Search

To gather more objective information about effective teaching and levels of student engagement, research in higher education has shifted to increased observations within the college classrooms and is focused more on the collection of systematic data. Despite the attempt by instructors to implement various pedagogies and use different instructional approaches in the classroom setting, research into teaching and learning suggests that it may depend less on what the instructor is doing and more on the relationship between teaching and student learning, and to what degree students are engaged. A number of studies have been designed to compare and contrast various methods for delivering content, with most of the research leading to mixed results. In this particular study, results indicated the media in which an instructor delivers content does not necessarily translate to greater student learning outcomes. The purpose of this study was to systematically analyze the effect of content delivery media on student engagement, learning outcomes, and instructor behavior in two sections of the same lecture-based college Biomechanics course. Educating and encouraging instructors to implement more interactive and active teaching methods will assist them in fostering student engagement.

In 1999, the New Zealand government released a new Health and Physical Education (HPE) curriculum that reflected a fundamental shift from the traditional and dominant skill mastery approach. The "new" HPE curriculum was based on humanistic principles and supported by constructivist notions of teaching and learning, within a critical pedagogy. Since this time, and a subsequent curriculum revision in 2007, the HPE curriculum writers have suggested that physical education (PE) teachers and physical education teacher education (PETE) students in New Zealand have struggled to understand the epistemological complexities and pedagogical implications of critical pedagogy in their practice. Therefore, this paper highlights the findings of a study that explored a New Zealand PETE program, in light of HPE within the New Zealand Curriculum (NZC). Additionally, and in light of the findings, the authors consider an examination of Kirk's (2013) concept of models-based practice as it could apply to the preparation and professional development of physical education teachers in New Zealand. The case study included nine volunteer participants, from a cohort of 32 students, who were nearing graduation from a critically oriented PETE program in New Zealand. Semistructured interviews were deployed and analyzed and reoccurring themes central to the purpose of the study identified and explored. The participants viewed movement contexts as being pivotal for learning in physical education and that the NZC had multiple educational aims and purposes. Participants also believed that PE teachers were required to move beyond direct instruction and implement a variety of teaching styles to achieve these multiple aims. However, the participants also shared misunderstandings and paradigmatic uncertainty around the critical and humanistic underpinnings of the NZC and failed to demonstrate an understanding of how this is enacted through critical pedagogy. The implications of this theory to practice nexus are further discussed in light of recent research debate around models-based practice.

This commentary was written in response to the Rink (2013), McKenzie and Lounsbery (2013), and Ward (2013) articles published earlier on teacher effectiveness in physical education (PE). The historical analyses of teacher effectiveness research in PE (TER-PE) presented in those 3 articles are briefly described, particularly as they represent a collective agenda in the first 3 decades in this line of inquiry. That collective agenda was primarily driven by physical education researchers and P-12 teachers, who developed and explored empirically based best practices for effective teaching and learning in physical education, which informed much of the content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge learned in physical education teacher education programs. Based on 2 recent policy developments in many states, external threats to the previous agenda for TER-PE are presented by the author, who concedes that the lead for the future agenda for TER-PE will soon be taken out of the hands of researchers, teachers, and teacher educators and transferred to educational agencies in the form of new policies on initial teacher certification and the evaluation of in-service teachers in a growing number of states.

Part 1 of this article, which appeared in the April 2013 of JOPERD, presented the theoretical foundation and evidence-based needs for a main-theme curriculum model called Health Optimizing Physical Education (HOPE) for schools. It also described eight strands that could be used to plan, implement, and assess this version of a comprehensive school physical activity program (CSPAP). Teachers in HOPE programs will need a broader knowledge base than what is currently provided to preservice teachers and available for practicing (inservice) teachers. Also, HOPE programs cannot be effective without the support and collaboration of parents, teachers, administrators, and other professionals and organizations in the local community. This article, Part 2, presents some strategies for the initial preparation of HOPE teachers, continued professional development of inservice HOPE teachers, and suggestions for establishing strong working relationships both inside and outside of schools in order to make HOPE an effective CSPAP model. (Contains 1 table and 1 figure.) [To view Part 1 of this article, please see, EJ1013300.]

