Physical Education: Liberate It Or Confine It To The Gymnasium?

Conclusion

The approach adopted in the initial development of unit standards for the senior school and the curriculum statement has been one characterised by comprehensive consultation and debate, literature searches and the identification and confrontation of key theoretical issues, as well as attempts to understand the political context that education is operating within and how this context directly effects physical education practice and the choice of a coherent curriculum model. The approach adopted by the NZQA's unit standards writer, the NZQA's Advisory Group and the Curriculum Statement writers, suggests that there is a consistent, coherent, and shared philosophical approach to curriculum development in physical education. The success of such an approach is, of course, highly dependent on its general acceptance by practising teachers and on the ability and willingness of the Ministry of Education to resource and deliver a comprehensive teacher development programme.

Generally, it is possible to summarise the approach taken by the curriculum developers as one which has attempted to:

• address the critical learning dimension that has been absent from other curriculum documents;
• engender debate on healthism discourse, which is difficult because many teachers do not understand the central or underlying assumptions of this discourse;
• define outcomes and (despite the pressure from the NZQA) encourage a holistic approach to physical education;
• avoid the "moral facism" associated with the development of appropriate attitudes in students;
• encourage greater integration and balance between the social and physical sciences;
• integrate an acknowledgement of both national and international cultural orientations and practices; and
• develop and integrate the professional views of practitioners in all curriculum developments.

It must be acknowledged that the achievement of a new physical education teaching paradigm is a huge personal and epistemological challenge. Any attempt to debunk commonly held beliefs in physical education and sport (as in any subject area) or to situate them into a political and social context nearly always gives rise to incredulity, discomfort and even hostility among students and practioners (McKay, 1991). In an informal critique of the work done to date, Tinning (Personal Communication, 1995) points out that it is at the teacher development, pre-service and inservice levels that real changes can occur.

As with all curriculum development and practice, one must pose the question: to what extent can it improve physical education practice in the field? Indeed, the future must be characterised by connection between scholars, curriculum developers, practitioners and the community so that new curriculum initiatives are relevant to the times. This "human connectedness" and "usefulness" is, perhaps, one of the most challenging tasks for the physical education profession to accomplish as it moves towards the twenty-first century. It remains to be seen whether the Draft Health and Physical Education Curriculum Statement (1996) which the Ministry of Education has had under consideration for fourteen months will facilitate this.

previous / back to index / next