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.
Search Results
Boundary Crossing and Bridge Building
Hal A. Lawson
Changing Boundaries and Evolving Organizational Forms in Football: Novelty and Variety Among Scottish Clubs
Andrew Adams, Stephen Morrow, and Ian Thomson
This paper presents a novel theoretical conceptualization of football clubs and empirical evidence as to how supporter groups, owners, and others engaged to resolve threats to their club. We use boundary theory to understand the evolution of two football clubs’ ownership, financing, and governance structures and demonstrate how the blurring of club boundaries was linked to engagements in interface areas between the club and other social groups. We argue that the appropriateness of different combinations of ownership, financing, and governance practices should be evaluated in terms of how they support effective engagement spaces that negotiate relationships with codependent social groups. Conceptualizing football clubs as boundary objects provides some specific insights into changes observed in Scottish football clubs. However, this approach is relevant to other situations in which club success is dependent on cooperative engagements with multiple social groups that have both convergent and divergent interests in the club.
Bridging Boundaries Between Life and Sport: Exploring Sports Coaches’ Micro Role Transitions
Paul A. Davis, Faye F. Didymus, Scott Barrass, and Louise Davis
directed toward making effective transitions between roles appeared to be important for coaches. Boundary theory, which is concerned with how people manage different work and nonwork roles ( Edwards & Rothbard, 2000 ; Nippert-Eng, 1996 ), offers useful explanations of the potential of coaches’ movement
