This essay addresses four main questions. The first is devoted to how I became interested in the philosophy of sport. The second question concerns how my academic career has evolved over time in line with various developments in the field that privileged certain lines of study over others and which largely marginalized philosophy in particular and the humanities in general. The third question centers on what I take to be my own main contributions to the philosophy of sport and what, if any, impact they may have had on the larger field of kinesiology. Finally, I offer my own brief prognosis of what I think the future has in store for the relationship between sport philosophy and kinesiology.
William J. Morgan
David Thivel, Michéle Tardieu, Pauline Genin, Alicia Fillon, Benjamin Larras, Pierre Melsens, Julien Bois, Frédéric Dutheil, Francois Carré, Gregory Ninot, Jean-Francois Toussaint, Daniel Rivière, Yves Boirie, Bruno Pereira, Angelo Tremblay, and Martine Duclos
Andréa Kruger Gonçalves, Eliane Mattana Griebler, Wagner Albo da Silva, Débora Pastoriza Sant´Helena, Priscilla Cardoso da Silva, Vanessa Dias Possamai, and Valéria Feijó Martins
The objective was to assess the physical fitness of older adults participating in a 5-year multicomponent exercise program. The sample consisted of 138 older adults aged 60–93 years (70.4 ± 7.8 years) evaluated with the Senior Fitness Test (muscle strength, flexibility, balance, and cardiorespiratory fitness). The multicomponent program was carried out between the months of March and November of each year. Data were analyzed using generalized estimating equations (factor year: Year 1, Year 2, Year 3, Year 4, and Year 5; factor time: pretest and posttest) with Bonferroni’s post hoc test. Participation in the multicomponent exercise program for 5 years (baseline pretest Year 1 and follow-up Year 5) improved lower and upper limb strength, lower limb flexibility, and balance and cardiorespiratory fitness, while upper limb flexibility was maintained. Year-by-year analysis revealed variable patterns for each fitness parameter. The results of this study show the potential benefits of implementing a long-term community-based exercise program.
Kathleen A. Martin Ginis, Amy E. Latimer-Cheung, and Christopher R. West
Catherine Carty, Hidde P. van der Ploeg, Stuart J.H. Biddle, Fiona Bull, Juana Willumsen, Lindsay Lee, Kaloyan Kamenov, and Karen Milton
Hal A. Lawson
Twentieth-Century Physical Education gave rise to Kinesiology. Today’s Kinesiology structures and influences Physical Education. Boundary crossing and bridge building facilitate analysis of their relations and have import for investigations of career pathways and outcomes. Decisions regarding boundaries and bridges will impact the futures of Kinesiology, Physical Education, and their relations in diverse, turbulent higher education environments.
David I. Anderson
I am not sure by what fortunate circumstance I was invited to contribute to this special issue of Kinesiology Review. However, I am deeply honored to be part of an issue with such esteemed scholars and colleagues. Like many, my introduction to the field of kinesiology was through sports, but my inspiration to pursue kinesiology as a career was the result of an injury that ended my sporting ambitions. My career is characterized by little planning, large amounts of dumb luck, a willingness to explore some paths that are less well trodden, and deep and enduring friendships that have resulted from a spirit of teamwork and collaboration. The work has been hard, the hours have been long, but the payoff has been enormously gratifying. The overarching lesson from my career for emerging scholars is to have an adventurous spirit and seek out excellent mentors and collaborators.
Mana Ogawa, Chiaki Ohtaka, Motoko Fujiwara, and Hiroki Nakata
The authors investigated the kinematic characteristics of the standing long jump in preschool children. Sixty 4-year-old children (boys: 30 and girls: 30) and sixty 5-year-old children (boys: 30 and girls: 30) participated in the present study. The authors focused on three differences in kinematics: between 4- and 5-year-old children, between boys and girls, and between high and low jumping performance groups at the same age. The kinematic data included the maximum flexions of the knee and hip before takeoff, at takeoff, and on landing; angular displacement of the upper body; takeoff speeds in horizontal and vertical directions; and takeoff angle of the greater trochanter. Anthropometric variables and kinematic data were separately analyzed with factors of age, sex, and group. The authors also performed multiple regression analysis to identify predictors of the jump distance. The movement speed of the greater trochanter in a horizontal direction, the maximum flexion angle of the hip before takeoff, and the hip angle on landing were identified as significant predictors of the jump distance among young children. These findings suggest that knowing how to use the hip and awareness of the horizontal direction are key factors to improve the long jump distance in young children.
An examination of the kinds of questions we ask ourselves provides a window through which to interpret our history and imagine our future. I suggest that there are three kinds of questions—large ones, small ones, and leaky ones. Those that are identified as large and small map onto the value structures we have created for ourselves in higher education. I call these structures caste systems in which some subdisciplines are valued over others, and theoreticians stand above both practitioners and skill teachers. Leaky questions are those that cross boundaries because they cannot be effectively answered by those residing in any one area or at any one level. I argue that leaky questions generate humility, mutual respect, and incentives for collaboration. I trace my own attempts to address all three kinds of questions as a sport philosopher and conclude that our brighter future in kinesiology, including our attempts to address the harms created by the caste system, requires us to see that most of the questions we find interesting are, in fact, leaky in nature.
Jane E. Clark
The past is prologue, writes Shakespeare in The Tempest. And there seems no better expression to capture the theme of my essay on searching the future of kinesiology in its recent past through my lens as a motor development scholar. Using the developmental metaphor of climbing a mountain amidst a range of mountains, the progressing stages of my development and that of kinesiology are recounted. Over the five-plus decades of my growth as an academic and that of kinesiology, I look for the antecedents and the constraints that shape our change and may shape the future of the field of motor development and kinesiology.