Search

Background: How teachers enact policy has been of significant interest to educational scholars. In physical education research, scholars have identified several factors affecting the enactment of policy. These factors include but are not limited to: structural support available for teachers, provision of professional development opportunities, the nature of the policy, and the educational philosophies of the teachers. A recurring conclusion drawn in this scholarship is that official documentation and teachers' work often diverge, sometimes in profound ways. Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to investigate how physical education teachers in Sweden describe their enactment of policy regarding the concept "complex movement," which features in the latest Swedish curriculum. Methods: Interview data were generated with six specialist physical education teachers. Three questions guided the interviews: What is complex movement? What is not complex movement? And, can you give examples from your teaching of complex movement? Data were analyzed using a discourse analytic framework. Meaning was understood as a production of dialectical relationships between individuals and social practices. Two key concepts were utilized: "intertextuality," which refers to the condition whereby all communicative events, not merely utterances, draw on earlier communication events, and "interdiscursivity," which refers to discursive practices in which discourse types are combined in new and complex ways. Results: We identified three discourses regarding the teachers' enactment of policy: (1) Complex movement as individual difficulty, (2) Complex movement as composite movements, and (3) Complex movement as situational adaptation. Several features were common to all three discourses: they were all related to issues of assessment; they suggested that complex movement is something students should be able to show or perform, and; they left open room for practically any activity done in physical education to be considered complex. Discussion: Three issues are addressed in the Discussion. The first concerns the intertextual nature of the teachers' statements and how the statements relate to policy and research. The second concerns the way that knowledge, and specifically movement knowledge, becomes problematic in the teachers' statements about complex movement. The third concerns more broadly the language used to describe the relationship between policy and practice. Conclusions: We propose that modest levels of overlap between teachers' discursive resources, policy, and research is unsurprising. In line with earlier research, we suggest that the notion of 'enactment' is a more productive way to describe policy-oriented practice than notions such as 'implementation' or 'translation', which imply a uni-directional, linear execution of policy.