Comprehensive School Physical Activity Programs (CSPAP) are designed to provide expanded opportunities for physical activity beyond regularly scheduled physical education time-including before, during, and after school, as well as at home and in the community. While CSPAPs are gaining support, currently there are no models for designing, implementing, and assessing these programs. This two-part article presents a new CSPAP curriculum model called Health Optimizing Physical Education (HOPE) that can be used to help P-12 students acquire knowledge and skills for lifelong participation in physical activity. Part 1 discusses the need for the HOPE model, presents its theoretical foundation, and describes eight strands that could be included in such a comprehensive school program. Part 2, next issue, will discuss the knowledge base needed by teachers for conducting effective HOPE programs, offer some strategies for preparing and developing HOPE teachers, and identify some of the many other professionals that HOPE teachers must collaborate with to achieve the overall learning objectives. (Contains 1 table and 1 figure.) [To access Part 2 of this article, see EJ1013296.]

A well defined line of research has been conducted on the role of self-efficacy (Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. "Psychological Review", 84, 191-215.) in teaching and learning environments. The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of Laboratory-Based (LB) and Field-Based (FB) practicum experience on pre-service teachers' efficacy levels within one Physical Education Teacher Education program. The participants were 59 undergraduate students who were placed into two groups, LB design (n = 31) and FB design (n = 28). A quasi-experimental design with two levels of treatment and no control group was implemented. Both groups were administered a version of the Teacher Efficacy Scale (TES) adapted for physical education teachers at four stages of their preservice program: (1) at or near entry; (2) at the start of their methods course sequence; (3) at the end of the methods course sequence, just prior to student teaching; and (4) at program completion. Results from a Repeated Measures ANOVA indicated significant differences between groups on one facet of teacher efficacy at Stages 2 and 3. Those differences are attributed to the differing levels of authentic teaching practice between groups, and the challenges posed to each group of preservice teachers prior to student teaching. By the end of student teaching, both groups' efficacy levels were essentially equal, perhaps due to the similarly high level of authenticity across all subjects in that key experience. This study also highlights the importance of on-going, appropriate and authentic challenges in eventually establishing strong and stable efficacy levels among preservice teachers. (Contains 3 tables and 1 figure.)

The purpose of this chapter is to advance the concept of pedagogical content knowledge in a manner that would better align it with the integrative type of knowledge needed by teachers at all three stages (preservice teachers, induction teachers, and cooperating teachers), allowing them to use model-based instruction (MBI) most effectively in physical education school programs once they have adopted that approach. This improved alignment would allow teachers to learn pedagogical content knowledge within a dynamic process that requires their attention to several key factors simultaneously, rather than as a set of deconstructed pieces of knowledge (e.g., management, content, pupil characteristics). Cochran et al. (1993) offer seven "working hypotheses" for the application of pedagogical content knowing to teacher education. These authors redefine those hypotheses as "postulates" that reflect necessary conditions for the development of pedagogical content knowing for MBI, and include all three stages of teaching (preservice, induction, veteran).

Previous chapters in this monograph have reported on a series of research studies that examined the adoption of an instructional innovation, model-based instruction (MBI), by teachers in three stages of career development: preservice/student teachers (STs), induction teachers (ITs), and experienced/cooperating teachers (CTs). All the teachers were affiliated to varying degrees with one physical education teacher education (PETE) program. All the teachers were involved with making decisions that would ultimately lead them to reject, adopt, or discontinue the use of MBI in their daily teaching practices. The purpose of this chapter is to take a closer examination at the dynamics involved with teachers in different career stages making decisions about adopting MBI as an innovative approach. All teachers cope with varying degrees of autonomy to make those decisions while interacting with different constellations of change agents, and learning MBI in school and PETE program settings (agencies) that offer different arrays of facilitating and inhibiting factors that influence their decisions about best practice in general and MBI in particular. The preceding chapters that reported the findings for teachers in this series of studies did so by within-group analyses; this chapter provides an analysis of the findings from these studies by presenting commonalities and differences found across the three groups of teachers, based on the sets of change agency factors and change agents. (Contains 1 figure.)

