This article is the first part of a two part series. The second segment will be published in the next issue of PHE America.
Recently, I was asked to participate in a college class activity in which students “defended physical education” before a simulated school board. I, along with several others, served as “board members” for this activity. Different groups were asked to make presentations to the board concerning proposed exemptions for band and athletics, or proposed decreases in the physical education requirement. The activity was realistic because we in physical education often find ourselves on the defensive. Challenges to our programs “pop up” and, in the defensive mode, we prepare statements or appear before school boards to defend them.
In recent years, I have written position papers for submission to school boards (solicited by physical educators or prepared on my own), and have presented to a number of school boards to defend programs. After involvement in several program challenges, I have come to believe that by the time a program challenge has reached the school board agenda, the battle has already been lost. Indeed program losses, especially at the high school level, have been significant over time.
The most recent Shape of the Nation report indicates that there has been a drop in high schools mandating physical education. In 2012, 86.3% of the states mandated physical education, compared to 90.2% in 2010 (SHAPE America, 2012, p. 7). But decreases in programs, or program requirements by states, tell only part of the story. According to the Shape of the Nation report, 65% percent of the states “permit school districts or schools to allow students to substitute other activities for the physical education credit (SHAPE America, 2012, p. 8).” Common substitutions include Junior ROTC, interscholastic sports, marching band, cheerleading, and community sports. In addition, 55% of the states “allow schools or school districts to grant exemptions/waivers for time or credit requirements (SHAPE America, 2012, p. 8).” Most states allow local schools or school districts to grant the exemptions/waivers. Since the states allowing substitutions (65%) may not be the same as those granting exemptions/waivers (55%), the number of states allowing substitutions or waiver/exemptions is likely higher than 65% (overlap not reported). Common reasons for exemptions/waivers include “health, physical disability, religious beliefs, and early graduation (SHAPE America, 2012, p. 8).”
Taking the Offense
In 1987, I wrote a paper for JOPERD (Corbin, 1987) describing some “defensible solutions to perennial problems.” Now I propose taking the offensive rather than being defensive. My proposal includes insuring high-quality required programs, creating innovative electives, creating innovative new programs, creating options for students with special circumstances, and developing supplemental program options for students seeking substitutions, exemptions, or waivers. Each of these offensive strategies is described in this article and the second segment to be published in the next pelinks4u issue.
Conduct High-Quality Required Programs
1. Start with Standards and Be Accountable.
The best way to survive in the current educational environment is to have quality programs (Corbin, 1978). Feingold (2014) suggests that adult behaviors should guide physical education. SHAPE America agrees indicating that the goal of a quality physical education program “is to develop physically literate individuals who have the knowledge, skills, and confidence to enjoy a lifetime of healthful physical activity (SHAPE America, 2013, page 1).” Specifically a physically literate person meets the following national standards:
Standard 1. The physically literate individual demonstrates competency in a variety of motor skills and movement patterns.
Standard 2. The physically literate individual applies knowledge of concepts, principles, strategies and tactics related to movement and performance.
Standard 3. The physically literate individual demonstrates the knowledge and skills to achieve and maintain a health-enhancing level of physical activity and fitness.
Standard 4. The physically literate individual exhibits responsible personal and social behavior that respects self and others.
Standard 5. The physically literate individual recognizes the value of physical activity for health, enjoyment, challenge, self-expression and/or social interaction (SHAPE America, 2013, page 1).
Very specific performance outcomes are described for each of the five characteristics of a physically literate person (SHAPE America, 2013). Programs that meet these standards and performance outcomes are likely to be valued by students, parents, administrators, and school board members, especially if programs are evaluated and there is accountability for the standards (see Metzler, 2014). Unfortunately, the recent United States Report Card on Physical Activity for Children and Youth (NPAPA, 2014) awarded schools a C- for their efforts. I believe that the C- grade is a fair (if not generous) overall assessment of high school programs. It is my opinion that many high school physical education programs have not been accountable, thus making it difficult to defend them. Further, it is my opinion that many school board members experienced poor programs when they were in school resulting in today’s negative attitudes. It is our job to show them that their children’s physical education is NOT the physical education of the past. Changes will be necessary if this is to happen. Some of these changes are described below.
Note: I acknowledge that there are many great programs across the country. These programs have many of the features described below. These programs can serve as models for the many others that do not have these features. They have taken the offensive and have no need to be defensive.
