping of the standards that are not bound to a single concept, model or theoretical paradigm.

Purpose: We aimed to identify, categorize, and analyze published peer-reviewed research on teaching in physical education between July 1994 and December 2015. Methods: An exhaustive search was conducted on three databases (Education Resources Information Center, PE Index, and Web of Science), which produced 18,966 abstracts that were reduced to 1,023 articles that met the inclusion criteria through a review of abstracts and titles, and the second review of full papers. Articles were coded independently for numerous aspects of the research method by three coders, with multiple checks for interobserver agreement, all of which were above 0.85 interobserver agreement. Results: There was a great increase in the number of articles, methodological diversity, and research focus compared with a previous analysis. Research was published in 183 journals and by researchers in 45 different countries. Challenges in maintaining quality over quantity and the growth of the field are discussed. Conclusion: Research on teaching in physical education has grown greatly, and the field has matured.

Purpose: To explore teachers' perceptions of incorporating digital technologies in physical education (PE) and how they influenced pedagogical practices. Method: Data were collected using qualitative methods (interviews, observations, and artifacts) and were analyzed using a grounded theory approach. Results: Teachers integrated wearable digital technologies in ways they thought would augment their PE programs, not replace them. It also was found that teachers' ideologies of PE shaped the way they implemented wearable digital technologies. Finally, the material circumstances of schools affected the ways in which wearable digital technologies could be implemented in PE. Conclusion: Teachers were willing to integrate wearable digital technologies if they augmented (and did not replace) their preferred purpose of PE. Given this, ideologies of teachers influenced the role that technologies played in teaching and learning in PE.

Background: LGBTQ scholarship in physical education has a history tracing back to 1982. Recently, however, there has been a 'rising tide' in LGBTQ studies in physical education. Despite this recent surge there has not been a genuine attempt to critically understand, track, and map the scope of this literature. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to identify, categorize, and analyze published scholarship and peer-reviewed research on LGBTQ issues in physical education. Design and Analysis: An exhaustive search was conducted on nine databases which produced 230 abstracts that was reduced down to 76 manuscripts chosen for inclusion. Articles were coded independently for numerous aspects of the scholarship and research. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and then deductively conceptualized drawing on critical social theories. Conclusions: Whilst there is a current surge in LGBTQ focused research in physical education, such work is met with a complex web of interconnected and staunch problems that limit researchers. As such, the authors end with suggestions that can make the field more amicable for LGBTQ inspired research and researchers.

The purpose of this paper is to introduce the special issue on equity and diversity in health, physical activity, and education. We (Dillon and Sara) start the introduction by explaining our relationship to sociocultural issues and the circumstances that led to this special issue. We then provide a broad overview of how this special issue is structured by linking the manuscripts that comprise this issue to the past, map out the present, and explore potential future directions. To conclude the introduction, we argue that equity and diversity research needs to develop creative research, pedagogy, and scholarship practices to meet the emerging needs of a progressively diversified population.

Education has the ability to both reproduce and transform broader social structures. Yet, teachers' responsibilities are constantly increasing whilst budgets, resources, and staffing are depleted. We argue that we are living in a time of great uncertainty and precarity. As physical educators, we should make attempts to be socially conscious of this precarity and provide equitable environments for all students. This article (the second installment of a two-part series) is an attempt to make an important step in enacting a socially just and informed physical education program. In so doing, we highlight specific ways that teachers and teacher educators can prepare for and teach about precarity in physical education. By providing resources, readings, and examples from practice, we provide a framework that promotes ethics of value, care, and zeal for others. [For Part 1 of the series, see EJ1254389.]

Background: Physical education has historically been a repressive place for queer persons. Since physical education spaces are predominantly heteronormative, research on sexual identity management has shown lesbian teachers often try to "pass" as straight or distance themselves from their sexualities. There has been no research to date that examines the experiences of queer male physical educators. Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to use Deleuzo-Guattarian theory to reflect on my affective experiences as a queer male physical educator. A secondary goal is to transcend binary theorising that has shaped previous research in the field. Design and Analysis: This paper uses autoethnographic examination to analyse experiences as a queer male physical educator. Data consists of narratives from my first year as a physical educator. These narratives are analysed using Deleuzo-Guattarian theory to map their affective implications. Conclusion: I conclude the paper by reflecting on and recommending several initiatives that can help shift our field toward a Queer Inclusive Physical Education.

In this paper, we reflect on models-based practices in physical education using a sociocritical lens. Drawing links between neoliberal moves in education, and critical approaches to the body and physicality, we take a view that models are useful tools that are worth integrating into physical education, but we are apprehensive to suggest they should redefine the purpose of physical education. In arguing this, we attempt to understand the particular effects of certain models on practice and students. We draw on the theoretical concepts of Deleuze, in particular his notion of "striated" space to analyze SPARK-PE, HOPE, and Sport Education. We assert that some models can be useful tools for thinking about instruction, but models-based-practices are no substitute for a thoughtful and thorough physical education program.