Browse

Kinesiology and adapted physical activity (APA) share a common history rooted in the medical model approach to physical activity, movement, and the human body. The evolution of APA was influenced by these early roots and later by special-education legislation, sensory-motor perspectives, inclusion movement, and the disability-rights movement. Originally identified as adapted physical education, APA emerged as a professional field and an academic discipline. Since the 1950s, the research and scholarship has increased and cuts across the specialization areas (subdisciplines) of kinesiology. The multidisciplinary nature of APA scholarship has also reached beyond the discipline of kinesiology informed by disability studies and sociology. Reflection about APA and kinesiology reveals the ableist nature of the medical model, which informed early professional practice and scholarship. Thus, it is critical that APA and kinesiology engage in anti-ableist scholarship to better understand human physical activity and movement inclusive of individuals with disabilities.

Many sport for development and peace organizations operate with limited resources and in low-resource environments. While resource constraints impede some organizations, others demonstrate an adaptive behavior, known as bricolage, to repurpose and flexibly engage existing resources to accomplish their goals. In this study, we ask what distinguishes organizations that engage in bricolage from others. We specifically test whether sport for development and peace nonprofits that engage in bricolage are more likely to engage in social innovation, and we test those findings against organizational size, age, and characteristics of organizations’ operating environments. Using data from an international sample of 161 sport for development and peace nonprofits, we find that organizations employing greater levels of bricolage also demonstrate significantly higher levels of innovation, except for process-focused innovations, which are significantly associated with environmental turbulence. Organizational size itself does not appear to influence the use of bricolage or the relationship between bricolage and innovation.

This essay delves into the intricate relationship between biomechanics and motor control, exploring their historical evolution and close interdependence. From the foundational works of Aristotle to the contemporary advancements achieved by esteemed members of the National Academy of Kinesiology, we describe the impactful contributions of both past and present National Academy of Kinesiology figures in the realms of motor control and biomechanics. A key theme throughout the essay is the recognition of the fundamental influence of natural laws on movement and the fundamental role of variability in unifying the realms of biomechanics and motor control. Looking ahead, we emphasize the transformative potential of strong inference as a guiding principle for substantive research in both fields, illustrating its application through our investigative endeavors. By uniting biomechanics and motor control through interdisciplinary collaboration, this pursuit of knowledge holds the promise of reshaping our comprehension of human movement and performance.

This article assesses the state of the humanities in kinesiology. Programs variously referred to as sport history, sport philosophy, physical culture studies, and physical cultural studies have become endangered species within the field. In response, I highlight several scholars who are, in their own ways, stewards of a humanities-centered, interdisciplinary approach to understanding human movement. In learning from their work, humanists must do more to save themselves from extinction.

Based on the lessons learned from history and articulation of paradigm change in science, this article clarifies the concept of curriculum alignment and describes the risk of curriculum disalignment between school physical education and kinesiology. Through contextualizing kinesiology as an integrated science, it explains the difference between a discipline and a field (subdiscipline) and argues that K–12 physical education is an integral and indispensable component of kinesiology. The article provides detailed discussions about the historical reasons/events that might have led to the curriculum disalignment and the ways the disalignment can be understood and addressed. Based on the analysis, a four-pillar framework (science, health, culture, and education) is proposed as a platform for “doing kinesiology” and a way to address the curriculum disalignment crisis.

Throughout their lifespans, women undergo unique endocrinological changes relative to their reproductive hormones. The influence of how the female sex steroid hormones have nonreproductive actions is a trending topic of great interest in the exercise–sports sciences, especially among women of reproductive age. Herein, we present several key points on our perspective for moving the study of this topic forward in the future. These are (a) encouraging researchers to pursue high-quality research on female physiology–endocrinology in the exercise–sports science setting, (b) the need for exercise–sports science educational curriculums at the university level to embrace the study of female physiology–endocrinology area, and (c) the need for innovation in the study of this topic. As such, we propose using research design models involving supraphysiological hormonal states in vivo, that is, pregnancy and in vitro fertilization treatment, to gain new insights on sex steroid hormonal actions in women. Herein, we provide the rationale for our recommendations as well as a brief physiological overview of these clinical states. We acknowledge, exercise sports sciences need more studies on women! But there is a need to “think outside the box” on this topic, and we encourage researchers to be unconventional, be bold, think creatively, and contemplate whether these supraphysiological hormonal states might give them insightful information on female physiology and ovarian sex steroid hormones actions.

The underrepresentation of female research participants, women, and girls has been highlighted as an issue of concern within a variety of research areas and disciplines across academia. More specifically, this lack of visibility has contributed to widening knowledge gaps regarding these populations while also perpetuating and strengthening existing inequities. Given these concerns, the purpose of this review was to explore whether similar imbalances could exist within the sport psychology literature and, if so, what future research projects might be completed to rectify these issues. To do so, all articles (n = 3,005) published between the years of 2011 and 2021 in five journals of sport psychology were assessed. Following an analysis of the relevant studies collected, it was found that more articles including all boys, men, and male athletes (n = 343) were published within this time frame compared with articles including exclusively girls, women, and female athletes (n = 155). Additionally, it also appeared that research working with girls, women, and female athletes was lacking: (a) in recreational sport, (b) at both young and older ages, and (c) within team sport contexts. Further, most of the studies assessed often conflated participant sex- and gender-descriptive terminology. As such, it is highly encouraged that researchers in sport psychology make greater strides to conduct purposeful and targeted research focusing on girls, women, and female athlete participants and their specific issues over the coming years.

This essay is based on the premise that kinesiology has evolved into a field made up of disparate subdisciplinary areas contributing to fragmentation and lack of common goals and objectives since the publication of Franklin M. Henry’s famous 1964 essay “Physical Education: An Academic Discipline.” As it now stands, there is much evidence of significant disparity between kinesiology’s creed and its practice, with the field failing to fulfill its promise of an integrationist approach to the study of human movement. In order to rectify this situation, steps should be taken to encourage individuals in the field to cross subdisciplinary boundaries, practice what psychologist Jonathan Baron has referred to as “active open-mindedness,” and take seriously the cues provided in the books by Rafe Sagarin, Learning from the Octopus: How Secrets from Nature Can Help Us Fight Terrorist Attacks, Natural Disasters, and Diseases, and Sy Montgomery, The Soul of an Octopus: A Surprising Exploration Into the Wonders of Consciousness. One specific recommendation is for academicians in kinesiology to prepare students to become polymaths, a term describing individuals with a thorough knowledge of one subject and broad understanding of many others.

This paper traces the evolution of scholarship in motor learning and development over the last ∼100 years, with a focus on contributions by Fellows from the National Academy of Kinesiology (NAK). It begins with a brief discussion of the centrality of motor skillfulness in kinesiology, followed by a discussion of the appropriate label for the study of motor learning and development. The bulk of the paper focuses on the important events and milestones in the field and an examination of the most influential frameworks and models that NAK Fellows have put forward to guide research. The final section looks at future prospects and challenges for the field. Two key findings emerge: (a) Considerable overlap exists in the theoretical frameworks, conceptual models, empirical questions, research methodologies, and practical applications that dominate scholarship in motor learning and development, and (b) NAK Fellows have made enormous contributions to the field.