This article considers another group of educators involved with the adoption of model-based instruction (MBI)--the cooperating teachers, who supervise physical education teacher education (PETE) student teachers in the Georgia State University (GSU) program. The university spends several semesters educating preservice teachers about the skills and knowledge necessary to become effective teachers with MBI. The student teacher is then assigned to a cooperating teacher to practice this new knowledge and implement theories into real-world practice. Cooperating teachers can reinforce the lessons learned at the university or cause a "washout" effect (Zeichner & Tabachnick, 1981). Because of the key role that cooperating teachers play in the educational process, the purpose of this study is to examine the factors that influence cooperating teachers' decisions to adopt MBI. (Contains 2 figures and 2 tables.)

Teachers are regularly exposed to a number of new and innovative technologies, ideas, philosophies, systems, and experiences from the time they enter teacher education to the time they leave the profession. A predictable result of this increased exposure is that teachers are regularly faced with decisions about whether to incorporate one or more of these innovations into some aspect of their daily practice. Rogers (1995) defines innovation "as an idea, practice, or object that is perceived as new by individual or other unit of adoption," and describes two processes involved in moving an innovation into mainstream practice or thought: adoption and diffusion. Adoption occurs when one or more individuals move along a path from first becoming aware of an innovation to the eventual regular usage of that new idea, technology, or practice. Diffusion occurs as an innovation spreads from its introduction to wide usage among members of the same social system. This article provides a review of Rogers's framework for the adoption of an innovation, and sets the stage for studying the adoption of model-based instruction. (Contains 1 figure.)

The series of studies in this monograph examined the adoption of model-based instruction (MBI) as an innovative approach to teaching physical education. This innovation must be learned and used by preservice teachers, and then ultimately accepted by pupils in schools where student teachers plan for and implement MBI. Decisions by student teachers to reject or adopt MBI at the end of that experience will likely depend on the messages they receive from their P-12 pupils. This chapter focuses on P-12 pupils as significant change agents in the adoption of MBI by preservice/student teachers--agents that play an indirect, probably unintentional, but arguably the "most" influential role in adoption decisions made by new physical education teachers. Thus, the purpose of this chapter is to analyze the perceptions of pupils in P-12 schools regarding their experiences with the MBI approach being implemented by student teachers. Specifically, the authors analyzed how those pupils perceived the use of the models in terms of their novelty, amount of perceived learning, and preferences for engagement. (Contains 2 tables.)

Although some "learning to teach" research was found to address the preservice training process within the general education settings and for a specific model (i.e., tactical games) with physical education teacher education (PETE) students, no research was found that addressed the notion of student teachers "learning to teach" using model-based instruction (MBI) innovations in physical education settings. It would also then be important to know the factors that influence student teachers' planning and teaching decisions in the knowledge, persuasion, decision, and implementation stages of innovation adoption. Because the implementation stage is critical to the decision about whether to adopt or reject the innovation, examining student teachers' practical experience is important in determining the magnitude of the conceptual change shift that occurs during their culminating field experience. The research study reported in this chapter was designed to examine student teachers' "learning to teach" using the MBI innovational approach. The two purposes of this study were to determine: (1) the student teachers' observed and perceived levels of adherence to various MBI designs in authentic physical education settings; and (2) the facilitators and inhibitors of MBI implementation by student teachers. (Contains 3 tables and 1 figure.) [For Chapter 4, see EJ812493.]

