PE LEARNERS

PE Learners

PE Learners

Introduction

To be effective, teachers need to be responsive to the learning needs of their students through mastering important subject content, integrating concepts and implementing teaching strategies that are responsive to a diverse clientele (Dill, 1990; Jewett & Bain, 1985). In stating the obvious, Graham (1995) said the task of delivering physical education (PE) would be substantially easier if students had identical interests, abilities and background; the 'one programme fits all' adage was described as inappropriate. Yerg (1983) summarised the complexity of the PE learning environment and effective teaching and referred to three pertinent and influential aspects. The developmental level of the learners dictated the opportunities and limitations for instruction, and their stages of learning (beginner, intermediate, advanced) impacted on the teaching and learning strategies. Furthermore, the task itself dictated the most appropriate instructional strategies to be adopted. Teachers of PE “… have stressed the importance of self-efficacy in relation to desired outcomes in performance, motivation, and enjoyment for children” (Chase, 1998, p. 87). Given that self-efficacy refers to “… people's judgment of their capacity to successfully perform a task” (Chase, 1998, p. 76), the importance of a differentiated approach as suggested by Yerg (1983) and Graham (1995) is placed in context.

Some have expressed concerns for PE student outcomes. These concerns include; students being engaged in motor activities for less than 30% of class time and only half of this at a level appropriate to student needs and readiness (Silverman, 1991), teaching to the top five or ten percent in skill level (Goodwin, 1997) and “… little obvious progress made by students from one lesson, unit and year to the next” (Kirk, 1995, p. 370). When questioned, some physical educators have laid blame for poor educational outcomes with the students, and “… some blamed the school for only giving them two periods of PE per week,” whilst “… few teachers blamed PE, its aims, content, and pedagogy” (Kirk, 1995, p. 370). While the outcomes of contemporary PE appear questionable, they must be referenced to context. Further to this point, Rink (2001), notes that: “There may be no best way to teach, but there may be a best way to teach particular content to particular learners” (pp. 123-124).

PE Curriculum and Differentiation

Physical educators who employ a “middle of the road approach” (Napper- Owen, 2003, p. 19) do not respect that children learn motor skills at different rates and, ultimately, will not meet student needs. Good teachers reflect students' different needs and interests in their programmes (Graham, 1995). This could be exemplified by the provision of two activities, one more difficult than another (Pellet & Harrison, 1996); or the provision of the choice to swim with or without a floatation device or fins (Block & Conaster, 2002). Poor or inexperienced teachers also are aware of student diversity, but they tend to rationalise this as the students' problem (Graham, 1995; McCaughtry & Rovegno, 2003). Furthermore, Golder (2003) suggested that without a developmentally appropriate pedagogy, which targets the level of each child in the ...