2. Implement a Strong Fitness Education Program.
In 2012, SHAPE America identified fitness education as one important component of a total quality physical education program. In recognition of the importance of fitness education in the total physical education program, an instructional framework for fitness education in physical education was prepared (SHAPE America—formerly NASPE, 2012). According to this document:
“Fitness education is a subcomponent of the total physical education program, focusing on helping students acquire knowledge and higher-order understanding of health-related physical fitness (the product), as well as habits of physical activity and other healthy lifestyles (the process) that lead to good health-related physical fitness, health and wellness” (SHAPE America, 2012, p. 1).
The instructional framework provides a detailed description of learning outcomes for fitness education that are consistent with SHAPE America physical education standards.
Support for including a fitness education component in a quality physical education program is strong. In addition to SHAPE America, the National Academy of Kinesiology (1988) has endorsed fitness education programs. Further, a recent national report by the prestigious Institute of Medicine (IOM, 2013) includes fitness education as a viable approach to quality physical education. Research has shown that this type of program can be effective (Dale, Corbin, & Cuddihy, 1998; Dale & Corbin, 2000).
In addition, fitness education programs have been used to defend programs from elimination. For example, in the early 1980s the state of Florida moved from district to state requirements for all subject matter areas. Initially, physical education (in its traditional form) was not included as a state requirement. However, the inclusion of a fitness education program (personal fitness class) resulted in a one-credit state physical education requirement. Florida followed the lead of American colleges and universities. At the college level, implementing fitness education (typically referred to as conceptual physical education) has saved many programs. Now many years after the first college programs were challenged, fitness education programs are almost universal at the college level (see Cardinal & Corbin, 2008; Kulinna et al., 2009). This approach has saved many required high school physical education programs and several states have implemented fitness education standards or requirements (Jahn, et al., 2010). Other schools have implemented fitness education programs because it is the right thing to do (e.g., Ann Arundel County Public Schools, Maryland; Columbus City Schools, Ohio; Mountain Pointe High School, Phoenix, AZ.; Lincoln Public Schools, Nebraska).
I have found that parental and administrative support for fitness education is strong. SHAPE America has noted that one characteristic of programs judged to be “academic” is the use of a textbook. A text, and periodic classroom sessions (common to fitness education programs), provides students with knowledge, critical thinking and consumer skills, and self-management skills necessary to plan for lifelong physical activity. This is unique to fitness education and separates this type of program from other programs commonly substituted for physical education (see later section on substitutions, exemptions/waivers). In fact, when defending programs to school boards (or mock school boards) physical educators often rely on the knowledge component (SHAPE America standards 2 and 3). Students presenting to a mock school board used this defense more than any other. They argue that physical education classes provide something none of the substitute activities provide, the knowledge and self-management skills to achieve and maintain a health-enhancing level of physical activity and fitness (standard 3).
Including a quality fitness education program of at least one semester puts us on the offensive. Student portfolios that include results of self-assessments, program plans, and evidence of mastery of self-management skills provide accountability and establish academic credibility. A student text helps parents and administrators see the valuable content that is critical to promoting physical literacy among all students. A quality fitness education program provides the foundation for extended learning in physical education through high quality required or optional electives.
3. Offer Innovative Electives
In my opinion, a high school required physical education program should include a fitness education class and all other required classes should be “required electives.” If we teach students how to make good decisions (in fitness education), we must allow them opportunities to make decisions. We can do this by offering a wide variety of classes that appeal to students. Conducting a survey to determine student interests would be a good start. Then offering classes that meet student interests would be the next step. Some (but not all) options are describe below:
Fitness Club Approach
In this approach students plan their own program, based on knowledge and skills learned in fitness education. They carry out the program under the guidance of an instructor. Ideally students have many choices of activities including resistance machines, free weights, aerobics workout rooms, to name only a few. Schools with less available equipment may rely on less expensive equipment such as elastic bands, exercise balls, etc. This approach lends itself to the use of technology as well (e.g. activity monitors). The approach allows high school students to carry out programs similar to what they will do later in life (Dale, McConnell, & Corbin, 2007, pp. xvii-xviii; Bicorn, D. & Darst, P. W., 2001).
Resistance Training, Core Exercise, Yoga, Tai Chi, Other Martial Arts.
Classes such as these are very popular among high school students and help students learn skills that are likely to be used after graduation. Some schools have been successful in using community instructors to assist in teaching these classes.
Lifetime Sports and Recreation Activities
Sports and recreational activities that can be used for a lifetime (e.g., golf, tennis, adventure education, outdoor education) have been recommended for years and many schools now offer these activities, but many do not. As with the previous category, some schools have been successful in using community instructors and community facilities to make these types of classes possible.