We cite four disconnections among teacher education programmes, research on teaching, and programme assessment that contribute to a paucity of systematically collected evidence and the inability of teacher educators to fully address the "outcomes question" [Cochran-Smith, M. (2003). Assessing assessment in teacher education. "Journal of Teacher Education," 54, 187-191] now central to the conduct and future of teacher education programmes. To reduce those disconnections, we present the Development, Research, and Improvement model of programme assessment [Metzler, M. W., & Tjeerdsma, B. L. (1998). PETE program assessment within a development, research, and improvement framework. "Journal of Teaching in Physical Education," 17, 468-492] that has guided a comprehensive, longitudinal, and research-based assessment project at Georgia State University in the United States for 13 years. We situate this work in the framework of Self-Study of Teacher Education, now gaining attention worldwide as a legitimate approach to bridging the methodological and evidentiary gap between teacher education programmes, research on teaching, and programme assessment. Examples of data collected in the longitudinal programme are described, along with illustrations of how those data have guided decisions about our teacher education programme, and how those findings can add to the empirical knowledge in teacher education.

This article features the standards and practice for K-12 physical education in Japan. Physical education in Japan has many similarities to, and differences with, programs in the United States. Many of the main objectives for the school curriculum are the same; both systems promote major outcomes related to fitness and lifelong sport and physical activity participation. The Japanese system promotes two outcomes that many physical educators in the United States espouse, but are rarely included in official curriculum documents: making a mind-body connection and learning to live a happy and cheerful life. Most of the movement content taught at each of the three school levels is included in American schools at those same levels, but the two secondary school levels in Japan include cognitive content on the social and cultural aspects of sport, motor learning, and the affective outcome of learning physical activity for personal meaning. In comparison to the United States, there are major differences in the way curricular policies are decided in Japan. The Ministry of Education, Culture, Sport, Science, and Technology determines both the objectives and the content for school programs for the entire country; this acts to restrict the kinds of instructional approaches that are used by teachers. The United States does not have anything that approaches this level of centralized policy-making--most states outline a series of outcomes that should be learned in physical education, which is included in a curriculum guide for all. However, most of the day-to-day decisions about program content and instructional approaches in the United States are made by teachers in schools--either individually (most P-5 programs) or in teams (middle and high school programs).

Describes a development, research, and improvement framework for conducting comprehensive program assessment in physical-education teacher education (PETE). The framework includes questions that guide PETE faculty through program assessment to create customized plans. Data from observation instruments, qualitative techniques, and psychometric instruments monitor students' acquisition of the program's intended pedagogical skills, content knowledge, performance knowledge, beliefs/attitudes, and professional dispositions. (SM)

Characteristics of good teaching are described. A general model for identifying, measuring, and developing teaching skills in physical education is presented. (MT)

This study examines student process behavior differences resulting from divergent lesson planning patterns within an experimental teaching unit. Two physical education teachers planned and implemented contrasting lessons for an identical teaching goal. Differences in student process behavior are discussed. (Author/DF)

The article provides an overview of the framework for the adoption of instructional innovation across teacher's career stages which was formed by Everett Rogers, a scholar. It discusses Rogers' theory of diffusion of innovations in framing the study in adopting model-based instruction (MBI) in which three groups of teachers that are associated in different ways with a physical education teacher education (PETE) program faculty that uses MBI are being studied. Moreover, it asserts that the mixed methods approach that was used on the framework was designed to examine the influence of MBI in daily practice.

The article discusses the study that examines the role of model-based instruction (MBI) in a physical education teacher education (PETE) in the U.S. The current study examines the impact and adoption of MBI assessed by the Georgia State University (GSU) which attempts to determine the impact of programmatic decisions and changes on the quality of teaching. It also attempts to find out how PETE learn about and make decisions in adopting model-based instructions in three stages of developments which enumerates preservice, induction, and veteran teachers.

Focuses on the progress of the Physical Education Teacher Education Assessment Project at Georgia State University in Atlanta. Way to provide feedback on the program; Learning experience in assessing teacher education programs; Benefits associated with program assessments.

Outlines the use of assessment evidence in making decisions to maintain or change the parts of the Physical Education Teacher Education program. Effectiveness in areas of student dispositions and pedagogical knowledge; Demonstration of positive aspects of professional and personal development; Enhancement of the planning abilities of student teachers.

Examines the pedagogical knowledge of student teachers in accordance with the National Standards for Beginning Physical Education Teachers. Scope of the general pedagogical knowledge; Evidence of the pedagogical knowledge of students in class management and interaction with learners; Standards related to the types of performance assessed in the program.

