Search Results

As new designs are advanced for industrial age schools and universities, including cradle-to-career systems that connect them, needs and opportunities grow for kinesiology, school physical education programs, and community exercise and sport programs for young people to be redesigned in accordance with 21st century realities. While augmenting its technical problem solving capacities, kinesiology must wrestle with two new problem types. They compel new designs for kinesiology, including new relations among the subdisciplines, outcomes-focused interdisciplinary work, and expanded knowledge systems. This work entails different speci-fcations for school and community programs, and it also necessitates policy and systems changes. Design-oriented language, knowledge frameworks, and planning templates are needed, and so is intervention science. Disciplinary stewards, guided by Francis Bacon's ideals for science, can help realize America's promise to young people by developing synchronized designs for university, school, and community programs, leading to improved outcomes.

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.

The U.S. has a children’s crisis. A crisis also looms for physical education. Physical education is becoming a plowed out, decimated, and disappearing field because of its design flaws, selectivity, and silences. The children’s crisis provides opportunities for physical education to rejuvenate, reconstitute, and transform itself. New visions, missions, and conceptions of competent practice can be developed in response to the multiple, interdependent needs of poor and vulnerable children, youth, families, and their local neighborhood communities. Opportunities are emerging to develop new change theories and design models in conjunction with emergent complex change initiatives in school communities. Different kinds of change theories are identified. Possibilities for new design models are sketched. Together, these change theories and design models provide new directions for research and practice. They signal a change in paradigms.

I offer a critique of Richard Tinning’s analysis of dominant discourses, problem setting, and teacher education pedagogies. I begin by capsulizing his argument. Then I amend his definition of discourse. Next, I take issue with the way he connects discourses to the process of problem setting. After suggesting new avenues for research on problem setting, I disagree with Tinning’s problem setting, raising questions about his categorizations, assumptions, and silences. Finally, I agree with Tinning’s call for alternative pedagogies. After indicating that he has not provided all of the information and assistance we require, I conclude by requesting a practice-centered orientation in future papers.

Sport pedagogy research is yielding an increasing amount of information. However, there is a difference between mere information and research based knowledge, which may guide and improve practice. If more useful knowledge is to result from research, then several related adjustments in sport pedagogy’s knowledge system are required. Such adjustments begin with researchers’ reasons for doing research and include adjustments in today’s approaches to organizing, communicating, and applying research findings. Additionally, increases in the production and use of knowledge may be facilitated by political activity that is aimed at gaining more consensus among physical education professionals and, in turn, more uniformity among programs and teaching practices.

Conceptual and methodological limitations are evident in the previous research on physical education teacher education (PETE) professors. The developing literature on professors in all fields, career theory, and occupational socialization theory may be blended to build a conceptual framework for future research. This framework illuminates influences on and questions about PETE professors’ work lives, role orientations, productivity, and affiliations. It also invites autobiographical, developmental, longitudinal, and action-oriented research perspectives. Several benefits may be derived from research on PETE professors, including improved career-guidance and faculty-development systems.

The following analysis is one-sided and selective. It is an attempt to derive guidelines for the design of teacher education programs from recent work on the occupational socialization of physical educationists. The work cited is limited almost exclusively to that completed by the author and his former students. This can be justified insofar as this analysis doubles as a benchmark for an additive and integrative research program, indicating which questions need to be asked next and signalling the practical significance of past work. The discussion begins with a definitional treatment of occupational socialization prior to identifying guidelines for teacher education programs.

Occupational socialization, together with selected works in cultural studies, offers analysts of the physical education curriculum a unique scholarly perspective. Presentation of this perspective proceeds by means of 11 primary assumptions about curriculum work and workers. Such a perspective helps to explain the absence of other theoretical perspectives in physical education, as well as the prevalence of competing technical models which are dominant, emergent, and residual. This perspective also calls attention to the relationship among teachers, teacher educators, curricula, and social structure.