Sport Education
Sports classes including team sports are popular with some, but not all students. When sports classes, especially team sports, are offered as electives, using a sport education approach can make the classes fun and attractive (Siedentop, Hastie, van der Mars, 2011).
Dance and Interdisciplinary Classes
Dance classes are an attractive alternative for many students. Classes that combined dance, music, and even theater components, provide innovative options for students and help build relationships among programs. Music, art, and physical education programs often are put at odds with each other when program cuts are made. Joint programs promote cooperation and can benefit all programs in the future.
We can learn from schools such as Naperville Central High School, Illinois where a wide variety of choices (such as the classes listed above) have been part of the high school curriculum for years.
Summary
It is time to take the offensive with high school physical education. For too long we have been playing defense and the result has been a loss of programs. The first step is to build strong programs that show accountability to parents and administrators. These quality programs must be standards-based (e.g., SHAPE America standards) and innovative. Implementation of a strong fitness education program that adheres to the SHAPE America fitness education framework can bring credibility to our programs. But a strong fitness education program is only one part of a quality program. Offering innovative electives is another key ingredient for taking an offensive approach. The second part of this two part series will be included in the next issue of PHE America. This second article features more ideas for “going on offense” including ideas for innovative new programs and quality online options.
References
Bicorn, D. & Darst, P. W. (2001). Motivating middle school students: A health-club approach. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance. 72, 7, 24-29.
Corbin, C. B. (1978). Quality secondary school physical education. Journal of Physical Education and Recreation. 42-43.
Corbin, C. B. & Cardinal, B. J. (2008). Conceptual physical education: The anatomy of an innovation. Quest. 60, 467-487.
Corbin, C. B. (1987). Physical fitness in the K-12 curriculum: Some defensible solutions to perennial problems. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance. 58, 49-54.
Dale, D.L. & Corbin, C.B. (2000). Physical activity participation of high school graduates following exposure to conceptual or traditional physical education. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 71,1, 61-68.
Dale, D. D., Corbin, C. B., & Cuddihy, T. (1998). Can conceptual physical education promote physically active lifestyles? Pediatric Exercise Science. 10, 2, 97-109.
Dale, D. D., McConnell, K., & Corbin, C. B. (2007). Fitness for Life: Wraparound Teacher Edition and Resource Kit. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Feingold, R. (2014). Adult behaviors should guide physical education. PELinks4U. Available at: http://www.pelinks4u.org/articles/feingold2_2014.htm
Institute of Medicine. (2013). Educating the student body: Taking physical activity and physical education to school. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences. Available at: http://www.iom.edu/Reports.aspx
Jahn, J. A., Kulinna, P. H., & Corbin, C. B. (2010). A state-level update on secondary physical education policies. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport. 81, S-1, 54-55.
Kulinna, P. H., Warfield, W., Jonaitis, S., Dean, M., & Corbin, C. (2009). The progression and characteristics of conceptually based fitness/wellness courses at American universities and colleges. The Journal of American College Health. 58, 2, 127-131.
Metzler, M. (2014). Is physical education heading towards extinction or a renaissance? PELinks4U. Available at: http://www.pelinks4u.org/archives/0114.htm
National Academy of Kinesiology (formerly the America Academy of Physical Education) (1988). Position statement on conceptual physical education.
National Physical Activity Plan Alliance (NPAPA). (2014). The 2014 United States Report Card on Physical Activity for Children and Youth. Available at: http://www.physicalactivityplan.org/reportcard/NationalReportCard_longform_final%20for%20web.pdf
SHAPE America (formerly AAHPERD/NASPE). (2012). Instructional framework for fitness education in physical education. Reston, VA: SHAPE America. Available at: www.shapeamerica.org/standards/guidelines/upload/Instructional-Framework-for-Fitness-Education-in-PE-2012-2.pdf
SHAPE America. (2012). The 2012 Shape of the Nation Report: Status of Physical Education in the USA. Reston, VA: SHAPE America. Available at: http://www.shapeamerica.org/advocacy/son/
SHAPE America (formerly AAHPERD/NASPE). (2013). National standards and grade-level outcomes for K-12 physical education. Reston VA: SHAPE America. Available at: http://www.shapeamerica.org/standards/pe/upload/Grade-Level-Outcomes-for-K-12-Physical-Education-rev1.pdf.
Siedentop, D., Hastie, P., & van der Mars, H. (2011). Complete Guide to Sport Education. (2nd ed.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Acknowledgments: The author would like to thank Don Cain of the Columbus City Public Schools for graciously agreeing to review and provide comments on the two articles in this series.
— Contribute an Article on HPE —
Contact: pheamerica20@gmail.com
1 Comment