Examines the knowledge areas in the Physical Education Teacher Education assessment program. Level of knowledge on physical education content and movement; Analysis of the written final exams from the introductory methods courses; Competency of the knowledge standard of student teachers with the National Standards for Beginning Physical Education Teacher.

Focuses on the contextual analysis of the Physical Education Teacher Education (PETE) at Georgia State University in Atlanta. Profile of a PETE student in the university; Factors attributing to the design, structure and operation of the PETE program; Content of a preservice teacher program.

Examines the attitudes and beliefs of student teachers about teaching, physical education and learners in Atlanta, Georgia. Perceptions toward the Physical Education Teacher Education program in Georgia State University; Assessment of the dispositions among student teachers; Details on the teaching skills of student teachers.

Presents the data sources used to collect assessment evidence in the Physical Education Teacher Education (PETE) at Georgia State University in Atlanta. Sources of the data; Instruments for analyzing PETE program coherency; Difficulty of the program assessment.

Provides the Development, Research, and Improvement (DRI) Model for Physical Education Teacher Education (PETE) assessment programs. Criteria for the design of a framework for doing PETE program assessment; Stages of the DRI model; Provision of theoretical foundation and working plan for the program.

Focuses on the teacher education program and the GSU PETE Assessment Project. Importance of the NASPE standards on the teacher education assessment; Use of instrumentation and technique on the general literature of teacher education; Promotion of decision-making program.

Describes a development, research and improvement (DRI) framework for conducting program assessment in physical education teacher education programs in the U.S. Stages of the DRI model; Purposes of the program assessment; Function of the framework.

This thematic article is based upon personal reflections and tangible evidence that the emphasis in sport pedagogy has shifted away from doing research on instruction and toward doing research on teachers. Several contributing factors to this trend are discussed along with implications for continued change in the patterns of sport pedagogy. Suggestions are made that could alter these patterns and address how to conduct research on teaching that is both meaningful to practice and valued in the academy. Finally, there is a call to question the role of traditional sport disciplines and subdisciplines in the conduct of professional practice and the conceptualization of sport pedagogy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this study was to determine several features and opinions of the faculty group who staff preprofessional physical education programs in the United States. A total of 171 college and university faculty members who identified themselves as elementary and/or secondary specialists returned a 33-item questionnaire for this study. This questionnaire was designed to seek demographic data on subjects' institution, department, faculty, and personal career information. In addition, the questionnaire requested opinions on several topics related to preprofessional physical education programs. The profile sketch of the PETE faculty group described a notably diverse professoriate, with very few commonalities binding them in terms of education, teaching responsibilities, publication records, professional duties, and membership in professional societies. However, there was some agreement within the sample about how well preprofessional programs are faring, and on the steps needed to make programs stronger in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As one might expect in today's global society physical education in Japan has many similarities to, and differences with, programs in the United States. Many of the main objectives for the school curriculum are the same; both systems promote major outcomes related to fitness and lifelong sport and physical activity participation. The Japanese system promotes two outcomes that many physical educators in the United States espouse, but are rarely included in official curriculum documents: making a mind-body connection and learning to live a happy and cheerful life. Most of the movement content taught at each of the three school levels is included in American schools at those same levels, but the two secondary school levels in Japan include cognitive content on the social and cultural aspects of sport, motor learning, and the affective outcome of learning physical activity for personal meaning. In comparison to the United States, there are major differences in the way curricular policies are decided in Japan. The Ministry of Education, Culture, Sport, Science, and Technology determines both the objectives and the content for school programs for the entire country; this acts to restrict the kinds of instructional approaches that are used by teachers. The United States does not have anything that approaches this level of centralized policy-making- most states outline a series of outcomes that should be learned in physical education, which is included in a curriculum guide for all. However, most of the day-to-day decisions about program content and instructional approaches in the United States are made by teachers in schools-either individually (most P-5 programs) or in teams (middle and high school programs). There is no doubt that policy makers and physical educators in both countries have much to learn about each other. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]