The purpose of this study was to (a) examine how two preservice teachers (PTs) interpreted and delivered the sport education (SE) model during their student teaching and (b) discover factors that led to the their interpreting and delivering the model in the ways they did. The theoretical framework used to guide data collection and analysis was occupational socialization. Data were collected using a variety of qualitative techniques and analyzed using standard interpretive methods. Results revealed that high quality SE-Physical Education Teacher Education (PETE) facilitated both a commitment to the model and the ability to teach the full version of it for a teaching-oriented and moderately coaching-oriented PT. Key elements of SE-PETE responsible for this commitment and competence appeared to be the teaching of prescribed mini-seasons before student teaching, the conditions encountered by PTs during teaching practice, and a host of PETE faculty characteristics congruent with the general PETE occupational socialization literature.
Margaret Stran and Matthew Curtner-Smith
This paper outlines the sport management curricula adopted by the Rand Afrikaans University in South Africa. The literature that provided the framework and the local conditions that influenced the curriculum design are described. The differences between the curriculum models generally found in North America and the present model are noted.
Catherine D. Ennis
As typically taught, sport-based, multiactivity approaches to physical education provide students with few opportunities to increase their skill, fitness, or understanding. Alternative curriculum models, such as Sport Education, Teaching Games for Understanding, and Fitness for Life, represent a second generation of models that build on strong statements of democratic, student-centered practice in physical education. In the What Goes Around section of the paper, I discuss the U.S. perspective on the origins of alternative physical education curriculum models introduced in the early and mid-20th century as a response to sport and exercise programs of the times. Today, with the help of physical educators, scholars are conducting research to test new curricular alternatives or prototypes to provide evidence-based support for these models. Yet, the multiactivity, sport-based curriculum continues to dominate in most U.S. physical education classes. I discuss reasons for this dogged persistence and propose reforms to disrupt this pervasive pattern in the future.
Peter A. Hastie
This study provides an ecological analysis of a sport education season. Through the examination of the tasks and accountability operating in this season, it was determined that the high level of enthusiastic student engagement was due to the presence of three vectors, all of which make positive contributions to sustaining the program of action. These vectors include the teacher’s managerial task system, the student social system, and the content-embedded accountability inherent in the curriculum model. Sport education provides a multidimensional program of action, in contrast to more traditional physical education settings, where teachers either push students through the curriculum with strong external accountability as a way of achieving and sustaining order, or retreat to a curricular zone of safety and negotiate minimum student work for cooperation in the managerial system.
Zachary Wahl-Alexander, Matthew D. Curtner-Smith and Oleg A. Sinelnikov
student- and teacher-initiated negotiations appear to vary within different curriculum models. Specifically, negotiations within traditionally taught multi-activity (MA) sport and games units appear to be more frequent and negative and increase in volume as the unit progresses ( Wahl-Alexander & Curtner
Laura Prior and Matthew Curtner-Smith
students to learn about “cooperation and teamwork.” To realize this broad range of goals, progressives employed a variety of curriculum models. Specifically, while their base models were movement education for younger students and multiactivity for older children, they also wrote and talked about, or were
Shrehan Lynch and Matthew D. Curtner-Smith
instructional ( Silverman, 1991 ) and managerial ( Doyle, 1986 ) behaviors, use Mosston and Ashworth’s ( 2008 ) spectrum of teaching styles, and deliver PE through a variety of curriculum models (i.e., the skill themes approach, the traditional multiactivity model, sport education, teaching games for
Haichun Sun and Tan Zhang
movement process associated with the concepts and learn to analyze movement activities such as games, dance, or gymnastics by breaking down and integrating movement components ( Ennis, 1990 , 1991a ). This curriculum model provides students opportunities to break down specific components of skill and
Christine Galvan, Karen Meaney and Virginia Gray
theory appear to be on the rise ( Galvan & Parker, 2011 ); however, there is limited research that focuses on curriculum models and the reciprocity of service-learning programs. The present study explored the implementation of physical education curricula within a service-learning program designed to
Senlin Chen and Alex Garn
physical education institutionalized in thousands of schools in the United States and throughout the world. Ennis wrote extensively about pitfalls of the traditional multiactivity sport-based physical education curriculum model, highlighting how this popular recreational approach created structural